Gospel Notes by Michael Whelan SM
In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, asking, “Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews? For we observed his star at its rising, and have come to pay him homage.” When King Herod heard this, he was frightened, and all Jerusalem with him; and calling together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born. They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea; for so it has been written by the prophet:
‘And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for from you shall come a ruler
who is to shepherd my people Israel.’”
Then Herod secretly called for the wise men and learned from them the exact time when the star had appeared. Then he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, “Go and search diligently for the child; and when you have found him, bring me word so that I may also go and pay him homage.” When they had heard the king, they set out; and there, ahead of them, went the star that they had seen at its rising, until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw that the star had stopped, they were overwhelmed with joy. On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother; and they knelt down and paid him homage. Then, opening their treasure chests, they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. And having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they left for their own country by another road. (Matthew 2:1-12 – NRSV)
Introductory notes
“Many scholars have declined to see anything historical in this chapter. They point to the fact that all kinds of legends were in circulation about the infant Moses and that while the heyday of such legends came later, Josephus is evidence that wonderful stories about Moses were in circulation at this time (Ant. 2.205–7, 215–16). These scholars suggest that the author of this Gospel, moved by such stories, is manufacturing tales to bring out the greatness of Jesus. Matthew is simply concerned to improve on previous models (“anything they can do we can do better”!). Others hold that the Old Testament quotations in the chapter form the clue to what went on. They think that there was a collection of testimonia circulating in the early church, passages taken from the Old Testament to show that Jesus was the Messiah and that everything in his life was done in accordance with the plan of God. The author of this Gospel, they hold, started from such a collection and manufactured fulfilments of prophecy in the birth at Bethlehem, importantly in the place of Gentiles from the first, and in general improving on the Moses stories.
“Clearly there is a large subjective element in such reconstructions. That there were stories about Moses does not require us to think that a writer about Jesus would manufacture similar stories (and anyway, apart from the protection of the child, the resemblances are minor). We may agree with some scholars that Matthew regards Moses as in some respects a ‘type’ of Christ, but we can scarcely say more. The existence of testimonia, while held by many, is far from certain. And even if they did exist, we have no evidence that the writer of this Gospel used them as a basis for composing stories about Jesus. It is much more probable that he started from what he knew had happened (the account of the visit of the Magi ‘has on the face of it all the elements of historical probability’, and brought forward passages from Scripture to show that all was in accordance with prophecy than that the prophecy led to the creation of beautiful stories that lacked factual foundation.” (Leon Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew, W.B. Eerdmans, 1992, 34.)
In the time of King Herod: The Roman Senate appointed Herod king in 40 BC but he actually began his reign in 37 BC. He probably died in 4 BC. Herod was not a Jew by birth but was raised as a Jew. His father was an Idumean and his mother an Arabian. “He was an unscrupulous tyrant, but his achievements were such that he merited the epithet “the Great.” He was a great builder and was responsible for the erection of the temple in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of Samaria (which he called Sebaste in honor of the emperor), and other significant works. And, in the words of Barclay, “He was the only ruler of Palestine who ever succeeded in keeping the peace and in bringing order into disorder.” (Leon Morris, op cit. 35.) Jesus was probably born in 7 or 6 BC, just before Herod the Great died.
Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea: “When he was telling us about Jesus’ birth Matthew did not say where it took place, but he now informs his readers that it was at Bethlehem of Judea. This distinguishes it from another Bethlehem in Galilee (Josh. 19:15), and more importantly directs attention to the fact that it was the royal city, the place where the great David was born. This is part of the way Matthew indicates Jesus’ messiahship. The location was not important for what he had to say in chapter 1 (in the birth story he does not say where Jesus was born), but it matters a great deal for what comes before us now. The name Bethlehem means “House of Bread,” that is, a granary. Matthew speaks of Bethlehem 5 times, but Luke (twice) and John (once) are the only other New Testament writers to refer to it. It was evidently not considered an important place. It was located about 5 miles (or 8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. Judea, here as in most places, indicates the southern part of Palestine (in contrast to Samaria, etc.); it can mean the region occupied by the Jewish nation (Luke 1:5), and it may be used in such a way as to include territory on the east of the Jordan (19:1).” (Leon Morris, op cit, 35.)
wise men: The English word “wise” translates the Greek magos. It may also mean “magician”. It is made clear that these “wise men” get their wisdom from studying the stars.
the child who has been born king of the Jews: The wise men use a title that we will hear three more times in Matthew’s Gospel – see 27:11, 29 & 37. And the correct translation is past tense – “has been born king” – not future tense – “born to be king (in the future)”. This child is already king!
