Synoptic Christology

Donald L. Gelpi, S.J.
The
Firstborn
of
Many
A Christology for
Converting Christians
Volume 2
SYNOPTIC NARRATIVE
CHRISTOLOGY
Marquette Studies in Theology

No. 21
Andrew Tallon, Series Editor
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Gelpi, Donald L., 1934The firstborn of many : a christology for converting Christians / Donald
L. Gelpi.
p. cm. (Marquette studies in theology ; no. 20, 21, 22) Includes
bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-87462-644-7 (pbk. : alk. paper), Volume 1: To hope in Jesus
Christ; ISBN 0-87462-645-5 (pbk. : alk. paper), Volume 2: Synoptic
narrative Christology; ISBN 0-87462-646-3 (pbk. : alk. paper). Volume
3: Doctrinal and practical Christology.
1. Jesus ChristPerson and offices. 2. ConversionChristianity.
3. Catholic ChurchDoctrines. I. Title. II. Marquette studies in theology ; #20, #21, #22.
BT205 .G37 2001
232dc21
00-012328
Cover image compliments of St. Isaac of Syria Skete.

We gratefully acknowledge the generous support of The New Orleans
Province of the Society of Jesus, also known as The Southern Province,
in making possible the publication of these three volumes.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be

reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without prior permission of the publisher.
For My Mother, Alice,

Who Died As She Lived
with Great Hope, Faith, Love, Courage,
and Dignity
Volume 2
Table of Contents
Preface to Volume 2 ............................................................................ 7
Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology .................................................. 9
Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative .................................. 9
Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark ............................... 24
Chapter 3: Negative Dramatic Linkages in Mark .............................. 53
Chapter 4: Ambiguous Dramatic Linkages in Mark ......................... 82
Chapter 5: Thematic and Allusive Linkages in Mark ...................... 125
Part 2: Matthews Narrative Christology ......................................... 148
Chapter 6: Matthews Infancy Narrative ......................................... 148
Chapter 7: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Matthew ........................ 160
Chapter 8: Negative Dramatic Linkages in Matthew ...................... 194
Chapter 9: Ambivalent Dramatic Linkages In Matthew ................. 237
Chapter 10: Jesus Teachings in Matthew ........................................ 276
Chapter 11: Miracles, Fulfillment, and Allusion in Matthew .......... 306
Part 3: Lukes Narrative Christology ............................................... 327
Chapter 12: Lukes Prologues and Infancy Narrative ....................... 327
Chapter 13: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Luke ............................ 349
Chapter 14: Negative Dramatic Linkages in Luke .......................... 397
Chapter 15: Ambiguous Dramatic Linkages in Luke ...................... 434
Chapter 16: Thematic and Allusive Linkages in Luke ..................... 498
Chapter 17: Jesus Christ Proclaimed: The Christology of Acts ....... 517
Part 4: The Pragmatic Meaning of Christological Knowing........... 545
Chapter 18: Imagination and the Christian Conscience:
The Practice of Christological Knowing ...................................... 545
Glossary .......................................................................................... 581
Indices ............................................................................................ 602
Preface to Volume 2
The second volume of The Firstborn of Many deals with synoptic narrative Christology. The intuitive mind expresses itself in a variety of artistic
and literary forms. The synoptic evangelists chose to express their graced,
intuitive insight into the person of Jesus through the medium of narrative. This volume compares and contrasts the narrative statement which
each of the evangelists chose to make about Jesus. It examines how narrative forms of intuitive thinking grasp reality, and it situates the unique
literary form of the gospel within a spectrum of standard narrative techniques.
In the course of examining how gospels grasp the reality of Jesus, I shall
in what follows clarify the meaning of what in volume one I called
Christological knowing. I have defined Christological knowing as knowledge of Jesus Christ through practical assimilation to Him in the power
of His Breath. That definition, like any abstract definition, remains vague,
however, until one invokes pragmatic logic in order to explicitate its operational consequences.
This volume invokes such a logic, and it discovers the practical meaning of Christological knowing articulated in the three synoptic accounts
of Jesus ministry, death, resurection and mission of His divine Breath.
The term Christological knowing does not designate an arcane or esoteric religious experience. Anyone growing in holiness has it. The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius Loyola inculcate Christological knowing. In
a very real sense, this volume of The Firstborn of Many offers an extended
dialectical and foundational interpretation of the knowledge of Jesus Christ
mediated by the directed Ignatian retreat.
This volume divides into four sections. The first three sections analyze
one of the synoptic gospels. Section one deals with Mark; section two,
with Matthew; section three, with Lukes gospel and with the Acts of the
Apostles. Chapter one of section one explains in greater detail the method
of linkage analysis which I employ in analyzing the gospels as narrative
wholes. Section four clarifies the meaning of Christological knowing by
reflecting on what synoptic narrative theology tells us about the imaginative structure of Christian moral deliberation.
I owe a special debt of gratitude to Herman Waetjen for his careful
reading of this volume and for his suggestions for improving it. Elizabeth
Meier Tetlow also went through the text with a careful editorial eye. In
addition, colleagues in the John Courtney Murray Group read and cri-
Donald L. Gelpi: The Firstborn of Many
tiqued the section of Marks gospel in an earlier, more primitive version

than the one which here appears. Their suggestions helped reshape the
treatment of Mark and indirectly the treatment of the other synoptics as
well.
Donald L. Gelpi, S.J.
The Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley
Preface
Part 1
Marks Narrative Christology
Chapter 1
Understanding Gospel As Narrative
Before one can understand the gospels as narrative, one needs to understand how narrative thinking works. This chapter addresses this complex
question by reflecting on the nature of narrative in general and of synoptic gospel narrative in particular. This chapter also explains the method
of linkage analysis which I shall apply dialectically to each of the synoptic
gospels. Dialectic compares and contrasts interpretative frames of reference.
This chapter divides into three parts. Part one situates narrative thinking within the method, the construct of experience, and the theology of
conversion presented in volume one. Part two analyses how narrative communicates. It distinguishes scholarly history from story telling and then
describes the elements of story telling. It compares and contrasts oral and
written narrative and explains how different kinds of narrative relate to
the world which they disclose. Part three situates gospel narrative within
the spectrum of oral and written narrative. Part three argues that the
synoptic gospels exemplify a unique narrative genre and that their uniqueness corresponds to the uniqueness of the Christological knowing which
they seek to promote. At the end of part three I announce the thesis
which I shall argue in this volume.
(I)
The dialectical analysis of the three synoptic gospels which this volume
undertakes exemplifies the understanding of method which I endorsed
in volume one. There, with Lonergan, I defined the term method to
mean a set of recurrent and related operations yielding cumulative and
progressive results. In what follows, I shall apply the same analytic operations to all three synoptic narratives; and I shall argue that the resulting
analysis yields a cumulative and progressive insight into narrative Christology.
Moreover, this reading of the three synoptic gospels presupposes the
construct of experience developed in volume one. That construct recognizes that imaginative, intuitive forms of thinking grasp reality in their
own right. The intuitive imagination speaks with different voices. The
lyric voice seeks primarily to express the rich texture of affective, personal
perceptions of reality. The narrative voice grasps reality through story
10
Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology
and drama. The voice of interpretative, practical, and prudential deliberation weighs imaginatively the concrete suitability of different kinds of
decisions. The voice of discernment endows prudential deliberation with
charismatic docility to the divine Breath.1 The analysis which follows
focuses on the expression of intuitive faith in Jesus Christ enshrined in
synoptic narrative.
In the first volume of this study I also suggested that human experience, when understood in realistic, social, triadic categories, exhibits a
symbolic structure. By a triadic construct of experience I mean one which
discovers three relational variables, or feelings, operative within the higher
forms of experience: particular values (or qualities), concrete decisions
(or facts), and general tendencies (or laws). By philosophical realism I
mean an account of experience which recognizes both the operative reality of general tendencies in the world which we experience and the human capacity to know those tendencies and the decisive and evaluative
activities which they ground. By a social construct of experience I mean
one which can account for two selves communicating with one another
about a third reality, together with everything which such communication implies. By a symbol I mean whatever mediates the evaluative grasp
of significance.
Events exemplify expressive symbols. By that I mean that they have a
dynamic relational structure which the human mind can grasp evaluatively.
Unexpressed human evaluations exemplify interpretative symbols. Expressed human evaluations exemplify communications. In a triadic, social construct of experience, synoptic narrative counts as a kind of communication. In what follows I shall examine in more detail how the
synoptics communicate a Christological statement about Jesus Christ
through the creative use of gospel narrative.
Because this volume deals with the synoptic gospels, the reader might
assume that I have undertaken an exegetical study of New Testament
texts. The following analysis of synoptic narrative, however, exemplifies,
not exegesis as such, but dialectic. Allow me to explain.
All three volumes of this Christology endorse Lonergans theory of functional theological specialties. In Lonergans account of theological method
four functional specialties retrieve a religious tradition: research, interpretation, history, and dialectic. Research provides the basic tools which
practitioners of the other specialties need for their work: archeological
evidence, critical editions of sacred texts, dictionaries and grammars of
sacred languages. Interpretation offers a theory of what religious texts
and artifacts meant to those who created them and might mean to those
who read and interpret them today. History tells the story of a religious
1. Cf. Donald L. Gelpi, S.J., Inculturating North American Theology: An Experiment in
Foundational Method (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1988), pp. 49-97.
Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative
11
community. Dialectic compares and contrasts different theological frames

of reference in order to determine how they agree or disagree and why.
Four functional specialties undertake the critical reformulation of a
religious tradition. Foundational theology elaborates a strictly normative
account of the conversion which lies at the basis of a religion. Doctrines
distinguishes between sound and unsound religious teachings by their
ability to foster integral conversion. Systematics explains the connection
among sound doctrines. Communications passes on the fruits of technical theological reflection to non-theologians and re-establishes dialogue
among the members of a religious community when dialogue breaks down
from lack of conversion.
Each functional specialty asks a different kind of question and therefore follows different operational procedures. Nevertheless, each functional specialty has to deal with sacred scripture. Accordingly, each functional specialty deals differently with the sacred texts as the operational
procedures proper to its method dictate. Research theologians, for example, publish critical editions of the Bible. The new quests for the historical Jesus illustrate how historians deal with sacred texts: they read the
Bible in the light of criteria which authenticate the historicity of the events
which the Bible narrates. Exegetes, or interpretative theologians use a
variety of methods in order to determine what the sacred texts meant to
those who created them and continue to mean to those who read them:
historical-critical method, reader-response theory, literary analysis, rhetorical analysis. Dialecticians compare and contrast the different theological frames of reference which different sacred writers construct.
Reading the Gospels Dialectically
This volume undertakes a dialectical analysis of the three synoptic gospels. It compares and contrasts the Christological statement which each
synoptic gospel makes. Ordinarily, scholarly summaries of synoptic
Christology present some of the major doctrinal positions which each
evangelist develops in the course of his narrative. Doctrinal summaries of
narrative Christology fail, however, to deal with gospel narratives as narratives.
The account of narrative Christology which follows avoids that particular methodological blunder. It does so by proposing a method for
reading narrative Christological statements as narratives. I call my dialectical method linkage analysis. Linkage analysis compares and contrasts
some of the major narrative strategies which all four evangelists employ
in making a Christological statement about Jesus of Nazareth.
In volume one I argued that the gospel narratives display traits proper
both to oral and to written narratives. Like oral narratives, they tend to
begin in medias res, although Matthews and Lukes literary sensibilities
led them to modify the abruptness with which Marks gospel begins. Both
12
evangelists begin the story of Jesus with an infancy narrative. As in oral

narratives, one-dimensional characters people the gospel stories. The evangelists offer no detailed psychological portraits of the people whom they
describe, including Jesus, their hero. The gospels have no literary plot.
Instead, they stitch together remembered anecdotes about Jesus handed
down orally in the Christian community. Still, the four evangelists did
write down the story of Jesus. Moreover, the four evangelists each display
different kinds of narrative sensibility.
In the texts of all four gospels, dramatic linkages unify the story much
as a plot does in a more sophisticated written narrative. By dramatic linkages I mean the way in which Jesus, the hero of the story, relates to the
other persons and constituencies who populate the gospel anecdotes.
One-dimensional psychological portraiture causes the characters in gospel narratives to sort out into three basic categories: good guys, bad guys,
and wishy-washy people. Jesus, John the Baptizer, the Father, and the
divine Breath of God exemplify the good guys. Satan and his demons,
the scribes and Pharisees, the chief priests, Herod, Pilate, and the Roman
empire qualify as bad guys. The crowds and the disciples vacillate in their
response to Jesus and so count as wishy-washy. In all four gospels, the
wishy-washy characters must finally choose for or against Jesus in the
light of the paschal mystery.
In addition, all four evangelists employ the same thematic linkages. By
a thematic linkage, I mean the development of a theological motif across
the anecdotes which comprise the gospel narratives. All four evangelists,
for example, give an account of Jesus teachings and of His miracles. Their
narratives also develop other theological themes. Mark, for example, develops the theme of Jesus messianic secret. Both Matthew and Luke
mute this Markan theme in their accounts of Jesus ministry. Matthew,
however, develops extensively the theme of fulfillment, while Luke elaborates both in his gospel and in Acts a three-stage theory of salvation history. Finally, all three evangelists use literary allusion in order to link
together theologically different events in their narrative. Moreover, as we
shall see, each evangelist uses literary allusion in a distinctive manner.
A comparative analysis of the dramatic, thematic, and allusive linkages
which structure all the gospels allows one to read each gospels narrative
Christological statement as a narrative whole; for narrative Christology
makes its statement about Jesus by describing how Jesus relates to the
good guys, the bad guys, and the wishy-washy people whom He confronts, by developing Christological themes across the events of Jesus
ministry, and by using literary allusion in order to interpret the deep
religious meaning of Jesus person and ministry. In other words, comparative linkage analysis of the gospels allows one to compare and to
13
contrast dialectically each evangelists narrative Christological frame of

reference.2
While linkage analysis yields a comparative dialectical reading of gospel narrative Christology, dialectical theologians, like the practitioners of
all the other functional theological specialties, need to take into account
the fruits of exegesis, or of interpretative theology. Like historical-critical
exegetes, dialecticians in dealing with gospel texts must read them in the
light of the kind of community for whom the texts were written. Indeed,
a dialectical reading of narrative gospel Christology needs to profit from
any legitimate method for interpreting gospel texts. In the comparative
dialectical reading of synoptic narrative Christology which follows, I have,
accordingly, relied on the insights of contemporary exegesis while simultaneously invoking linkage analysis as a legitimate method for comparing
and contrasting each evangelists narrative Christological statement about
Jesus.
The following dialectical reading of synoptic narrative Christology discovers broad areas of agreement among the three synoptic evangelists. It
also finds convergence and complementarity in their narrative portraits
of Jesus. The final chapter examines the agreement, convergence, and
complementarity and argues that they yield a clarifying insight into the
meaning of Christological knowing. As I indicated in volume one, Christological knowing consists in the kind of understanding of the person of
Jesus which results from practical assimilation to Him in the power of
His Breath. The final chapter of this volume draws upon a comparative
dialectical reading of the three synoptic gospels in order to propose a
foundational theory about the practical demands of Christian conversion. That theory offers a foundational interpretation of the intuitive dimensions of Christological faith.
2. The approach to narrative Christology undertaken in this study differs significantly
from that proposed by Michael L. Cook, S.J. in Christology as Narrative Quest. Cook
seems to reduce all Christology to narrative Christology, whereas I restrict the term
narrative Christology to those statements about Jesus in which a story as such carries
the meaning. Christological creeds, rhetorical proclamations of Christ, and rational
reflection on the Christ event do not, then, qualify as narrative Christology. The fact
that theses Christologies occur in an historical context does not make them strictly
speaking narrative Christologies. All Christology has a history, of course; and creedal,
kerygmatic, and doctrinal Christologies all address historical audiences. Unless,
however, the Christological statement takes the form of a story, I do not regard it as
a narrative Christology. Cf. Michael L. Cook, Christology as Narrative Quest (Collegeville,
MI: The Liturgical Press, 1997); see also: Pheme Perkins, Crisis in Jerusalem?
Narrative Criticism in New Testament Theology, Theological Studies, 50(1989), pp.
296-313; John R. Donahue, S.J., The Changing Shape of New Testament Theology, Theological Studies, 50(1989), pp. 314-335; The Literary Turn and New
Testament Theology: Detour or New Direction, Journal of Religion, 76(1996), pp.
250-275.
14
In attempting a dialectical analysis of the three synoptic gospels, I make

no claim to having said the last word about them or their meaning. In
interpreting classic religious texts like the gospels, no one ever says the
last word. I have more modest hopes. I will rest content if the analysis
which follows helps contemporary Christians read and pray the gospels
as narrative wholes. Having both taught and preached the material contained in this volume, I have some confidence of success.
In this section I have situated the linkage analysis of gospel narratives
within the method and construct of experience which I developed in
volume one. In the following section, I shall ponder the nature of narrative in general as a context for understanding how gospel narrative works.
(II)
Narrative exemplifies one way in which human beings try to communicate with one another. When we construct narratives rationally and inferentially, we call them scholarly history.3
When successful, scholarly history performs two interrelated tasks. First,
on the basis of the remnants of the past which still survive in the present,
it reconstructs an accurate chronology of how the past in fact unfolded.
Chronologies specify what happened when and where. They also make it
clear which events came first. Second, on the basis of an accurate chronicle,
scholarly history then proposes a theory about which events actually decided the course of history and why they did so. Events decide the course
of history when they cause it to develop in one way when it might have
gone in one or more other possible directions.
The Elements of Literary Narrative
Not all narratives, however, develop as scholarly history. Instead, they
take literary form. Moreover, the literary forms of narrative exhibit a bewildering variety and complexity. Every narrative, however, involves a
story-teller, an audience, and a tale. Each of these three elements contributes something to a narratives character and meaning.4
In telling a story, a narrator communicates a vision of the world, of
reality as he or she perceives it. The more sophisticated forms of narrative
3. For a somewhat more detailed discussion of the epistemological and methodological
presuppositions which lie at the basis of this volume, see: Donald L. Gelpi, S.J.,
Inculturating North American Theology: An Experiment in Foundational Method
(Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1988), pp. 49-97. For an illuminating discussion of
historical thinking, see: Morton White, Foundations of Historical Knowledge (New
York, NY: Harper & Row, 1965).
4. Cf. John Dominic Crossan, Dark Interval: Towards A Theology of Story (Niles, IL:
Argus, 1975); Robert Scholes and Robert Kellog, The Nature of Narrative (New York,
NY: Oxford, 1966).
15
have two narrators: the actual author and a fictional character who tells
the story which the author desires to communicate.
When authors speak in their own voice, the way they structure the plot
dramatically and symbolically conveys the kind of statement they wish to
make about reality. The gospels exemplify one such form of written narrative.
When a fictional character tells the story, however, one cannot assume
that the fictional narrator necessarily speaks for the real author. One can,
as a consequence, in more sophisticated narratives interpret the tales
meaning only by determining first the extent to which the author identifies with the fictional narrator or the extent to which the author uses
other characters, events, or symbols to convey his or her vision of the
world.
The audience to whom one directs a narrative also shapes the way the
narrative unfolds. One communicates differently with different individuals
and with different groups of people. One writes a childrens story differently from a novel meant for adults. One might satirize a hostile audience
or seek to subvert their world through parables. The correct interpretation of a story demands, therefore, some understanding of the kind of
audience the story addresses and the way in which the audiences character and attitudes influence the narrative.
Besides having an author and audience, narratives tell a story. The storys
plot organizes the way in which it unfolds. The plot moreover organizes
the storys meaning, the kind of affirmation about reality which the story
attempts to make.
In oral narrative, the story-teller and the audience confront one another face to face. As a consequence, in oral narrative, the two of necessity share, at least to some extent, the same world.
Narrative tends to play a more prominent role in oral cultures than it
does in literate ones. Because oral cultures tend to lack elaborate, rationally ordered, scientific explanations of things, they rely more on narrative to store, organize, and communicate shared knowledge.
In oral cultures, moreover, the very telling of stories creates and
re-enforces social bonding. As a consequence, oral cultures abound in
repeatable stories which ritualize the shared lives of communities. Often
traditional stories go on at great length, because narrative organizes and
bonds thought more massively in oral cultures than in literate.
The plots of oral narratives tend to begin in medias res. Moreover, the
language of oral narrative tends to employ traditional formulaic and stanzaic patterns of speech. Finally, oral memory adapts traditional stories to
specific audiences with a flexibility alien to the spatially fixed printed
word.
16
Oral narrative abounds in monochromatic rather than in polychromatic characters. The characters in oral narratives tend to act and react in
stereotypical or archetypal ways because predictable reactions tend to
delight the shared expectations of living audiences. It takes the advent of
the written narrative for characters to begin to acquire psychological complexity and subtlety. Similarly, as oral traditions take written and then
published shape, the literary forms which they incarnate acquire greater
subtlety and complexity.5
Written narrative displays characteristics which contrast with oral narrative. Writing and publication detaches a story from both the author
and the audience. We call classics written stories which continue to
engage generation after generation of readers. The telling of the tale makes
a statement about the world in which story-teller and audience both live.
Classics address in some depth perennial aspects of the human condition.
While oral plots begin in medias res, written narratives have a beginning, a middle, and an end. While oral narrative tends to leave its characters psychologically undeveloped, written narrative nuances characterization with subtle motivation and diversity of temperament.
In both written and oral narrative the characters in the story divide
roughly into the good, the evil, and the ambivalent. Good characters
tend to embody ideas and ideals which the real author of the story endorses. Bad characters tend to embody ideas and ideals which the real
author repudiates. Ambivalent characters often remain torn between the
good and the evil people they confront. The way in which ambivalent
characters respond often carries the central message or statement which
the real story-teller desires to make about human life and reality.
Since written narrative cultivates psychological nuance in characterization, any of its characters can exhibit some ambivalent tendencies. In
sophisticated literary tales good characters can have minor flaws, just as
bad characters can exhibit moments of beneficence.
One can classify stories by the way in which they relate to the real
world which the author addresses. Myths create a world of meaning, reality, and value in which people, whether real or fictional, live. Narrative
parables subvert a world. Parables tend to introduce startling and
discombobulating developments into stories about ordinary life as a way
of challenging the audience to new and unfamiliar ways of perceiving
reality. Apologies defend a world. The David story in the first book of
Samuel, for example, endows the Davidic dynasty with divine sanction.
Satires, like Gullivers Travels, ridicule a world.
5. Cf. Walter Ong, Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word (New York, NY:
Methuen, 1982), pp. 138-155; Kenneth E. Bailey, Middle Eastern Oral Tradition
and the Synoptic Gospels, Expository Times, 106(1995), pp. 663-666.
17
Comic narrative engages the negative emotions. Satire, for example,

attacks a world bitterly. Light comedy chides it affectionately. Tragedies
engage the sympathetic emotions and seek to evoke compassion and sympathy in the face of human suffering.
Some narratives merely describe a world. Realistic fiction describes a
non-existent world which might exist, and it presents its world as though
it actually exists.
Unrealistic narrative divides into romance and didactic stories. Romance
in the broad sense creates imagined worlds without pretending that they
actually exist. Didactic stories tell about a non-existent world in order to
make some moral or theoretical point. Fables usually make a moral point.
Allegories can make both kinds of points.
I have reflected on the nature of narrative and how different kinds of
standard narrative work. In the section which follows I shall situate gospel narrative within the spectrum of narrative thinking.
(III)
Although they have a parabolic intent the synoptic gospels do not fit
neatly under any of the preceding literary categories. The synoptic gospels narrate historical events but do so differently from scholarly history.
They show minimal concern with an accurate chronology of the events
they narrate, although in all three gospels some events clearly precede
others. John the Baptizer begins his ministry before Jesus does. Jesus teaches
in Galilee before His final tragic confrontation with the high priests in
Jerusalem. Jesus ministry ends with His crucifixion by Pilate. Most of
the anecdotal stories about Jesus which constitute the plot of the
synoptics, however, follow one another with no scholarly validated temporal priority.
While all the synoptics principally blame the high priests for Jesus
death, the gospels show virtually no concern with proposing a causal,
scholarly hypothesis about why most of the events they narrate happened
in the order in which the evangelist presents them. In other words, in
contrast to contemporary scholarly history, neither chronological accuracy nor causal explanation of the chronological order of events plays a
significant role in the way the anecdotal plot of the synoptics unfolds.
On one point, however, all the gospels agree: the paschal mysterythe
death and resurrection of Jesus together with His sending the divine
Breathdecisively re-orients and transforms the rest of human history.
The synoptics do, of course, tell the story of a man who lived, ministered, and died. In that sense they deal consciously and deliberately with
historical events; but they do not tell the story of Jesus as a scholarly
historian would.
If one defines a myth as a story which creates a world of reality, meaning, and value for people to live in, then the gospels do, in a sense, func-
18
tion as the basic Christian myth.6 The story of the life, ministry, death,
and resurrection of Jesus creates the world of religious meaning and reality in which believing Christians live their lives.
The gospels, however, differ from most myths by narrating historical
events. Usually myths provide purely imaginative accounts of the ending
or beginning of all things. By encompassing in their vision all things,
myths make an quasi-metaphysical statement about the nature of reality
in general. Myths function in intuitive thinking roughly in the way in
which world hypotheses function in inferential thinking.
Moreover, myths do not usually enjoy parabolic intent. They seek to
create a world, not to subvert one. The synoptic gospels paradoxically
seek to do both. They tell the story of Jesus as a tale about the divine,
messianic reversal of ordinary human perceptions. As a consequence, the
gospel stories pose a perennial challenge to any humanly concocted world
or culture. In calling with Jesus for the establishment of Gods reign on
earth as in heaven, the synoptic gospels also assume a prophetic stance
toward sinners and toward natural and sinful human institutions and
cultures.
The Uniqueness of the Gospels as Narrative
The gospels, then, have a unique narrative structure. They tell the story
of a real person; but they do not narrate scholarly history. They do not
fictionalize the story of Jesus, but they do endow it with an enormous
weight of symbolic meaning. Simultaneously myth and parable, the gospels at one and the same time create and subvert the world in which their
readers live. The gospels tell about events which really happened; but like
some forms of romantic literature, they inculcate moral and religious
values.
The gospels also blur the distinction between oral and written narrative. Though written, they emerge from an oral tradition and preserve
many of the characteristics of oral narrative. Like oral narratives, their
main story tends to begin in medias res. Like oral narratives, they eschew
subtle psychological portraiture, even of their hero Jesus. As in oral narrative, the good guys tend to be very, very good and the bad guys very, very
evil.
6. Cf. Ian Barbour, Myths, Models, and Paradigms (New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1971);
James S. Dunne, Time and Myth (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1973); Lee W. Gibbs
and W. Taylor Stevenson, Myth and the Crisis of Historical Consciousness (Missoula,
MN: Scholars Press, 1975); Morton P. Kelsey, Myth, History, and Faith: The
Remythologizing of Christianity (New York, NY: Paulist, 1974); Alan M. Olsen, ed.,
Myth, Symbol, and Reality (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1980);
Tony Stonebrunner, Parable, Myth, and Language (Cambridge, MA: The Society,
1968).
19
Despite the fact that they manifest oral patterns of thinking, however,
the gospels confront us as written narratives of extraordinary originality
and complexity. When Mark wrote the first gospel he created a new and
unique literary form. While the first evangelists Greek lacks literary polish, Mark tells no simple story. As we shall see, he weaves together his
account with both subtlety and complexity.
The meaning of a story results from the way a particular story teller
tells a tale to a specific kind of audience. History tells us practically nothing about the identity of the evangelists and virtually nothing about their
biographies. Almost anything we know about them as story-tellers we
must glean from the tales they tell.
We must say the same for the historical audiences whom each of the
synoptic evangelists addressed. A comparative reading of the gospels in
the light of historical-critical method yields some insight into the kind of
Christian community each evangelist catechized: but the principal evidence for reconstructing those communities lies in the texts of the gospels themselves.
Careful attention to the way in which the synoptic evangelists construct the story of Jesus does, however, yield an insight into a common
and central motive which inspired the composition of all three synoptic
gospels. Both Matthew and Luke seem to have used and edited Marks
gospel in writing their own. While both evangelists edited the text of
Mark freely in the course of incorporating it into their own narrative,
they both adopted several of the literary conventions which Mark created
in writing the first gospel. Specifically, both Luke and Matthew reproduce with some variations the same dramatic linkages which tie together
Marks narrative as well as some of Marks thematic linkages.
Marks gospel uses three kinds of narrative devices to unify its anecdotal story of Jesus. I call these devices dramatic, thematic, and allusive
linkages. The term linkage designates a literary device which ties the
anecdotal material of the gospels into a more or less unified narrative. By
a literary device I mean a stylistic reather than a grammatical structuring of a text with a view to communicating meaning. As I have already
indicated, by dramatic linkages I mean the way in which Mark portrays
Jesus interaction with the other persons or identifiable constituencies
who confront Him in the course of His narrated career. By thematic linkages I mean the way in which Mark clusters interrelated insights around
a specific motif: e.g., around the teachings of Jesus, around His healings,
around the idea of the messianic secret. By allusive linkages, I mean Marks
use of descriptive details in order to suggest how the different events in
Jesus story illumine one another and cast light on the deep religious
significance of His person. As we shall see, in Mark most of these allusive
references cluster around the two multiplications of the loaves and fishes.
20
Each kind of linkage weaves like a thread through Marks narrative and
creates the gospels distinctive narrative texture. The dramatic linkages tie
together the plot of Marks story. The thematic and allusive linkages
enrich the plots meaning.
Sometimes all three linking strands run through the same event. As a
consequence, any analysis of the linkages inevitably involves some repetition, as one examines the same event from different perspectives: dramatic, thematic, and allusive. In my judgment, the repetition serves a
constructive function; for it calls attention to the complex pattern of
meanings which create the remarkable narrative and religious depth which
Mark achieves.
In the pages which follow, I shall reflect in detail on Marks narrative
artistry and on the way in which each of these linkages unifies his telling
of Jesus story. Moreover, I shall in subsequent sections also examine in
some detail how Matthew and Luke both adopt and modify Marks three
basic narrative strategies.
In general, Matthew and Luke endorse with some development Marks
dramatic linkages. Both evangelists develop and expand in considerable
detail two of Marks thematic linkages: namely, Jesus teachings and
miracles. They mute the theme of the messianic secret, however; and
they employ literary allusion very differently from Mark.7
In endorsing the way in which Mark uses dramatic linkages in order to
structure the plot of his gospel, the other two synoptic evangelists also
endorse one of the fundamental purposes for which Mark wrote. No
narrative as complex as a synoptic gospel fulfills a single purpose. The
complexity of gospel story telling suggests that a variety of religious, doctrinal, and pastoral motives persuaded the evangelist to tell Jesus story.
Nevertheless, all three synoptic gospels share this central purpose: all three
challenge believing Christians to come to terms with any moral or religious ambivalence which might still mar their relationship to the person
of Jesus. In other words, the evangelists wrote their gospels in order to
challenge converted Christians to deepen in Christological knowing
through ongoing converted assimilation to Jesus in the power of His
Breath. Let us reflect on the narrative strategies which Mark invokes in
issuing this challenge.
An analysis of the dramatic linkages of all three synoptic gospels reveals
a cast of characters which includes in the manner of oral narrative very
good guys, very bad guys, and ambivalent people. In all three gospels, the
7. Ched Myerss Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Marks Story of Jesus (New
York, NY: Orbis, 1988) blends both literary and political analysis. In the dialectical
reading of Mark which I shall attempt, I shall try to remain sensitive to the political
connotations of the text. I shall also approach Marks text as a summons to conversion;
but I shall attempt a foundational reading of Mark which remains sensitive to all five
forms of conversion and to the ways in which they condition one another.
21
Father, the divine Breath, and John the Baptizer all function as good
guys. Satan and his demons, the scribes and Pharisees, the temple priests,
Herod and the Herodians, Pilate, and the Roman empire all function as
bad guys. Jesus models for His disciples how to relate to the good guys
and to the bad guys.
Jesus always relates positively to the crowds and to His disciples, but
they both relate to Him ambivalently. The crowds flock to Jesus but fail
finally to understand either His identity or the true purpose of His mission. The disciples follow Him with a measure of commitment; but they
too fail finally to understand Jesus during His lifetime.
Of the three synoptic evangelists, Mark stresses most the ambivalence
with which the disciples related to Jesus during His mortal ministry. In
all three synoptics, the time of decision for both the crowds and the disciples arrives with the passion. During the passion, the crowds turn on
Jesus while the disciples respond in a variety of ways. Most of the disciples abandon Jesus. Judas betrays Him. Peter denies Him. Simon of
Cyrene functions as an ironic symbolic type of the disciple who carries
the cross to Calvary in Jesus footsteps. Joseph of Aramathea buries Jesus.
Moreover, in all three synoptic gospels Jesus puts the same fundamental question to His disciples: Who do you say that I am? All three synoptic writers expect the disciple, the believing Christian who reads the
gospel, to measure his or her response to that question against their insight into Jesus relationship to the Father, to the Breath, to the Baptizer,
to the crowds, to Jesus enemies, and to His disciples as the gospel portrays each of them. The evangelists also expect the disciples to measure
their response to Jesus against His teachings and other religiously significant actions during His ministry.
Clearly, none of the evangelists wrote the story of Jesus for God the
Father, for the Holy Breath, or for the defunct Baptizer. Nor did they
write it for Jesus enemies. All three assume that the ambivalent and finally unbelieving crowds cannot understand the real truth about Jesus,
although in the gospels they sometimes symbolize potential converts. That
leaves Jesus disciples as the group whom each of the synoptic gospels
targets as its principal audience.
Moreover, in endorsing the way in which Mark uses dramatic linkages
in order to structure the story of Jesus, all three synoptic writers challenge
the disciples of Jesus to face any lack of faith, any lack of commitment,
any moral deviation which might mar the integrity of their practical response to the challenges of discipleship.
I do not know if the evangelists themselves would have used the same
words to express this fundamental aim of their gospels as I have; but I
would like to think that, having understood what I mean by Christological knowing, they would have endorsed my suggestion that fostering
22
it in believing Christians defined one of their major purposes in writing.

In the end, of course, we have only the texts of the gospels themselves
against which to test such theories.8
Christological Knowing in the Synoptics
As we have just seen, both Matthew and Luke endorse in general the way
in which Mark uses dramatic linkages in structuring the plot of his
gospel. By that I mean that the other two synoptic evangelists endorse
the general lines of the way in which Mark depicts Jesus relationship to
the major persons and constituencies whom He confronts in the course
of His life.
All three synoptic evangelists also preface Jesus entire public ministry
with His baptism by John and with His desert temptations. In all three
synoptic narratives, Jesus baptism begins His public revelation as
Breath-baptizer. The paschal mystery completes that revelation. All three
synoptic evangelists presuppose, then, that the disciples of Jesus for whom
they write have experienced Breath-baptism and that they have in some
measure committed themselves to Jesus in the light of the paschal mystery.
Moreover, as we shall see in greater detail in the chapters which follow,
in all three synoptic gospels Jesus functions in His desert temptations as
the beginning of the new Israel. In all three gospels, Jesus own temptations provide prototypes of the temptations and testing which the members of the new Israel, who follow a crucified messiah, will themselves
have to confront.
By portraying the baptism and temptations of Jesus as the preface of
His entire public ministry, all three synoptic evangelists invite the reader
to interpret that ministry in the light of these symbolic and prototypical
events. The baptism of Jesus, which begins His revelation as
Breath-baptizer, foreshadows Christian baptism. His temptations foreshadow the testing and trials which those who follow Him must face.
By telling the story of Jesus in a way which invites Breath-baptized
Christians to come to terms which any surviving ambivalence in their
relationship to Jesus, the evangelists simultaneously challenge their audience to deepen in their baptismal experience of Gods Breath, to vanquish temptation as Jesus did, and to live in single-hearted commitment
to Him and to the gospel.
All three synoptic gospels seek, then, to deepen in the Breath-baptized
Christian the experience of practical assimilation to Jesus in the power of
His Breath. The positive linkages, as we shall see, lay down the basic
ontological and moral conditions for advancing in Christological knowing. The negative linkages define its negative parameters: they identify
8. Cf. Adela Yarbro Collins, The Beginnings of the Gospel: Probings of Mark in Context
(Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1992), pp. 1-38.
23
those vicious choices which the believing Christian must avoid. Finally,
the thematic and allusive linkages provide more detailed norms for deciding whether or not ones conduct advances or undermines Christological knowing.
In this section I have been attempting to contextualize and to explain
the meaning of the fundamental thesis which I shall argue in the course
of this volume. At this point I can only state the thesis dogmatically; but
I would hope that the dialectical analysis of the synoptic gospels which
follows will establish its credibility.
The thesis in question affirms: Among the narrative and pastoral purposes of the three synoptic gospels, helping believing Christians advance in the
knowledge of Jesus through assimilation to Him in the power of His Breath
ranks as fundamental and structures the way in which all three evangelists
tell the story of Jesus.
I argue this thesis in stages. This chapter has situated narrative thinking
within the continuum of human evaluative responses. It has argued the
following two theses: 1) The synoptic gospels do not conform to any of the
traditional canons of literary narrative. 2) The synoptic evangelists use dramatic, thematic, and allusive linkages in tying together into a unified narrative the largely anecdotal material which comprises their gospels. I shall substantiate the second thesis in the first three sections of this volume. By
undertaking a comparative linkage analysis of all three synoptic gospels,
in what follows I shall in addition argue the following methodological
thesis: 3) A comparative linkage analysis of the synoptic gospels yields an
insight into the narrative Christological frame of reference which each synoptic evanglist develops. Finally, in the last chapter of this volume, I shall
argue that: 4) A dialectical comparison of synoptic narrative Christology clarifies the practical demands of Christological knowing.
In the chapters which follow I shall begin to concretize these abstractions by analyzing Marks gospel as a narrative whole. I begin with Mark
because Mark created the gospel as a literary genre and set the narrative
patterns which Matthew and Luke would embellish.
24
Chapter 2
Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark
This chapter begins the linkage analysis of Marks gospel. It focuses on
how the evangelist develops the positive dramatic linkages which structure the gospel. In other words, this chapter examines how Marks Jesus
relates to John the Baptizer, to the Father, and to the Breath of God.
This chapter divides into five parts. Part one describes the community
for whom Mark wrote. Part two analyses the preface to his gospel. Parts
three, four and five describe how Jesus relates respectively to John the
Baptizer, to the Father, and to the divine Breath. I begin, then, by summarizing what contemporary exegesis tells us about Mark the evangelist,
and about the community for whom he probably wrote.
(I)
We do not know for certain who wrote the first gospel or where the
composition occurred. Some locate the creation of the first gospel in the
Middle East, possibly in Syria. Others locate its writing in Rome sometime before 70 a.d. I favor the latter position. Patristic tradition calls the
author Mark and links his name to that of Peter, who died in Rome
during the persecution of Nero in 64 or 67 a.d. Probably, Mark wrote
during the 60s as the Roman community either geared itself for persecution or, more likely, dealt with its aftermath.1
A sizeable community of Jews lived in Rome, the capital of the Roman
empire. We find evidence of their presence as early at 139 b.c. We also
find evidence of anti-Semitic prejudice in pagan literature written in Rome.
Such prejudice suggests a Jewish community sizeable enough and influential enough to threaten the native Gentiles.
1. Cf. John R.Donahue, Windows and Mirrors: The Setting of Marks Gospel, Catholic
Biblical Quarterly, 57(1995), pp. 1-26; Donald Senior, C.P., The Gospel of Mark in
Context, The Bible Today, 34(1996), pp. 215-221; C. Clifton Black, Was Mark A
Roman Gospel? Expository Times, 105 (1993-1994), pp. 36-40. For very different
approaches to the redaction of Marks gospel, see: Willi Marxsen, Mark the Evangelist:
Studies on the Redaction History of the Gospel, translated by James Boyce, et al.
(Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1969); Etienne Trocm, The Formation of the Gospel
According to Mark, translated by Pamela Gaughan (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster,
1975); David Barrett Peabody, Mark as Composer (Macon, GA: Mercer University
Press, 1987); C. Clifton Black, The Disciples According to Mark: Markan Redaction in
Current Debate (Worcester: Billings & Sons Ltd., 1989); J. Duncan M. Derrett, The
Making of Mark (2 vols.; Shipston-on-Stour: P. Drinkwater, 1985); Charles Masson,
Lvangile de Marc et lglise de Rome (Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle, 1968); M.-E.
Boismard, Lvangile de Marc et son prhistoire (Paris: Gabalda, 1994); Herman C.
Waetjen, A Reordering of Power: A Socio-Political Reading of Marks Gospel (Minneapolis, MI: Fortress, 1989).
Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark
25
Both Jewish support for Caesar and Herodian luck in backing the winning side in the wars which followed upon Julius Caesars assassination
earned for Jews in Rome special privileges, including the right of assembly. (Josephus, Antiquities, 14.10.1-8; # 185-216) Christians did not gain
the right to assemble until the fourth century.
An expulsion of Jews from Rome under Tiberius may have resulted
from a successful intensification of proselytizing activity which resulted
in conversions among the Roman aristocracy.2 The expulsion happened
around 19 a.d.
During the Jewish wars which culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d., Roman Jewry seems to have created no political problems
in the capitol. Nevertheless, we do have some evidence of close political
and religious ties between the Jewish community in Rome and that in
Jerusalem.
The persecution of Christians in Rome under Nero means that by the
late sixties the Christian community had grown large enough in the capitol to bear identification as a distinctive religious group. That suggests
that a Christian community had been developing in Rome for some time.
Pauls letter to the Roman church dates about 58 a.d.; but we have other
evidence of a fairly sizeable Christian Roman community as early as the
40s.
Some evidence supports the belief that the Roman community originally espoused Petrine Christianity. In other words, it baptized Gentiles
without circumcising them; but it did require Gentile converts to observe a certain number of dietary regulations. In writing to Rome, Paul
seems to hold out an olive branch to Petrine Christians at the same time
that he defends the legitimacy of his own more liberal baptismal practices. Pauls preaching in Rome, however, probably produced some Roman converts to his gospel and more egalitarian view of the Church.
Quite possibly, the persecution under Nero, which seems to have provided the context for the writing of Marks gospel did not target more
conservative Jewish Christians at Rome, who would have lived lives indistinguishable from other Jews. The persecution focused instead on the
more visible Pauline and Petrine Christians. During the persecution both
Peter and Paul suffered martyrdom.3
2. Cf. E. Mary Smallwood, Some Notes on the Jews under Tiberius, Latomus,
15(1956), pp. 314-329.
3. Cf. Raymond E. Brown and John P. Meier, Antioch and Rome: New Testament Cradles
of Catholic Christianity (Ramsey, NJ: Paulist Press, 1983), pp. 92-127; Theodore J.
Weeden, The Heresy That Necessitated Marks Gospel in The Interpretation of
Mark, edited by W.R. Telford (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark Ltd., 1995), pp. 89-104;
Ernst Best, Marks Preservation of the Tradition in The Interpretation of Mark, pp.
153-168.
26
Given such a community and such a context, how, then, did Mark the
evangelist choose to tell the story of Jesus to Roman Christians?
(II)
The gospel of Mark divides roughly into six major parts: 1) the prologue
to Jesus ministry (Mk 1:1-13); 2) stories of proclamation and conflict
during Jesus Galilean ministry (Mk 1:14-6:29); 3) the bread section of
Mark, which narrates the events surrounding the two miracles of the
loaves (Mk 6:30-8:26), 4) the way section of Mark,4 which follows Peters
profession of faith; 5) the account of Jesus final Jerusalem ministry, which
concludes with the eschatological discourse (Mk 11:1-37); and 6) the
passion and resurrection of Jesus (Mk 14:1-16:8).5
The Preface
Mark begins his narrative account of Jesus ministry, death, and resurrection with a kind of title. The first verse of the gospel announces: The
beginning of the good news (euaggeliou) of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.6
(Mk 1:1) The manuscript tradition suggests that a scribe inserted the
phrase the Son of God. Like virtually every verse in Mark, however,
this simple statement contains subtleties within subtleties.7
4. The way section narrates Jesus final journey to Jerusalem and to the cross. On the way
Jesus instructs the disciples about the demands of discipleship. (Mk 8:27-10:52)
5. Cf. Joanna Dewey, Mark as Interwoven Tapestry: Forecasts and Echoes for a Listening
Audience, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 53(1991), pp. 221-236; F. Neirynck, The
Minor Agreements and Proto-Mark: A Response to H. Koester, Ephemerides Theologicae
Lovaniensis 67(1991), pp. 82-94; Joel Marcus, The Jewish War and the Sitz im Leben
of Mark, Journal of Biblical Literature, 111(1992), pp. 441-462; Dieter Lhrmann,
The Gospel of Mark and the Sayings Collection of Q, Journal of Biblical Literature,
108(1989), pp. 51-71; E. Trocm, La formation de lvangile selon Marc (Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France, 1963); Peter J.J. Botha, The Historical Setting of Marks
Gospel: Problems and Possibilities, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
51(1993), pp. 27-55; L.W. Hurtado, The Gospel of Mark: Evolutionary or Revolutionary Document? Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 40(1990), pp. 15-32;
Ernest Best, Marks Narrative Technique, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
37(1989), pp. 43-58; T.A. Burkill, New Light on the Earliest Gospel: Seven Markan
Studies (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1972), pp. 180-264; W.R. Teleford,
Introduction: The Interpretation of Mark: A History of Developments in The
Interpretation of Mark, pp. 1-62; Claus-Jrgen Thornton, Justin und das
Markusevangelium, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 84(1993), pp.
93-110; Donald H. Juel, A Master of Surprise: Mark Interpreted (Minneapolis, MN:
Fortress, 1994); C.S. Rodd, Reading the Book 1. The Gospel According to Mark,
Expository Times, 108(1996), pp. 4-7.
6. Although absent from some manuscripts, the phrase Son of God has solid attestation
in the manuscript tradition from the second century on. Moreover, the phrase echoes
an important theme in Marks gospel, his portrayal of Jesus as Son of God. (Cf. Mk
15:39)
7. Trocm allows the imperfection of Marks Greek to lead him to underestimate the
evangelists literary ability. Cf. Trocm, op.cit., pp. 72-73.
27
Mark dates the beginning of the proclamation of the good news about
Jesus with the ministry of John the Baptizer and with his prophecy that a
mightier one than himself (ho ischyroteros mou) would follow him, one
who would baptize with water and a Holy Breath. (Mk 1:7-8) By his
prophecy of the mightier one, John enters the narrative as the first person to proclaim Jesus and the good news about him. In a sense, the rest of
Marks gospel offers a detailed commentary on the Baptists prophetic words.
The phrase the beginning of the good news has, however, other connotations as well. Mark views the proclamation of Christ as a new beginning in salvation history, a new creation, a new and decisive act of God, a
divine victory over the powers of sin and of evil.
The phrase good news of Jesus Christ also has a double meaning:
while it certainly includes Jesus preaching and message, i.e., the good
news which He announced, the phrase tacitly equates the good news
with the person of Jesus. Mark, moreover, tells the story of Jesus in a way
which focuses upon His person and His actions. Indeed, Marks gospel
challenges the reader to answer the question which Jesus Himself puts to
His disciples: Who do you say I am? (Mk 8:29)
Of the three synoptic gospels Mark shows the least concern to collect
and preserve the sayings of Jesus. Mark does indeed frequently portray
Jesus preaching, but often he fails to tell the reader what Jesus said. The
identification of Jesus Christ with the good news in the first verse of
Marks gospel offers a plausible explanation of these Markan stylistic idiosyncrasies: for Mark, Jesus embodies the good news in His person. As a
consequence, Mark looks primarily to the events of Jesus ministry, death,
and glorification to disclose to the reader Jesus religious identity. Moreover, Mark expects the reader to read deeply into these events and to
discern their true religious significance. (Mk 6:52, 8:17-21)
The scribal gloss designates Jesus Christ as Son of God. (Mk 1:1)
Mark himself will, however, designate Jesus by this title more than once
in his gospel. (Mk 3:11, 5:7, 15:39); and he will use analogous titles as
well: my Beloved Son (Mk 1:11, 9:7) and Son of the Blessed One. As
we shall see, Mark places the latter title on the lips of the high priest in
Jesus trial before the Sanhedrin. (Mk 14: 61) Moreover, as we shall also
see, Mark uses a variety of clear narrative strategies to assert Jesus divinity and thus endow this messianic title with divine significance. If, then,
a scribe later inserted this phrase into the original text of the gospel, the
insertion accords well with Markan narrative Christology.8 (Mk 4:35-41,
6:45-52)
8. Cf. Raymond E. Brown, S.S., Joseph A. Fitzmeyer, S.J., Roland E. Murphy, O. Carm.,
eds., The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1988), 41:6. I shall hereafter refer to this edition as NJBC. See also: C.S. Mann, Mark:
A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (Anchor Bible; New York, NY:
28
This section has examined the preface to Marks gospel. The following
section examines how Jesus related to John the Baptizer.
(III)
Mark, alluding to Mal 3:1 and to Is 40:3, portrays John as divinely sent
to proclaim Christ in the desert: Behold, I send my messenger before
your (sou) face, who shall pave your (sou) way. The voice of one crying in
the desert: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight His paths. (Mk
1:2-3) The first sentence of the citation derives from Malachi, the second
from Isaiah. When read in the context of Marks text, the pronoun you
(sou) which appears twice in verse 2, refers to Jesus and tacitly equates
Him with the Lord whose way John prepares.
John and Jesus
The desert sojourn of the Israelites after their escape from Egypt together
with the symbolic use in the Old Testament of desert imagery like that
which one finds in Is 40:3 had nourished the messianic hope that when
salvation would finally dawn for Israel, it would come out of the desert,
the traditional place for Israels purification, testing, and encounter with
God. Mark in citing Is 40:3 portrays the preaching and ministry of the
Baptist in the deserts of Judea east of Jerusalem as the fulfillment of that
messianic hope. John preaches a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins which prepares Israel for the coming of Jesus, the true messiah. John even prophesies that a greater one than himself will follow him
who will baptize, not just with water, but with a sanctifying Breath.9 (Mk
1:4-8)
With a touch of hyperbole, Mark states that all the country of Judea
and all the people of Jerusalem went out to John to receive his baptism
in the Jordan. (Mk 1:5) One need not see mere exaggeration in Marks
Doubleday, 1986), pp. 193-197; Hugh Anderson, The Gospel of Mark (New Century
Bible; Greenwood, SC: The Attic Press, Inc., 1976), pp. 62-64; Robert A. Guelich,
The Gospel of Mark (World Biblical Commentary; 2 vols.; Dallas, TX: Word Books
Publisher, 1989), I, pp. 1-28. Hereafter I shall refer to this last edition as MWBC;
Edwin K. Broadside, Jesus the Nazarene: Narrative Strategy and Christological
Imagery in the Gospel of Mark, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 52(1993),
pp. 3-18; Peter M. Head, A Text-Critical Study of Mark 1.1: The Beginning of the
Gospel of Jesus Christ, New Testament Studies, 37(1991), pp. 621-629; Norman
Perrin, The Christology of Mark: A Study of Methodology in The Interpretation of
Mark, pp. 125-140; Ulrich B. Mller, Sohn Gottesein messianischer Hoheheitstitel
Jesu, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 87(1996), pp. 1-32.
9. Cf. Walter Wink, John the Baptist in the Gospel Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1968), pp. 1-15; J. Lambrecht, S.J., John the Baptist and Jesus in
Mark 1, 1-15, New Testament Studies, 38(1992), pp. 357-384; Elizabeth Struthers
Malbon, Narrative Space and Mythic Meaning in Mark (San Francisco, CA: Harper &
Row, 1986).
29
hyperbole. Given Israels restlessness under Roman domination, a restlessness which eventually culminated in the Jewish wars, no doubt Johns
prophetic ministry stirred deeply and widely felt national and religious
hopes. John, moreover, baptized in the river Jordan, which in the book of
Joshua had parted like the Red Sea to admit the Israelites into the promised land. (Jos 3:14-17) Such memories would have fueled nationalistic
hopes for a new exodus, a new liberation from enslavement. Marks dramatic portrayal of Johns popularity contrasts, however, with the prophecy of the mightier one which closes Marks brief portrait of John. Despite Johns enormous success and popularity, he only prepares the way
for Jesus Christ, the Breath-baptizer. (Mk 1:7-8)
Moreover, Mark probably cites the Baptizers prophecy of the
Breath-baptizer with polemic intent. The fact that Jesus had submitted
to the baptism of another religious leader in Israel seems to have embarrassed the first Christians. The fact that Jesus submitted to Johns baptism could have suggested the superiority of Johns baptism to Christian
baptism. It seems probable that, as Christianity took ecclesial shape, the
disciples of John would have put such an interpretation on Jesus acceptance of Johannine baptism.
In Marks gospel, the Baptizers prophecy that a mightier one would
follow him who would baptize with a sanctifying Breath precludes any
such interpretation of Jesuss own baptism at Johns hands. Even though
Jesus submitted to Johannine baptism, Johns baptism of repentance lacked
the saving efficacy of Christian baptism to confer the Breath of the risen
Christ. Mark underscores this theological point by having the Baptizer
confess his unworthiness even to loosen the strap of Jesus sandal. (Mk
1:7) Slaves performed the task of untying their masters sandals.
Johns attire, a camels hair cloak and a leather belt, marks him as a
prophetic figure, even as Elijah redivivus. (2 Kings 1:8) Perhaps the greatest of the ecstatic prophets of the Old Testament, Elijah had ascended
into heaven in a fiery chariot and a whirlwind (2 Kings 1:11-2); and the
book of Malachi had predicted his return as the prelude to the dawning
of divine judgment. Johns message of repentance agrees with the message
which Malachi foresaw Elijah proclaiming on his return. (Mal 4:5-6)
Marks Jesus also identifies the Baptizer with Elijah after his account of
the transfiguration. (Mk 9:13) As Jesus descends from the mount of transfiguration with the disciples, He orders them not to relate what they saw
on the mountain until He rises from the dead. The disciples (bewildered
as usual) do not understand how anyone can rise from the dead until
Elijah comes. (Mal 3:23-4) Jesus then assures them that Elijah has come
and sees in Johns martyrdom by King Herod a repetition in its own way
of the first Elijahs persecution by King Ahab and his wicked wife Jezabel.
(Mk 9:9-13; 1 Kings 19:2-10)
30
Johns austere diet of locusts and wild honey could have expressed his
concern with ritual purity. (Mk 1:7) That concern Jesus would not share.10
In contrast to Matthew and Luke, Mark records only one saying of
John: his prophecy of the coming mightier one who would baptize with
a sanctifying Breath. (Mk 1:7-8) The prophecy keeps the witness of John
narrowly focused on the meaning of Christian baptism. It also sets the
stage for Jesus appearance. He journeys from Nazareth in Galilee to the
Judean desert and the banks of the Jordan in order to submit to Johns
baptism. (Mk 1:9) Moreover, in Marks narrative Jesus baptism follows
immediately after the Baptizers prophecy and begins Jesus revelation as
Breath-baptizer and beginning of a new Israel.11
Immediately after His baptism, Jesus experiences His messianic commissioning. The fact that Jesus experiences His commissioning after Johns
baptism rather than during it depicts the baptism itself as more the occasion than the cause of Jesus commissioning. (Mk 1:9-10)
On emerging from the waters of the Jordan, Jesus sees the Breath of
God descending upon Him from a rent in the heavens. (Mk 1:10) The
symbolic rending of the heavens recalls a prophecy of Isaiah in which the
splitting of the skies presages Gods final and decisive act of salvation. (Is
64:1-12) The Breath of God descends upon Jesus in order to transform
Him into the divinely chosen instrument for effecting that salvation. More
specifically, the Holy Breath of God descends upon Jesus in order to begin His revelation as the mightier Breath-baptizer who fulfills the Baptizers
prophecy.
The Breath descends under the image of a dove. The Hebrews kept
doves as pets; moreover, both in Ps 74:19 and in rabbinic literature, the
image of a dove designated Israel as Gods special pet, as the object of His
special delight. The Holy Breath now descends upon Jesus in order to
transform Him into the beginning of a new Israel. She also reveals Him
as the special object of Gods love, as the Fathers words to Jesus make
clear: for, as the dove descends, Jesus hears the Father say to Him: You
are my beloved Son; in You I am well pleased. (Mk 1:11) Moreover, the
fact that the Breath descends upon Jesus before He hears the Fathers
voice, suggests that the Breath descends in order to empower Him by
Her enlightenment to hear the Fathers words.
The descent of the Breath on Jesus probably also alludes to Is 63:11,
where the Breath of God comes to Israel in order to effect a new exodus.
University Press, 1968), pp. 13-17; Justin Taylor, The Coming of Elijah, Mt
17:10-13 and Mk 9, 11-13: The Development of Texts, Revue Biblique, 98(1991),
pp. 107-119; Joel Marcus, Mark 9:11-13, As It Has Been Written, Zeitschrift fr
die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 80(1989), pp. 42-63.
11. Cf. James D.G. Dunn, Spirit-and-Fire Baptism, Novum Testamentum, 14(1972),
pp. 81- 92.
31
As Breath-baptizer and beginning of the new Israel, Jesus will effect just
such a second liberation and commitment to God.
The Breath of God descends after Jesus emerges from the baptismal
waters of the Jordan. The image of the Breath hovering over the waters
recalls the first chapter of Genesis in which the Breath of God hovers over
the waters of chaos, apparently in order to render them docile and obedient to the Gods creative word. (Gen 1:2) The descent of the Breath of
God upon Jesus now transforms Him into the beginning of a new creation. The image of Jesus in His desert temptations surrounded by brute
beasts like the first Adam who named them re-enforces the theme of the
new creation. (Mk 1:13; Gen 2:18-20)
The image of the dove over the waters also recalls the story of the flood
in Genesis. The dove which returned to Noahs ark with an olive branch
in its mouth, revealed that the flood waters were receding and foreshadowed the covenant between God and Noah. In it God promised never
again to destroy the world by flood. (Gen 8:6-9:17) The dove hovering
over Jesus baptismal waters suggests that through the Breath baptism which
He will impart He will seal a new covenant between God and humanity.
The descent of the Holy Breath upon Jesus probably designates Him as
the one who fulfills Isaiahs prophecy of a Breath-filled king whom the
divine breathing would transform into a compendium of all the great
charismatic leaders of Israel. (Is 11:9-11) The Breaths descent also recalls
the prophecy in trito-Isaiah of the coming of an anointed leader to proclaim a season of jubilee.12 (Is 61:1-4)
The voice from heaven combines two texts from the Old Testament.
The second psalm, a messianic psalm, asserts: You are my son, this day
have I begotten you. (Ps 2:7), while the first of the servant songs in
second Isaiah begins with the verse: Behold my servant whom I uphold,
my chosen one in whom my soul delights. (Is 42:1) The commissioning
voice from heaven thus designates Jesus messiah, but in the image of the
suffering servant. Moreover, later in his gospel, Mark will refer to Jesus
passion and death as the completion of His baptism. (Mk 10:38) That
reference suggests that Breath baptism, which draws the disciples into Jesus
baptismal experience, spans a lifetime and draws one into His passion.13
12. Cf. Leander E. Keck, The Spirit and the Dove, New Testament Studies,
17(1970-1971), pp. 41-67; A Feuillet, Le symbolisme de la colombe dans les recits
vangeliques du baptme, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 46(1958), pp. 524-544;
Frank J. Matera, The Prologue as the Interpretative Key to Marks Gospel, Journal
for the Study of the New Testament, 34(1988), pp. 3-20; Ulrich Mell, Jesu Taufe durch
Johannes (Markus Christologie vom neuen Adam, Biblische Zeitschrift, 40(1996), pp.
161-178.
13. Cf. Kilian McDonnell, O.S.B., Jesus Baptism in the Jordan, Theological Studies,
56(1995), pp. 209-236.
32
Jesus temptation in the desert follows immediately upon His baptism.

I shall consider His temptations when reflecting on His conflict with
Satan. Here it suffices to note that the desert temptations re-enforce the
desert imagery which Johns proclamation of Jesus in the desert introduced in verse four. Jesus desert sojourn undertaken at the behest of the
Breath with which He will baptize designates Him rather than John as
the one who actually brings salvation from the desert of testing.
Although in Mark Jesus messianic commissioning follows immediately
on His baptism by John, Mark makes a point of dating the beginning
Jesus ministry after Johns arrest. Mark writes, After John had been handed
over, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the good news of God . The
time (kairos) has been fulfilled .The reign of God is at hand. Repent and
believe in the good news. (Mk 1:14-15)
As we shall see, Mark will later describe the actual beginning of Jesus
preaching, as the good news spreads first to the disciples, then to Peters
family and the people of Capernaum, and finally to the whole of Galilee.
(Mk 1:16-39) This summary statement of Jesus entire ministry does not,
then, describe a specific event but instead summarizes the thrust of Jesus
ministry as a whole. This summary description of Jesus ministry also
underscores the centrality which His proclamation of the kingdom occupies in Marks gospel.14
The verb had been handed over, suggests a parallel between Johns
arrest and Jesus, who was delivered up to His enemies by one of His own
disciples. Moreover, in portraying the death of the Baptizer, Mark will
make it clear that the Baptizer not only prophesied Jesus coming but
foreshadowed Jesus own death by his prophetic martyrdom. (Mk 5:17-29)
The fact, moreover, that Jesus waits until Johns arrest to begin His own
ministry of proclamation underscores both the ephemeral nature of the
Baptists ministry and its continuity with Jesus own. Jesus also runs risks
similar to those which led to Johns imprisonment and death. As the
mightier one who follows the Baptizer, Jesus, the servant messiah, (Mk
10:45) completes and perfects the saving impulse which the Baptizer began with his desert preaching.
The words of Jesus underscore this last idea. After Johns ministry and
prophecy of the mightier one, Jesus proclamation of Gods reign begins
the appointed time (kairos), the eschatological moment designated by
God to effect the salvation He had promised. Salvation stands or falls,
not on faith in the Baptizer, but on faith in Jesus and in His proclamation
of the kingdom.15
14. Cf. Wink, John the Baptist in the Gospel Tradition, pp. 1-8.
15. Cf. R.A. Guelich, The Beginning of a Gospel, Biblical Research, 27(1982), pp. 5-15;
MWBC, I, pp. 28-35; NJBC, 41;6; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 65-74.
33
Mark records a conflict between Johns disciples and Jesus during the
lifetime of both men. The two groups of disciples differ in their attitude
to fasting. The incident occurs in the course of a series of conflict stories
which follow upon the cure of the leper in Mk 1:40-45. These conflict
stories play an important dramatic role in Marks gospel. At the heart of
Marks gospel stands the question which Jesus puts to His disciples: Who
do you say I am? (Mk 8:28) The conflict stories offer important dramatic clues to the correct answer to that question, since through conflict
Jesus defines His identity over against other persons, groups, and movements.
In the conflict over fasting, the disciples of John join with the Pharisees
in questioning Jesus about His disciples reluctance to fast. Their link to
the Pharisees puts them in an adversarial relationship to Jesus, despite
Jesus positive relationship to John. In associating the disciples of the
Baptizer with the Pharisees, Mark asserts that some of them, perhaps at
the suggestion of John himself, had adopted the Pharisaical practice of
fasting on Mondays and Thursdays. (Lk 18:12)
In recording the conflict over fasting, Mark bears witness to the fact
that Jesus, unlike John the Baptizer, eschews extreme ascetical practices
and confronts people, as Lukes gospel insists, as the joyful messenger of
the kingdom. (Mk 2:18-22) Mark, however, because of his stress on the
centrality of the cross, puts less stress than Luke on this aspect of Jesus
ministry.
Jesus replies to the complaint against his disciples:
Can wedding guests [literally: the sons of the bridal chamber (hoi huioi
tou nymphonos)] fast while the bridegroom (ho nymphios) is among them?
As long as they have the bridegroom among them, they cannot fast. But
the days are coming when the bridegroom will be taken from them, and
then they will fast on that day. (Mk 2:19-20)
The image of the bridegroom has both divine and messianic overtones.
It recalls Yahwehs espousal of Israel. (Hos 2:19, Is 54:4-8, 62:4-5, Ezek
16:7-63) The image also points to Jesus as the messianic bridegroom.
(Cf. Jn 3:29; 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:32; Rev 19:7, 21:2) The spontaneous joy
which His presence among His disciples inspires makes it impossible and
inappropriate that they fast and act penitential. Jesus application of the
image of the divine bridegroom to Himself designates Him as the supreme embodiment of Yahwehs faithful and forgiving love of Israel.
Having justified his disciples failure to adopt the penitential attitude
of both the disciples of John and of the Pharisees, Jesus predicts that,
after He, the bridegroom, has departed from their midst, His disciples
will fast. Because this saying justifies the practice of fasting in the early
church (Cf. Didache 8:1), many commentators regard it as unauthentic.
34
Nevertheless, the prediction has theological significance for Mark, for

it alludes to the passion and death of Jesus. Moreover, Mark places this
allusion at the center of the five conflict stories of which the conflict over
fasting marks the third. At the very moment, therefore, when he is portraying Jesus as the divine and messianic bridegroom whose presence
evokes spontaneous joy from His followers, Mark reminds the reader that
these conflicts will culminate in Jesus final struggle with the powers of
evil on the cross. That reminder also implicitly points to the cross as the
supreme expression of divine love. Finally, in this passage, Mark gives an
eschatological interpretation to Christian fasting: it expresses the bride of
Christs longing for His return.16
After Jesus self-depiction as the divine bridegroom, Mark appends two
other sayings of Jesus, which He probably uttered on another occasion:
No one sews an unshrunken patch of cloth on an old cloak; otherwise, the
added piece tears from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear happens.
Similarly, no one stores new wine in old wineskins; otherwise, the wine
bursts the skins, and both wine and skins are lost. Rather, new wine in new
skins. (Mk 2:21-2)
Both sayings point to the radical newness of Jesus message about the
kingdom. While they probably originated in another context, Mark inserts them here as a justification of the disciples failure to fast. Jesus
proclamation of Gods reign marks a break with traditional Jewish faith
and devotion and therefore justifies the disciples reluctance to submit to
the traditional religious practices, which Johns disciples embrace. The
novelty of what Jesus embodies escapes traditional categories and devotion. It demands confrontation on its own terms, a radical re-interpretation
of traditional Jewish piety. Matthew, as we shall see, will present Jesus
instead as reforming traditional Jewish piety from within.17
Mark prefaces his account of John the Baptizers martyrdom, with King
Herods fallacious interpretation of Jesus as John risen from the dead.
Herod hears that not only Jesus but even His disciples are performing
healing and exorcisms. (Mk 6:13-14) Given the disciples obtuseness and
lack of faith in Mark, their healing ministry could reflect the experience
of the post-resurrection Church. Herod has learned of a variety of explanations for Jesus unusual powers and for His ability to communicate
them to His disciples: 1) that Jesus is John come back from the dead, 2)
that Jesus is Elijah, whose return would usher in the messianic age, 3)
16. Cf. J.A. Zeisler, The Removal of the Bridegroom: A Note on Mark II. 18-22 and
Parallels, New Testament Studies, 19(1972-1973), pp. 190-194; Birkill, New Light on
the Earliest Gospel, pp. 39-47.
17. Cf. NJBC, 41:17; Mann, op. cit., pp. 232-236; MWBC, I, pp. 106-117; Anderson, op.
cit., pp. 106-108.
35
that Jesus has the same prophetic anointing as the prophets of old. (Mk
6:14-5) Later, when Jesus will ask His disciples Who do people say I
am, they will respond with the same three interpretations of His person
and ministry. (Mk 8:28) Herod superstitiously decides that Jesus is John
resurrected from the dead. (Mk 6:16)
As in Mk 8:26, this erroneous interpretation of Jesus underscores with
irony two truths about both Jesus and John. First, Jesus ministry prolongs and perfects Johns. Second, Herods superstitious assessment of
Jesus also foreshadows the fact that Jesus, unlike John, will actually rise
from the dead. Even in misinterpreting Jesus, Herod comes ironically
close to the truth about Him.
This reminder of the resurrection prefaces Marks account of the
Baptizers martyrdom. The account itself gives evidence of legendary
embellishment. Mark portrays Herod as a weak, vain, sensuous, and violent man with tattered and superstitious remnants of religious faith. All
of these vices illustrate what Mark will mean when later in the gospel he
refers to the leaven of Herod. (Mk 8:16)
Having imprisoned John for having denounced Herod for marrying
his brother Philips wife, Herodias,18 Marks Herod vacillates over his next
move. He recognizes Johns holiness, sees to it that the Baptizer goes unharmed while in prison. A troubled Herod even listens privately to the
Baptizers preaching. As we shall see, Matthew will paint a much darker
portrait of Herod.19
The implacable Herodias, however, plays on Herods vanity and sensuality by sending her daughter to dance for Herod at a banquet. Herod
publicly promises her anything, even half his kingdom. She goes to her
mother who orders her to ask for the Baptizers head on a platter. Herod,
grief-stricken but unwilling to go back on his word in the presence of his
guests, orders the Baptizers beheading. With black irony, Mark has the
head brought before the banquet guests on a serving dish. Later, the disciples come and claim Johns body and bury it. (Mk 6:17-29)
The Baptizers martyrdom takes place in the presence of Herods assembled court: the Herodian nobility, Herods military commanders, and
rich Galileans. (Mk 6:21) Moreover, Herods fear of looking foolish in
their eyes motivates his decision to behead John. The delivery of Johns
head on a platter to a feasting, self-indulgent assembly of rich, Jewish,
client aristocracy makes both a religious and a political statement about
the forces which conspired to kill John.20
18. In point of fact, Herod Antipas did not marry his brother Philips wife.
19. Cf. Kazimierz Romaniuk, EPOREI and EPOIEI en Mc 6,20, Ephemerides
Theologicae Lovaniensis, 69(1993), pp. 140-141; F. Neirynck, Marc 6, 14-16 et par.,
Ephemerides Theologiae Lovaniensis, 65(1989), pp. 105-109; David Alan Black, The
Text of Mark 6.20, New Testament Studies, 34(1989), pp. 141-145.
20. Cf. Myers, op.cit., pp. 215-216.
36
The Baptizers martyrdom clearly foreshadows Jesus own death on the