all the chief priests and scribes of the people: There was only one high priest and he was appointed for life. Joachim Jeremias notes: “So we receive the following picture. The captain of the Temple, who was responsible for the conduct of worship and external arrangements in the Temple, was the most important priest immediately below the high priest, and was the head of the chief priests. After him came the leader of the weekly course of priests, whichever course was on duty, and the leaders of the four to nine daily courses of this week. The organization of external arrangements in the Temple was in the hands of the seven permanent Temple overseers, to which belonged four chief Levites; financial arrangements were entrusted to the three permanent Temple treasurers and their colleagues. The chief priests permanently employed at the Temple formed a definite body who had jurisdiction over the priesthood and whose members had seats and votes on the council.” (Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus – 180 found online at: http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/books/jremias2.pdf ) Herod would have had quite a number of “chief priests and scribes” he could call on for advice.
They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea: The chief priests and scribes know exactly where the Messiah is to be born – contrary to John 7:27. They refer to the Prophet Micah 5:2. Their refusal to believe in Jesus is not due to ignorance but willfulness. The gentile wise men see and proclaim what the representatives of the Chosen People are unwilling to see and proclaim.
gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh: “Matthew specifies three gifts (from which some deduce that there were three Magi; legend has made them three kings (an idea which Bruce calls ‘beautiful but baseless’), and even given them names. The gifts were gold (which Matthew has in more than half its New Testament occurrences, 5 out of 9), frankincense (‘a white resinous gum, obtained from several kinds of a certain tree in Arabia, used both medicinally and for cult purposes’, Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, rev. and aug. by William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker from the 5th edn. (BAGD)), and myrrh (‘the resinous gum of the bush ‘balsamodendron myrrha,’” BAGD). Clearly all three were valuable, and together they formed a munificent gift, suitable for offering to a king. Christians have often seen symbolical meanings in them, gold for royalty, frankincense for deity, and myrrh pointing to suffering and death, but Matthew says nothing about this.” (Leon Morris, op cit, 41.)
Reflection
We have a saying when we cannot see something that is right in front of us: If it had a mouth it would bite you! It is not an uncommon experience to look without seeing.
Our English word Epiphany comes from the Greek word phainein meaning “to show”.
Wonder
In today’s Gospel – Matthew 2:1-12 – we have the story of the Magi. The Greek word is magos and was used in the time of Christ to describe those people considered wise, worthy of consultation by those in power. The term came “to denote those who possessed mystical knowledge as priests, astrologers, soothsayers, or sages. Their popular association with kings today may be based on Old Testament passages that recount kings bringing gifts to the royal Davidic son (Ps 72:10–11), including gifts of gold and frankincense (Isa 60:3–6)” (Curtis Mitch, Edward Sri, The Gospel of Matthew (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture) (p. 50). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition). Mention of these people would also recall for Matthew’s audience those who opposed Daniel in Babylon, “who were associated with enchanters and sorcerers and claimed to interpret dreams and signs (Dan 1:20; 2:2; 4:6–7; 5:7 LXX). (Matthew’s account of the visit of the Magi) thus sets up a theme that will be repeated throughout Matthew’s Gospel: Israel’s king is welcomed by those one would least expect while Jewish leaders work against him (2:4)” (Ibid).
Whatever else we might say about the Magi, they are filled with wonder. Their wonder leads them in search of “the king of the Jews.” Unknowingly, their wonder brings them to the Christ.
Wonder is to be distinguished from modes of escape such as daydreaming and fantasising. Wonder is a profound and demanding way of engaging the world. It is the active disposition towards the world perceived as inexhaustibly intelligible. Wonder is the natural response to mystery. The inexhaustible intelligibility in people, events and things is an invitation, indeed a summons to us all. The wonder evoked reminds us of our humanity – our true humanity.
Perhaps this is part of the hidden meaning in Jesus’ statement as recorded by Matthew: “Unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me” (18:3-4)? Children have a natural inclination to wonder. What a tragedy it is if that natural inclination is in any way deformed.
Aristotle believed “it is owing to wonder that people both now begin, and at first began, to philosophise” (Metaphysics 982 b 12ff). Moved by wonder, we search, question and embark on pilgrimages and journeys of exploration. The searching, questioning, pilgrimages and exploration deepen our wonder. In wonder, we are not seeking answers that would bring an end to the wonder. We are rather engaging the inexhaustible intelligibility of the infinite manifest in the finite. Like the Magi, we seek the Christ even if we do not know it.
Is a/the central task of our lives to allow ourselves to be drawn beyond the unreal masquerading as the real, the fictions distracting us from who and what we really are? Is wonder just our learning to see and be?