cross. It also implicitly foreshadows the fate which can await any of Jesus
disciples. Mark has already linked the two events by alluding to the paschal mystery before he recounts Johns martyrdom. After John dies, his
burial by his disciples foreshadows Jesus burial by a handful of his own
disciples; but the martyred Baptizer does not rise from the dead as Jesus
will, except, of course, in Herods guilt-ridden imagination.21
Mark also underscores the continuity between Jesus and John. As Jesus
walks in the temple during His final Jerusalem ministry, the high priests,
scribes and elders, ask Him by what authority He does what he does. (Cf.
Jn 2:18) Jesus replies by agreeing to answer their question, if they will
first answer one of His. Jesus asks: Did Johns baptism come from heaven
or from humans? (Mk 11:29-30) The term heaven functions here as a
euphemism for God. In effect, Jesus is asking, Did John administer
his baptism with divine sanction or not?
The Sanhedrin delegation recognizes at once that Jesus has faced them
with a dilemma. If they publicly deny the prophetic character of Johns
mission, preaching, and ministry, they will anger the people who regard
John as a prophet. If they concede Johns prophetic authority, then Jesus
can counter with a second question: Why then did you not believe in
him? (Mk 11:30-2)
The delegates from the Sanhedrin also know that, if they concede Johns
right to speak and act prophetically, then they must also concede Jesus
right to do the same. They therefore reply. We do not know. (Mk 11:33)
Jesus then refuses to tell them by what authority He Himself acts.
Jesus reply to the delegation confronts them with their own lack of
repentance. It points to that lack of repentance as the chief obstacle which
prevents them from recognizing the divinely inspired, prophetic character of Jesus own mission. Jesus question to the delegation also suggests
that to the end of His life Jesus continued to endorse the ministry of John
as prophetically inspired at the same time that He claimed prophetic authority of His own.22
Christological Knowing
I have defined Christological knowing as practical assimilation to Jesus
in the power of His Breath. In Mark, Jesus relationship to John casts
significant light on its nature.
Mark discovers a radical newness in Jesus person and message, a newness which contrasts with the more traditional Baptizer. Moreover, Mark
hints at the fact that the root of that novelty lies in the paschal mystery
21. Cf. NJBC, 41:41; Mann, op. cit., pp. 293-298; MWBC, pp. 324-334; Anderson, op.
cit. , pp. 167-170; Wink, John the Baptist in the Gospel Tradition, pp. 13-17.
22. Cf. NJBC, 41:75; Mann, op. cit., pp. 455-467; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 269-270.
37
which discloses the full scope of Jesus relationship to God. While Jesus
and John resemble one another in the prophetic martyrdom they both
suffer, Jesus differs from John by rising from the dead, as Herods superstitious identification of Jesus with the risen John suggests.
In portraying Jesus relationship to John, Mark, then, makes a clear
statement about the way in which the converted Christian must relate to
Jesus in faith. John for his part stands within salvation history as the
promised Elijah, as a prophet like Elijah who prepared Israel for the coming of the true messiah. One must, however, consent in faith to Jesus as
Son of God, as the Breath-filled messiah, and as Gods suffering servant.
The Breath of God coincides with the reality of God; and only God
sends God. Jesus, the Breath-baptizer, therefore, not John, confronts one
as the divine Bridegroom. Jesus ministry, not Johns, begins the final age
of salvation. Jesus rises from the dead; John does not. Jesus, not John,
baptizes with a sanctifying Breath.
As Breath-baptizer, Jesus begins a new Israel. Those who belong to that
Israel acknowledge the saving significance of Jesus ministry, death, and
resurrection. They also exhibit repentant submission to the conditions
for living in Gods kingdom. Finally, the converted Christian recognizes
the radical newness of what God accomplishes in Jesus, who begins the
new creation in which the believing Christian shares.
I have considered the implications of Jesus relationship to John. The
following section examines the relationship in Mark between Jesus and the
Father. That relationship, as we shall see, discloses even more about the dynamics of Christological knowing than Jesus relationship to the Baptizer.
(IV)
Mark names God Father in only three texts. (Mk 8:38, 13:32, 14:36)
Elsewhere, he designates the Father simply as God (ho Theos). In this
section I shall consider both sets of texts together.
Jesus and the Father
As we have seen, in Marks gospel Jesus first confronts the Father in His
messianic commissioning which follows immediately upon His baptism
by John. The Holy Breath descends upon Him to begin His revelation as
Breath-baptizer. Immediately after Her descent from an apocalyptic rent
in the heavens, the Father speaks to Jesus from the heavens, proclaiming
Him His beloved Son and messiah in the image of the suffering servant.
(MK 1:10-1)
The words of the Father allude to Jesus Abba experience, to the fact
that He experienced God with special intimacy as Father. The fact that
Jesus hears the Fathers voice after the Breath descends suggests that She
inspires His Abba awareness.
38
The fact that the Father designates Jesus messiah makes the Father the
ultimate source of Jesus messianic authority and mission. Because, however, Jesus conducts His ministry in the power and enlightenment of the
divine Breath, She also endows His ministry with divine, prophetic authority.
The Father commissions Jesus messiah in the image of the suffering
servant of deutero-Isaiah. That suggests that the Father foresaw the passion of Jesus and incorporated it into His providential arrangement of
the messianic age.
Later in the transfiguration, the Father will, as we shall see, communicate to Peter, James, and John that Jesus is His beloved Son in the same
words which He spoke to Jesus in His messianic commissioning. (Mk
9:8) In Marks account of the transfiguration, however, the Father omits
any reference to the suffering servant and focuses instead on Jesus divine,
messianic Sonship.
In his account of Jesus initial proclamation of the kingdom, Mark
underscores the fact that Jesus message and authority come to Him from
God. Mark portrays Jesus as proclaiming the good news of God (to
euaggeliou tou Theou). (Mk 1:15) Since Jesus proclaims the reign of God,
the phrase of God could also function as an objective genitive and mean
the good news about God as well as the good news from God.23
In Mk 1:24, the demoniac in the synagogue at Nazareth cries out: What
have we to do with you, Jesus of Nazareth? Did you come to destroy us?
I know who You are: the Holy One of God. (Mk 1:24) Jesus confrontation with the Gerasene demoniac elicits a similar cry of terror from the
demons who torment the possessed man. At Jesus approach, the demoniac cries out: What have I to do with you, Jesus, Son of the Most High
God? I adjure you by God, do not torture me! (Mk 5:7) The title Son
of the Most High God has messianic connotations and for Mark connotes Jesus divinity as well.
The fact that the demons recognize Jesus and express terror at His very
presence in their midst underscores the divine transcendent origin of His
mission. He confronts them with the commissioning authority of the
Father and in the power of the sanctifying Breath. Moreover, His very
arrival signals the end of the power of the demonic world over creation,
as His exorcisms of the terrified demons portend.24
One finds two references to God in Marks account of the healing of
the paralytic. When Jesus assures the paralyzed man that his sins are forgiven, the scribes who witness the event think to themselves: Why is this
man talking like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone? (Mk 2:7)
23. Cf. NJBC, 41:6; Mann, op. cit., pp. 204-207; MWBC, I, pp. 40-43; Anderson, op. cit.,
p. 83.
24. Cf. NJBC, 41-9; Mann, op. cit., pp. 210-216; Guelich, MWBC, I, pp. 54-59;
Anderson, op. cit., pp. 88-92.
39
When Jesus cures the paralytic in order to prove that the Son of Man
has power on earth to forgive sins, those who witness the event all praise
God in astonishment.25 (Mk 2:12)
As Mark narrates the event, Jesus claims an authority to forgive sins on
a par with the Father. While Jesus does not say to the paralytic I forgive
your sins, but Son, your sins are forgiven (Mk 2:5), He presents His
cure of the paralytic as a sign that the Son of Man has power on earth to
forgive sins. (Mk 2:10) Then, by healing the paralytic, Jesus demonstrates by His actions the truth of the judgment which His adversaries
have passed on Him.
The phrase Son of Man could, in fact, translate an Aramaic euphemism for I, roughly equivalent in English to yours truly. So interpreted, Jesus would merely be saying that you may know that I have
power on earth to forgive sins. In claiming the power to forgive sins,
however, Jesus would be claiming more than human authority. It seems
likely, therefore, that Marks readers would have read this phrase as Jesus
claim to exercise the divine, eschatological, judicial authority of the Son
of Man. (Cf. Dan 7:13-4; Mk 14:62) As we shall see in greater detail
below, Mark expects his readers to see deeply into the revelatory significance of the events He narrates.
Mark here invokes the name of God (the Father) as the ultimate sanction of Jesus messianic and eschatological power over sin. Jesus speaks
not only with divine sanction but with the authority of the Father Himself. The fact that the scribes interpret Jesus claim as blasphemy confirms
this interpretation. Jesus is in effect doing what only God does. Moreover, when He cures the paralytic in proof of His right to exercise such
authority, the astonished onlookers praise God. Their praise implicitly
acknowledges the legitimacy of Jesus claims.26
Mk 3:35 yields implicit insight into Jesus relationship to the Father.
Convinced that Jesus has lost His mind (Mk 3:20-1), His relatives, accompanied by His mother, come to take charge of Him while He is teaching in a crowded house. Informed that His relatives stand outside asking
for Him, Jesus replies: Who is my mother and who are my brethren?
He then looks around searchingly (periblepsamenos) at those listening to
His preaching and announces: Behold my mother and brethren! For
whoever does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and
25. Cf. James F. Strange and Hershel Shanks, Has the Home Where Jesus Stayed Been
Found? Biblical Archeology Review, 8(1982), pp. 26-37; Timothy Dwyer, The Motif
of Wonder in the Gospel of Mark, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
57(1995), pp. 49-59.
cit., pp. 88-93. In Mk 2:26 Jesus refers to the temple as the house of God. While the
verse certainly expresses Jesus attitude toward the temple, it throws no new light on
His relationship to the Father.
40
mother. (Mk 3:33-5) Marks Jesus frequently gives people searching looks.
These probing glances designate those whom Jesus is especially addressing on a given occasion.
Place plays a symbolic role in the story. Those who surround Jesus inside the house appear as the insiders, as His true disciples. Jesus natural
family, His blood relatives, remain outsiders separated from Him by their
contemptuous unbelief. Mark also dramatizes the unbelief of Jesus relatives by bracketing the controversy over Beelzebul with the story of their
repudiation of Jesus. (Mk 3:20-35) The bracketing suggests that the judgment of Jesus relatives that He has lost His mind expresses the same kind
of unbelief as the Jerusalem scribes who accuse Jesus of exorcising in the
power of the prince of demons.
In the confrontation with His relatives, Jesus is in fact warning both
His family and those who listen to Him that the kingdom undercuts
traditional, clannish kinship ties by broadening them to include anyone
who does the Fathers will. In the end the kingdom seeks to transform
humans into one and the same family united by its single-hearted, obedient commitment to God. That commitment, rather than mere ties of
blood, must define sibling relationships in the family of God. Accordingly, Jesus warns His blood relatives that, if they do not recognize his prior
responsibility to proclaim Gods reign in obedience to the Father, then they
no longer count as the members of His true family.27 (Cf. Mk 10:28-31)
Jesus response stands as a rebuke to all unbelief, including that of His
own family. Moreover, it makes it clear that Jesus understands His messianic mission as the gathering of Gods family. He gathers the children of
God by drawing others into His own Abba experience. At the heart of
that experience lies obedience to the will of God. Obedience to the will
of God transforms one into a child of God, irrespective of ones sex.
Obedience to God makes one into Jesus own brother or sister and
therefore, implicitly, into a child of the same Father whom He knows and
proclaims. Anyone who obeys the will of God whom Jesus is proclaiming
in announcing the kingdom has a claim to membership in Gods own
family and a right to treatment as a brother or sister of Jesus. In other
words, Jesus proclamation of the Fatherhood of God seeks to break down
the barriers which separate people from one another, including sexual
and social barriers or clan pride. That proclamation seeks to transform
Israel and eventually all humanity into a single family reconciled to one
another in the one God. This saying of Jesus also shows the kind of reverent intimacy which He expected His disciples to have, not just with God,
but also with one another.28
27. Cf. Myers, op.cit., pp.167-168.
cit., pp. 120-124. See also: Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, Narrative Space and Mythic
Meaning in Mark (San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row, 1986).
41
Jesus confrontation with the Pharisees in the bread section of Marks

gospel underscores the importance of obedience to the Fathers will. When
the Pharisees complain that Jesus disciples fail to perform the ritual libations before eating, Jesus rebukes them sharply for their hypocrisy and
for replacing the commands of God with mere human tradition. In the
course of His discourse Jesus repeats the charge three times. (Mk 7:8-13)
Jesus charge asserts more than a condemnation of superficial legalism,
although it does indeed assert that. The incident identifies a fundamental
issue between Jesus and the Pharisees: viz., the real meaning of Torah.
Jesus identifies the true meaning of Torah with the reign of God. The
Pharisees, by contrast, while proclaiming their own fidelity to Torah actually replace Gods own commands with human traditions which excuse
them from what God is demanding of them. In effect, therefore, they
stand convicted of testing God, of setting the conditions under which
they choose to obey the divine will rather than submitting in unquestioning obedience to what the Father asks of them.29
The next reference to the Father in Mark makes clear just how unconditioned an obedience Jesus demands of Himself and of His followers.
After Peters confession of Jesus as the messiah (Mk 8:30), Jesus rebukes
Peter when he tries to dissuade Jesus from walking the path which leads
to the cross. In words which suggest an emotionally charged confrontation, Jesus says to Peter: Get out of my sight, Satan, for you are not
committed to the things of God but to the things of humans. (Mk 8:33)
In opposing Jesus passion Peter is tempting Him, putting Him to the
test as Satan had in the desert. In so acting, Peter therefore stands not on
the side of God but on the side of Satan and His minions. In Jesus eyes
absolute obedience to the Father includes the cross. The passage, then,
implicitly harkens back to His messianic commissioning by the Father,
who had designated Him messiah, but messiah in the image of the suffering servant. (Mk 1:11) The path to messianic victory leads obediently
through Calvary.30
Moreover, having rebuked Peter, Jesus summons His disciples and makes
it clear to them that He requires of them the same kind of obedience to
God even unto death. Jesus sternly warns:
If any one would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross
and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever
loses his life for my sake and for the gospels will save it. For what does it
profit one, to gain the whole world and forfeit ones life? For what can one
give in return for ones life? For whoever is ashamed of Me and of My
words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of that one the Son of man
29. Cf. NJBC, 41:47.
30. Cf. NJBC, 41:55-56; Mann, op. cit., pp. 310-314; MWBC, I, pp. 359-371; Anderson,
op. cit., pp. 183-186.
42

will be ashamed, when He comes in the glory of His Father and with the
holy angels. (Mk 8:38)
The way of the cross leads finally to glory; but those who deny Jesus in
order to avoid the suffering of the cross must confront Him personally
when He returns in the glory of the Father. Once again the phrase Son
of Man functions as the equivalent of I; but it also connotes the
eschatological judicial authority of the apocalyptic Son of Man, who participates in the very glory of the Father.
The divine glory manifests the reality and excellence of God. Having
undergone the humiliation of the cross, Jesus will return as eschatological
judge with the manifest right to pass judgment on humans with divine
authority and in the very presence of His Father. Those who through fear
of death deny Him in this life may expect that He will deny them before
the Father when He returns to pronounce divine judgment on humans
and on their deeds. The evangelist may allude to unrepented apostasies
committed during Neros persecution.31
Jesus repudiation of Mosaic divorce practices also expresses His obedience to the Fathers will and His insistence on the deep intent of the
Torah. Asked to decide between Rabbi Hillel and Rabbi Shamai on the
question of divorce, Jesus challenges His Pharisaical questioner in turn to
recognize Gods original intent in creating marriage. He concludes: What
God had joined together, let no human put asunder. (Mk 10:9)
As in the case of Jesus earlier conflict with the Pharisees over ritual
libations, the issue concerns the deliberate substitution of human customs for the divine will. Such substitution only caters to the hardness of
the unrepentant heart. Marks Jesus insists, moreover, that Moses commanded rather than permitted divorce because of the hardness of the
male heart. (Mk 10:3-5) Jesus abrogation of one of the laws of the Torah
would have deeply scandalized His contemporaries.
Jesus repudiation of Mosaic divorce practices in Mark makes a statement about the patriarchal oppression of woman in marriage. It replaces
the moral compromises which the Mosaic code commanded because of
mens lack of repentance with Jesus perception of Gods original intent
in marriage: life-long mutual fidelity of the spouses.32
The Fathers testimony to Jesus in the transfiguration summons the
disciples to show to Jesus as Gods beloved Son an obedience which supersedes their obedience to the Law and the prophets. Mark describes the
event as a theophany. After six days, Jesus takes Peter, James, and John
up a high mountain where the disciples receive a glimpse of Him in a
32. Cf. Myers, op.cit., pp. 264-266; Ernst Bammel, Markus 10. 11 ff. und das jdische
Eherecht, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 61(1970), pp. 95-101;
NJBC, 41:62; Mann, op. cit., pp. 385-394; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 239-244.
43
glorified state. The temporal reference alludes to Ex 24:16. There God

appears to the Israelites in a cloud which rests for six days upon Mount
Sinai. On the seventh day, God summons Moses to ascend the mountain. Jesus, on the seventh day, summons His disciples to the mountaintop.
Jesus clothes become an intense and dazzling white, whiter than any
human power could make them. (Mk 9:2) The dazzling garments foreshadow those worn by the young man who announces to the terrified
women Jesus resurrection. (Mk 16:5) The brightness of the young mans
clothes symbolize his transcendent origin. Jesus dazzling robes probably
enjoy similar symbolism. Clothes also symbolize social relationship. The
transformation of Jesus clothes, therefore, indicates that He, when revealed in glory, will relate to the disciples in a new and transcendent way.
As a foreshadowing of the resurrection, the transformation of Jesus clothing also foreshadows the risen glory which will reveal his transcendent
origin.
Moses and Elijah, who both experienced theophanies atop the mount
of the covenant, appear and converse with Jesus. Moses, the special intimate of God and giver of the Torah, and Elijah, the greatest of the ecstatic prophets, also personify the Law and the prophets. (Mk 9:4) Peter
speaks to Jesus calling Him rabbouni, the Aramaic equivalent of the
Hebrew word rabbi. Here, however, the word may have the connotations of Lord.33 Peter proposes to build three tents atop the mountain:
one for Jesus, one for Moses, and one for Elijah. In the process, he foolishly places Jesus on a par with Moses and Elijah and implicitly with both
the Law and the prophets.
At this point, the cloud of the divine presence which once appeared on
Mount Sinai settles upon the mountain, and the voice which spoke to
Jesus in His messianic commissioning, speaks to Peter, James, and John.
It says: This is my beloved Son, listen to Him. As messianic Son of
God, Jesus speaks with an authority which surpasses that of the Law and
prophets because He participates in heavenly glory. In effect, then, by
endorsing Jesus and His teaching, the Father, whose words implicitly allude to the first verse of Marks gospel, demands that the disciples obey
Jesus and His teaching with the same unswerving obedience which they
owe to the Father Himself.
The story of the transfiguration follows immediately on Jesus injunction to the disciples to take up their crosses and follow Him. (Mk 8:34-9:1)
The Fathers command, Listen to Him gives divine sanction to that
injunction. One who obeys both Jesus and the Father walks the way of
the cross, as the Roman martyrs had.34
33. See: Benedict T. Viviano, Rabbouni and Mark 9:5, Revue Biblique, 97(1990), pp.
207- 218.
34. Cf. Enrique Nardone, La Transfiguration de Jess y el Dialogo Sobre Elias (Buenos
Aires: Editora Patria Grande, 1975); Johannes M. Neutzel, Die Verklrungserzhlung
44
Absolute Trust in the Father

The encounter between Jesus and the rich man introduces a new dimension of Jesus and the disciples relationship to the Father: namely, that of
trust. The rich man runs up to Jesus and greets Him with extravagant
reverence, kneeling on the ground before Jesus. He then asks with equally
exaggerated courtesy, Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal
life? (Mk 10:17) Jesus rebukes the florid character of the rich mans
address with the dry comment, Why do you call me good? No one is
good except God. (Mk 10:17-8) Jesus reply expresses His typical humility and self-effacement not only with respect to the Father but with
regard to other teachers as well. He refuses to claim any special titles of
respect and cites the popular Jewish belief that the term good applies to
God alone. One can also read His response as Markan irony. In floridly
calling Jesus good, the rich man implicitly recognizes His divinity.
When the rich man cannot accept Jesus invitation to sell all his possessions, give them to the poor, and join the inner circle of disciples, Jesus
tells the astonished disciples that the rich will enter the kingdom of God
only with great difficulty. He counters their astonishment by insisting on
the point and astonishing them even further. (Mk 10:23-6)
When the disciples then ask in their despondency, Then who can be
saved? Jesus looks at them (a phrase, as we have seen, which Mark habitually uses to underscore the importance of what Jesus is about to say
and to whom it applies) and then replies: For humans it is impossible,
but not for God; for all things are possible for God. (Mk 10: 27)
Jesus does more than deny the disciples naive assumption that riches
manifest Gods favor and give evidence that the one who has them lives
assured of salvation. Jesus insists in addition that no merely human activity has the power to save one, including the amassing of wealth. Only
God saves. Hence, the way to salvation lies in absolute trust in the Fathers
saving power.35
The theme of trust in God resurfaces during Jesus Jerusalem ministry.
Mark situates the cleansing of the temple in a tryptic whose first and
im Markusevangelium: Eine redactionsgeschitiliche Untersuchung (Bamberg: Ecleterverlag,
1972); A. Feuillet, Les perspectives propres chaque vangeliste dans les rcits de la
transfiguration, Biblica, 39(1958), pp. 281-301.
35. Cf. NJBC, 41:64; Mann, op. cit., pp 397-406; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 247-252; J.W.
Wenham, Why Do You Ask Me about Good? A Study of the Relation between Text
and Source Criticism, New Testament Studies, 28(1982), pp. 116-125; Ernest Best,
Uncomfortable Words VII. The Camel and the Needles Eye (Mk 10:25), Expository
Times, 82(1970-1971), pp. 83- 89; Walther Zimmerli, Die Frage nach dem ewigen
Leben, Evangelische Theologie, 19(1959), pp. 90-97; Dieter Snger, Recht und
Gerichtigkeit in der Verkndigung Jesu: Erwgungen zu Mk 10,17-22 und 12,
28-34, Biblische Zeitschrift, 36(1992), pp. 179-194; Thomas C. Schmidt, Mark
10.29-30; Matthew 19.29: Leave Houses and Region, New Testament Studies,
38(1992), pp. 617-620.
45
third scenes have to do with Jesus cursing a fig tree.36 In cursing the fig
tree, Jesus acts out a parable. He goes to the fig tree to pick its fruit and
finds it without fruit, since the season for the tree to bear had not arrived.
Jesus then curses the tree, predicting that it will never again bear fruit. In
between these two interrelated incidents Mark locates the cleansing of
the temple. Jesus, after discovering the withered tree with His disciples
then instructs them on the importance of an unwavering faith as the
basis for prayer. (Mk 11:12-14)
When read in context, the tree without fruit symbolizes the sterility of
a temple worship vitiated by the greed and oppression of the high priestly
caste. Moreover, Jesus discourse on faith-filled prayer implicitly contrasts
the faithless worship of the temple priesthood with authentic worship of
the Father. (Mk 11:20-2)
When Peter calls Jesus attention to the fact that the fig tree has withered, He replies by instructing the disciples on the need to trust that God
will answer prayers of petition.
Have faith in God. Amen, I say to you, Whoever says to this mountain,
Be taken up and cast into the sea, and does not doubt in his heart, but
believes that what he says will come to pass, it will be done for him. Therefore, I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received
and it will be yours. (Mk 11:22-4)
Jesus uses deliberate hyperbole in order to underscore the point that,

when we turn to the Father in prayer, we should do so with absolute and
unconditioned confidence that He will hear us. This teaching of Jesus
also recalls His assurance to the disciples that all things are possible with
God. (Mk 10:27) It looks forward as well to Jesus prayer to the Father
on the cross. (Mk 15:34)
After the cursing of the fig tree, Mark appends another teaching about
Christian prayer. We cannot expect God to forgive us, unless we are willing to forgive one another first. In other words, mutual forgiveness authenticates prayer to the Father.37 (Mk 11:25-6)
God in the Jerusalem Ministry
In the confrontations which occur in Jesus final Jerusalem ministry, the
figure of the Father enters on three different occasions. The first two
36. See: James R. Edwards, Markan Sandwiches: The Significance of Interpolations in
Markan Narratives, Novum Testamentum, 31(1989), pp. 193-216.
37. Cf. William R. Telford, The Barren Temple and the Withered Tree (Sheffield:
Redwood Burn, Ltd., 1980), pp. 39-68; NJBC, 41:71; Mann, op. cit., pp. 438-454;
Anderson, op. cit., pp. 263-269; Christfried Bttrich, Jesus und der Feigebaum: Mk
11:12-14, 20-25 in der Diskussion, Novum Testamentum, 39 (1997), pp. 328-359 .
46
confrontations rework points which Mark has already made about the
Father and our relationship to Him.
First, the Pharisees and the Herodians, who earlier in the gospel had
joined forces to kill Jesus (Mk 3:6), now come to Him in the hope of
trapping Him into forbidding paying taxes to Caesar. With elaborate
flattery, they tell Jesus that they recognize in Him a man who disregards
the opinions of others, does not respect persons, and teaches the way of
God in truth. (Mk 12:13-4)
Jesus sees through their hypocrisy and asks them to show him the Roman coin of tribute. When they correctly identify Caesars face stamped
on the coin, Jesus replies: Render to Caesar the things due to Caesar and
to God the things due to God. (Mk 12:17)
Jesus replies ironically that, if Caesars image identifies his coins, then
the Herodians and Pharisees should have no difficulty in returning it to
him, since it belongs to Caesar in the first place; but He then challenges
his adversaries to show even greater zeal in returning to God what they
own to God.
As far as Jesus is concerned, God expects the Pharisees and Herodians
to recognize a universal, divine fatherhood which transforms all who obey
God into their brothers and sisters. God desires them to submit to the
demands of His divine reign. Jesus enemies can recognize Caesars image
on a coin. They need to learn to recognize Gods image in other people,
especially in the poor and the needy.38 (Mk 12:29-31; cf. Gen 1:27)
In the second confrontation which alludes to God, the Sadducees, who
deny the resurrection of the body, pose a dilemma to Jesus about seven
brothers who all married the same woman. The want to know to whom
she will belong as wife in the resurrection. (Mk 12:18-23)
In his reply Jesus addresses only the resurrection of the righteous. He
challenges both the Sadducees knowledge of the Pentateuch and the presuppositions on which their dilemma rests. He also challenges their faith
in the power of God. (Mk 12:24-5)
In rebuking the Saducees ignorance of the Pentateuch, Jesus reminds
them that it calls God the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It also calls
Him the God of the living. (Mk 12:26-7) Jesus argues that God could
not speak of Himself in this way unless Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were
now living with Him and destined for resurrection.
38. Cf. NJBC, 41:77; Mann, op. cit., pp. 468-472; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 273-276;
Herbert Loewe, Render Unto Caesar: Religious and Political Loyalty in Palestine
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940); Charles Homer Giblin, The
Things of God in the Question Concerning Tribute to Caesar (Lk 20:25; Mk 12:17;
Mt 22:29), Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 33(1971), pp. 510-511; Paul Corby Finney,
The Rabbi and the Coin Portrait (Mark 12:15b, 16): Rigorism Manque, Journal of
Biblical Literature, 112(1993), pp. 629-644; Karl- Gustav Sandelin, The Jesus
Tradition and Idolatry, New Testament Studies, 42(1996), pp. 412-420.
47
Jesus also challenges the presupposition on which the Sadducees have

constructed their dilemma: viz., that risen life consists in resuscitation to
the same kind of life which humans now live. Instead, resurrection creates a new way of existing which assimilates one to the angels. (Mk
12:25-6) The angels worship God and do His bidding. The Sadducees
denied not only bodily resurrection but the existence of angels as well.
Jesus reply would seem to rebuke them for both doubts.39
The ignorance and error of the Saducees spring, however, from a deeper
deficiency. They lack faith and trust in Gods power to raise people from
the dead. They doubt Gods ability to transform them in ways which
impart to them everlasting life. Implicitly, Jesus is asserting that unconditioned faith and trust in the Fathers power to save includes faith and
trust in His power to raise one from the dead.40
In the third Jerusalem confrontation, a scribe asks Jesus which commandment of the Law qualifies as greatest. (Mk 12:28)
Jesus replies:
The first is: Listen, Oh Israel, the Lord our God is Lord; and you shall love the
Lord your God with your whole heart, with your whole soul, and with your
whole mind, and with your whole strength. This is the second: You shall love
your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than this. (Mk
12:29-31)
As we have seen, Jesus has heretofore demanded of His disciples unconditioned obedience to the Father as well as an absolute and unconditioned trust. The latter includes belief in His power to raise the just from
the dead. Now Jesus also demands an all-consuming love for the Father.
Moreover, when the scribe approves Jesus answer, Jesus looks at him
a gesture which, as we have seen, calls attention to the importance of
what He is about to sayand says:You are not far from the reign of
God. (Mk 12:34) The reply has importance because it indicates that, as
far as Jesus is concerned, one must interpret the meaning of the two great
commandments in the light of His proclamation of Gods reign and of
the moral demands of life in the kingdom.41
Mark ends his account of Jesus final Jerusalem ministry with Jesus
apocalyptic discourse. (Mk 13:1-37) Toward the end of the discourse,
Jesus warns that no onenot even Jesus Himself knows when the destruction of Jerusalem and the final judgment will occur. Only the Father
39. The assimilation of the risen to angels accords with Jewish apocalyptic thinking. (Cf.
1 Enoch 104:4; Apoc. Bar. 51:10). Cf. E, Main, Les Sadducens et la resurrection des
morts: comparaison entre Mc 12,18-27 et Lc20, 27-38, Revue Biblique, 103(1996),
pp. 411-432.
48
knows when the things which He has just predicted will happen. (Mk
13:32) Moreover, since the disciples live in ignorance of the Fathers timetable, they must live lives of constant vigilance, ready to face judgment,
whenever it occurs. Here Mark could conceivably be countering an exaggerated chiliasm which anticipated an immanent second coming.42
The Father in the Passion
Two references to the Father occur in Marks passion narrative. In
Gethsemani Jesus prays: Abba, Father, all things are possible for you;
take this cup from me; but, not what I will, but what you will. (Mk
14:36) In His prayer, Jesus relates to the Father with the same reverent
trust and unconditioned obedience which He demands of His disciples.
Although Mark does not record the Our Father among Jesus teachings,
the evangelist may have patterned Jesus prayer in the garden on the petition Your will be done.
The reference to the Fathers ability to do anything also recalls Jesus
assurance to the disciples that God can accomplish what humans cannot,
since all things are possible with God. (Mk 10:27) Jesus begs the Father
urgently not to visit on Him the destiny which threatens Him, the cup of
suffering He is about the drink; but Jesus nevertheless submits unconditionally to the Fathers will.43
The prayer has other connotations as well. The cup of which Jesus
speaks has eucharistic connotations. Having given the disciples the cup
of His covenant blood at the last supper, Jesus now finds Himself loathe
to drink of it Himself. In Gethsemane, Marks Jesus, like a true son of
Israel, wrestles with the Father in the face of a cruel martyrdom. Jesus
submits, however, to the divine will. Marks Jesus therefore models for
Christians how to deal with human weakness when martyrdom threatens.44
On the cross Jesus, shortly before He dies, prays in Aramaic the first
verse of Ps 22, My God, My God why have your forsaken me? (Mk
15:33-4) The words suggest that Jesus dies feeling utterly abandoned by
the Father. Mark, however, is making a theological rather than a psychological point. Throughout his gospel, Mark invites the reader to see deeply
into the saving significance of the events which he narrates. One would
anticipate, therefore, that, when the evangelist describes the culminating
42. Cf. NJBC, 41:88; Mann, op. cit., pp. 538-550; Anderson, op. cit., p.301; J.K. Elliot,
The Position of the Verb in Mark with Special Reference to Chapter 13, Novum
Testamentum, 38(1996), pp. 136-144.
43. Cf. NJBC, 41: 98; Mann, op. cit., pp. 587-594; The cup also recalls the eucharistic
cup of the new covenant and of His blood that Jesus gave to the disciples at the Last
Supper. (Mk 14:23)
44. Cf. Raymond E. Brown, S.S., The Death of the Messiah (2 vols.; New York, NY:
Doubleday, 1994), I, pp. 161-178.
49
events of his entire narrative, he would expect the reader to see beyond
the obvious meaning of the text to its deeper soteriological significance.
Jesus prayer on the cross cites the first verse of psalm 22. Psalm 22
expresses the prayer of the innocent poor who in the midst suffering,
oppression, and persecution turn to God as their only and best refuge.
The poor find in Him deliverance and vindication. In placing the first
verse of the psalm on Jesus lips Mark, identifies Him in His passion with
the innocent poor man of Psalm 22. In other words, in the face of rejection, betrayal, torture, and death, Jesus clings to the Father in obedience
and trust that He will somehow know vindication at the Fathers hand.45
Moreover, the rending of the temple veil and the testimony of the centurion which follow immediately upon Jesus death express the Fathers
instant response to Jesus dying prayer. The rending of the temple veil
de-sacralizes Gods sanctuary under the old Law and foreshadows its destruction. The centurions testimony foreshadows the conversion of the
Gentiles to Christ. Since, moreover, according to Josephus, the outer veil
of the temple depicted the heavens, the rent veil could conceivably recall
the apocalyptic rending of the skies at Jesus Baptism when the Father
first commissioned Him messiah in the image of the suffering servant.
The paschal mystery brings that revelation to its culmination.46 (Mk 1:10)
In Mark, Jesus relationship to the Father defines one of the fundamental
aspects of Christological knowing. Jesus relates to the Father with unconditioned trust, with perfect obedience, and with all-consuming love. He
expects His disciples to do the same. They must recognize that through
Jesus the Father forgives sins. Their trust in the Father must inform their
prayer and confirm their confidence in the Fathers power to raise them
from the dead. In introducing the disciples into Gods family, Jesus draws
them into His own Abba awareness. He calls them, therefore, to live as
children of God in His image. As we shall see in what follows, Jesus
45. Jrgen Moltmann has popularized a psychologized and, in my judgment, false and
misleading reading of Jesus final prayer in the cross in Mark. In Moltmanns peculiar
Hegelian reading of Jesuss last words, Jesus despairs on the cross and ceases temporarily to be Son, while the Father abandons the Son and ceases temporarily to be Father.
The resurrection negates the negation of the cross and restores the interpersonal
relationship between Son and Father. We shall have occasion to reflect on Moltmanns
reading of the death of Jesus in the third volume of this study. Here it suffices to note
that it combines bad logic with bad exegesis. Cf. Jrgen Moltmann, The Crucified God,
translated by R.A. Wilson and John Bowden (New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1974);
The Trinity and the Kingdom, translated by Margaret Kohl (San Francisco, CA: Harper
& Row, 1981), pp. 75-88. See also: NJBC, 41:106, Mann, op. cit., pp. 646-655;
46. Cf. David Ulansey, The Heavenly Veil Torn: Marks Cosmic Inclusio, Journal of
Biblical Literature, 110(1991), pp. 123-125.
50
relationship to the divine Breath also defines a fundamental dimension

of Christological knowing.
(V)
One finds only sparse references to the Holy Breath in Marks gospel; but
those which occur have considerable significance.
Jesus and the Breath
John the Baptizer, as we have seen, prophesies that a mightier one than
himself will follow him and that this mightier one will prove his superiority to John by baptizing, not just with water but with a sanctifying
Breath. (Mk 1:7-8) Mark writes his gospel, as we have seen, for people
who have experienced Breath-baptism and who already know the identity of the mightier one.
After Jesus baptism by John, the Holy Breath begins Jesus revelation
as the mightier one by descending upon Jesus from an apocalyptic rent in
the heavens. The rent symbolizes the beginning of the end time and the
decisive arrival of salvation from God. (Mk 1:10) The Breath, as we have
also seen, descends in the form of a dove in order to manifest Jesus publicly as the beloved Son of God, as both messiah and suffering servant.
The dove also symbolizes Israel as the object of Gods special delight.
(Cf. Ps 74:19) Hence, the Breath also comes to Jesus under the sign of
the dove in order to reveal Him publicly as the beloved of God and as the
beginning of a new Israel. Indeed, immediately after His messianic commissioning, the Breath drives Jesus out into the desert for His initial confrontation with Satan and the powers of evil. During His forty day sojourn in the desert Jesus relives the first Israels period of desert testing.
The image of the dove over the waters, as we saw above, also recalls the
Noah story and foreshadows the new covenant which Jesus will seal between God and humanity by sheding His blood on the cross and by
baptizing with a sanctifying Breath. (Mk 14:24-5) Indeed, for Mark, Jesus
suffering and death brings His baptismal anointing to its completion by
manifesting Him publicly, not only as messiah but as messiah in the image of the suffering servant of deutero-Isaiah.
The image of the Breath over the waters also recalls the creation narrative which opens Genesis (Gen 1:2) and indicates that Jesus transformation in the power of the Breath begins a new creation.
After the Breath descends, Jesus hears the Father proclaim Him messiah in the image of the suffering servant. (Mk 1:10-1; cf. Ps 2:7, Is 42:1)
The fact that Jesus hears the voice from heaven proclaim Him Son after
the Breaths descent suggests that His Abba awareness results from Her
presence and action within Him.47
47. Cf. James D.G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit (London: SCM Press, 1970), pp.
23-36; Kilian McDonnell and George T. Montague, Christian Initiation and Baptism
Chapter 3: Negative Dramatic Linkages in Mark
51
After His baptism, the Breath immediately drives Jesus into the desert
to begin the final eschatological conflict with Satan. By driving Jesus into
this conflict, the Holy Breath of God declares war on the evil spirits.
As we shall see, the call of the disciples in Mark parallels Jesus messianic commissioning after His baptism, for it draws the disciples into Jesus
own mission by transforming them into fishers of people. (Mk 1:18) In
the same way, the confrontation with the demoniac at Capernaum parallels Jesus confrontation with Satan in the desert. The exorcism at
Capernaum also reveals how the Holy Breath will manifest Jesus messianic authority in the course of His ministry: namely, by endowing His
teaching with compelling authority and by empowering Him to drive
out demons and to heal.48 (Mk 1:21-28)
During His Galilean ministry Jesus interprets the slanderous charge
that he casts out demons in the power of Beelzebul as blasphemy against
the Holy Breath, a sin which blinds one in this life to Gods saving action
in this world and exposes one to damnation in the next life. (Mk 3:28-9)
The incident dramatizes the struggle between the Breath of God and the
breath of evil present in the world and personified by the figure of Satan.49
By alluding to the Holy Breath as the inspiration of the psalms (Mk
12:36), Mark makes it clear that the same divine Breath who had been at
work in Israel prior to Jesus coming is now working in Him to manifest
Him as messiah, suffering servant, and Breath-baptizer.
Finally, Mark indicates that Breath-baptism will manifest itself in the
willingness of Jesus disciples to bear witness to Him even at the risk of
their own lives.50 (Mk 13:9-11)
Breath-baptism effects in the disciples personally and corporately the kind
of awareness which I have called Christological knowing. Christological
in the Holy Spirit: The First Eight Centuries (Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical Press,
1991), pp. 3-14; NJBC, 41:6; Mann, op. cit., pp. 198-205; MWBC, I, pp. 29-36;
Anderson, op. cit., pp. 74-80; Leander E. Keck, The Spirit and the Dove, New
Testament Studies, 17(1970-1971), pp. 41- 67; A. Feuillet, Le symbolisme de la
colombe dans les recits vangeliques du baptme, Recherches de Science Religieuse,
46(1958), pp. 524-544.
48. Cf. C.K. Barrett, The Holy Spirit and the Gospel Tradition (London: SPCK, 1947).
49. Cf. NJBC, 41:23; Mann, op. cit., pp. 251-257; MWBC, I, pp. 166-186; Anderson,
op.cit., pp. 121-125.; Owen E. Evans, The Unforgivable Sin, Expository Times,
68(1956-1957), pp. 240-244; Gottfried Fitzer, Die Snde wider den Heilegen
Geist, Theologische Zeitschrift, 13(1957), pp. 161-182; James G. Williams, A Note
on the Unforgivable Sin Logion, New Testament Studies, 12(1965-1966), pp.
75-76; I. Howard Marshall, Hard SayingsVII, Theology, 67(1964), pp. 65-69.
50. Cf. NJBC, 41:84; Mann, op. cit., pp. 513-520; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 293-295; J.
Giblet, La promesse de lEsprit et la mission des aptres dans les vangeiles, Irenikon,
30(1957), pp. 5-43.
52
knowing, therefore, roots itself in commitment in faith to Jesus, the Breath

baptizer.
The paschal mystery completes Jesus own Breath-baptism. Moreover,
the Holy Breath strengthens the disciples to bear fearless witness to the
risen Lord by inspiring their testimony to Him. In Mark, bearing witness
to Jesus at the risk of ones life gives the clearest evidence of responsiveness to the Breath of Jesus. It functions therefore as the ultimate sign of
Breath-baptism.
Taken together, the positive dramatic linkages in Mark define in a general way the realistic and moral conditions for Christological knowing.
Jesus relationship to John designates Him as the Breath baptizer. Breath
baptism effects Christological knowing by drawing one into Jesus baptismal experience. Jesus relationship to the Father and to the Breath describe Breath-baptisms moral conditions and consequences.
Christological knowing presupposes repentance and personal acceptance of the forgiveness of sins which Jesus embodies and proclaims.
Christological knowing then draws one into Jesus Abba experience. It
frees one to recognize that Jesus speaks with the divine authority of Gods
only Son. It teaches one to relate to Jesus as a brother and to all those who
exhibit the obedience of faith as siblings. Accepting divine forgiveness
commits one to forgive others as gratuitously as God forgives us. Such
mutual forgiveness authenticates prayer. Christological knowing frees one
to trust absolutely Gods power both to save us and to impart transforming risen life. That trust enables one to lay down ones life for the gospel,
if necessary. Finally, Christological knowing teaches one to relate to the
Father with an all-consuming love.
The divine Breath functions as the enlightening source of Christological
knowing. As the Breath teaches one to relate to the Father in Jesus image, She incorporates one into the new Israel which Jesus begins. She also
imparts a share in the new creation which He embodies. By conforming
one to Jesus, the Breath draws one into His mission of proclaiming and
embodying Gods reign. The Breath also inspires Jesus victorious struggle
with Satan.
As we shall soon see, the negative dramatic linkages together with the
thematic and allusive linkages in Mark further develop the conditions for
advancing in Christological knowing. In the chapter which follows I shall
begin to examine the negative dramatic linkages which dramatize the sins
of which the Breath-baptized must repent. I begin with the most negative relationship of all: Jesus relationship to Satan and to everything which
Satan symbolizes.
53
Chapter 3
Negative Dramatic Linkages in Mark
In the preceding chapter I showed how Jesus relationship to John the
Baptizer, to the Father, and to the divine Breath define the overall parameters of Christological knowing. Jesus negative relationships enlarge those
parameters by clarifying the kinds of attitudes and commitments which
Christological knowing excludes. Marks Jesus relates negatively to Satan,
to the scribes and Pharisees, to Herod, to the chief priests, and to Pilate.
Taken collectively, these enemies of Jesus and of the kingdom symbolize
the forces of anti-Christ. Prophetic resistance to them in Jesus image
further assimilates the disciples to Him in the power of His Breath.
This chapter divides into five parts. Part one examines Jesus conflict
with Satan and his demons. Part two ponders Jesus quarrel with the scribes
and Pharisees. Part three meditates Jesus relationship to Herod. Part four
analyses Jesus battle with the chief priests. Part five reflects on His trial
and execution by Pilate.
(I)
As we saw in the last chapter, Jesus messianic commissioning by the Father in the enlightening empowerment of the Holy Breath plunges Him
into immediate conflict with Satan. The Holy Breath expels Him with
force into the desert (ekballei eis ten eremon) to confront the prince of
darkness. (Mk 1:12-3)
Jesus and Satan
In his account of Jesus desert temptation, Mark, with a dense overlay of
images, once again compresses a multiplicity of theological insights into
just a few verses. That Jesus confronts Satan in the desert has symbolic
meaning. That confrontation points to Him rather than to John as the
one who will fulfill the messianic expectation that Israels final salvation
will dawn in the desert. The violence with which the Holy Breath drives
Jesus into the desert (expressed in the verb ekballei) foreshadows the
violence of Gods final confrontation with the forces of evil which Jesus
ministry, death, and resurrection will accomplish. Jesus remains in the
desert forty days and forty nights. His forty-day desert sojourn recalls
Israels forty years of desert wandering and testing and portrays Jesus as
the Breath-filled beginning and prototype of a new Israel.
Mark depicts Jesus in the desert surrounded by wild beasts. The image
recalls Adam in the garden of Eden surrounded by the beasts whom God
presents to him for naming. (Gen 2:18-20) Jesus implicit identification
54
with the figure of Adam underscores the newness and universality of the
salvation which He brings: namely, that it begins a new creation. While
the image of the new creation foreshadows Jesus ultimate victory over
Satan when He rises from the dead as the Breath-baptizer whom John has
just foretold, the beasts also have sinister connotations. Desert animals in
the Old Testament symbolized the dangerous and destructive forces which
dwell in the desert. Here they symbolize Jesus conflict with those same
demonic forces. (Cf. Lev 16:10; Is 13:21-2, 14: 23, 30:6, 34:11-6; Zeph
2:14) The figure of Jesus surrounded by wild beasts also conjures up the
image of Christians thrown to the beasts in the Roman arena during the
persecution of Nero. Ministering angels sustain Jesus in His desert conflict. The members of the new Israel which Jesus begins can, therefore,
look forward to analogous divine support in their own confrontation
with the powers of darkness.1 (Mk 1:12-13; cf. Mk 13:9-11)
Mark parallels Jesus messianic commissioning with the call of the disciples. In the same way, the evangelist parallels Jesus confrontation with
Satan in the desert with His first exorcism in the synagogue in Capernaum.
The demoniac at Capernaum responds in terror to Jesus Breath-filled,
authoritative proclamation of the kingdom.
As we have seen, the demon not only recognizes Jesus but perceives His
ministry, quite correctly, as a systematic assault the whole demonic realm
ruled by Satan. (Mk 3:22-7) Jesus implicitly confirms the truth of what
the unclean spirit has said by silencing it and casting it out with pneumatic authority. Mark dramatizes the violence of the conflict between the
Holy Breath in Jesus and the unclean spirit in the demoniac by the violence of the demons departure. It leaves, but only after throwing the
demoniac into wrenching convulsions.2 (Mk 1:25-6)
Mark, moreover, habitually describes possessing demons as unclean.
(Mk 1:32-34, 39, 5:1-20, 7:24-30, 9:14-29) Demon possession defiles
one, renders one ritually impure. It excludes one from the community of
the undefiled. Jesus exorcisms in Mark, therefore, not only deliver the
possessed from Satanic domination but also, by purifying those defiled
by demons, re-incorporate them into the communion of the saints.3
Jesus commands demons with personal authority and they obey Him.
(Mk 1:27) The demons recognize Jesus spontaneously as the messiah,
though humans do not. Both facts imply the divine, transcendent char1. Cf. NJBC, 41:6; Mann, op. cit., pp. 198-204; MWBC, pp. 36-40; Anderson, op. cit.,
pp. 81-83; Matthew Black, The Temptation and the Passion: The Markan Soteriology
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965); Herbert Haag, Der Teufel im
Judentum und Christentum Saeculum, 34(1983), pp. 248-258.
pp. 89-93.
3. Cf. Peter Pimentel, The unclean spirits of St. Marks Gospel, Expository Times,
99(1987- 1988), pp. 173-175.
55
acter of Jesus call and mission. Later Jesus Himself will argue that the
realm of the demonic remains subject only to the divine and that His
exorcisms in the power of Gods Breath therefore make Gods reign present
in His person and mission. (Mk 3:22-27)
The demonic conflict begun in the synagogue continues that evening
when, after the end of the sabbath rest, the people of Capernaum bring
to Jesus the sick for healing and the demoniacally possessed for exorcism.
Once again, Jesus silences the demons who, like the unclean spirit in the
synagogue, all spontaneously recognize His divine authority and messianic identity. (Mk 1:34) The repeated silencing of the demons at the
beginning of Jesus ministry introduces dramatically the Markan theme
of Jesus messianic secret, a notion which I shall consider in more detail
when I examine thematic linkages in Mark.4 (Mk 1:34)
Mark portrays Jesus ministry as Gods final eschatological struggle with
the demonic realm of Satan and of evil. More than the other synoptic
evangelists, Mark places exorcism at the heart of Jesus ministry of proclamation. As Jesus begins His ministry in Galilee He travels about preaching in synagogues and casting out demons. (Mk 1:39) In a dramatic and
symbolic manner, he expels the demon named Legion from the Gerasene
demoniac. (Mk 5:1-13) In response to the faith of the Syro-Phoenician
woman, Jesus casts a demon out from Her daughter even at a distance.
(Mk 7:26, 29-30) That Jesus can exorcise at a distance without even confronting the demon face-to-face dramatizes the easy authority He wields
over the realm of Satan.
When Jesus calls the Twelve to begin a new Israel, He empowers them
to cast out demons as well. (Mk 3:15) That they do so successfully not
only dramatizes Jesus authority over the realm of Satan but also draws
the new Israel into the same demonic conflict as Jesus Himself. (Mk 6:13)
The pseudonymous ending to Marks gospel makes this same point explicitly. After noting the tradition that Jesus had cast seven demon from
Mary of Magdala, the final redactor of Mark portrays the disciples of
Jesus continuing His ministry of exorcism after His resurrection.5 (Mk
16:9, 17)
The story of the Gerasene demoniac links Jesus power to exorcise implicitly and symbolically to His divinity. Moreover, the narrative strategies which Mark uses in order to make this link illustrate well the way in
which the evangelist ties his story together through the use of literary
allusion. First of all, Mark uses allusion in order to associate the two
cosmological miracles of Jesus. In both miracles, Jesus conquers the sea,
pp. 93-95; B. Kollman, Jesu Schweigegebote und die Daemonen, Zeitschrift fr die
Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 82(1991), pp. 267-273.
5. As we shall see, both Matthew and Luke will mute by editing Marks theme of demonic
conflict.
56
the Biblical image of primal chaos. Together, as we shall see, these two
miracles disclose the divinity of Jesus. Second, Mark uses the image of
the sea in order to link the two cosmological miracles to Jesus exorcism
of the Gerasene demoniac. As these allusively linked events throw light
on one another, they reveal the divine source of Jesus authority over the
kingdom of Satan.
In addition, Jesus two cosmological miracles, His calming of the storm
(Mk 4:35-41) and His walking on the water (Mk 6:45-52), both allude
to the central question which Jesus at Caesarea Philippi will put to His
disciples and to the reader: Who do you say that I am? (Mk 8:29)
These same miracles also give the reader important clues for answering
Jesus question correctly. Let us try to understand Marks clues.
After Jesus for the first time calms the storm, in this case by a simple
commandan act possible only for Godthe disciples ask themselves a
slight variation of the very question which Jesus will put to them at
Caesarea Philippi. The disciples ask one another: Who is this that even
the wind and the sea obey Him? (Mk 4:41)
Mark would have expected His reader to know the answer to the disciples question: namely, God only can tame the forces of chaos by the
power of His word. (Cf. Gen 1:1-3) That the disciples in the story seem
incapable of coming up with the right answer to their own question only
exemplifies their obtuseness and lack of faith. That same faith, however,
Mark presupposes his reader to have.6 (Cf. Mk 6:51-2, 8:20-21)
Moreover, in case the reader did not get the point in the first story of
the calming of the storm, Mark reiterates it more explicitly. He does so in
his account of Jesus walking on the water, which ends with a second
victory over chaos.
After the first miracle of the loaves, the disciples re-embark on the Sea
of Galilee, this time without Jesus. They suddenly find themselves once
again engulfed in a storm which threatens to drown them. Then the terrified disciples see Jesus coming to them walking on the water and mistake Him for some kind of apparition. In the Old Testament God walks
on the water, but mere humans cannot. (Job 9:8, 38:16)
While walking on the water, Jesus intends to pass by the disciples.
(Mk 6:48) The phrase pass by alludes to other Old Testament
theophanies. God passes by both Moses and Elijah on the mount of the
covenant.7 (Ex 33:18-34:6; I King 19:11)
cit., pp. 141-146; John Paul Heil, Jesus Walking on the Sea (Rome: Biblical Institute,
1981), pp. 119-144; Albert Fuchs, La Pericopa de la Tempestad Calmada (Mc 4,
35-42 par.) en el Kerigma de la Iglesia Primitiva, Estudios Biblicos, 48(1990), pp.
351-373.
7. Cf. John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (3 vols.; New York,
NY: Doubleday, 1994), II, pp. 905-933; NJBC, 41:52; Mann, op. cit., pp. 328-335;
57
The very fact that Jesus walks on the water points, then, to the fact that
He is God; but, lest the reader have any doubt, Mark has Jesus apply the
divine name to Himself. He reassures the disciples by saying: Courage! I
am! (ego eimi) Fear not! (Mk 6:50) The phrase I am applies the divine
name to Jesus (Ex 3:14; Deut 32:39; Is 41:4, 43:10) and transforms His
walking on the water into a theophany.
Mark ends the incident by noting that had the disciples at that time
possessed the kind of faith which would have allowed them to grasp the
symbolic meaning of the multiplication of the loaves, they would have
also grasped simultaneously the significance of this theophany. Both
multiplications of the loaves foreshadow the eucharist. In both miracles,
Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it, and gives it, as He does in the
eucharist. (Mk 6:41, 8:6, 14:22) In Mark, moreover, the eucharist derives its meaning from the paschal mystery which it introduces and
contextualizes. In other words, if the disciples had eucharistic faith in the
paschal mystery they would recognize the significance of Jesus walking
on the water and invoking the divine name, because they would acknowledge His divinity.8
The faithless disciples remain, however, for the time being completely
bewildered. One is tempted to say at sea. Commentators on Mark who
find in his gospel only a low Christology put themselves in same boat
as the obtuse and unbelieving disciples prior to the resurrection.9
The two cosmological miracles, then, assert the divinity of Jesus in
narrative form by attributing to Him divine power over the forces of
chaos. The deliverance of the Gerasene demoniac then links Jesus divine
power over the forces of chaos and of evil to His power to exorcise.
Guelich, MWBC, I, pp. 328-335; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 200-205; John Paul Heil,
Jesus Walking on the Sea (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981), pp. 119-144.
8. Quentin Quesnell has, I believe, put his finger on an important key to Marks entire
gospel through his analysis of the deep sacramental significance of the events
surrounding the two miracles of the loaves. Mark clearly wants these events to disclose
to the reader a much deeper significance than at first appears. The network of allusive
linkages which Mark weaves around these two miracles of multiplication further
suggests that Mark wants the reader to use the miracles of the loaves as a key to
understanding how to interpret the gospel as a whole. By that I mean that Mark writes
a gospel of event and intends that the reader ponder the deep religious significance
which emerges as different events throw light on one anothers deeper sacramental
significance. Cf. Quentin Quesnell, The Mind of Mark, Analecta Biblica No. 38
(Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1969). See also: NJBC, 41:45. See also: Norman
A. Beek, Reclaiming a Biblical Text: The Mark 8:14-21 Discussion about Bread in
a Boat,Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 43(1981), pp. 49-56; Elizabeth Struthers Malbon,
Echoes and Foreshadowings in Mark 4-8: Reading and Rereading, Journal of Biblical
Literature, 112(1993), pp. 211-239; Karl Kertelege, The Epiphany of Jesus in the
Gospel (Mark) in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 105-125.
9. See, for example, Javier Jos Marin, The Christology of Mark (Bern: Lang, 1991).
58
The Gerasene demoniac comes to Jesus from his home in the tombs,
the place of death and the haunt of demons. The fact that people have
tried unsuccessfully to control the demoniac, even with chains and fetters, gives eloquent testimony to the power which the demons exert over
him, as does the fact that the demons force the demoniac to do violence
to himself. (Mk 5:2-5) Jesus deliverance of the demoniac expresses therefore His power over life and death which the raising of the daughter of
Jairus will soon dramatize even more graphically. (Mk 5:41-42)
Mark uses other allusions in order to link the exorcism of the Gerasene
demoniac to Jesus first exorcism in the synagogue at Capernaum. In
both stories, Mark refers to the demon as an unclean spirit. (Mk 5:2,
1:23) Moreover, the Gerasene demon puts to Jesus virtually the same
question as the unclean spirit in Capernaum had: What have you to do
with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? (Mk 5:6, 1:23) In both
incidents Jesus power to exorcise evokes terror in the demon and the
realization that he is under attack. In response to Jesus exorcism, the
Gerasene demon cries out: In Gods name, do not torment me! (Mk
5:6)
The Gerasene demon names Jesus. Very likely the demon does so as a
way of trying to exert power over Him. Jesus turns the tables on the
demon by forcing it to confess its own name before He casts it out.
The demon gives the name Legion because more than one inhabits
the demoniac. The name Legion also has clear political symbolism.
The Roman legions spread the empire through conquest. They also policed, often with extreme violence and cruelty, the lands they had conquered. The demons name, therefore, identifies him with Roman social,
political, military, and economic oppression. The drowning of Legion in
the Sea of Galilee also assimilates Rome and its legions to Pharaoh and
his charioteers, who perished at Gods hand in the Red Sea. (Ex 14:26-31)
Legion asks permission to enter a herd of pigs, animals which the Torah banned as unclean. (Lev 11:7) Jesus gives the requested permission.
Legion possesses the pigs and drives them into the waters of chaos which
Jesus has just calmed with divine power. As a biblical symbol for chaos
the waters provide a place as connatural to the demons as the tombs had
been. (Mk 5:10-3) That the pigs perish in the waters which Jesus has just
calmed with divine authority manifests that His mastery over the powers
of chaos includes His power over Satan and his minions. Jesus divine
authority over the forces of chaos, therefore, grounds His power to exorcise. That same authority will one day triumph over Rome, its legions,
and everything which both symbolize.10
When the former demoniac, now delivered and quieted, begs to accompany Jesus, He sends the man instead to tell his own pagan people
10. Cf. Myers, op.cit., pp. 246-248.
59
about what Jesus has done for him. Jesus reply and the mans proclamation of Jesus in the Ten Cities foreshadows Jesus proclamation to the
Gentiles after His resurrection.11 (Mk 5:18-20)
The fact that Jesus power to exorcise reveals His divine origin highlights the depths of unbelief which the Jerusalem scribes manifest when
they accuse Jesus of exorcising in the power of Beelzebul, or of Satan.
(Mk 3:20-3)
Jesus replies to the slander first of all by a reduction to the absurd: If
Satan is casting out Satan, his kingdom is crumbling and his power at an
end. (Mk 3:23-4) The response expresses deep irony: even when the Jerusalem scribes slander Jesus, they find themselves nevertheless forced to admit that His power over the demons spells the end of Satans reign.
Having shown the absurdity of the charge, Jesus then uses a comparison in order to assert the true significance of His exorcisms: namely, that
they manifest the superior power of the divine Breath dwelling in Him.
She empowers His exorcisms. Only one stronger than Satan can bind
Satan, just as only a stronger man can overpower a weaker one. (Mk
3:27) The fact that Jesus has greater power than Satan discloses, therefore, the divine origin of His power to exorcise.12
One finds only two other references to Satan in Mark. In his allegorical
application of the parable of the sower to the apostolic Church, Mark
identifies the birds which eat up the seed sown by the path with Satan.
(Mk 4:4, 15) Satan seeks to pluck out the seed of faith from the heart of
those who believe by putting them to the test.
This allegorical interpretation of Satans activity identifies him not only
as the enemy of Jesus but also as the enemy of faith in Him. The allegory
also lends added irony to the controversy over Beelzebul, since it suggests
that the unbelief of the scribes who charged Jesus with exorcising in the
power of Beelzebul stemmed from their having yielded to the very power
of evil which they claimed to discover in Jesus.13
Marks final reference to Satan occurs when Jesus rebukes Peter for trying to keep Him from walking the way of the cross. Jesus tells Peter: Out
of my sight, Satan! (hupage opispo mou, satana)! For you are intent not on
the things of God but of humans. (Mk 8:33)
11. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 650-653; NJBC, 41:35; Mann, op. cit., pp.
276-281; MWBC, I, pp. 271-278; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 147-151; Thomas Schmeller,
Jesus im Umland Galilas: zu den markinsichen Berichten am Aufenhalt Jesu in die
Gebieten von Tyros, Caesarea Philippi und der Dekapolis, Biblische Zeitschrift,
38(1994), pp. 44-66.
12. Cf. Heinz Kruse, S.J., Das Reich Satans, Biblica, 58(1977), pp. 29-61; NJBC,
41:23; Mann, op. cit., pp. 251-257; Guelich, MWBC, I, pp.166-186; Anderson, op.
cit., pp. 121-124.
cit., pp. 132-135.
60
Peters opposition to Jesus passion illustrates how Satan tests Jesus disciples: namely, by teaching them to resist the cross. In opposing the cross
Peter transforms himself into an adversary of Jesus and puts Him to the
test as Satan had in the desert. Jesus underscores the point by then demanding that every disciple of His must walk the way of the cross behind
Him. Failure to do so causes the loss of ones very self and will transform
the faithless disciple into one of whom the Son of Man will be ashamed
on the day of final judgment.14 (Mk 8:34-7)
Clearly, for Mark, conflict with Satan and his kingdom assimilates the
believing disciple to Jesus. In other words, that conflict constitutes an
important dimension of Christological knowing. The Breath-filled disciple confronts Satan in two ways.
First, Satan seeks to undermine faith in Jesus. Mark hints, moreover, at
the way in which Satan attempts to destroy faith. The demon named
Legion identifies the realm of Satan with oppressive institutions like
the Roman empire. Organized oppression and persecution by the political powers both put the faith-commitment of the disciples to a severe
test. Under persecution, however, the divine Breath inspires the disciples
witness to Jesus.
Second, one also confronts Satan in the power of the Breath by sharing
in Jesus own power to exorcise. The disciples therefore participate in
Jesus victorious authority over Satan and his minions. Moreover, Jesus
relationship to Satan defines the context within which one ought to understand all the other negative dramatic linkages in Mark; for whatever
opposes Jesus and the kingdom embodies the realm of Satan.
This section has reflected on Jesus relationship to Satan. The section
which follows begins to examine the human forces which oppose the
gospel and put Jesus to the test. It focuses on Jesus conflict with the
scribes and Pharisees.
(II)
Mark contrasts Jesus teaching style with that of the scribes. Jesus speaks
with an authority derived from His messianic anointing by the Holy
Breath. (Mk 1:22) The scribes, by contrast, argue by appealing to the
authority of famous rabbis.
Jesus and the Scribes and Pharisees
Repeatedly in Marks narrative, Jesus relates negatively to the scribes and
Pharisees. The conflict goes beyond teaching style. Mark begins Jesus
public ministry with a series of conflicts between Jesus, on the one hand,
14. Cf. NJBC, 41:57; Mann, op. cit., pp. 342-354; Anderson, op. cit., p. 217.
61
and the scribes and Pharisees, on the other. The conflicts contrast legalistic piety and religious hypocrisy, on the one hand, with the moral demands of life in the kingdom which Jesus, on the other hand, proclaims
with pneumatic authority.
Mark records four sets of conflict stories. Five conflicts with the scribes
and Pharisees open Jesus Galilean ministry. Subsequently, scribes from
Jerusalem accuse Jesus of exorcising in the power of Beelzebul. Two conflicts occur during the bread section of Mark. Four confrontations happen during the way section. Jesus confronts the scribes and Pharisees
three times in His Jerusalem ministry. Finally, scribes, members of the
Sanhedrin, join the chief priests in mocking the crucified Jesus.15
In the first conflict story, Jesus scandalizes some scribes when He assures a paralytic lowered through the roof by friends that his sins are
forgiven. Jesus first reads the scribes censorious thoughts and then, as we
have seen, proves that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive
sins by curing the paralytic. The crowds glorify God at the miracle. (Mk
2:1-12) The scribes, however, understand well what Jesus has said and
done: namely, He has claimed the right to do something which only God
can do.16
In the first conflict story, the scribes pass judgment on Jesus but keep
their thoughts to themselves. In the second story, the conflict takes overt
form. Scribes of the Pharisee party17 object to Jesus table fellowship with
sinners. Marks text leaves one in the dark concerning the exact location
of the dinner. The confrontation follows the call of Levi, the tax collector.
Some locate the party in Levis house; but grammatically it could have
happened in Jesus house. For a Jew to have welcomed public sinners into
his own home would have posed an even greater scandal than dining in a
sinners home.18 (Mk 2:16) The scribes in question do not themselves
attend the banquet; but they observe Jesus eating with tax collectors and
sinners and express their surprise to Jesus disciples. Jesus overhears and
replies: The healthy have not need for a physician, but the sick do. I
have not come to call the righteous (dikaious) but sinners. (Mk 2:17)
15. Cf. Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, The Jewish Leaders in the Gospel of Mark: A literary
Study of Markan Characterization, Journal of Biblical Literature, 108(1989), pp.
259-281; Jack Dean Kingsbury, The Religious Authorities in the Gospel of Mark,
New Testament Studies, 36(1990), pp. 42-65.
16. Cf. NJBC, 41:15; Mann, op. cit., pp. 221-228; Guelich, MWBC, I, pp. 89-96;
Anderson, op. cit., pp. 98-102; Richard T. Mead, The Healing of the ParalyticA
Unit? Journal of Biblical Literature, 80(1961), pp. 348-354.
17. A Pharisee belonged to a pious fraternity, while a scribe plied a specific trade. Here
we find some people who did both.
18. Cf. David M. May, Mark 2.15: The House of Jesus or Levi, New Testament Studies,
39(1993), pp. 147-149.
62
Jesus reply suggests that His table fellowship with sinners flows from
the mission given Him by the Father to proclaim a message of repentance
and of the nearness of Gods kingdom. (Mk 1:15) As physicians risk contact with physical contagion to bring healing, so Jesus risks contact with
the contagion of sin in order to bring about repentance and conversion.
Jesus ironically calls the Pharisees righteous. Their righteousness,
measured by the standard of the kingdom amounts to self-righteous religious snobbery. Jesus will have none of it.19
A third encounter between Jesus and some Pharisees follows immediately. Some Pharisees and some of Johns disciples join forces to confront
Jesus over the issue of fasting. Jesus disciples do not observe the same
optional fast days which both the Pharisees and Johns disciples do. (Mk
2:18) Jesus, as we have seen, replies that they will fast but that they cannot as long as the bridegroom remains among them.
The image of the bridegroom, as we have also seen, has both divine and
messianic connotations. It also connotes the spousal relationship between
Israel and God. In effect, then, Jesus replies that the disciples cannot fast
because they are overwhelmed by the joy of encountering in His person
both the coming of the messiah and the presence of Gods faithful love
for His faithless people. (Mk 2:19-20)
Moreover, as we have also seen, Mark appends two parables to this
saying which suggest the reason why both Johns disciples and the Pharisees take scandal at Jesus disciples joy and at their lack of asceticism.
Their judgmentalism flows from their unwillingness to recognize the utter newness of the reality which confronts them in the person of Jesus.20
(Mk 2:21-2)
The fourth conflict story concerns the disciples violation of the sabbath by picking and shucking corn to eat. The disciples act of gleaning
produce left in the fields for the poor to take marks them as belonging to
the anawim, the vulnerable poor. (Lev 19:9-10) Jesus defends them by
citing the precedent of David, who also violated the law in order to feed
himself and his hungry men on the loaves of offering reserved for the
priests. (Mk 2:23-26; cf. 1 Sam 2:2-7; Lev 24:5-9) Jesus first argument
refutes the Pharisees attempt to impose arbitrary restrictions on the disciples behavior.
Jesus then asserts: The sabbath was made for people, not people for
the sabbath. Therefore, the Son of Man is Lord even of the sabbath.
(Mk 2:27-8) This second argument appeals to Gods intention in estab19. Cf. NJBC, 41:16; Mann, op. cit., pp. 228-232; MWBC, I, pp. 96-106; Anderson, op.
cit., pp. 102-106; Robert L. Mowery, Pharisees and Scribes, Galilee and Jerusalem,
Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 80(1988), pp. 266-268.
20. Cf. NJBC, 41: 17; Mann, op. cit., pp. 232-236; MWBC, I, pp. 106-117; Anderson,
op. cit., pp. 106-108.
63
lishing a day of rest: the rest seeks to benefit and humanize people. Jesus
claim, however, to have authority over the sabbath would have deeply
shocked Jesus adversaries, who regarded God as the Lord of the sabbath.
Moreover, Mark probably wants the reader to interpret Jesus Lordship in
the light of the paschal mystery.21
The conflict with the Pharisees reaches its culmination in the fifth and
final healing story. Confronted with a man with a withered hand in a
synagogue on the sabbath, Jesus tells the man to stand in front of the
assembly. He then challenges those present to acknowledge that traditional Torah piety allows one to do good deeds on the sabbath. They
refuse intransigently to respond to the challenge. Like the Pharaoh in the
exodus, they harden their hearts. (Ex 7:13-14, 8:15, 19, 32, 9: 7, 12, 35)
In anger and frustration at their hardness of heart, Jesus tells the man to
hold out the withered hand. When he does, he finds his hand restored.
Unmoved by the miracle, the Pharisees immediately join with the
Herodians to plot Jesus death. (Mk 3:1-6)
The Herodians appear here for the first time in Mark. Their instant,
murderous enmity toward Jesus makes it clear that Jesus and John have
the same political adversaries.22
The five initial encounters with the scribes and Pharisees form a literary unit in Mark. The five incidents also throw light on one another.
Jesus incarnates Yahwehs faithful love for his sinful people. That love
manifests itself in Jesus concern to call sinners to repentance just as it
inspires spontaneous joy in anyone who follows Him. As the embodiment of that divine love Jesus confronts the Pharisees as something utterly new.
The full scope of the newness which Jesus embodies appears, when as
Son of Man he claims authority over both sin and the sabbath. Mark
portrays Jesus authority in messianic and eschatological terms. Jesus in
effect claims an authority proper only to God, the Lord of the sabbath,
who alone can forgive sins.
In the end the Pharisees find themselves utterly scandalized by Jesus
and His claims. As a result, when He cures a man on the sabbath, they
immediately begin to conspire with the Herodians, the client Jewish aristocracy, to have Jesus killed. In Mark, then, Jesus early conflict with the
cit., pp. 108-111; Maurice Casey.Culture and Historicity: The Plucking of the Grain
(Mark 2.23-28), New Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 1-23; Damia Roure, Jesus y
la Figura de David en Mc 2,23-26 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1990).
22. Cf. W.J. Bennett, Jr., The Herodians in Marks Gospel, Novum Testamentum,
17(1975), pp. 9-14; NJBC, 41:19; Mann, op. cit., pp. 240-243; MWBC, I, pp.
130-141; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 111-114; Stephen H. Smith, Mark 3:1-6: Form,
Redaction, and Community Function, Biblica, 75(1994), pp. 153-174.
64
Pharisees transforms them at the very beginning of His ministry into His
mortal enemies.23
As Marks story of Jesus unfolds, conflict between Him and the scribes
and Pharisees intensifies. Scribes from Jerusalem malign Jesus by suggesting that He casts out devils by the power of Beelzebul. (Mk 3:22) That
they come from Jerusalem suggests that they function as agents of the
temple priesthood.
In refuting their slander, Jesus unmasks the deep reason for the scribes
hostility: their own lack of faith and resistance to the Holy Breath. Jesus
warns the scribes that they can find forgiveness for merely slandering
Him, but when they call the manifest work of the divine Breath a work of
the devil, they only betray the fact that they have closed their hearts to
Her influence in this life and therefore court damnation in the next.24
(Mk 3:28-30)
The Pharisees in the Bread Section of Mark
The Pharisees appear in the bread section of Marks gospel after each
miracle of multiplication. Their presence there underscores the incompatibility of Pharisaical and eucharistic piety.
After the first miracle of the loaves, the Pharisees consort with the scribes
from Jerusalem, spies for the temple priests. They criticize Jesus disciples,
people of the land, for not observing ritual purity in washing before
meals. (Mk 7:1-5) The criticism expresses the Pharisees desire to extend
to all Jews the laws of ritual purity binding on the levitical priesthood, as
a symbol that all Jews belong to a priestly people.
Jesus defends the disciples for not performing such libations. Citing
Isaiah, Jesus accuses the Jerusalem delegation of offering God only lip
service and worthless worship because their hearts remain trapped in a
stubborn unrepentance which leads them to substitute human traditions
for the demands of the Law. In defending His disciples, Jesus also attacks
the Pharisees purity code which distinguishes between the religiously
clean and unclean. (Mk 7:6-7; Is 29:13)
In proof of this charge, Jesus condemns the practice of korban as a
violation of the commandment: honor your father and mother. The practice sanctioned dedicating property to God as a way of removing any
claim to it which aging parents might have. Such heartless treatment of
the aged reveals that Jesus adversaries have yet to repent and hear the
good news of the kingdom. (Mk 7:8-13)
23. Cf. Joanna Dewey, The Literary Structure of the Controversy Stories in Mark
2:1-3:6 in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 141-151.
cit., pp. 121-124.
65
After the second miracle of the loaves, some Pharisees challenge Jesus
to perform some striking miracle as a way of validating His right to speak
and act as He does. The sign they request probably has apocalyptic and
triumphalistic connotations. They doubt His ability to comply with their
demand and thus hope to discredit Him publicly. Mark uses the incident
to underscore the lack of faith which motivates the Pharisees malice. In
putting Jesus to the test, the Pharisees commit the sin of testing God, i.e.
of themselves setting the conditions for religious faith rather than meeting the conditions set by God. Jesus, deeply troubled by their hostility,
refuses to perform any sign. He also sees their unbelief as symptomatic of
the unbelief of all His contemporaries.25 (Mk 8:11-2)
This last confrontation provides the immediate context for Jesus warning to the disciples to avoid the leaven of Herod and of the Pharisees if
they expect to understand the miracle of the loaves. (Mk 8:15) The warning alludes to all the preceding confrontations between Jesus and the
Pharisees. Hence, by the leaven of the Pharisees Jesus means unbelief,
superficial legalism, religious hypocrisy, unrepentance, replacing the deep
intent of the Torah with mere human customs, self-righteousness,
judgmentalism, hostility of heart, and testing God. In contrasting these
attitudes with the meaning of the two miracles of the loaves, Mark stigmatizes them as irreconcilable with authentic eucharistic piety.26
The Pharisees Along the Way to Jerusalem
Mark punctuates the way section of his gospel with four incidents whhich
involve Jesus, on the one hand, and the scribes and Pharisees, on the
other. 1) On His final journey to Jerusalem, Jesus foresees that the scribes27
will connive with the temple priesthood to put Him to death. (Mk 8:31;
10:33) 2) Later, Jesus sanctions the belief of the scribes and Pharisees that
Elijah must return before the resurrection can take place; but He regards
the ministry and death of the Baptist as the fulfillment of that expectation and as a foreshadowing of His own death. (Mk 9:9-13) 3) As Jesus
draws closer to Jerusalem and to His own death, the scribes take to harassing the disciples. On descending from the mount of the Transfiguration, Jesus finds the disciples in dispute with some scribes over their failure to exorcise the epileptic demoniac boy. As we shall see below, the
hostility of the scribes, the unbelief of the boys father, and the disciples
25. Cf. NJBC, 41:47, 52; Mann, op. cit., pp. 310-314; MWBC, I, pp. 359-381, 410-425;
Anderson, op. cit., pp. 180-186, 198-202; Jeffrey Gibson, Jesus Refusal to Produce
a Sign (Mk 8.11-13), Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 38(1990), pp.
37-66; Elian Aivillier, Tradition et redaction en Marc 7:1-23, Novum Testamentum,
34(1992), pp. 169-192.
26. Cf. NJBC, 41:52; Terence J. Keegan, The Parable of the Sower and Marks Jewish
Leaders, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 56(1994), pp. 501-518.
27. Here scribes probably means the same as the Sanhedrin.
66
reliance on themselves rather than on Godall these things drive Jesus

to utter exasperation. (Mk 9:14) 4) Finally, as Jesus approaches Jerusalem, Pharisees approach Jesus in order to put Him to the test. They ask
Jesus to choose between a strict and lenient interpretation of Mosaic divorce practices. They apparently anticipate that He will take the lenient
position. To their surprise, Jesus repudiates Mosaic divorce practices altogether and justifies His response to by appealing to Gods original intent
in creating marriage.28 (Mk 10:1-11)
Scribes and Pharisees in the Jerusalem Ministry
During Jesus Jerusalem ministry, the scribes and Pharisees again figure
prominently as His enemies and adversaries. As Jesus had foretold, the
scribes and temple priests plot together to have Him killed; but their fear
of the crowds, who hang on Jesus teachings, keep them at first from
acting. (Mk 11:18)
After Jesus cleanses the temple, the chief priests, scribes, and elders
challenge His authority to act in the way He does. As we have seen, Jesus
plays on their fear of the crowds and refuses to respond unless they tell
Him by what authority John acted. In the process, He summons them to
acknowledge the prophetic character of both Johns and His own ministry. He also challenges them to acknowledge the lack of repentance which
has kept them from hearing both John and Himself.29 (Mk 11:27-8)
Shortly thereafter, the cabal of Pharisees and Herodians who has been
plotting Jesus death try and get Him to forbid paying taxes to Caesar. As
we have seen elsewhere, Jesus challenges them to place the kingdom before all else by recognizing the image of God in others.30 (Mk 12:13, cf
3:6)
Soon after this encounter, Jesus calls into question scribal teaching that
the title Son of David offers an adequate description of the messiah.
Jesus cites Psalm 110, a messianic psalm. Jesus attributes its composition
to David and points out that David composed the psalm under the inspiration of the divine Breath, and therefore with divine sanction. Jesus then
notes that in verse one of the psalm David refers to the messiah as Lord.
Jesus therefore concludes that the messiah must be more than just Davids
son. (Mk 13:35-7)
Jesus is asserting that scribal endorsement of secular Jewish messianic
hopes prevents them from recognizing in Him a messiah superior to David
and to any messianic pretender who resembles David. The true messiah
will surpass David as his Lord. (Mk 13:35-37) Mark almost certainly
28. Cf. NJBC, 41:56-58, 62.
30. Cf. NJBC, 41:77; Mann, op. cit., pp. 468-472; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 274-276; Paul
Corby Finney, The Rabbi and the Coin Portrait (Mark 12:15b,16): Rigorism
Manque, Journal of Biblical Literature, 112(1993), pp. 629-644.
67
intended his readers to hear the title Lord with faith and to see in it a
reference to the Lordship of Jesus. In effect, then, the evangelist is asserting that only someone who combines divinity and humanity in his
own person can act as messiah.
Jesus teaching on Davidic messianism highlights another point of disagreement between Jesus and the Jerusalem scribes: they believe in using
force to establish the kingdom of God, while Jesus does not. Because they
misconceive the messiahs character and role, they cannot recognize Jesus
as the messiah.31
Toward the end of His Jerusalem ministry, Jesus again warns His disciples against scribal religious hypocrisy. He ridicules scribes who take
the first seats in synagogues and who covet public praise and the honor of
sitting in the first place at feasts. These hypocrites also pray long prayers
to God at the same time that they oppress widows and deprive them of
their little means of support. (Mk 12:38-9)
Jesus is referring to a practice of lawyers who served as the trustees of
widows: they regularly claimed part of the estate as payment for their
services. In Jesus eyes, they tended to claim more than they deserved. As
we shall see, in Mark as in the other synoptics, for Jesus, the willingness
to share ones bread with the poor expresses the kind of authentic faith
which membership in the kingdom requires. Instead of compassionating
the poor, the scribal lawyers take from them the little they possess.
Jesus immediately contrasts the cupidity of the scribal lawyers with the
generosity of the poor widow who gives her last cent to pay the temple
tax. (Mk 12:41-3) The story of the widows mite implicitly castigates
burdening the poor with the temple taxes in order to fill the coffers of the
rich priestly aristocracy. While admirable in a way for her foolhardy generosity, the woman functions more as an example of oppression than as
someone to emulate. Accordingly, Jesus prediction of the destruction of
the temple follows immediately.32 (Mk 13-14)
In his account of Jesus Jerusalem ministry, however, Mark makes it
clear that not all the scribes regarded Jesus with hostility. When a scribe
approves of Jesus teaching on the great commandment, Jesus replies that
he is not far from entering the kingdom.33 (Mk 12:28-34)
The Scribes in the Passion
In his passion narrative, Mark refers to members of the Sanhedrin as
scribes. Scribes accompany the chief priests when the arrest finally occurs (Mk 14:43), and, scribal members of the Sanhedrin fulfill Jesus proph31. Cf. NJBC, 41:80; Mann, op. cit., pp. 482-487; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 283-286.
32. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Eating up the Houses of Widows: Jesus Comment on
Lawyers, Novum Testamentum, 14(1972), pp. 1-9; Mann, op. cit., pp. 487-498;
33. Cf. NJBC, 41:105.
68
ecy that they would kill Him. (Mk 14:53-65) Scribes join the chief priests
and other members of the Sanhedrin in handing Jesus over to Pilate. (Mk
15:1) Finally, they stand in mockery with the chief priests at the foot of
Jesus cross.34 (Mk 15:31-2)
Mark clearly expects the disciples of Jesus to stand with Him in repudiating scribal and Pharisaical hypocrisy and violence of heart. (Mk 8:15)
Like Jesus the disciples must stand for divine forgiveness, for reaching
out mercifully to sinners, and for valuing human compassion and human
need more than self-righteous legalism. In other words, opposition to
Pharisaical legalism, unbelief, and judgmentalism assimilates one to Jesus
and contributes in a significant way to Christological knowing.
So too does the recognition of everything to which the scribes and
Pharisees remain blind. The disciples must recognize that Jesus table fellowship with sinners embodies the divine offer of forgiveness. The disciples must confess the radical newness of the kingdom which Jesus proclaims and begins. Finally, the disciples must acknowledge that in Jesus
the Holy Breath of God is routing Satan and overthrowing his kingdom.
Such faith advances Christological knowing by challenging the disciples
to imitate Jesus love and forgiveness and to submit to the moral demands of life in the kingdom.
In this section I have considered Jesus relationship to the scribes and
Pharisees. Other human figures in Marks gospel also incarnate the forces
of anti-Christ. Among them Mark singles out the figure of Herod for
special comment, as we shall see in the section which follows.
(III)
Mark refers to Herod in only three passages. As we have seen, Herod
superstitiously mistakes Jesus for John the Baptist risen from the dead
(Mk 6:14-6) We have also seen how Herod, through the connivance of
Herodias and of her daughter, orders John the Baptizer beheaded. (Mk
6:17-29) Finally, Jesus warns His disciples against the leaven of Herod as
well as against the leaven of the Pharisees. (Mk 8:15) Despite the paucity
of references, however, Herod plays an important symbolic role in Marks
Christology.35
Jesus defence of the prophetic character of John the Baptizers ministry
refers, of course, implicitly to Herod, whom John denounced. (Mk
11:27-33) That endorsement sets Jesus in the same kind of prophetic
opposition to Herod as John exhibited. More important still, Jesus warn34. Cf. NJBC, 41:105; Mann, op. cit., pp. 643-649; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 342-343.
35. Cf. NJBC, 41:52: Mann, op. cit., pp. 293-298; Guelich, MWBC, I, pp. 324-334;
69
ing against the leaven of Herod transforms that cruel client king into a
symbol of attitudes which contradict eucharistic faith.
Jesus warning against the leaven of Herod makes, then, an important statement about the moral demands of discipleship: namely, anyone
who exhibits the same vices as Herod remains blind to the eucharistic
meaning of the loaves and therefore blind to the paschal mystery which
the eucharist interprets and recalls. In other words, the disciples must
have no truck with superstition, vacillation, sensuality, vanity, human
respect, covetousness, violence, and the unscrupulous use of power to
oppress others. While the Pharisees symbolize self-righteous hypocrisy
and unbelief, Herod symbolizes religious superstition, unbridled passion,
and violence.
Christological knowing requires, then, that one cultivate the virtues which
negate Herods vices: deep faith, unswerving commitment, self-control,
self-forgetfulness, disregard of human judgments, the renunciation of
wealth, and the replacement of violent coercion with faithful and mutual
service in the image of a crucified messiah.
Mark uses the Pharisees and Herod as prime examples of vices which
the disciples of Jesus must avoid if they hope to share in the worship of
the Christian community. Jesus final conflict with the temple priesthood
casts them in an analogous role.
(IV)
In Marks gospel, as we have seen, scribal delegates from Jerusalem travel
to Galilee in an attempt to discredit Jesus and His ministry. As in the
other synoptic gospels, however, face-to-face confrontation between Jesus
and the temple priesthood does not happen until His final Jerusalem
ministry.
Jesus and the Priests
Mark refers explicitly to the temple priesthood for the first time in the
way section of the gospel. There Jesus twice predicts His death at the
hands of the temple priests. In the first prophecy, Jesus predicts that the
chief priests and scribes will reject Him. (Mk 8:31) In the second, Jesus
makes the chief priests and the scribes the ones chiefly responsible for His
death. They will condemn Him to death and then hand Him over to the
pagans who will mock Him, spit at Him, and kill Him.36 (Mk 10:33-4)
In Mark, the other references to the chief priests, other than Jesus allusion to Abiathar who gave the temple bread to David and his men to eat
36. Cf. NJBC, 41:57, 61, 66.
70
(Mk 2:26), all occur during Jesus Jerusalem ministry and in the passion
narrative.37
After Jesus triumphal entry into Jerusalem, He surveys the Temple and
returns to Bethany. (Mk 11:11) What Jesus sees there displeases Him, for
He returns the next day to drive the vendors from the Temple precincts.
As we have also seen, Mark describes the cleansing of the temple as part
of a tryptic. In the first panel of the tryptic, he describes Jesus cursing of
the fig tree on the second day of His Jerusalem ministry. (Mk 11:12-4) In
the second panel, he describes the cleansing of the temple on the same
day and the decision of the temple priests to kill Jesus. (Mk 11:15-9) In
the third panel, Mark describes the withering of the fig tree on the third
day of Jesus Jerusalem ministry. The third panel also records Jesus discourse on the importance of faith-filled prayer. (Mk 11:20-1) By situating the cleansing of the Temple between the cursing and withering of the
fig tree, Mark points to the commercialization of temple worship as an
example of the kind of spiritual barrenness which will eventually lead to
the Temples destruction.
Jesus, in driving the merchants from the temple, explains to them the
reason for His action. They and the priests have used the temple for personal economic gain. (Mk 11:17-8) They get rich at the poors expense.
(Mk 12:41-44) In explaining His assault on the vendors, Jesus cites both
Is 56:7 and Jer 7:11. The latter citation points to Jesus as a prophet in the
tradition of Jeremiah who denounced in his own day the hypocrisy of the
temple priests. The citation from Isaiah contrasts the Jerusalem temple
with the kind of temple which God desires: namely, a house of prayer
for all the nations. (Mk 11:17; cf. Is 56:7) The Church, which will incorporate the Gentiles into the New Israel, will eventually embody Isaiahs
words.38 (Mk 8:1-10)
The cursing and withering of the tree anticipates Jesus prophecy of the
destruction of Jerusalem and of its temple in His eschatological discourse.
(Mk 13:1-2, 14-20) It also suggests why God will visit this fate upon the
city of David and its temple: viz., their failure to produce fruit: i.e, repentance and submission to Gods reign.39
37. Cf. NJBC, 41:18; Edwin K. Broadhead, Christology and Apologetic: The Priestly
Portrait of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
47(1992), pp. 21-34; Stephen H. Smith, The Literary Structure of Mark 11:1-12:40,
Novum Testamentum, 31(1989), pp. 104-124.
38. Cf. Gam Seng Shae, The Question on the Authority of Jesus, Novum Testamentum,
16(1974), pp. 1-29; F.M. Braun, O.P., Lexpulsion des vendeurs du temple, Revue
Biblique, 38(1929), pp. 178-200; David Seeley, Jesus Temple Act, Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, 55(1993), pp. 263-282; Hans Dieter Betz, Jesus and the Purity of the
Temple (Mark 11:15-18): A Comparative Religion Approach, Journal of Biblical
Literature, 116(1997), pp. 455-472.
39. Cf. NJBC, 41:71; Mann, op. cit., pp. 443-454; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 270-273. Jesus
action in cursing the tree seems out of character in Mark. Jesus here performs a miracle
71
After the cleansing of the temple, Mark describes a series of confrontations between Jesus and the Jerusalem priests. The incidents help clarify
why the priests want to kill Jesus. All three confrontations intensify Jesus
opposition to the temple priests and they to him. In the first, Jesus calls
them unrepentant hypocrites. In the second confrontation, which follows, he calls the aristocratic priests Gods tenant farmers and the equivalent of traitors to Israel. In the third, Jesus censures clerical skepticism
about the resurrection of the dead.
The first incident makes it clear why the priests have refused to believe
that Jesus has the authority to say and do the things He says and does:
namely, the priests have resisted the message of repentance which both
Jesus and John proclaimed. (Mk 11:27-33) This hardness of heart sets
Jesus and the priests on a collision course.40
In the second confrontation Jesus castigates the priests by telling the
parable of the wicked tenant farmers. The parable subjects the quality of
the chief priests national leadership to scathing attack. In the parable the
owner of a vineyard sends wicked servants to care for it. The Old Testament frequently compares Israel to Gods vineyard; but it takes little imagination to understand how the aristocratic, landed temple priests would
have reacted to Jesus comparing them to slaves or peasants. The parable
also makes it clear that those currently wielding religious power in Israel
number ultimately among the expendables. God does not need them and
can replace them whenever He chooses.
In the parable those who tend the vineyard not only refuse to give the
owner His due; but they murder the servants sent to them by the owner
in order to collect His rent. Finally, the wicked servants conspire to murder the son and in fact succeed in doing so.
Greed motivates the murder. The tenant farmers hope to get the sons
inheritance, the vineyard, for themselves. The action sounds irrational;
but the tenants seem to hope that killing the young man will cause the
father to back off and leave the vineyard in their hands.
Marks Jesus then predicts, however, that His death will seal the doom
of the temple priests. Moreover, God will confirm this prophecy when, at
the very moment of Jesus death, the veil of the temple splits from top to
bottom. In the end, the true Lord of the vineyard will see the wicked
tenants killed and will hand the vineyard over to other servants. The
which destroys the property of another person. Elsewhere in Mark Jesus acts miraculously only to heal or to save life. Moreover, Jesus acts quite irrationally in cursing the
tree for having no fruit, since, as Mark makes quite clear, Jesus came looking for figs
on the tree at a time of year when fig trees do not bear. (Mk 11:12-13) The fact that
Jesus acts atypically in the story has led some exegetes to suggest that Mark has
transformed a parable told by Jesus into a story about Jesus.
72
scribes, priests, and elders recognize that the parable attacks them; but
again they fear the people and for the moment do nothing. (Mk 12:1-12)41
By appending Jesus prediction of retribution for the priests, Mark, as
he has done elsewhere allegorizes the parable. In the parable, God becomes the owner, Israel the vineyard, the prophets the murdered servants, and Jesus the murdered son.42
In the third confrontation, Jesus, the lay, peasant prophet from Galilee,
rebukes some Sadducees, who belonged to the priestly aristocracy, for
denying the resurrection. As we have seen, in this incident they try to
make the resurrection look ridiculous by posing a dilemma for Jesus to
solve: namely, if, in virtue of the levirate law (Dt 25: 5-10), the same
woman marries seven successive husbands, to which shall she belong when
they all rise from the dead?
As we have also seen, Jesus traces the Sadducees skepticism about the
resurrection to their misunderstanding of the Torah and to their fallacious assumption that resurrection means resuscitation rather than transformation in the power of God. (Mk 12:18-27) The Sadducees doubts
about the resurrection dramatize the shallowness of their religious commitment.43
Judas plays into the high priests hands by freely offering to betray Jesus.
(Mk 14:10-1) Judas leads the arresting party to Jesus, men armed with
swords and clubs and sent by the high priests. One of the disciples draws
a sword and severs the ear (Mark actually says earlobe) of the servant of
the high priest. If one takes servant of the high priest to mean the high
priests chief assistant, the second in command in the temple hierarchy,
then this minor mutilation renders him unfit for further priestly service,
a fit retribution for his attack upon the Son of God.44 (Mk 14:43)
The Sanhedrin assembles at the house of the high priest for Jesus trial.
Mark portrays the trial as a travesty of justice: the Sanhedrin does not
seek the truth about Jesus but only evidence which will convict Him.
The high court even rounds up false witnesses to testify against Jesus.45
41. Cf. Myers, op.cit., pp. 308-312.
42. Cf. John R. Donahue, The Gospel in Parable (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1988), pp.
52-57; NJBC, 41:76; Mann, op. cit., pp. 458-467; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 270-273.
43. Cf. NJBC, 41:78; Mann, op. cit., pp. 472-476; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 276-279; F.
Dreyfus, O.P., Largument scripturaire de Jsus en faveur de la resurrection des morts
(Marc XII, 26-27), Revue Biblique, 66(1959), pp. 213-224; Jean Le Moyne, O.S.B.,
Les Sadducens (Paris: Librairie Lecoffre), pp. 123-127, 129-135.
44. Cf. Benedict T. Viviano, O.P., The High Priests Servants Ear: Mark 14:47, Revue
Biblique, 96(1989), pp. 71-80
45. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, p. 433; for an analysis of the literary structure
of Marks account of the paschal mystery, see: John Paul Heil, The Progressive
Narrative Pattern of Mark 14, 53-16, 8, Biblica, 73(1992), pp. 331-358; Collins, The
Beginning of the Gospel, pp. 92-118.
73
Two witnesses testify that Jesus said: I am going to destroy this temple
in three days and in three days build another not made by human hands.
(Mk 14:55-8) Mark mentions no other testimony given against Jesus at
His trial. In citing this particular testimony, he asserts that Jesus criticism of the temple and His prediction of its destruction played an important role in His trial.
Mark portrays the passion as effectively putting an end to temple worship. Jesus enemies will repeat the charges of the false witnesses as He
hangs on the cross. (Mk 15:29) Their mockery recalls Jesus prediction of
the temples destruction; and, immediately after Jesus dies, the Father
responds to His dying prayer by rending the temples veil.46 (Mk 15:38)
Even with the evidence of the two witnesses, however, the Sanhedrin
cannot move legally against Jesus because the witnesses in testifying contradict one another. Jesus, for His part refuses to respond to the accusations or answer questions. (Mk 14:60) Mark probably sees in Jesus silence a fulfillment of two Old Testament texts: Is 53:7 describes the servant of Yahweh led to his death in silence, like a lamb to the slaughter;
and Ps 38:13-5 describes the innocent poor suffering threats and abuse in
silence. The high priest, however, could have interpreted such stubborn
silence as contempt of court.
In the course of Marks gospel narrative, the evangelist has recorded
several testimonies to Jesus: the Baptizers prophecy of the coming mightier
one, the Fathers testimony in Jesus messianic commissioning and on the
mountain of transfiguration, Peters confession of Jesus as messiah. Now,
in His trial before the Sanhedrin Jesus gives a culminating testimony to
Himself. The high priest, at a legal impasse because the witnesses against
Jesus contradict one another, forces Jesus to break His silence with a question: Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One? (Mk 14:61)
Mark has already portrayed the Temple priests as skeptical of Jesus
claims to have a special experience of intimate sonship with God. Mark
has also portrayed Jesus as accepting two public gestures which connoted
His messianic authority: His anointing on the head by a woman in Bethany
and the accolades of the crowds as He entered Jerusalem. The high priest
would certainly have known of the triumphal entry. Later in the Jerusalem ministry, Jesus had also expressed publicly reservations about Davidic
messianism. Now, the high priest demands that He state clearly His personal pretensions. The high priest does not, however, ask Jesus, Are you
the messiah, the son of David? but Are you the messiah, the Son of the
Blessed One (God)?
In the final redaction of Mark, the high priests question takes us back
to the gospels first verse: The beginning of the good news about Jesus
46. Cf. Nikolaus Walter, Tempelzerstrung und synoptische Apokalypse, Zeitschrift
fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 57(1966), pp. 38-49.
74
Christ, the Son of God. (Mk 1:1) Christ means messiah. From the
standpoint of Markan Christology, the high priest has asked the right
theological question: Is Jesus the messiah because He stands in a privileged relationship to God as His Son? The high priests question echoes
the central question which Marks gospel poses to the reader: viz., the
very question which Jesus asks His disciples at midpoint in His career:
Who do your say I am? (Mk 8:28) We are about to get Jesus own reply
to the question which He put to His disciples.47
Jesus finds Himself legally trapped: persistent silence leaves Him open to
the charge of contempt of court; at the same time He cannot, given the logic
of Marks narrative, truly deny His baptismal commissioning by the Father.
He replies: I am (ego eimi); and you shall see the Son of Man seated at the
right hand of the Power and coming on the clouds of heaven. (Mk 14:62)
The phrase the Power substitutes for the name of God. In this culminating scene of Jesus trial, Mark has both Jesus and the high priest use
typical Jewish euphemisms for the divine name, probably as a literary
device for endowing his account with a tone of genuine facticity. Jesus
and the priests talk like real Jews.
Jesus in His response assumes two positions with respect to God. First,
He sits at the right hand of the deity. The attitude of sitting alludes to
the first verse of the messianic psalm 110. Jesus had cited the same verse
in confounding the priests during His Jerusalem ministry when they questioned His authority to do what He did. Here Jesus implicitly claims that
God has endowed Him with both messianic authority and power over
His enemies.
Besides sitting, however, Jesus also positions Himself in a second way
with respect to the deity. He promises the high priests that they will see
him coming on the clouds of heaven as the apocalyptic Son of Man.
Jesus will come from his position of authority at the right hand of God
and will enforce His authority over His enemies when He passes divine
judgment upon them.48
One could interpret the words I am simply as Jesus confession to
being the messianic Son of God, even though Jesus open avowal of messianic pretensions here contrasts with His earlier reservations about Davidic
messianism. (Cf. Mk 12:35-40) One could also interpret Son of God
as just a messianic title. As we shall see in greater detail later, however,
Mark makes it clear more than once that he desires the reader to use the
eyes of faith in order to see into the deeper revelatory significance of the
events which the gospel narrates.
47. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 470-472; J. Duncan M. Derrett, Jesus
as Seducer, Theology Digest, 42(1945), pp. 26-29; Joel Marcus, Mark 14:61: Are
You the Messiah-Son-of-God? Novum Testamentum, 31(1989), pp. 125-141.
48. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 496-498.
75
The words which Jesus speaks to the high priestI amhave in the
course of the gospel already acquired important theological connotations.
They recall Jesus tacit invocation of the divine name in His second calming of the storm, after the first miracle of the loaves. (Mk 6:51) There the
words I am transformed Jesus walking on the waters and His power
over the forces of nature into a theophany. On that occasion, the evangelist also made faith in Jesus divinity a condition for authentic eucharistic
worship.
The high priest calls Jesus response blasphemy. Claiming to be messiah did not qualify as blasphemy. The high priest is probably referring to
Jesus claim to enjoy the divine judicial authority of the Son of Man, an
authority greater than that of the high priest himself. The high priest
rends his garments, points out the blasphemy to the rest of the Sanhedrin,
and demands their judgment. They pronounce Jesus guilty and condemn
Him to death, as He had predicted they would.49 (Mk 14:63-4)
As we have seen, Jesus testimony to Himself marks the culmination of
a series of prior testimonies to Him by others. John the Baptizer has
identified Jesus as the mightier one to follow Him who would baptize in
a sanctifying Breath. (Mk 1:7-8) Peter has testified to Jesus as the messiah. (Mk 8:33) The Father has testified to Jesus as His beloved Son who
speaks with greater authority than the Law and the prophets. (Mk 9:8)
Now Jesus testifies to Himself, to His messianic authority and divine
Sonship; and the reader knows that He speaks with a divine authority
sanctioned by the Father. Moreover, in confessing His true identity, Jesus
warns His enemies that those who judge Him now will one day stand
before Him when He returns to pronounce eschatological judgment on
the powers of this earth. All of these testimonies, as we have seen, provide
in Mark a cumulative answer to the probing question Jesus puts to His
disciples: Who do you say that I am? (Mk 8:29)
The members of the Sanhedrin, however, ignore Jesus warning. After
condemning Jesus to death, they spit at Him in contempt. They blindfold and beat Him. While abusing Him they challenge Him to prophesy
who hit Him. The guards beat Jesus unmercifully. (Mk 14:65)
This violent scene makes clear the utter contempt and hatred in which
the temple priesthood and the scribes hold Jesus and His response to the
high priests question. In the light of His response, it seals their malice,
unbelief, and guilt in condemning Him.
Mark also describes Jesus maltreatment with intentional irony. Jesus
enemies blindfold Him and mock Him as a false prophet. They strike
Him and then challenge Him to identify prophetically His assailant. Mark,
however, follows this scene with an account of Peters denial of Jesus which
fulfills in every detail Jesus prophecy at the last supper. At the very mo49. Cf. Burkill, New Light on the Earliest Gospel, pp.1-38.
76
ment, then, when Jesus enemies are rejecting Him as a false prophet,
events are proving Him a true one. Ironically, the blindfolded Jesus sees
all too clearly, while those who mock Him act out of their own sinful
blindness.50
Marks account of Jesus trial before the Sanhedrin offers the reader a
theologized account of that event. Mark is here remembering an historical event: Jesus trial and condemnation by the temple priests. As we saw
in volume one, that trial may not have taken place before the entire
Sanhedrin; but at least some members of the Sanhedrin certainly tried
and condemned Him.
Mark, however, is remembering Jesus trial from the other side of the
paschal mystery. Moreover, he is proclaiming in the light of that mystery
the deep religious significance of what happened: viz., that humans dared
to pass judgment on the Son of God, who would one day return as Son of
Man in order to pass judgment upon them. In Marks gospel, therefore,
the trial of Jesusespecially Jesus testimony to Himself functions dramatically as a culminating revelatory moment. Jesus avows His own divinity and promises His judges that one day the tables will be turned and
that He will stand in judgment over the priests.51
After a night of plotting, the high priests decide to hand Jesus over to
Pilate. The priests decide what to do with Jesus at a second meeting of
the Sanhedrin the following morning. Mark gives no indication why they
decided to hand Jesus over to Pilate instead of stoning Him according to
Mosaic law. From what Mark has said about the trial, one could infer
that they wanted Jesus messianic claims completely discredited by having Him crucified. The chief priests make many accusations against Jesus
in Pilates presence; but He, the suffering servant and innocent poor man,
remains silent, to Pilates amazement.52 (Mk 15:1-5)
The chief priests make their last appearance in Marks gospel at the foot
of Jesus cross where they mock His inability to save Himself. They speak
derisively of His messianic claims. They tell Him that they will believe in
Him if He will come down from the cross. (Mk 15:34-5)
The heartless mockery of a dying man dramatizes the extent of the
priests hatred for Jesus. In setting conditions for believing in Jesus, the
chief priests also test God and commit the sin of unbelief. The reader,
of course, knows that Jesus will in fact foil His enemies when He rises
from the dead (Mk 14:51-2); but one senses instinctively that even so the
chief priests will never believe in Him.53
51. Cf. Werner H. Kelber, ed., The Passion in Mark (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1976),
pp. 61-94.
52. Cf. NJBC, 41: 101-102; Dunn, op. cit., pp. 606-620; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 324-333.
77
Clearly, in Mark the temple priests incarnate everything which a religious
leader in Gods kingdom needs to avoid. Rich, politically ambitious, ruthless, spiritually barren, religiously skeptical, unrepentant, persistently blind
to the divine reality which Jesus incarnates, murderous, covetous, hypocritical, manipulative.
Those who advance in Christological knowing must cultivate all those
virtues which negate the chief priests vices: active compassion for the
poor, humility in serving others, justice, resurrection faith, repentance,
religious sensitivity to Gods revelatory activity, and fruitful religious practice. The evangelist makes it clear that Christian leaders especially must
by contrast incarnate the humble service which Jesus embodies. (Mk
10:41-45)
I have considered Jesus negative relationship to Satan, to the scribes
and Pharisees, to Herod and to the chief priests. Only one negative, dramatic relationship remains. The next section ponders Jesus relationship
to Pilate and to the Roman empire which he represents.
(V)
In Mark, Pilate makes his first personal appearance at Jesus trial; but we
find an indirect reference to the Roman governor in Jesus warning to the
Twelve that they must never model their leadership of the new Israel on
that of pagan rulers, who lord it over others and make their authority felt.
Jesus regards such rulers as merely putative wielders of authority (hoi
dokountes archein ton ethnon). (Mk 10:41-2) Those, then, who need to
exercise brute force in order to rule lack any real authority. One could
conceivably hear in this remark an implicit reference to Legion, the demon who tormented the Gerasene demoniac and who symbolizes Roman oppression.54
True authority in the new Israel rests on following Jesus in His way to
the cross. True authority derives from self-abasement and from free subjection to all as their slave (doulos). True authority derives from the imitation of Jesus who lays down His own life as His act of ultimate service to
God and to His disciples. (Mk 10:43-5)
That Jesus death expresses obedience to God flows from the fact that
Jesus did not come to be served but to serve and to lay down His life.
(Mk 10: 45) Jesus words refer tacitly to His messianic commissioning by
the Father as suffering servant. At the same time, He lays down His life
for the sake of others, trusting the Father to make it a source of life and
salvation for His disciples. (Mk 10:45)
54. Cf. NJBC, 41:67; Dunn, op. cit., pp. 411-420; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 253-258; Gerald
Sloyan, Jesus on Trial (Philadelphia, PA: 1973), pp. 36-73.
78
Jesus and Pilate

Pilate enters Marks narrative in person when he tries Jesus. The chief
priests, after condemning Jesus to death for blasphemy, plot during the
night how best to handle Him. They decide to hand Him over to Pilate
and to accuse Him of messianic pretensions, as Pilates question to Jesus
Are you the King of the Jews? indicates. (Mk 15:1-2)
In other words, Mark asserts that, having condemned Jesus on religious grounds for blasphemy, the high priests sought to have him executed on political grounds. Jesus responds to Pilates question differently from the way in which He responded to the question put Him by
the chief priests. To Pilate Jesus answers noncommittally: You are saying
it (su legeis). Jesus neither affirms nor denies the charge. Instead, He
leaves Pilate to decide for himself its truth or falsity. Nor does His answer
contain any of the allusive religious symbolism of His answer to the high
priest.
Jesus also refuses to respond to the allegations pressed by the high priests.
His refusal to defend Himself astonishes the governor. Once again Jesus
silence in Mark portrays Him as the innocent poor man and as the suffering servant who bears silently the slanders and sufferings inflicted by His
enemies.
Instead of making a clear-cut decision about Jesus, Pilate compromises.
He appeals to the crowds to decide between Jesus and Barabbas, an insurrectionist and a murderer.55 (Mk 15:6-10) Did Mark recognize or intend
the irony in Barabbass name? It means son of the father. Given the
evangelists propensity to find deeper symbolic meaning in the events of
Jesus life, I suspect that the irony did not escape him.
The chief priests incite the crowds to choose Barabbas. When the frustrated Pilate asks them what he should do with Jesus, the crowds cry out
Crucify Him! (Mk 15:11-3) When Pilate asks for evidence that Jesus
has done something deserving of crucifixion, the crowds only cry the
louder for His blood. Pilate, to placate the crowds, releases Barabbas and
orders Jesus scourged and crucified. (Mk 15:14-15)
As Mark tells the narrative, once Pilate realizes that the crowds want
Jesus crucified and will not cause a disturbance because of His death, he
acquiesces and condemns Jesus to death. Marks Pilate acts, then, not out
of concern for justice, but for reasons of political expediency. A poten55. Mark, like the other synoptic evangelists, portrays Pilates granting of amnesty to a
prisoner at the time of Passover as an established custom. (Mk 15:6-8) We find no
extra-biblical evidence of such a custom, although an argument from silence does not
prove its non-existence. Cf. Mariano Herranz Marco, Un problema de critica
historica en el relato de la Pasion: la liberation de Barrabas, Estudios Biblicos,
30(1971), pp. 137-160; Alois Bajsic, Pilatus, Jesus, und Barabbas, Biblica, 48(1967),
pp. 7-28.
79
tially violent situation over which he exercises dubious control forces his
decision.56
Pilate hands Jesus over to flogging and crucifixion. After soldiers scourge
Him, in the presence of the whole company of soldiers, they array him in
a purple cloak which derides His messianic pretensions. They crown Him
with a sadistically satirical crown of thorns and bow before Him in contemptuous mockery, first calling Him King of the Jews, then striking
the crown of thorns with a staff and spitting on Him.57 (Mk 15:16-20)
When Jesus reaches Golgotha, the soldiers offer Him sweet wine drugged
with myrrh in order to diminish the pain of crucifixion; but He refuses
and chooses to suffer the full agony of the execution. (Mk 15:22-3) The
gesture suggests the totality of Jesus self-immolation.
Mark indicates that Jesus rode the cross for six hours. The soldiers
divide His garments among them by casting lots and wait to see what will
occur. They affix the charge for which Jesus suffers execution: His messianic claim to be King of the Jews. (Mk 15:24-6)
Mark portrays Jesus death as one of total humiliation and repudiation.
Not only do Jesus enemies revile Him as He dies, but even the two rebels
crucified with Him join in the mockery. (Mk 15:22-32)
Halfway through Jesus death agony, darkness blankets the whole earth
(eph holn tn gn) until Jesus finally dies. These darkening clouds have
received a variety of interpretations. The darkness could recall Amos 8:9.
If so, it symbolizes Gods judgment upon the world and upon Jesus
murderers for what they have done. The darkness could also call attention to the darkness of the deed.58 (Mk 15:33)
At the ninth hour, Jesus cries out in Aramaic, My God, My God, why
have you forsaken Me? The bystanders mistake the Aramaic word for
God (Eloi) for the name of Elijah. They ridicule Jesus for expecting Elijah
to come and save Him and in mockery of His messianic pretensions offer
Him sour wine to drink. (Mk 15:33-37)
As we have seen above, while Jesus cry seems to express abandonment
by God, Marks allusion to Psalm 22 depicts Him clinging to God even
in death in the hope of ultimate divine vindication. The citation therefore implicitly foreshadows the resurrection; for in Psalm 22, God hears
the poor mans cry and vindicates Him.59 (Ps 22:22-31)
57. Cf. NJBC, 41: 104; Mann, op. cit., pp. 641-643; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 338-339.
58. Cf. Rufino Maria Grandez, Las Tinieblas en la Muerte de Jess: Historia de la
Exegesis de Lc 23, 44-45a (Mt 27, 45; Mc 15,33), Estudios Biblicos, 47(1989), pp.
117-223.
59. Cf. Miguel Perez Fernandez, Lectura del Antique Testamento desde el Nuevo
Testamento: Estudios sobre las Citas Biblicas Atribudas a Jess en el Evangelio de
Marcos, Estudios Biblicos, 47(1989), pp. 450-474.
80
Jesus dies with a loud outcry which dramatizes the violence of His final
confrontation with the forces of evil. (Mk 15:34-7) Instantly, the temple
veil splits from top to bottom. (Mk 15:38) Jesus prediction of the temples
destruction had figured prominently in His trial and condemnation by
the Sanhedrin. Now, as we have seen, God acts immediately upon Jesus
death in order to vindicate the truth of Jesus prophecy. The rending of
the veil abolishes the temples privileged sanctity and prepares it for destruction. Moreover, because the outer temple veil depicted the heavens,
its rending may recall the apocalyptic rending of the heavens at Jesus
Baptism when the Father proclaimed Him messianic Son of God in the
image of the suffering servant.60 (Mk 1:10)
The soldiers have sat waiting for the crucified men to die. The centurion, having observed the manner of Jesus death, now confesses Him
Gods Son. (Mk 15:39) The centurions testimony points to the deep
meaning of Jesus final words on the cross. God will in fact vindicate
Jesus when the Gentiles accept the universal salvation which He brings.
The centurions confession alludes to the Fathers testimony to Jesus in
His baptism and transfiguration. It also implicitly recalls Jesus victory
over Legion.61
Pilate makes a final appearance in Marks gospel when he consents to
the bold request of Joseph of Aramathea for permission to bury Jesus
body. Pilate consents after he has a centurion verify that Jesus has in fact
died. Mark identifies Joseph as a member of the Sanhedrin. He does not
describe Joseph as a disciple of Jesus but as a man who hoped for the
coming of the kingdom of God. (Mk 15:42-5) Josephs hope for the coming of Gods kingdom could in Mark connote only the re-establishment
of Jewish political hegemony and the end of Roman rule. Mark gives no
reason for Pilates acquiescence.62
In the course of Marks narrative, Jesus has referred to His impending
death as His second baptism. Clearly, for Mark the Breath-baptized Christian must stand prophetically opposed, as Jesus did not only to the client
priesthood and everything which they symbolize but also to Pilate, the
60. Cf. Kenneth E. Bailey, The Fall of Jerusalem and Marks Account of the Cross,
Expository Times, 102(1990-1991), pp. 102-105; David Ulansey, The Heavenly Veil
Torn: Marks Cosmic Inclusio, Journal of Biblical Literature, 110(1991), pp. 123-125.
61. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, pp. 1098-1102; Kelber, ed., op. cit., pp. 115134; NJBC, 41:105-106; Mann, op. cit., pp. 648-650; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 339-349;
Juergen Roloff, Anfange der soteriolgischen Deutung des Todes Jesu (Mk X. 45 und
Lk XXII.27), New Testament Studies, 19(1972-1973), pp. 38-64; Bernadette Escaffe,
La mort de Jsus et la venue du royaume dans lvangile de Marc, Estudios Biblicos,
52(1994), pp. 329-339.
81
type of the oppressive Gentile ruler. Jesus death at the hands of Rome
therefore reveals the Roman empire and similar oppressive human institutions as anti-Christ.
Marks Jesus in His crucifixion also models for Christians the faith and
trust in God with which they too must approach death. Mark does not
minimize the cruelty of Jesus executioners or the suffering which Jesus
endured. Jesus final cry dramatizes the bitterness of His final conflict
with the powers of Satan. Like Jesus prayer in the garden, Jesus final
prayer exemplifies the prayer of the innocent poor and provides the paradigm for all those who die with faith in the Fathers power to raise from
the dead.
Finally, Pilate, like the chief priests, incarnates vices which Christian
leaders especially must avoid: moral vacillation, moral compromise, the
violent and oppressive use of power, injustice.
I have considered both the positive and negative dramatic linkages which
tie together Marks story of Jesus. I have also pondered the light which
they throw on the person of Jesus and on the practical demands of Christological knowing. The chapter which follows reflects on the all important
ambiguous dramatic linkages in Mark.
82
Chapter 4
Ambiguous Dramatic Linkages in Mark
As the story of Jesus unfolds, two constituencies stand in a morally ambivalent relationship toward Him during His ministry: the crowds and
His own disciples. Jesus always relates positively to both groups; but they
respond ambiguously to Him. The evangelist endows the second relationship with the greatest dramatic importance. Indeed, insuring the correct resolution of the disciples ambivalence toward Jesus provides his
gospel with its fundamental challenge.
This chapter divides into two parts. Part one examines the crowds relationship to Jesus. Part two analyses how Jesus disciples relate to Him.
(I)
Mark describes crowds of people flocking to Jesus. He always welcomes
them, teaches them, heals them, and exorcises them. They respond to
Him initially with enthusiasm but ultimately with misunderstanding,
unbelief, and finally rejection. For that reason their relationship to Him
qualifies as ambiguous.
In this section I shall first consider Jesus relationship to the crowds in
Galilee. Then I shall examine His relationship to the Judean crowds.
The Crowds in Galilee
The cure of the leper in the first chapter of Mark begins Jesus popularity
with the Galilean crowds. Mark tells the story of the cure of the leper in
a way which makes it a prognosis of Jesus entire ministry.
Leprosy in first century Israel applied to a variety of contagious skin
diseases. Lepers lived lives of total ostracism. The Law banned them from
social contact with other persons until they found a cure for the disease.
To identify themselves they had to wear rags and leave their hair disheveled. They also had to warn anyone approaching them to stay clear lest
they catch the dread disease. (Lev 13: 1-14:57)
In other words, leprosy in first century Palestine excommunicated one
from the rest of the human community and made one socially expendable. Jesus cure of the leper counts, therefore, in Mark not just as a miracle
of healing but also and especially as a miracle of inclusion. In healing the
man Jesus restores to him his humanity and transforms him once again
into a functioning member of society.
Marks leper leaves the deserted places in which He has lived, breaks
the ban imposed by the Law, and actually approaches Jesus, throwing
himself to his knees in front of Him. The leper comes in faith and says:
Chapter 4: Ambiguous Dramatic Linkages in Mark
83
If You will, You can make me clean. (Mk 1:40) Jesus deeply moved by
the man stretches out His hand and Himself breaks the taboo against
lepers by touching the man and saying, I do will [it]; be cleansed. (Mk
1:41) The touch should have defiled Jesus. Instead, it heals the leper.
That compassionate act of healing simultaneously restores the man to
health and to social communion with others.1
The actual cure of the leper does not, however, bring Marks story to its
narrative climax. Rather the story climaxes when Jesus and the leper trade
places. At the beginning of the story Jesus, an insider in the sense that He
does not lie under the lepers ban, confronts the leper, a total outsider.
With the cure Jesus and the leper begin to change places.
Jesus orders the leper to have a priest verify the cure and make the
offering prescribed by the Law; but He warns the cured man sternly not
to tell anyone how he came to experience a cure. The warning develops
the theme of Jesus messianic secret, whose significance I shall consider
in the next chapter. Here, however, it suffices to note that the leper disobeys Jesus and spreads the story of his cure everywhere.
As a result, Jesus, in order to avoid the throngs who flock to Him, finds
Himself forced to live where the leper formerly lived, in desert places
outside the city. (Mk 1:41-3) In other words, Jesus act of healing and
compassionate concern to break down the barriers which separated the
leper from the rest of humanity transform Jesus Himself from an insider
into an outsider.2
In Mark, then, the cure of the leper foreshadows Jesus entire ministry,
which the evangelist describes as His growing marginalization, as His
inexorable transformation into a complete outsider. Jesus conflicts with
the scribes and Pharisees, which follow immediately on the cure of the
leper, begin His marginalization and motivate the first plots against His
life. (Mk 2:1-3:6) Very quickly, Jesus relatives repudiate Him as madman. (Mk 3:20-1) The crowds hear Jesus proclaim the kingdom in parables
but fail to receive the message in faith. (Mk 4:10-12;33-4) Jesus rejection by the citizens of Nazareth foreshadows His ultimate rejection in
Jerusalem. (Mk 6:1-6) The disciples show greater and greater obtuseness
until finally they scarcely differ from the unbelieving crowds. (Mk 8:17)
Finally, Jesus begins His final journey to Jerusalem, where He experiences ultimate margenalization and crucifixion outside the city walls on
Golgotha. (Mk 15:21-2)
1. Cf. Michael Wojciechowski, The Touching of the Leper (Mark 1, 40-45) as an
Historical and Symbolic Act of Jesus, Biblische Zeitschrift, 33(1989), pp.114-119;
Carl R. Kazmierski, Evangelist and Leper: A Socio-Cultural Study of Mark 1.40-45,
2. Cf. Edwin K. Broadhead, Mk 1.44: The Witness of the Leper, Zeitschrift fr die
84
Mark, however, gives the story of the cure of the leper a final ironic
twist. Despite Jesus margenalization, the crowds still keep coming to
Him. In other words, Jesus the outsider will, despite His margenalization,
continue to draw crowds to Himself as the gospel spreads. Jesus, the outsider, actually re-defines what both outside and inside mean. The
crowds who flock to Jesus in the desert foreshadow, then, the multitudes
who will one day believe in Jesus, the crucified outsider whom resurrection will transform into the only real insider.
This interpretation of Marks account of the cure of the leper gains
plausibility in the light of the concern with boundaries which characterizes the first gospel. Jesus unbelieving relatives, for example, confront
Him as outsiders, while Jesus embraces as His true family the disciples
inside the house where He teaches. (Mk 3:31-35) Similarly, Jesus regards the unbelieving crowds as outsiders, but He reveals the secrets of
the kingdom to the disciples who gather around Him as insiders.
(Mk 4:10-11) As we have seen, Jesus repeated deliverance of the possessed from unclean demons transforms them from tainted outsiders
into insiders, re-welcomed to the bosom of society and of their religious community. In the cure of the paralytic, the sick mans friends must
contrive to get him from the outside to the inside of the house where
Jesus teaches before Jesus can forgive and heal him. The disciples err when
they regard the man exorcising in Jesus name as an outsider and therefore forbid him such activity in the future. (Mk 9:38-41) The disciples
own lack of faith transforms them temporarily into outsiders, scarcely
distinguishable from the unbelieving crowds. (Mk 8:17-21, 4:10-13)
Exegetes find other less obvious allusions to insiders and outsiders scattered throughout Marks gospel, allusions also foreshadowed by the cure
of the leper. Suffice it here to say that Marks concern with boundaries
reflects the margenalization of the Roman community through persecution. The evangelist summons that community to identify with Jesus, the
ultimate outsider, in both His martyrdom and margenalization. At the
same time, Mark challenges the persecuted Roman church to recognize
that Jesus redefines the meaning of both inside and outside. Only those
who identify with the ultimate outsider count in the end as insiders.3
Mark states that the crowds who followed Jesus in His Galilean ministry
came not only from Galilee but from Judea and from the city of Jerusalem
itself, from across the Jordan, and even from Tyre and Sidon. Presumably the
people who came from these pagan cities were primarily Jews; but, given
Marks propensity to seek deeper meaning in the events he narrates, one could
3. Cf. W. Ernest Moore, Outside and Inside: A Markan Motif, Expository Times,
98(1986- 1987), pp. 39-43; Inside and Outside: Paul and Mark, Expository Times,
103(1991-1992), pp. 331-336; S.H. Smith, Inside and Outside in Marks Gospel:
A Response, Expository Times, 102(1990-1991), pp. 363-367; NJBC, 41:73; Mann,
op. cit., pp. 218-220; MWBC, I, pp. 71-79; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 96-98.
85
see here another possible foreshadowing of the flocking of the Gentiles to the
gospel after Jesus rises and baptizes with a sanctifying Breath.
Mark dramatizes the size of the crowds who swarm to Jesus by noting
that He must teach them from a boat in order to avoid being crushed by
them.4 (Mk 3:10) The crowds all but overwhelm Jesus because they want
Him to heal their diseases and deliver them from demon possession (Mk
3:10-2); but they fail finally to understand His teaching. Indeed, Mark
portrays Jesus as deliberately hiding the meaning of His message from
the crowds by concealing it in parables whose true meaning He explains
only to His disciples.5 (Mk 4:10-2, 33-4)
Initially, then, Mark draws a sharp contrast between the crowds in Galilee
and the disciples. In describing the crowds relationship to Jesus, Mark
portrays the crowds as the outsiders, the disciples as the insiders, as people
with a special, intimate, enlightening relation to Jesus. As Jesus becomes
more and more margenalized from His own disciples, however, Mark makes
it clear that this intimate, enlightening relationship will apply to the disciples
fully only after Jesus rises and baptizes them with a sanctifying Breath.
Jesus Himself, of course, did not seek to hide His message from those
to whom He preached. The notion that He did boils down, then, to a
Markan theological interpretation of Jesus use of parables. As we have
seen, parables seek to subvert the ordinary world in which people live
and open them to new possibilities. Jesus parables sought to open people
to the novel possibilities inherent in the reign of God. One may, however,
discern a kernel of historical fact in Marks allegation that the parables
concealed the message of the kingdom from the crowds: Jesus may have
preferred the indirect and allusive form of parabolic discourse to direct
statement as a way of concealing from His enemies the revolutionary
chracter of the claims He was making.6
4. In point of fact sound carries extremely well on the Sea of Galilee, which abounds in
small inlets where Jesus could have effectively taught while sitting on the water in a
boat. In the course of his narrative, Mark uses the crowds for a variety of narrative
purposes. The crowds, for example, who flock to Jesus cause His alienation from His
relatives. When Jesus relatives see the size of the crowd and that the pressure they put
on Jesus gives Him scarcely time to eat, the relatives decide that He has lost His mind.
(Mk 3:20-1) Jesus, however, uses the crowd to rebuke His relatives, calling them His
true brothers and sisters, since their desire to listen to Him manifests a deeper desire
to do the Fathers will. (Mk 4:31-5)
The crowds pressing around Jesus in the cure of the woman with a flux of blood
function as a narrative prop within the story. The crowd makes the disciples
misunderstand Jesus question, Who touched me? The disciples fail to realize that
Jesus felt power go from Him and knew that He had healed someone in the great press
of people. (Mk 5:21, 30-2)
5. Cf. NJBC, 41:21; Edward F. Siegman, C.PP.S., Teaching in Parables (Mk 4, 10-12;
Lk 8, 9-10; Mt 13, 10-15), Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 23(1961), pp. 161-181.
cit., pp. 130-132; Edward F. Siegman, C.PP.S., Teaching in Parables (Mk 4, 10-12;
Lk 8, 9-10; Mt 13, 10-15, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 23(1961), pp. 161-181.
86
The crowds function symbolically in the two miracles of the loaves. In

Marks account of the first miracle, which takes place on Jewish soil, despite the fact that both Jesus and the disciples need a break from their
pastoral work, when the crowds frustrate their attempt and beat them to
the place they were headed for a rest, Jesus reacts not in frustration and
anger, but with the compassion of a good shepherd. He teaches them at
great length. (Mk 6:30-5) The confusion of the leaderless Jewish crowds
and their apparent willingness to have Him lead them both motivate
Jesus compassion.
Moreover, as recipients of the multiplied loaves and fishes which symbolize the eucharist, the crowds foreshadow those Jewish Christians who
will one day believe in Jesus and share His body and blood in faith. The
second multiplication of the loaves in Gentile territory foreshadows the
fact that the multitudes who will eventually come to believe in Jesus will
include Gentiles as well as Jews. (Mk 8:1-10) In the same way, the faith
of the Syro-Phoenician woman and that of the centurion beneath the
cross also foreshadow the faith which Gentiles will one day place in Jesus.
(Mk 8:31-7, 15:39) Moreover, while Jesus compassionates the Jewish
crowds because their leaders have betrayed them, He compassionates the
Gentile crowds because their desire to hear His teaching exceeds even
their desire for food. (Mk 8:1-3)
After the first miracle of the loaves and after Jesus has walked on the
water, invoked the divine name, and calmed the storm, the people once
more flock to Him, and He cures anyone who touches Him. The incident, composed by Mark as a literary transition in his narrative, calls the
reader to faith in Jesus universal healing power.7 (Mk 6:53-6)
The Galilean crowds also function dramatically in the cure of the epileptic demoniac. They have been watching the disciples futile attempts
to exorcise the possessed boy. After Jesus descends from the mount of
transfiguration, the crowds run to Him filled with amazement, apparently at His unexpected appearance. Mark suggests that they press upon
Jesus more out of curiosity than out of faith, because Jesus takes the lack
of faith He finds in both the father of the boy and in His disciples as
symptomatic of the lack of faith of the entire generation in which He
lives. Moreover, the crowd expresses neither wonder nor admiration when
Jesus heals the boy. Indeed, Jesus cuts short His dialogue with the father
of the boy and cures the lad apparently as a way of dispersing the crowd
of curiosity seekers.8 (Mk 9:14, 19, 25)
7. Cf. NJBC, 41:44-51.

8. Cf. NJBC, 41: 59; Mann, op. cit., pp. 368-371; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 229-232.
87
The Crowds in Judea

On Jesus final journey to Jerusalem, the people of Judea crowd around
Him to hear His teaching. (Mk 11:1) The Judean crowds welcome Jesus
joyfully as the messiah, as the one who comes in the name of the Lord
and who is about to re-establish the kingdom of David. (Mk 11:8-10)
The fact, however, that Jesus will later in His Jerusalem ministry distance
Himself from Davidic messianism suggests that the welcoming crowds in
Jerusalem misunderstood the true meaning of Jesus messianic commissioning. (Mk 12:35-7) Nevertheless, the crowds in Jerusalem hang on
Jesus words; and His popularity with them shields Him temporarily from
the malice of the temple priests and scribes. (Mk 11:18-9, 32, 14:1-2)
After Jesus arrest, however, the crowds in Jerusalem turn against Him.
Incited by the plotting temple priests, they call for Pilate to release Barabbas
instead of Jesus and demand Jesus crucifixion. Mark portrays Pilate as
reluctantly yielding to pressure from the blood-thirsty crowds as he orders Jesus scourged and crucified. (Mk 15:11-15)
Given, finally, a chance to choose between Gods real Son and a false
son of the father (Barabbas), the crowds choose the false son. Instead of
choosing Jesus non-violent way; they choose the way of Barabbas, the
way of violence.9
Jesus always responds with compassion to the crowds in Galilee despite
their obtuseness and unbelief. He heals all who come to Him for healing.
He labors tirelessly and selflessly for them, both teaching and healing
them, even to the point of neglecting His own need for food and for rest.
He pities their confusion and seeks to pastor them like a good shepherd.
He will one day relate to the crowds as their eucharistic Lord.
Clearly, the disciples who relate to the crowds as Jesus did will look
upon the masses of humanity with compassion and with a desire to incorporate them through faith into the family of God. Their confusion
and hunger for the gospel should motivate active pastoral concern to
draw others into a eucharistic community of faith by revealing to them
the full truth about Jesus.
As we shall see in the next section, however, far from standing in judgment on the unbelief of the masses, disciples of Jesus need to face their
own religious obtuseness and lack of faith.
(II)
Mark, as we have seen, begins his account of Jesus public ministry with
the summary statement that He went about Galilee preaching, The time
is fulfilled. The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good
9. Cf. Myers, op.cit., pp. 380-382.
88
news. (Mk 1:14-5) Jesus, however, does not begin His preaching tour of
Galilee until Mk 1:39. Instead, He begins His ministry by calling four
disciples: Peter, Andrew, James, and John. (Mk 1:16-20)
Of the four Peter, James, and John will enjoy a privileged relationship
to Jesus. Mark indicates that He gave them (probably ironic) nicknames.
(Mk 3:17) Moreover, their presence at the cure of Peters mother-in-law
(Mk 1:26-31), at the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mk 5:37), on the
mount of the transfiguration (Mk 9:2), at the beginning of the
eschatological discourse (Mk 13:3-4), and in Gethsemane (Mk 14:33)
tie all these events allusively to one another. As we shall see, in Mark such
allusive links indicate that the events in question all throw light on one
another.
Jesus and His Disciples
It seems unlikely that the first disciples would have followed Jesus without any prior knowledge of Him; but Mark tells the story of their call in
a way which suggests that it happened in just that way. Jesus walks up to
Peter and Andrew as they are fishing and says to them: Follow me and I
will make you fishers of men. (Mk 1:16-18) Jesus confronts James and
John with the same abruptness, and they follow immediately leaving behind not only their possessions but their father Zebedee. (Mk 1:19-20) The
story lacks verisimilitude; but Mark is making several theological points.
Jesus, unlike other rabbis, called at least some of His disciples to follow
Him; and we can, as we saw in the first volume, almost certainly ascribe
this trait to the historical Jesus. The call has a prophetic character to it
(Cf. Mk 2:13-4), because it flows from Jesus own sense of mission. Jesus
mission, moreover, derives from His baptismal commissioning. The call,
then, draws the disciples into Jesus baptismal sense of mission: if they
follow Him, they will fish for people, not for fish. In other words, Mark
parallels the call of the disciples with Jesus messianic commissioning just
as he parallels the exorcism at Capernaum with Jesus desert confrontation with Satan.
Mark also tells the story of the disciples call in a way which makes clear
the peremptory character of a Christian vocation. Those who hear Jesus
call must respond instantly (euthus) and with a finality which demands
the abandonment of both possessions and family, if necessary. The disciples respond with initial generosity. The story narrates their finest hour
in Marks gospel.10
pp. 86-88; Juan J. Bartolom, El Discipulado de Jess en Markos: Motivo y
Methodologia de un Modelo Evangelico de Vida Cristiana, Estudios Biblicos, 51(1993),
pp. 510-530; Robert Tannehill, The Disciples in Mark: The Function of a Narrative
Role in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 169-195.
89
The disciples would seem to accompany Jesus as He exorcises the demoniac in the synagogue at Capernaum; for, after the synagogue service,
Jesus accompanies Peter to the disciples house. The presence of the disciples at this first exorcism has symbolic meaning; for, as we have seen,
Jesus will also draw them into His combat against Satan and against his
demonic minions. (Mk 3:14) Initially, however, they learn about discipleship by watching Jesus exorcise.
Peter welcomes Jesus to his home, where his mother-in-law lies ill. Jesus
heals her [literally: raises her up (egeiren autn)]; and she begins to wait
upon them. (Mk 1:29-32) Mark intends the healing to have symbolic
meaning; for the raising up of the woman connotes her participation in
Jesus own experience of being raised up, or resurrected. Moreover, her
subsequent service of Jesus and His disciples foreshadows the transforming effects of participation in Jesus risen life: viz., the freedom to serve
both Jesus and other persons in His image. As we shall see, Mark frequently uses miracle stories in order to foreshadow the transformation
which the paschal mystery will effect in the otherwise obtuse disciples.
Mark portrays this first day of Jesus ministry as the gradual spread of
the gospel. It begins with the disciples, then extends itself to the people in
the synagogue. That evening the authority of Jesus teaching and especially His power to exorcise and to heal draw the townsfolk to Peters
house, where Jesus accedes to their needs.
The next morning, Jesus rises early to pray. When the disciples find
Him praying alone, He announces that they must carry the good news
beyond Capernaum to all the synagogues of Galilee. Jesus sets off on His
first tour of preaching and exorcism. (Mk 1:16-39) Initially, the disciples
accompany Jesus; later He will also send them to preach as He does.11
(Mk 3:14)
As we have seen, Jesus preaching immediately involves Him in conflict; and three of the conflict stories involve the disciples. Jesus calls Levi,
the tax collector to follow Him like the other disciples. The call has the
same prophetic character as the call of the first four disciples, and Levi
responds with the same totality and selflessness as the other disciples had.
(Mk 2:13-4)
Jesus and the other disciples share a dinner with Levi and with other
tax collectors and sinners either at Levis or Jesus house. The event immediately involves both Him and the disciples in a controversy with the
11. Cf. NJBC, 41:9-10; Mann, op. cit., MWBC, I, pp. 53-60; Anderson, op. cit., pp.
88-93; Thomas Schmeller, Jesus im Umland Galilas: Zu den markinischen Berichten
vom Aufenthalt Jesu in den Gebieten von Tyros, Caesares Philippi, und der Dekapolis,
Biblische Zeitschrift, 38(1994), pp. 44-66; Jozef Verheyden, Mark 1, 23-25 and 6,
53-56, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 64(1988), pp. 413-428; John Granger
Cook, In Defense of Ambiguity: Is There a Hidden Demon in Mark 1.29-31? New
Testament Studies, 43(1997), pp. 184-208.
90
Pharisees, who complain to the disciples that Jesus should not eat with
tax-collectors and sinners. (Mk 2:15-7) Jesus certainly practiced table fellowship with sinners. Here, as we have seen, He justifies His action by
appealing to His mission and to the message He has been sent to proclaim, one of repentance and conversion. (Mk 2:15-7)
The two conflict stories which follow the call and banquet of Levi also
focus on the disciples. Jesus defends His disciples for not observing the
same optional fasts as do both the disciples of John and the Pharisees.
Jesus responds that people at a wedding do not fast in the presence of the
bridegroom. (Mk 2:18-9) As we have seen, the image of the bridegroom
has both divine and messianic connotations. (Cf. Jn 3:29; 2 Cor 11:2;
Eph 5:32; Rev 19:7, 21:2; Hos 2:19, Is 54:4-8, 62: 4-5; Ezek 16:7-63)
Jesus adds, however, that His disciples will fast when the bridegroom is
taken away from them. (Mk 2:20) The prediction, as we have also seen,
alludes to Jesus passion. The following of Jesus not only draws the disciples into the same conflicts as He faced, but it also sets their feet on the
path which leads to Calvary. And, indeed, these five conflict stories end
with the Pharisees beginning to plot Jesus death with the Herodians.
(Mk 3:6)
The fourth conflict story also involves the disciples, who scandalize the
Pharisees by gleaning corn on the sabbath. Jesus justifies them by appealing to the example of David, who, with the consent of the priest Abiathar,
assuaged his own hunger and that of his men by eating the altar breads
which only the priests where allowed to eat. (Mk 3:23-8)
As we have seen, Jesus concludes by enunciating the principle: The
sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the sabbath. (Mk 3:27)
This radical saying subordinates even the sacred sabbath rest to human
needs and would surely have scandalized Jesus contemporaries. Jesus concludes: Therefore, the Son of Man is Lord (kyrios) even of the sabbath.
(Mk 3:28) The phrase Son of Man at one level functions as the equivalent of I. Its linkage, however, to the suggestive term Lord (kyrios)
gives it deeper eschatological and theological connotations. The title points
to Jesus identity as the eschatological Son of Man who possesses divine
authority over Jewish religious practices.12
A summary description of Jesus early popularity and success in Galilee
follows. The crowds press upon Him in such numbers that He has the
disciples keep a boat ready in which He can escape the crush if need be.
(Mk 3:7-9) This incident sets the stage for the call of the Twelve, an event
which fulfills Jesus promise to Peter and Andrew that He would transform them into fishers of men. The size of the crowds dramatizes Jesus
need for help in His ministry. (Mk 3:33-9) It also foreshadows the first
cit., pp. 102-111.
91
formal discourse which Jesus gives in Marks gospel: His sermon on the
lake. (Mk 4:1 ff.)
The call of the Twelve begins to clarify what the phrase fishers of men
means. The Twelve will share Jesus intimate companionship and His
ministry. Mark suggests the intimacy of their relationship by noting that
Jesus had, as we have seen, probably given ironic nicknames to some of
the Twelve: He called the unpredictable Peter the Rock and James and
John sons of thunder. The Twelve as a group will later participate in
Jesus own proclamation of the kingdom and in His power over demons.
(Mk 6:7-13)
The number Twelve has clear symbolic significance: Jesus has been
anointed in His baptism to begin a new Israel. He now summons the
Twelve to function as the pillars on which He will construct that Israel.
The inclusion of Judass name in the list of the Twelve as well as the
Christian communitys concern to replace Judas after his betrayal of Jesus
and after his own death, an incident narrated only by Luke, indicates that
the disciples grasped well the meaning of the symbolism. (Mk 13:13-19;
Acts 1:13) By calling the Twelve, Jesus, moreover, gave rudimentary institutional structure to the movement He headed.13
Teaching about Discipleship
In Mark, Jesus inaugural sermon occurs, not on a mountain, but on a
lake. The sermon on the lake gathers together several parables of the kingdom. In the middle of the discourse, Jesus explains the meaning of the
first parable privately to the disciples. The switch from the lake to a private tte-a-tte between Jesus and the disciples lacks any realistic verisimilitude; but Mark makes the switch anyway so that he can apply the
first parable (the story of the astonishing harvest) allegorically to the apostolic Church. Mark also makes it clear that all the parables of the kingdom should disclose to the disciples its secret meaning. The disciples,
therefore, here number among the insiders who hear Jesus in faith, not
among the outsiders (ekenois de tois exo), who hear Jesus parables without
grasping them.14 (Mk 4:21-5; 10-2)
The first parable tells of the astonishing harvest which the kingdom
will bring about. The parable begins by describing a familiar experience
of peasant farmers: namely, some of the seeds they scatter produce no
fruit. The birds eat some. Other seeds land on barren soil. Other get
stifled by weeds. Then comes the astonishing end of the parable. Despite
the loss of some seed, Jesus proclamation of the kingdom will reap a
cit., pp. 115-119.
14. Cf. Michael D. Goulder, Those Outside (Mk 4:10-12), Novum Testamentum,
33(1991), pp. 289-302.
92
harvest of thirty, sixty, and even a hundred fold. (Mk 4:3-9) In

drought-ridden Palestine, one did well even to double the yield of a crop.
A yield as enormous as Jesus describes would have boggled the minds of
His peasant audience.
On Jesus lips, then, this parable originally had an apologetic meaning;
Jesus was defending the final triumph of the kingdom, despite its humble
and apparently ineffectual beginnings. Mark, however, in Jesus private
explanation of the parable to the disciples transforms it into an allegory
about discipleship.15
Marks allegorical elaboration of the first parable expresses, then, the
evangelists own vision of discipleship rather than the parables original
meaning. Marks allegory instructs the disciples about how to relate to
the word of God, which the seeds sown by the sower symbolize. First, the
disciples should remain on guard against Satan, who seeks, if possible, to
destroy their allegiance to the words of Jesus and to His proclamation of
the kingdom. If they hope to persevere in faith, they must allow the word
to take deep root in their lives. If they rest content with superficial first
fervor, they shall not survive times of persecution and Satanic testing.
Similarly, they must guard against worldliness, the lure of riches, and
other disordered passions which have the capacity to stifle the word and
keep it from bearing fruit. Those, however, who negotiate successfully
these trials and temptations, will bear the astonishing harvest which Jesus
promised.16 (Mk 4:13-20)
Mark indicates that the two proverbs which follow apply particularly
to the disciples by prefacing each parable with the phrase: He also said
to them. (Mk 4:21, 24) Mark introduces the last two seed parables more
simply with the phrase He also said (Mk 4:26-30) Moreover, on examination, the last two parables do not deal directly with the meaning of
discipleship. Instead, they call attention rather to two aspects of the mystery of the kingdom: its spontaneous growth under Gods providence
and its eventual expansion to an enormous size, despite its humble beginnings. (Mk 4: 26-32)
The first proverb addressed to the disciples notes that, when one lights
a light, one puts it on a lamp stand, not under a tub. On Jesus lips the
15. Cf. J. Jeremias, Palesetinakunliches zum Gleichnis vom Smann, New Testament
Studies, 13(1966), pp. 48-53; P.B. Payne, The Order of Sowing and Ploughing in the
Parable of the Sower, New Testament Studies, 25(1978), pp. 123-129; Donahue, The
Gospel in Parable, pp. 29-34; Terrence Keegan, The Parable of the Sower and Marks
Jewish Leaders, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 56(1994), pp. 501-518; John Paul Heil,
Reader Response and the Narrative Context of the Parables about Growing Seed in
Mark 4:1-34, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 54(1992), pp. 271-286; Michael Stahl,
Vom Verstehen des Neuen Testaments in der einen Welt: Anfragen einer
befreiungstheologie Bibelauslegung an die europische Exegesis am Beispiel von Mk
4, Zeitschrift fr Mission, 16(1990), pp.224-235.
16. Cf. NJBC, pp. 41:28.
93
proverb justifies the bold proclamation of Gods reign. Mark, however,

interprets the proverb of the lamp to mean that the hiddenness of the
kingdom which characterized Jesus enigmatic proclamation of it in parable will not last forever. Eventually, the good news will become completely manifest. (Mk 4:21-3)
Mark does not say exactly when this manifestation will occur. The statement, For there is nothing hidden which will not be brought to light,
nor is their anything kept secret which will not come into the open has,
however, a certain absoluteness about it. Absolutely nothing hidden can
escape eventual scrutiny. That absoluteness plus the warning: If anyone
has ears to hear, let him hear suggests that for Mark the day when all
things will come to light coincides with the last day, with the final judgment. (Cf. Mk 13:26-7)
If one interprets the final disclosure of the kingdom as coinciding with
final judgment, then one mutes the contrast between the meaning of this
second parable and Marks previous insistence on the secret character of
the kingdom. If the full revelation of the kingdom must await the second
coming, then the kingdom will remain a kind of secret wisdom even
during the age of the Church, a wisdom hidden from those who refuse to
believe.
Anticipation of the final revelation of the kingdom also implies living
in readiness for final judgment, a readiness which accords well with the
demands of discipleship which Mark has just sketched in his allegorization
of the parable of the astonishing harvest. (Cf. Mk 13:33-7) Mark will
further elaborate the demands of living in an eschatological age in Jesus
eschatological discourse during His Jerusalem ministry.17
The second proverbial teaching states:
Attend to what you are hearing. The amount you measure out is the amount
you will be given, and more besides. For the one who has will be given
more, and the one who has not will forfeit even what he has. (Mk 4:24-25)
This proverb calls the disciples to generosity in responding to the word.

Each will receive a reward proportioned to the generosity of his or her
personal response. (Mk 4:25)In oral cultures, wisdom manifests itself in
the ability to cite traditional proverbs in situations which endow them
with surprising meaning. Here Jesus takes a cynical peasant proverb about
economic injustice and greed and transforms it into a teaching about
generosity. The original proverb asserts a common experience of
first-century Palestinian peasants: the greedy rich get richer and the poor
17. Cf. Gerhard Schneider, Das Bildword von der Lampe: Zur Traditionsgeschichte
einer Jesus-Wortes, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 60(1970), pp.
183-209; Robert M. Fowley, The Rhetoric of Direction and Indirection in the
Gospel of Mark in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 207-227.
94
get poorer. Jesus transforms the proverb into a teaching about the kind of
generosity the kingdom demands: the more generously one responds, the
greater the reward one will receive. Moreover, no one outdoes God in
generosity. The reward will go beyond what one actually merits.
By juxtaposing these two proverbs Mark also endows the second with
an eschatological flavor. For Mark the kingdom brings present blessings;
but one looks for ones reward in the life to come. (Cf. Mk 10:28-31) The
clause the one who has not will forfeit even what he has may allude to
Israels failure to respond to the word; but the warning applies to the
disciples as well. (Mk 4:24) In the sermon on the lake, Jesus rebukes the
disciples for their unbelief. (Mk 4:40) Those who respond with little faith
risk losing what little they have.18
Despite their lack of faith and understanding, the disciples continue to
accompany Jesus in his ministry and witness His rejection at Nazareth,
an event which foreshadows His ultimate rejection on Calvary. (Mk 6:1-6)
Moreover, immediately after this rejection, Jesus joins the Twelve even
more intimately to His own ministry by sending them out by twos to
proclaim repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal. (Mk 6:7, 13) The
effectiveness of their mission, which Mark underscores, (Mk 6:13) foreshadows their eventual proclamation of the risen Christ. As a consequence,
Jesus brief instruction to the Twelve on the way to conduct themselves
while on mission provides a thumbnail sketch of the proper way to conduct a ministry of Christian proclamation, even in the face of hostility
and unbelief.
The Twelve must travel light: they can carry a staff and wear sandals
but must carry no food, no supplies, no haversack, no extra tunic. (Mk
6:7-9) The sparseness of their luggage dramatizes the urgency of their
message: those who travel light travel fast. The lack of provisions also
demands that they conduct their ministry in trust that they will be cared
for providentially. They must also expect those to whom they preach to
supply their physical needs through hospitality, just as the Christian community would one day welcome traveling apostles and teachers. (Mk 6:10)
As in the case of Jesus, a response of unbelief to the disciples proclamation of the gospel will endow their ministry with a judgmental character.
They must shake the dust from their feet in any place which refuses to
welcome them. The gesture signifies that the place has no relationship to
the new Israel. (Mk 6:11)
The Disciples Unbelief
The return of the apostles after their successful experience of ministry
introduces the first miracle of the loaves. Jesus suggests a break for all of
18. Cf. NJBC, 41:29-34; Mann, op. cit., pp. 260-276; Guelich, MWBC, I, pp. 186-257;
95
them, since the pressures of ministry do not leave them even time to eat.
(Mk 6:30-1) The crowds anticipate what Jesus and the disciples are doing and reach the isolated place of rest before Jesus and the apostles arrive.
The first miracle of the loaves takes place, not in a desert, but in a
lonely grassland. Like many other descriptive details in Mark the setting
has symbolic meaning. In the first miracle of the loaves, Mark portrays
Jesus as the good shepherd who cares with compassion for the sheep He
pastures. Moreover, like a good shepherd, Jesus feeds them with the bread
of wisdom, which foreshadows the eucharist. (Mk 6:34, 39-40) The
eucharist in turn derives its meaning from the paschal mystery and foreshadows the messianic banquet. (Mk 14:25)
Jesus out of pastoral compassion for the multitude teaches them at
some length. As evening draws on the disciples ask Jesus to dismiss the
crowds so that they can go find something to eat. When Jesus tells the
disciples themselves to feed the crowd, they foolishly think He wants
them to go and buy food. (Mk 6:35-8)
Jesus then sends the disciples to scour the crowds for bread. They find
five loaves and two fish. The disciples distribute the loaves and the fish
which Jesus then miraculously multiplies; but they do so without understanding that the miracle foreshadows the eucharist and manifests the
divinity of Jesus.19 (Mk 6:41-4, 51-2)
As we have seen, after each of the miracles of the loaves, Mark has Jesus
once again confront the Pharisees in controversy. Mark does so because
he wants to contrast the unbelief of the Pharisees with the demands of
eucharistic faith. (Mk 7:1-13)
The disciples, however, quickly manifest that they have as little faith
and understanding as the Pharisees. Jesus teaches publicly that nothing
entering a person from the outside can make that person unclean. (Mk
7:14-6) The disciples ask Him in private the meaning of this parable.
The reference to Jesus parables alludes to the sermon on the lake, which
distinguished between the unbelieving crowds, on the one hand, and the
disciples, with their privileged access to Jesus message, on the other. Now,
the disciples lack of understanding places them for the time being with
the unbelieving crowds who cannot understand Jesus teaching. (Mk
4:10-12)
Jesus first rebuffs the disciples for their lack of faith and understanding
(Mk 7:18); then He abrogates Mosaic legislation about clean and unclean food. As we shall see, Matthew, the Petrine Christian, finds this
19. For a detailed analysis of the miracles of the loaves, see: Quesnell, op.cit. Cf. NJBC,
41:43, 51; Mann, op. cit., pp. 298-308, 324-337; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 170-179,
194-205; Frank J. Matera, The Incomprehension of the Disciples and Peters
Confession (Mark 6, 14-8, 30) Biblica, 70(1989), pp. 153-172.
96
particular theological gloss of Mark unacceptable. Marks Jesus, however,

denies that anything physical can make a person unclean. Real uncleanness must proceed from the human mind and heart: evil thoughts, sexual
immorality, theft, murder, adultery, avarice, malice, deceit, fornication,
envy, slander, arrogance, and folly.20 (Mk 7:17-23)
This confrontation between Jesus and the disciples allows Mark to draw
out in more detail the contrast between the legalistic Pharisees attitude
to Torah and Jesus own more flexible view of the Law. It also foreshadows Jesus warning after the second miracle of the loaves that the disciples
must avoid the leaven of the Pharisees.21 (Mk 8:16)
The confrontation with the Pharisees which follows the second multiplication of loaves betrays the true reason for their opposition to Jesus:
their lack of faith. This second confrontation sets the stage for what happens next. As Jesus crosses the lake with His disciples, He warns them
against the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod. (Mk 8:14-5) As we have
seen, the stories of Jesus controversies with the Pharisees have revealed
what Jesus means by the leaven of the Pharisees: religious hypocrisy, superficial legalism, judgmentalism, subverting the true intent of the law
by replacing it with human traditions, and, finally, unbelief. The Pharisees manifest their unbelief by testing God, by trying to set the conditions under which they will believe in Jesus. By placing this sin immediately before Jesus warning about the leaven of the Pharisees, Mark seems
to point to it as their culminating sin, the sin which explains and finds
embodiment in all their other faults, the sin which the disciples must
especially avoid. As we have also seen, Herods conduct reveals what Jesus
means by the leaven of Herod: sensuality, weakness, vainglory, murder,
and oppression.
Once again the disciples misunderstand Jesus warning against the leaven
of the Pharisees and of Herod. They foolishly think that Jesus is complaining because they forgot to bring enough bread to eat. In rebuking
them, Jesus puts them in the same category as the unbelieving multitudes, who have eyes but cannot recognize the significance of Jesus ministry and who have ears but refuse to grasp His message. (Mk 8:16-8)
Moreover, Jesus links their lack of faith to their inability to understand
the meaning of the two miracles of the loaves. (Mk 8:19-21) Understanding the meaning of the loaves, requires eucharistic faith. In effect,
Jesus is saying that one cannot eat the eucharistic bread of wisdom without renouncing the malice and unbelief which Herod and the Pharisees
symbolize.
20. Cf. Camille Focant, La rapport la loi dans lvangile de Marc, Revue Thologique
de Louvain, 27(1996), pp. 281-308; Enrique Nardoni, Lo Puro y lo Impuro en
Marcos 7:1-23: La Respuesta del Lector, Revista Biblica, 59(1007), pp. 135-154.
Marks abrogation of dietary laws forms a piece with his abrogation of temple worship.
21. Cf. NJBC, 41:52.
97
The incident puts the disciples in an adversarial relationship with Jesus.

Mark, however, immediately portrays Jesus healing a blind man. (Mk
8:22-6) The story parallels the healing of the deaf and dumb man which
preceded the second multiplication of the loaves. (Mk 7:31-7) Both stories point to the eventual healing of the disciples. When Jesus baptizes
them with the Holy Breath, He will eventually heal the blindness of unbelief and will empower them to hear with understanding and to bear
witness to Him.
Both miracles of multiplication culminate, then, in a crisis of faith
among the disciples. The first miracle takes place on Jewish soil. On Jewish ground, the disciples fail to recognize the divinity of Jesus. (Mk
6:45-52) Accepting Jesus divinity constituted, of course, a major obstacle to potential Jewish converts. In foreshadowing the eucharist on
Jewish soil, therefore, the evangelist insists on belief in the divinity of
Jesus as a fundamental condition for authentic eucharistic faith.
The crisis of faith which follows the second miracle of the loaves has,
however, a different character. It takes place on Gentile ground and implicitly engages the moral issues likely to confront a mixed community of
Jewish and Gentile Christians. One suspects that, in the eyes of the evangelist, Jewish Christians need especially to guard against the leaven of the
Pharisees: they must not let their status as members of Gods chosen people
degenerate into elitism, legalism, judgmentalism, and condescension toward Gentile sisters and brothers. The leaven of Herod, on the other
hand, probably applies more to baptized Gentiles. It reminds them that
if they expect to worship eucharistically, they need to purge from their
hearts the sensuality and unbridled passions of their former lives.22
Peters confession of Jesus as messiah follows the healing of a blind
man. Like the blind man whom Jesus healed in two stages, Peter is only
beginning to see and understand Jesus true identity. At the first stage of
his healing, the blind man sees men who look like walking tress. Mark
could conceivably be alluding to the book of Judges 9:7-15, which narrates a fable about a gathering of trees to choose themselves a king. The
fable in Judges satirizes the kingship of Abimalech over Scheche. In Mark,
the blind man is probably looking at the disciples who surround Jesus.
By assimilating the disciples to walking trees, the evangelist could be
mocking their espousal of secular messianism and their attempt to cast
Jesus in the role of a Davidic messiah. (Mk 8:27-30) Peter, like the partially healed blind man, has not yet grasped the full truth about Jesus,
because, when Jesus predicts His coming death and resurrection, Peter
tries to talk Jesus out of it. Jesus eyes the disciples before giving Peter a
stinging rebuke: Get out of my sight, Satan, for you do not savor the
22. Cf. Stephen H. Smith, Bethsaida via Gennesaret: The Enigma of the Sea Crossing
in Mark 6,45-53, Biblica, 77(1996), pp. 347-374.
98
things of God but the things of humans. (Mk 8:33) Jesus eyes the disciples when saying this in order to make it clear that His rebuke includes
them all, not just the brash Peter. Discipleship demands of them the willingness to follow Jesus all the way to Calvary. In a sense, the partially
healed blind man foreshadows the imperfect faith of all the disciples as
they follow Jesus on the way.23
The Disciples on the Way
Mark underscores this point by having Jesus teach this immediately and
explicitly to both the crowds and the disciples. Any follower of Jesus must
stand ready to deny his or her very self and carry the cross after Him.
On Jesus lips this teaching need not have functioned as a prediction of
His own crucifixion. Jesus uses the image of the condemned criminal
carrying the patibulum on which he would hang. The condemned person stumbles pelted with rocks and reviled by the crowd as he goes to his
death. On the lips of Jesus this teaching painted a startling image of discipleship. Those who follow a servant messiah must stand as willing as
He to face hostility, rejection, and a shameful death.
Jesus also clarifies the cause for which the disciples must willingly sacrifice their lives: namely, for Jesus person and for the gospel which He
proclaims and embodies. Anyone who does so will save his or her life, not
lose it. (Mk 8:34-5) Here life means ones true self, what is deepest and
most precious about oneself, so precious, in fact, that gaining the whole
world could not replace it or begin to have the same value. (Mk 8:36-7)
This stern teaching opens the way section of Marks gospel. For Mark,
then, willingness to walk the way of the cross stands at the head of the
lessons which the disciples must learn along the way. Willingness to die
for the gospel presupposes, of course, willingness to live it as well. Indeed, during the way section of Mark, the disciples, as they reluctantly
follow Jesus on the way to Jerusalem and to martyrdom, reach, like Peter,
an imperfect insight into Jesus whose imperfections only the paschal
mystery will dispel.24
23. Cf. B. Willrt, La connexion entre la premire prdiction de la passion et la
confession de Pierre chez les synoptiques, Ephemerides Theologiae Lovaniensis, 32(1958),
pp. 24-45; Johannes M. Ntzel, Die Verklrungserzlung im Markusevangelium: Eine
redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung (Wurzburg: Echter Verlag, 1973); R.S.
Sugirtharajah, Men, Trees and Walking: A Conjectural Solution to Mk 8:24,
Expository Times, 103(1991- 1992), pp. 172-174; Jean-Francois Baudoz, Mc 7,
31-37 et Mc 8, 22-26: gographie et thologie, Revue Biblique, 102(1995), pp.
560-569.
24. Cf. Walter Rebell, Sein Leben Verloren (Mark 8.35 Parr.) als Strukturmoment vorand nachsterlichen Glaubens, New Testament Studies, 35(1989), pp. 202-218;
Elizabeth Struther Malbon, Galilee and Jerusalem: History and Literature in Markan
Interpretation in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 253-268.
99
After summoning the disciples to take up their crosses, Jesus warns that
anyone who feels ashamed of Him will discover that the Son of Man will
in turn feel ashamed of that person when He returns in the glory of the
Father and surrounded by His angels. (Mk 8:38) This saying seems to
suggest how Jesus saw Himself functioning in the judgmental role of Son
of Man. On the last day He would testify to the Father about how people
responded to Him and to His mission. This second teaching puts both
the one which precedes it and the one which it follows in an eschatological
context.25
Jesus next promises that some of His hearers will see the arrival of the
kingdom of God in power even during their lifetime. (Mk 9:1) The promise serves as a transition to Marks account of the transfiguration, which
follows immediately; and Mark may have intended this promise of Jesus
to refer to the transfiguration itself. If, however, one can trace this saying
back to Jesus, it suggests that He Himself at some point in His ministry
hoped for the rapid, final arrival of the kingdom. The evangelist probably
saw this prophecy sufficiently fulfilled in Jesus own resurrection, which
the transfiguration foreshadows. (cf. Mk 8:31) If, however, the account
of the transfiguration itself foreshadows Jesus glorification, the conversation of Jesus and His disciples after the transfiguration alludes once again
to the way of the cross. That allusion links it to the teaching on the cross
which opens the way section. The juxtaposition of cross and transfigured
glory indicates that one achieves the latter by passing through the former.
In testifying to Jesus in the transfiguration, the Father, as we have seen,
sanctions Jesus teachings and demands that the disciples obey Him with
the same absoluteness and trust as they owe to the Father Himself. The
disciples must regard Jesus teachings as more authoritative than the Law
and the prophets, viz., as the word of God itself.
The Fathers words also begin to draw the disciples into Jesus baptismal experience: they hear the very words which the Father spoke to Jesus
during His messianic commissioning after His baptism in the Jordan.
(Mk 1:11) In recalling Jesus messianic commissioning, the account of
the transfiguration also alludes to Johns prophecy of the mightier one
whose revelation Jesus messianic commissioning begins. The transfiguration, therefore, also contains an implicit promise of the disciples
Breath-baptism, which will draw them finally and fully into Jesus mission.
Jesus converses with Peter, James, and John as they descend the mountain. He forbids them to tell anyone about the transfiguration until He
rises from the dead. With typical obtuseness, the three disciples find it
hard to believe that Jesus could rise from the dead before the general
resurrection. In the process they mistakenly imagine that Jesus will rise
25. Cf. NJBC, 41:56-57; Mann, op. cit., pp. 342-354; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 213-222.
100
like anyone else. They fail to grasp that His resurrection will reveal Him
as the source of risen life. (Mk 9:9-10)
The disciples also find it hard to understand how Jesus could rise from
the dead before the return of Elijah. Jesus puts the latter doubt to rest by
assuring them that Elijah has come again and has been treated badly.
Jesus is identifying John the Baptist as Elijah, slain by Herod and especially by Herodias, just as Jezabel incited the wicked king Ahab to take
the life of the original Elijah. (1 King 19:2, 10) Moreover, Jesus assures
them that just as Johns death fulfills the Scriptures, so too will Jesus own
death. (Mk 9:12-3) Mark does not develop the theme of fulfillment as
extensively as Matthew or even Luke, but Jesus assurance provides the
Markan community with an important hermeneutical principle for interpreting the paschal mystery. One must interpret the paschal mystery
as a fulfillment of the Hebrew scriptures.26
The cure of the possessed boy happens as Jesus together with Peter,
James, and John join the rest of the disciples at the foot of the mount of
transfiguration. There the disciples have been trying unsuccessfully to
exorcise the boy; moreover, their failure stems from their self-reliance and
from their failure to look to God to effect the exorcism. (Mk 9:29) It also
stems from the boys fathers own lack of faith. (Mk 9:22-3)
This lack of faith helps explain Jesus exasperation when he learns of
the disciples failure to exorcise the boy: O faithless generation, how
much longer will I be with you? How long must I put up with you? (Mk
9:19) Jesus sees the faithlessness of His disciples and of the boys father as
an expression of the faithless response which He in His passion will receive from His contemporaries.
Again, however, Mark makes it clear that the cross leads ultimately to
risen life for those who follow Jesus. After Jesus exorcises the demon, the
disciples mistakenly believe that the demon has killed the child. Jesus,
however, takes him by the hand and raises him up (egeire), as He had
the daughter of Jairus and Peters mother-in-law. (Mk 5:41) Here too,
His raising of the boy reveals His power to raise from the dead. That Jesus
grasps by the hand those whom He raises up dramatizes the intimacy of
the relationship between the risen Lord and those whom He raises.
Moreover, the demon Jesus casts out causes deafness and dumbness.
The boys father has already described the boy as dumb (Mk 9:17); but in
characterizing the boy as both deaf and dumb, Mark alludes to Jesus
earlier healing of a deaf and dumb man. (Mk 8:31-37) That healing, as
we have seen, foreshadows the transformation which the paschal mystery
will work in the disciples. It will enable them to hear the gospel truly and
to proclaim it. The boys cure therefore foreshadows the fact that those
101
who share in Jesus risen life will not only hear Him in faith but will bear
witness to the gospel.27
During the rest of way section of Mark, Jesus patiently instructs the
disciples in the demands of discipleship, despite their persistent obtuseness and failure to get the point. In the first part of the way section of
Marks gospel, Jesus, as we have seen, has one basic lesson to teach His
disciples: viz., that they must stand ready to follow Him even to death
and crucifixion; but they must do so in the knowledge that death for
Him and the gospel leads not only to life but to true self-discovery and to
the salvation of what is most precious, viz., their very selves.
The second prediction of the passion introduces the second part of the
way section. Once again, the disciples respond to Jesus prediction of His
impending death and resurrection with complete incomprehension; but
they fear to ask Jesus for an explanation and remain in their ignorance.
(Mk 9:30-1)
Mark follows the second prediction with a series of teachings on a variety of topics: self-effacement in the leadership of service, avoiding cliquishness and intolerance, mutual charity, avoiding scandals, the repudiation of Mosaic divorce practices, welcoming children, the danger of riches,
and the rewards of renunciation. All these teachings deal with relationships among the members of the kingdom, in other words, with the kingdom viewed as community.
In the first teaching, Jesus embarrasses the disciples by forcing them to
admit that they were arguing along the way about which of them ranked
greatest. As Jesus goes humbly and obediently to His death, the disciples
remain full of self-importance and pride.
Jesus rebukes their ambition and arrogance in two ways. First, Jesus
instructs the Twelve that those who ambition leadership in the new Israel
must make themselves the least of all, the servant of all. (Mk 9:33-4)
Second, setting a small child in Their midst, He tells them that both He
and the Father so identify with the smallest and most vulnerable that
anyone who welcomes the least member of the new Israel welcomes both
Jesus Himself and the Father. (Mk 9:35-7) The fact that Jesus directs this
teaching to the Twelve makes it clear that His words apply especially to
all leaders in the new Israel, including those with the greatest responsibility.
Having dealt with the supposedly greatest members of the community, Jesus then deals with the smallest and neediest. He demands that
they receive the same welcome one would accord to Jesus Himself or to
the Father: Whoever welcomes one such child in My name welcome
Me, and whoever welcomes Me welcomes the one who sent Me. (Mk
27. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 653-656; NJBC, 41: 59; Mann, op. cit., pp.
368-371; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 229-232.
102
9:37) In effect, Jesus is standing the social order of first century Palestine
on its head. The weakest find the warmest welcome; the leaders must
learn humility and vulnerability.28
Jesus next rebukes cliquishness among His disciples. John informs Jesus
that the disciples came across someone doing what they could not do for
the possessed boy: namely, the person in question was invoking Jesus
name in casting out demons. The disciples forbade the stranger to continue exorcising, simply because he did not belong to their own inner
circle. Jesus tells John that the disciples have acted wrongly, because no
one can drive out demons in Jesus name while opposing Jesus and His cause.
Jesus concludes: Anyone who is not against us is for us. (Mk 9:38-40)
Mark is using the story to undercut any tendencies to narrow elitism
on the part of Christians. They must stand ready to credit the fruits of
faith and signs of Gods Breath wherever they find them, even in those
who do not belong formally to the Christian community. 29
Jesus next counsels mutual charity. Jesus promises that the smallest act
of benevolence toward another member of the kingdom will have its reward. This teaching re-enforces the universalism asserted in the preceding story, since the one who performs the act of kindness contrasts with the
believing Christian who receives the charity. Even unbelievers who act benevolently toward believers will have their eschatological reward. (Mk 9:41)
Jesus also requires that His disciples prefer death by drowning to giving
scandal to another. The sin of scandal means causing another member of
the community to sin, however small or insignificant the person might
be. (Mk 9:42) These two pronouncements illumine one another. Those
actively concerned for one anothers welfare will of necessity show concern to keep one another from sinning.
Having rebuked scandalizing others, Jesus next warns against scandalizing oneself. The disciples must avoid absolutely anything which leads
them into personal sin. Jesus underscores the absoluteness of this prohibition by the violence of His metaphors: better to amputate ones limbs
or to pluck out ones eye than sin. The violence of the metaphors also
make it clear that the kind of sin against which Jesus warns has a serious
character: it excludes both from the kingdom and from eternal life. It
consigns one to burn forever like the rubbish of Gehenna, the garbage
heap of ancient Jerusalem. (Mk 9:48) Here fire symbolizes the holiness of
God as it consumes the unrepentant, whose vary lack of repentance sets
them against God.
28. Cf. NJBC, 41:60-61; Mann, op. cit., pp. 375-379; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 233-235;
Harry Fleddermann, The Discipleship Discourse, Mk 9:33-50, Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, 43(1981), pp. 57-75.
Alfonso de la Fuente, A Favor or en Contra de Jess: El Logion de Mc 9,40 y sus
Paralelos, Estudios Biblicos, 51(1993), pp. 449-459.
103
Jesus, however, adds immediately: For everyone will be salted with

fire. (Mk 9:50) In other words, the fire of Gods holiness will also purify
those whom it does not consume. As we shall see, both Matthew and
Luke will link the fire of divine holiness closely to Breath-baptism. The
Breath of Christ will purify those to whom Jesus sends Her, but She will
consume in the fires of judgment those who resist Her sanctification.
Mark then adds two other proverbs about salt. The evangelist is stringing together diverse sayings of Jesus which contain similar images, even
though they deal with very diverse themes. The two salt sayings do, however, develop the general theme of this part of the way section: namely,
life in community.
The first proverb about salt teaches: Salt is a good thing; but, if salt
loses its taste, with what will you season it? (Mk 9:49) This saying reminds the disciples that they are being sent to season the world as purveyors of religious wisdom and must embody the wisdom they disseminate. If they abandon the salt of wisdom for folly, the world will not
correct them.
The second salt saying states: Have salt in yourselves and be at peace
with one another. (Mk 9:50) Here the salt of wisdom symbolizes hospitality, mutual friendship, and reconciliation in community.30
A confrontation with some Pharisees contextualizes Jesus next teaching about the way of discipleship. The Pharisees ask Jesus to choose between a lax and a stringent interpretation of mosaic divorce practices.
Marks Jesus sets aside Mosess command sanctioning divorce. (Mk
10:1-5) In revising the Law, Jesus invokes an authority superior to that of
Moses, the very authority with which the Father had endowed Him during the Transfiguration. (Mk 9:8)
Jesus refuses to choose between rabbinic interpretations of the divorce
legislation in Dt 24:1. Instead, He appeals to Gods original intention in
establishing marriage and holds up to His disciples the ideal of mutual,
life-long fidelity between husband and wife. When the disciples question
Jesus about His answer in private, He replies that it applies to both men
and women. If either divorce and remarry, they commit adultery. Since
Jewish women could not initiate a divorce, although Roman matrons
could, Mark in this private conversation about marriage extends Jesus
original prohibition of divorce to include female, Gentile Christians. In
private Jesus addresses the disciples as insiders.31
30. Cf. NJBC, 41: 61; Mann, op. cit., pp. 379-385; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 236-239; Harry
Fledermann, The Discipleship Discourse, Mk 9:33-50, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
43(1981), pp. 57-75.
31. Cf. NJBC, 41:62; Mann, op. cit., pp. 385-394; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 239-244; John
Noland, The Gospel Prohibition of Divorce: Tradition, History, and Meaning,
Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 58(1995), pp. 19-35; Barbara Green, O.P.,
Jesus Teaching on Divorce in the Gospel of Mark, Journal for the Study of the New
104
In His final teaching on relationships among members of the new Israel, Jesus indignantly rebukes the disciples for keeping mothers from
bringing their children to Him for Him to touch and heal. He tells the
disciples that the kingdom belongs to children in a special way and that
those who enter the kingdom must accept it with the simplicity of a
child. Then He embraces the children, blesses them, and lays His hands
on them in healing. (Mk 10:13-6)
The story insists that children, in virtue of their need and vulnerability,
enjoy a privileged place among the members of the new Israel. The kingdom belongs to children in a special way. Moreover, the simplicity with
which they accept the kingdom makes them a model to all the other
disciples. Since Mark includes this pronouncement story among Jesus
teachings concerning communal living, the evangelist is probably also
alluding to the apostolic practice of baptizing children who were members of households who converted to the faith.32
In the first part of the way section, Jesus summons the disciples to
follow the way of the cross in eschatological hope. In the second part of
the way section, He teaches them how to relate to one another in community. The message in the third part of the way section targets Christian leaders. It binds them particularly to follow the way of the cross; and
it challenges them to humble leadership in service in the image of a crucified messiah.
After the third prophecy of the passion, James and John, in an act of
overt ambition, ask Jesus if He will let them sit on His right and left
hands when He comes into His kingdom. Jesus replies darkly, You do
not know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup which I must
drink, or be baptized with the baptism with which I must be baptized?
(Mk 10:35-8) The cup, of course, symbolizes both the eucharistic cup
and the destiny of crucifixion which awaits Jesus. (Mk 14:23-5, 36)
Moreover, in Markan theology, Jesus passion and resurrection bring His
baptismal anointing to its culmination by completing His revelation as
messiah, suffering servant, and Breath-baptizer.33 (Mk 1:9-11)
Marks Jesus is, then, warning James and John that, in asking to sit on
His right and left hands, they are in fact asking for their own crucifixion.
Testament, 38(1990), pp. 67-75; Will Deming, Mark 9.42-10.12, Matthew 5.27-32,
and BNID.13b: A First-Century Discussion of Male Sexuality, New Testament
Studies, 36(1990), pp. 130-141.
32. Cf. NJBC, 41:63; Mann, op. cit., pp. 395-406; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 244-247; S.
Legasse, Jsus et lenfant: enfants, petits, et simples dans la tradition synoptique
(Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1969).; John W. Pryor, John 3.3,5: A Study in the Relation
of Johns Gospel and the Synoptic Tradition, Journal for the Study of the New
Testament, 41(1991), pp. 71- 95.
33. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Christs Second Baptism, Expository Times,
100(1988-1989), pp. 294-295.
105
They naively say that they are ready to drink the same cup as Jesus and to
receive His baptism. (Mk 10:39) They will, of course, along with the rest
of the disciples abandon Jesus when the chief priests arrest Him. (Mk
14:49) Jesus, however, looks beyond that moment and predicts that one
day James and John will suffer and die for Him; but He tells them that
only the Father has the authority to let them sit on His right and left
hands. (Mk 10: 40)
The ambition of James and John incenses the rest of the Twelve. Their
envious ambition contextualizes Jesus final teaching on the way. When
the other ten learn of the ambition of James and of John, they angrily
resent what the two brothers have done. Jesus in response calls the Twelve
together and instructs them on the true meaning of leadership in the
kingdom. Leaders in the kingdom must not lord it over others in the
manner of earthly kings and rulers, like Herod and Pilate. Instead, they
must act as the servants and slaves of all. They must model their leadership on Jesus who has come to serve others and to give His life as a ransom
for many. It would appear, then, that Mark included clericalism in his understanding of the leaven of the Phariseees and of Herod.(Mk 10:41-5)
The term ransom (lystron) means the deliverance by purchase of a
slave or captive. Here it connotes Gods liberating acquisition of humanity which Jesus death will effect. The term the many (pollon) alludes to
the third servant song of second Isaiah and points to Jesus death as an
atoning sacrifice for sins.34
The way section of Mark ends on a note of hope for the obtuse disciples. Despite their blindness and lack of understanding on the way, the
day will come when they will finally understand Jesus and His teachings.
On that day they will also find courage to walk the way of the cross.
Mark makes this prediction symbolically by closing the way section with
the healing of blind Bartimaeus. As the story unfolds, Bartimaeuss physical blindness becomes a symbol of the disciples blindness to the truth
which Jesus embodies; for Bartimaeuss healing transforms him into a
prototype of what the disciples will become after Jesus rises and baptizes
them with a sanctifying Breath.
When Bartimaeus, using the messianic title Son of David, begs Jesus
to have pity on him, the disciples in their spiritual blindness try to silence
Him. Bartimaeus, however, has more faith and more persistence than
they do: he continues to call upon Jesus. When Jesus calls Bartimaeus, he
casts off his garment, probably the beggars cloak he had spread for alms.
W.J. Noulder, The Old Testament Background and the Interpretation of Mark
X.45, New Testament Studies, 24(1977-1978), pp. 120-127; David Seeley, Rulership
and Service in Mark 10:41-45, Novum Testamentum, 35(1993), pp. 234-250;
Benedetto Prete, Il Logion di Ges: Dare la Propria Vita in Riscatto por Molti (Mc
10,45), Rivista Biblica, 34(1996), pp. 309- 335.
106
Since clothes symbolizes social relationships archetypally, the gesture symbolizes the blind mans passage from one mode of social existence to another. Hence, after Jesus heals him and leaves Jericho for the road that
leads to Jerusalem and the cross, Bartimaeus follows Him on the way (en
t hod). (Mk 10:52)
As we have seen, the first Christians called their movement the way.
(Acts 9:2, 18:25-6, 19:9, 23, 22:4, 24:14, 22) Bartimaeus, once healed of
his blindness, follows Jesus on the Christian way to Jerusalem and to the
cross. After Breath baptism transforms them, the disciples too will see
with the eyes of faith and follow Jesus along with the cured Bartimaeus.35
The Disciples in the Jerusalem Ministry
The disciples figure significantly in four incidents in Jesus final Jerusalem ministry. They prepare and participate in the triumphal entry into
Jerusalem. They witness the cleansing of the temple and the prophetic
cursing of the fig tree. They hear Jesus teaching about the widows mite.
Finally, they provoke and hear Jesus eschatological discourse, the culmination of Jesus teaching in Mark.
The disciples prepare Jesus triumphant entry into Jerusalem. They follow His detailed instructions, which Mark portrays as Jesus preternatural foreknowledge of events before they happen. Jesus tells the disciples
where to find the donkey He intends to ride and what to say when the
owners of the donkey find them untying it. They should reply that the
Lord (Kyrios) has need of it and should promise to return the beast when
Jesus no longer needs it. The term Lord has, of course, a double meaning. In context, it means master; but it would have connoted for Mark
and for his readers the Lordship of the risen Christ.
Jesus, then, orchestrates His entry into Jerusalem in a manner which
fulfills the prophecy of Zech 9:9. He enters the holy city as a peaceful
messiah, humbly seated on a beast of burden instead of on a war horse.
As He enters, however, the crowds misunderstand the gesture and greet
Jesus as the Davidic messiah.36 (Mk 11:1-11)
The disciples subsequently witness Jesus cursing the fig tree and its
consequences. (Mk 11:12-14, 20-25) And they accompany Jesus when
He cleanses the temple and on the following day. (Mk 11:15-9, 27) As
Stephen H. Smith, The Function of the Son of David Tradition in Marks Gospel,
New Testament Studies, 42(1996), pp. 523-539; Hans Joachim Eckstein, Markus
10,46-52 als Schlssetext des Markusevangelisums, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 87(1996), pp. 333-50.
Walter Bauer, The Colt of Palm Sunday (der Palmesel), Journal of Biblical
Literature, 43(1953), pp. 220-229; Paul Brooks Duff, The March of the Divine
Warrior and the Advent of the Graeco-Roman King: Marks Account of Jesus Entry
into Jerusalem, Journal of Biblical Literature, 111(1992), pp. 55-71.
107
we have already seen, after the cleansing they learn that they must replace
the simoniacal worship of the priests with a faith-filled prayer authenticated by mutual forgiveness. (Mk 11:20-25)
The disciples also hear Jesus praise the generosity of the widow who
gave her mite, all she had, to the temple. Mark, then, directs this teaching
especially to them. Jesus remark has a triple thrust. He praises the faith
and generosity of the impoverished widow, one of Gods little ones and
a marginal member of Jewish society. Jesus then mocks the ostentatious
donations of the rich who pay their taxes from the surplus of their possessions. Finally and especially, Jesus implicitly criticizes the temple taxes for
the burden they place upon the poor. Clearly, the disciples can admire
the widows faith and generosity; but they should eschew the example of
the religious hypocrites who oppress her. (Mk 12:41-4)
Having witnessed the cleansing of the temple, the withering of the fig
tree, which symbolizes the barren piety of the avaricious temple priests,
and having listened to Jesus denunciation of the priestly aristocracy, the
disciples occasion Jesus prediction of the destruction of the Jerusalem
temple. Moreover, Jesus prediction prefaces His second, final, and culminating discourse in Mark: the eschatological discourse. The discourse
counsels the disciples about living in the end time.
Longer than the sermon on the lake the eschatological discourse ranks
as the longest and most important continuous discourse in Marks gospel. That and its position at the culmination of Jesus ministry further
marks its importance. Its prominence also accords well with the
eschatological flavor of Marks narrative.
The disciples admire the enormous stones in the temple walls. Cyclopean
stone work typifies Herodian architecture. Jesus, however, unimpressed
by this architectural achievement, predicts that despite their size, these
very stones will one day be razed flat. (Mk 13:2)
Peter, Andrew, James, and John, the first disciples whom Jesus called,
ask Him in private when His prophecy will reach fulfillment. Their names
link the eschatological discourse which follows to their call and thus underscores the eschatological character of discipleship.
Jesus delivers the discourse on the Mount of Olives, whose riving in
Zech 14:4 announces the beginning of the final judgment. (Mk 13:3-4)
The privacy of Jesus remarks designates them as part of the secret wisdom of the post-resurrection Church.
The disciples function prominently in the eschatological discourse,
because it instructs them on how to conduct themselves in the
eschatological age. Jesus does not answer directly their request for a timetable of future events but instead encourages them to patient endurance
in the face of cosmic upheavals and persecution.37
108
Jesus first warns the disciples against false messiahs who will pretend to
be Jesus returned to earth. They will even claim the same divine name as
Jesus has: I am. (polloi eleusontai epi to nomati mou legontes hoti ego
eimi). They will also deceive many. The disciples, however, should put no
faith in them. (Mk 13:5-6)
This first saying of Jesus seeks to dampen any excess of eschatological
fervor on the disciples part which would leave them vulnerable to false
prophets. Moreover, Jesus here once again implicitly claims the divine
name which He used while walking on the water after the first miracle of
the loaves. (Mk 6:50) As we have also seen, He will claim it a third time
(also implicitly) in His trial before the Sanhedrin.
Jesus warns the disciples that cataclysmic events like wars, earthquakes,
and famines provide no evidence that the final judgment is near. Such
tribulations only begin the violent birth pangs of the messianic age. (Mk
13:7-8)
In the meantime, the disciples must expect persecution. They can expect growing hostility from Jews and Gentiles alike. They will face trial in
both Jewish and Gentile courts. They will suffer flogging in synagogues.
(Mk 13:9-10) The proclamation of the gospel will divide families in mutual
hatred and cause its members to hand siblings and parents over to death.
(Mk 13:12-3) This last saying may describe tragic betrayals during the
persecution under Nero.
Nevertheless, the gospel will spread not only despite persecution but
because of it; for through persecution itself disciples will bear witness to
Jesus. Moreover, the disciples can expect these tribulations to continue
until all the nations of the world have heard the good news. (Mk 13:10)
The fact that the gospel must find proclamation in every part of the earth
and to every nation before the final judgment can occur puts the date of
the second coming in the vague and far distant future.
In the midst of the tribulations which they face, the disciples will experience a divine enlightenment which will teach them how to bear witness
to Christ in the face of persecution and death. When they are hauled into
court, they should not think ahead how to answer their tormenters; for
the Holy Breath with whom Jesus will baptize them will teach them what
to say in their moment of trial. (Mk 13:11) Just as She inspired and
empowered Jesus own ministry of proclamation, so too She will inspire
and empower the disciples witness to Jesus and transform them into instruments for the spread of the gospel.38
The words of Jesus have so far described events within the experience
of the Markan community. Jesus, however, finally addresses the question
which Peter, Andrew, James, and John originally asked: namely, when
will Jerusalem and its temple undergo destruction? In the process He
109
begins to talk about things which have yet to occur. Jesus does not give a
date for the destruction of Jerusalem, but He foretells that it will happen
when the abomination of desolation (to bdelugma tes eremoseos) stands
where it ought not: i.e., in the sanctuary of the Jerusalem temple. (Mk
13:14)
The phrase abomination of desolation refers to the pagan altar erected
by Antiochus Epiphanes on the Jewish altar of holocausts in 168 b.c.
Jesus, however, speaks of the abomination of desolation as standing
where it ought not (hestekota hopou ouk dei). (Mk 13:14) The present
participle standing seems to connote a contemporary action. Moreover, Mark adds cryptically and parenthetically: let the reader understand.
Mark is probably referring to the abortive attempt of Caligula to erect
his own statue in the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem temple in the year
49 a.d. If so, the evangelist would seem to be interpreting this blasphemous attempt as a repetition of the desecration under Antiochus and as
an omen of the prompt fulfillment of Jesus prophecy. In fact, Jerusalem
would fall in 70 a.d.39
Marks Jesus then instructs His disciples in Jerusalem about how to
conduct themselves when the citys doom approaches. They should flee
Judea once the abomination of desolation has appeared and they should
do so at once, if they hope to avoid the unparalleled destruction and
suffering which will descend on the doomed city. (Mk 13:15-6) Jesus
foresees greatest suffering for pregnant and nursing mothers and their
children.
Jesus also exhorts the disciples to pray that they not have to flee during
the winter. During the winter, rains make the wadis of Palestine impassible. Moreover, in winter food would be scarcer. The instruction also
makes it clear that Jesus claims no detailed knowledge when the flight of
the disciples will occur. (Mk 13:16-7) Jesus does, however, predict that
the eschatological tribulation (thlipsis) which will visit Jerusalem will,
whenever it comes, have no parallel in the entire history of the world.
Only those whom God chooses will survive. Indeed, God will shorten
the period of suffering for their sake.
Jesus also warns that prior to the fall of Jerusalem false prophets and
false messiahs will arise and will try to deceive Gods chosen ones. Hence,
the disciples should remain on their guard. (Mk 13:18-22) Josephuss
account of the Jewish wars indicates that this prophecy too found ample
fulfillment.
39. Cf. N.H. Taylor, Palestinian Christianity and the Caligula Crisis. Part I. Social and
Historical Reconstruction, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 61(1996), pp.
101- 124; Palestinian Christianity and the Caligula Crisis. Part II: The Markan
Eschtological Discourse, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 62(1996), pp.
13-41.
110
Jesus closes His prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem with the
words, Look to yourselves. See, I have forewarned you of everything.
(Mk 13:23) The phrase recalls attention to Peter, Andrew, James, and
John and to the fact that Jesus vague prediction gives them all the answer
from Him which they will get concerning its precise date. Since the disciples lack any knowledge of when the Father has ordained that the tribulation of Jerusalem occur, they should stand ready to flee at the sign of its
approach.
The command to remain alert and on guard marks the transition to
the final part of the eschatological discourse, which describes Jesus return as Son of Man. Jesus will close this final prediction with a long
exhortation to the disciples to live in ready watchfulness for the final
judgment, since only the Father knows when it will occur.40 (Mk 13:24-37)
In describing the second coming, Marks Jesus introduces two significant interpolations into the account of the coming of Son of Man in Dan
7:13-4. First, in contrast to Daniel Jesus warns that apocalyptic signs of
destruction will precede the coming of the Son of Man. The darkening of
the sun and moon, the falling of the stars will manifest that the elemental
powers (dynameis) which dwell in the heavens and which take concrete
embodiment in oppressive human institutions like the Roman empire
are suffering their final overthrow. (Mk 13:24-6) Jesus draws His apocalyptic imagery from a number of Old Testament texts. (Is 13:10, 34:4;
Ezek 32:7; Amos 8:9; Joel 2:10, 31, 3: 15; Hag 2:6, 21) Jesus is predicting that, when He returns as the Son of Man described in the book of
Daniel, He will personally overwhelm the powers which persecute His
disciples as Nero had. (Mk 13:26)
As in Dan 7:13-14, the Son of Man in Jesus prophecy arrives riding
like Yahweh upon the clouds of heaven. (Mk 13:26) Jesus, however, modifies Daniels vision in a second way: He foretells that the Son of Man at
His arrival will dispatch His angels to gather His elect from the four
corners of the wind. (Mk 13:27) At no point does Daniel attribute such
an action to the Son of Man. The Old Testament does speak of God
gathering together His elect. (Deut 30:4; Is 11: 11, 16, 27:12; Ezek 39:27);
but nowhere do the texts in question attribute this act to the Son of Man.
Jesus, however, does precisely that. He ascribes to Himself in His role as
Son of Man the divine act of gathering. Both the assault of the Son of
Man upon the powers and His gathering of the dispersed elect put an end
to the present sufferings and tribulations of His disciples.41
The eschatological discourse ends, as we have seen, with an extended
exhortation to the disciples to live in constant readiness for Jesus return
40. Cf. Donahue, The Gospel in Parable, pp. 57-62; NJBC, 41:86; Mann, op. cit., pp. 520526; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 295-297.
111
because they know not when it will happen. Jesus begins this part of the
discourse by urging the disciples to live in expectation of the cosmic signs
which will mark His assault upon the powers. When the signs occur, the
disciples should recognize that the Son of Man is very near, even at the
gates. (Mk 13:28-9)
Jesus then predicts that all these things (tauta panta) He has just described will take place within the lifetime of His contemporaries and that
His words will outlast both heaven and earth. (Mk 13:30) Mark leaves
the antecedent of all these things vague, although the evangelist probably refers particularly to the destruction of Jerusalem.
Jesus, however, ends the discourse by warning the disciples once again
that only the Fathernot even Jesus Himselfknows the precise time
when these cataclysmic events will transpire. (Mk 13:32) As a consequence, as the disciples await the second coming, they should conduct
themselves like servants whose master has gone away on a journey. They
should keep the masters house in perfect readiness for His return. The
discourse ends with Jesus admonition that this command to live in readiness applies to everyone, and not just to the three disciples to whom He
is speaking. (Mk 13:33-7) As we shall see, Matthew will expand this warning in considerable detail.
Jesus predicted the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. Moreover, it
seems at least probable that His teachings included an apocalyptic strain.
Nevertheless, most of the eschatological discourse in Mark appears to
address pastoral needs in the Markan community.
Viewed as a component in Marks narrative, the eschatological discourse
in a sense completes Jesus instructions to the disciples in the way section
of the gospel. Certainly, it gives the disciples extensive practical advice on
how to conduct themselves in the end time.
The discourse exhorts the disciples to constant readiness for whatever
the future brings, including the second coming. At the same time, the
discourse puts a damper on the excesses of chiliastic enthusiasm. The
disciples should guard against gullibility in dealing with false prophets.
Mark could be countering an upsurge of prophetic chiliasm occasioned
by Neros persecution.
Instead of fussing about the precise timing of future events, the disciples should reconcile themselves to the fact that the second coming will
probably not happen soon. Better, then, to live in readiness for the judgment of God, whenever and however it occurs and to leave the future in
the Fathers hands. Christians living in the end time should, however,
expect to encounter suffering and persecution; but they should remain
completely confident of the final and total victory of Christ.
Marks gospel contains only two discourses: the enigmatic sermon on
the lake and the eschatological discourse. The positioning of the
eschatological discourse at the climax of Jesus ministry gives it greater
112
dramatic prominence than the sermon on the lake. This extended explanation about life in the end time accords well with Marks portrayal of
Jesus ministry as Gods final, eschatological struggle against the forces of
evil. Moreover, the obscurity of both discourses also reflects Marks sense
of Christianity as a secret wisdom.42
The Disciples in the Passion
Mark begins his passion narrative with the plotting of the chief priests
and scribes against Jesus (Mk 14:1-2) and with the story of the Jesus
anointing at Bethany. In fact, the evangelist sandwiches the story of the
devout woman between two stories about wicked men: the chief priests
and Judas. Mark situates the anointing at Bethany in the house of Simon
the leper. (Mk 14:3) Since such precision about details does not normally
characterize Marks narrative style, they probably derive from the story as
he received it. We do not know who Simon the leper was, but the fact
that the story names him specifically without explanation suggests that
the Markan community may have known the man first hand. Since lepers could not associate socially with others, Simon had presumably recovered from his leprosy. Jesus could conceivably have healed him. The evangelist may also have included these details in part for symbolic reasons.
Marks servant messiah receives his messianic anointing, not in the holy
city, where one would expect such an anointing to occur, but outside
Bethany, not in the temple, the normal site of the ritual, but in the house
of the unclean, the house of a leper. The reverse imagery recalls Jesus
own symbolic margenalization at the start of His ministry when he cured
a leper. (Mk 1:40-45)
A woman enters with an alabaster jar of ointment and precious spices
and anoints Jesus head. The gesture seems to signify her acknowledgement
of Jesus messianic dignity. Some of those present complain indignantly
about the waste of the oil and suggest that it should have been sold and the
money given the poor. They turn angrily upon the woman. (Mk 14:3-4)
We do not know whether Mark had the disciples in mind as the origin
of this complaint. Matthews account does attribute the complaint to
them (Mt 26:8), while John ascribes it to Judas only. (Jn 12:4) Mark, as
we have seen, tends to paint a fairly dim portrait of the disciples. The
fact, then, that he fails to name the disciples as the source of this com42. Cf. Jan Lembrecht, S.J., Die Redaktion der Markusapokalypse: Literarische Analyse und
Strukturuntersuchung (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967); Lars Hartman,
Prophecy Interpreted: The Formation of Some Jewish Apocalyptic Texts and of the
Eschatological Discourse, Mark 13 par. (Upsala: Almqvist & Wiksells, 1966); NJBC,
41:87-88; Mann, op. cit., pp. 538-542; A Feuillet, Le discours de Jsus sur la ruine
du temple, Revue Biblique, 55(1948), pp. 481-482; 52(1949), pp. 61-92; Nikolaus
Walter, Tempelzerstrung und synoptische Apokalypse, Zeitschrift fr die
113
plaint suggests that he intended the reader to assume that it came from
some other source. Moreover, it would seem from the way Mark tells the
story that the womans acknowledgement of Jesus messianic dignity really motivates the bystanders violent attack on her rather than any real
concern for the poor. Markan Christians would, of courase, have approved of the womans action. The attack on the woman assimilates her
to Jesus, whom Judas and the chief priests are plotting to destroy.
Jesus immediately comes to the womans defence. He changes her act
of homage into a corporal work of mercy, explaining that she has really
anointed Him for His burial. He also predicts that wherever people proclaim His message they will tell the story of this woman and her kindness
to Him. In defending the woman Jesus says: She did what she was able
to do. (Mk 14:8) Some see in the phrase an assimilation of the woman
to the widow who gave all her possessions to the temple. That could
suggest that the woman had in fact spent all her possessions on purchasing the oil.
In defending the woman Jesus also remarks: You always have the poor
in your midst and you can do good to them whenever you wish; but you
do not always have me. (Mk 14:6-7) The remark alludes to Deut 15,
which teaches that, if Israel acts justly, it will find no poor person in its
midst. Nevertheless, if poverty does persist, then openhanded generosity
toward the poor provides the only proper course of action.
Jesus saying also has Christological meaning. In effect, Jesus is sanctioning the messianic significance of the womans act at the same time
that He predicts that He Himself will soon die. Not just the womans
faith and dedication but the fact that she has proclaimed Jesus messianic
dignity makes her action an integral part of the good news. The paschal
mystery, which will soon take place, will, moreover, justify her action by
revealing Jesus as both the suffering servant and the messianic
Breath-baptizer.43
After Judas arranges with the chief priests to hand Jesus over to them
(Mk 14:10), Jesus sends the disciples into Jerusalem to prepare the passover
supper. As when He sent the disciples to procure the donkey on which
He rode in triumph to Jerusalem, Jesus exhibits a clairvoyant foreknowledge of events, a foreknowledge which reveals His mastery of them. He
predicts that the disciples will meet a man carrying a pitcher who will
lead them to the place where they will celebrate the supper. (Mk 14:12-6)
Men, of course, did not normally carry pitchers.
At the last supper, the evangelist makes it even clearer that Jesus retains
the mastery, even in His passion. Jesus foresees His own death clearly and
Stephen C. Barton, Mark as Narrative: The Story of the Anointing Woman,
Expository Times, 102(1990- 1991), pp. 230-234.
114
even knows that one of the Twelve will betray Him. Jesus does not name
Judas; but He insists that the traitor comes from among the Twelve. (Mk
14:12-4) Jesus then proclaims that His death does indeed fulfill the Scriptures but that the traitor would have been better off if he had never been
born. (Mk 14:21) Jesus says in effect that His death fits into the Fathers
providential plan of salvation; but He also confronts the traitor with the
fact that no appeal to providence justifies what He is about to do.44
Marks institution narrative follows. As He had done in the two multiplications of the loaves, Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it, and gives it
to the disciples. This time, however, He says: Take, this is my Body.
(Mk 14:22) Jesus is performing a prophetic act, similar to His cursing the
fig tree, to His triumphal entry, and to His cleansing of the temple. He is
portraying His coming death and, indeed, the whole paschal mystery as
His ultimate gift of Himself to His disciples. Moreover, the fact that He
gives His body as bread means that He goes to His death in the expectation that it will bring life to the disciples. The image of bread also recalls
the bread of wisdom with which Jesus fed the crowds in the miracles of
multiplication. That wisdom, as we have seen, includes both faith in Jesus
divinity and repentant renunciation of the leaven of Herod and of the
Pharisees.
Jesus then takes a cup of wine, says a prayer of blessing and gives it to
the disciples, saying: This is my blood of the covenant which will be
poured out for the many. Truly I tell you that I shall not again drink the
fruit of the vine until I drink it new in the kingdom of God. (Mk 14:23-5)
In Jewish worship, sprinkled blood symbolized the bond of life which the
covenant established between God and His chosen people. (Ex 24:8) Jesus
is predicting that His death will establish a covenant, a bond of life between the disciples and God.
In saying that He dies for the many, Jesus is once more alluding to Is
53:12 and is assimilating His death to the atoning death of the suffering
servant. In effect, then, Jesus is portraying His death as both a covenant
sacrifice and a sacrifice of atonement, of reconciliation. Despite the disciples obtuseness and lack of faith, despite betrayal, denial, and abandonment, His death will reconcile them to God. Moreover, the phrase
the many in Hebrew means the same as all. Hence, Jesus death has
universal atoning significance.
Jesus then promises that He will not drink wine again until He drinks
it new in the kingdom. Jesus words link the last supper to all the other
meals He has shared with the disciples, including His table fellowship
44. Cf. NJBC, 41:92; Mann, op. cit., pp. 561-569; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 308-310; John
Paul Heil, Mark 14:1-52: Narrative Structure and Reader Response, Biblica,
71(1990), pp. 303-331; Jean-Marie van Cangh, O.P., Le droulement primitif du
Cne (Mc 14, 18-26 et par.), Revue Biblique, 102(1995), pp. 193-225.
115
with sinners. The newness of the eucharistic wine, however, looks forward to the future. It connotes the new eschatological order of salvation
which the paschal mystery inaugurates. That salvation looks forward to
the final messianic banquet, which will reunite Jesus to His own.45
The passion of Jesus functions as a time of decision for the disciples.
The paschal mystery allows no ambivalence toward Jesus. The disciples
must choose for Jesus or against Him. Moreover, two disciples function
prominently in the passion narrative: Judas, the traitor, and Peter, who
denies Jesus, but subsequently repents.
As we have seen, the chief priests begin to plot Jesus death after His
triumphal entry into Jerusalem and cleansing of the temple. (Mk 11:18)
They reach a firm decision to arrest Jesus by trickery and put Him to
death; but they fear to do so during the Passover festival because they
recognize Jesus popularity and fear the reaction of the crowds gathered
for the festival. (Mk 14:1-2) Judas, then, plays directly into their hands
when he approaches the chief priests with an offer to hand Jesus over to
them. They promise money as a reward for Judass treachery. Mark does
not specify the amount. Judas begins looking for the right moment to
betray Jesus. Mark, then, presents Judass action as one of unadorned
treachery. Judas does not even ask for a reward for betraying Jesus. The
offer of money comes from the chief priests. (Mk 14:10-11)
Mark portrays Jesus as fully aware that one of the Twelve has betrayed
Him. (Mk 14:17-8) Moreover, Mark seems to include Judas among the
ones who come to Jesus after His prediction of the treachery to ask Him:
Surely, not I? (Mk 14:19) Mark gives no indication of Judass ultimate
fate other than Jesus dire prediction: Better for him, if he had never
been born. (Mk 14:21) Jesus holds Judas fully responsible for his treachery, even though it will cause Jesus Himself to fulfill the Scriptures by His
suffering and death.46
After the last supper, when the others head for Gethsemane, Judas goes
to the chief priests to collect an armed band which he leads to the garden
where Jesus has been praying. As he had prearranged with the armed
guard, Judas goes up to Jesus, calls Him Teacher, and kisses Him, as a
dutiful disciple would do. The kiss identifies Jesus for arrest. (Mk 14:43-6)
The kiss brings Jesus public ministry to an end and sets in motion the
events which will fulfill Jesus three predictions of His own passion and
death. Judass pretended affection for Jesus underscores the traitors base
hypocrisy and the horror of the act he is performing.
One hears no more of Judas in Mark. Matthew, however, tells us that
Judas regretted his treachery, returned the blood money to the chief priests,
and then hanged himself. He adds that the chief priests used the money
45. Cf. Kelber, ed., The Passion of Jesus, pp. 21-40.
116
to buy a graveyard, called the Field of Blood. (Mt 27:3-10) Luke tells us
that Judas died violently and speaks of his body bursting open and his
bowels gushing out; but Luke gives the impression that Judas himself
purchased the Field of Blood. (Acts 1:18-9) Mark contents himself with
Jesus statement that Judas would have been better off it he had never
seen the light of day.
During the last supper, Jesus predicts that the disciples are about to be
scandalized because of Him. Freely citing Zech 13:17, Jesus warns that
the disciples will in fact abandon Him. (Mk 14:26-27) The citation clarifies the nature of the scandal. Jesus arrest will cause the scandal. After it,
the terrified disciples will abandon Him.
Jesus, however, follows this dark prediction with a promise that He will
nevertheless be reunited to the disciples in Galilee after he rises from the
dead. (Mk 14:28) Jesus promise to appear to the disciples in risen glory
contains the implicit promise that after the resurrection He will empower
them to do what, prior to the paschal mystery, they could not do.
In response to Jesus warning, Peter protests that, even though the others abandon Jesus, he will never do so. Jesus then predicts that Peter will
deny Him three times before the cock crows twice. (Mk 14:26-30) Peter
responds by insisting that he will die rather than disown Jesus. (Mk 14:31)
At the last supper, Marks Peter contradicts Jesus just as he had after
Jesus first prediction of His passion. On that earlier occasion, Peter tried
to dissuade Jesus from embracing the cross. Now the volatile Peter contradicts Jesus by asserting his own personal readiness for martyrdom. In
both cases, events would belie Peters inflated presumption.47
On arriving at Gethsemane, Jesus first distances Himself from most of
the disciples by withdrawing from them in the company of Peter, James,
and John. Jesus desires to pray. (Mk 13:32) Suddenly Jesus finds Himself
seized with horror and distress (erxato ekthambeisthai kai adeomein) at
the prospect of His coming ordeal. Jesus tells the three disciples, My
soul is very sorrowful, even to death. Stay here and watch. (Mk 14:32-5)
Jesus urges Peter, James, and John to imitate Him by seeking strength
through prayer to face the coming ordeal.
The watchfulness of which Jesus speaks has clear eschatological overtones. It recalls the parable of the master who leaves His affairs in the
hands of His servants with an admonition to watch because he can return
unexpectedly and at any time. (Cf. Mk 13:37)48
Jesus then withdraws from the three disciples in order to pray in solitude. Jesus physical separation from the disciples foreshadows His separation from them at the moment of His passion. Jesus must face His
ordeal utterly isolated from any human support. His return three times
47. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 116-138; NJBC, 41:96.
117
to the disciples only to discover them asleep and not watching underscores dramatically both Jesus isolation and loneliness and the disciples
unpreparedness.
On His first return, Jesus speaks to all the disciples but chides Peter
especially: Simon, do you sleep? Didnt you have strength to watch one
hour? Watch and pray that you not enter into the testing (peirasmon).
(Mk 14:37) Peter, despite his protestations of readiness for martyrdom is
failing the eschatological test. Jesus triple return to the disciples foreshadows, moreover, Peters triple denial. The fact, however, that in reproaching Peter Jesus implicitly addresses all the disciples suggests that
they, by abandoning Jesus, will in their own way participate in his triple
renunciation of discipleship. (Mk 14:35-40)
In all three synoptics, Jesus exhorts the weak disciples to keep on praying lest they succumb to the final eschatological struggle (peirasmos).
(Mk 14:37-38; Mt 26:40-41; Lk 22:45-46) The exhortation implies the
disciples weakness in the face of the coming ordeal. As Jesus Himself is
entering the eschatological struggle which will separate Him temporarily
from His disciples, He warns them that only persevering prayer will enable them to triumph over Satan in the final testing.
Jesus concludes His admonition of the disciples with the rueful observation: The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. (Mk 14:38) One does
not find in Mark the same theological contrast between Breath and
flesh as one does in Paul. In Mark, flesh does, however, designate
humanity in its weak, fragile, death-bound state. Moreover, Marks Jesus,
who is wrestling with His own human weakness, probably alludes to His
own experience of human limitation as well as to His disciples weakness.
On His third visit to the disciples, Jesus announces abruptly that the
time is up and that His betrayer is at hand. (Mk 14:41-42) The ordeal
has begun; and Jesus must face it alone.49
When the soldiers seize Jesus after Judass kiss, one of the bystanders
strikes with a sword and cuts off the ear of the servant of the high priest.
(Mk 14:47) Mark leaves the bystander unnamed; but Luke and John
identify the assailant as one of the disciples. Johns gospel names the swordsman as Peter. (Jn 18:10; Lk 22:51)
Some exegetes, as we have seen, argue that the term servant of the
high priest designates a high temple functionary, the prefect of priests,
the second in command of temple affairs. If so, his mutilation renders
him subsequently unfit to offer sacrifice. (Lev 21:17-21) Not all scholars,
however, accept this interpretation of the phrase servant of the high
priest.50
49. Cf. Kelber, ed. op. cit., pp. 41-60.
50. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 272-278; NJBC, 41:98-99; Mann, op. cit.,,
pp. 587-606; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 317-321; Simon Legasse, Larrestation de Jesus
dapres Marc 14/43-52, tudes Thologiques et Religieuses, 68(1993), pp. 241-247.
118
In Marks passion narrative, Peter follows the arresting party to the house
of the high priest. Peter apparently wants to make good his boast that he
is willing to die with Jesus. In fact, while Jesus is suffering condemnation,
mockery, and beating, Peter denies Him three times, just as Jesus had
foretold. Peter, despite his protestations of his personal willingness to
face death for Jesus sake, finds himself terrified and intimidated by two
serving women and by the other bystanders. He even confirms his third
denial with oaths and curses. After the third denial Peter hears a cock
crow for the second time.51 Peter suddenly remembers Jesus prediction,
goes out, and weeps in repentance.52 (Mk 15:66- 72)
We see no more of Peter personally in the gospel. We hear Peter speak
for the last time when as he curses and swears to the bystanders, I do not
know the man of whom you speak. (Mk 14:72) If, as seems likely, Mark
wrote his gospel in the very community in which the great apostle had
just suffered martyrdom, then Peters denial makes his personal exit from
the gospel story a striking, even shocking event. It would, however, have
served to console those in the Roman community who out of weakness
had also denied Jesus in the face of suffering and persecution.
We do, however, find one final reference to Peters name in Mark. When
Mary of Magdala, Mary the Mother of James, and Salome encounter the
young man in a white robe in Jesus empty tomb, the young man tells
them that Jesus has risen and instructs them to tell the disciples and Peter, specifically, to go to Galilee where they will encounter the risen Christ
as He foretold them. (Mk 16:7)
Throughout his story of Jesus, Mark has underscored Jesus special relationship to Peter. Jesus calls Peter first together with his brother Andrew. The latter, however, does not enjoy the same dramatic prominence
in Mark as Peter does. (Mk 1:16) After calling Peter, Jesus stays at Peters
house and cures his mother-in-law. (Mk 1:30) When Jesus rises early the
next morning to pray, Simon leads the search to find Him. (Mk 1:36)
Mark names Peter first among the Twelve and notes that Jesus had a pet
name for him. (Mk 3:16) Peter along with James and John witnesses the
raising of Jairuss daughter (Mk 5:37), the transfiguration (Mk 9:2). and
the agony in the garden (Mk 14:33) Moreover in the transfiguration Peter speaks for the other two disciples. (Mk 9:5) Peter confesses Jesus as
messiah and then earns Jesus ire for trying to dissuade Him from His
passion and death. (Mk 8:29, 32) Peter, again as spokesman for the Twelve,
presses Jesus to tell them what reward they will get for following Him.
(Mk 10:28) Peter calls Jesus attention to the withered fig tree. (Mk 11:21)
51. Mark never mentions the first cockcrow.
52. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 589-626; NJBC, 41:100; Mann, op. cit.,
pp. 269-232; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 332-333; Eta Linemann, Die Verleugnung des
Petrus, Zeitschrift fr Theologie und Kirche, 63(1966), pp. 1-32.
119
Peter, together with James, John, and Andrew, presses Jesus in private to
tell them when the Jerusalem temple will meet destruction. With the
other disciples, Peter then hears Jesus eschatological discourse. (Mk 13:3)
Finally, as we have seen, Peter plays an important dramatic role in the
passion and is named as the special recipient of the news of Jesus resurrection. All this attention to Peter underscores his special relationship to
Jesus, his importance in the apostolic church, and his symbolic importance in Marks narrative.53
Judas and Peter both function, then, in Marks passion narrative as types
of the sinful disciple. In both cases, Jesus foresees their sin and continues
offering them both His friendship and forgiveness. That Jesus love pursues both disciples even in the act of sinning underscores its gratuity.
By contrasting the two disciples, Mark makes it clear, however, that the
ultimate fate of the fallen disciple results from the way in which each
disciple chooses to respond to personal guilt. Judass despair ends His
relationship with Jesus, while Peters repentance prepares him for his eventual encounter with the risen Christ and for his rehabilitation among the
disciples.54
What of the other disciples in Marks passion narrative? As we have
seen, they prepare the passover. They ask Jesus to assure them one by one
whether he is not the one to betray Jesus, and receive the eucharist from
Him. (Mk 14:12-25) After the eucharist, Jesus predicts that, when He
dies, all of them will cease to believe in Him after having abandoned
Him. (Mk 14:27; cf. Zech 13:7) Nevertheless, Jesus promises to remain
faithful to them and to appear to them in Galilee after He rises from the
dead. (Mk 14:28) As Jesus had predicted, the disciples do abandon Him
in fear after His arrest.
Mark, however, describes their abandonment of Jesus in a way which
points to the resurrection and to their eventual rehabilitation. As the disciples flee, the soldiers seize one of Jesus followers, an anonymous young
man (neaniskos) wearing a linen garment (syndona). The soldiers seize
him; but he eludes them by slipping out of the cloth and running away
naked. (Mk 14:51-2)
In Marks passion narrative, the incident at first seems to underscore
the soldiers violence and brutality; but in fact it foreshadows the encounter between the women who come to anoint Jesus and the young
man (neaniskon) wearing a long, white robe (stolen leuken) which recalls
Jesus garments in the transfiguration. The young man announces Jesus
53. Cf. Raymond E. Brown, Karl P. Donfried, and John Reumann, Peter in the New
Testament (New York, NY: Paulist, 1973), pp. 57-73; Marcus Ohler, Der Zweimalige
Hahnschrei der Markuspassion: Zur Textberlieferung von Mk 14, 30. 62.
72,Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 85(1994), pp. 145-150.
54. Cf. Kelber, ed., op. cit., pp. 96-114.
120
resurrection and His immanent appearances to the disciples in Galilee.

(Mk 16:5-7)
The figure of the young man links the two passages. In the garden the
young man escapes Jesus enemies leaving behind a linen garment
(syndona). Later Joseph of Aramathea will wrap Jesus in the same kind of
garment before burying Him. (Mk 15:46) In the encounter with the
young man in the tomb, garments recalling Jesus transfiguration have
replaced the burial cloth. The first young mans escape in the garden foreshadows the resurrection which the second young man announces.55
After the resurrection, the frustrated enemies of Jesus find themselves
left with an empty heap of burial cloth. The women who come to the
empty tomb will, moreover, see the young man sitting on the right side
(Mk 16:5), a position which suggests the position of the glorified Son of
Man sitting at the right hand of power. One cannot, however, simply
identify Marks neaniskos with the risen Christ, since the young man announces to the woman that Jesus is not in the tomb. One with the risen
Christ but distinct from Him, some interpreters find in the figure of the
enigmatic young man a type of the Christian neophyte, stripped and
plunged ritually through baptism into the death of Jesus in such a way as
to share in Jesus glorified, risen life.
The fact that Mark names both Simon of Cyrene, who carries Jesus
cross behind Him to Calvary, and Simons two sons, Alexander and Rufus
suggests that the Markan community knew all three men. If so, then
Simon and his sons probably converted to Christianity. As a consequence,
even though Simon performs this service for Jesus under duress, he functions in Marks narrative as an ironic type of the true disciple, carrying his
cross after Jesus. (Mk 15:21-2, 8:34-8) Simon functions as an ironic symbol
of the true disciple because prior to the paschal mystery soldiers had to
coerce Him to do something Simon would have presumably chosen freely
to do once Jesus had risen and sent the divine Breath. Soldiers, however,
also forced the Roman martyrs to their death; and that fact may have
caused the Roman community to view Simons coercion by the soldiers
as simply factual rather than as ironic.56
55. Raymond Brown, in my judgment, misreads this passage with a regrettable literalism.
He misses the fact that in Markan symbolism the long white robe (stoln leukn) worn
by the young man in the tomb replaces the burial cloth (syndona) which the first young
man leaves behind. Garments of glory, reminiscent of the transfiguration, replace the
burial cloth. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 300-301; Barbara Saunderson,
Gethsemane: The Missing Witness, Biblica, 70(1989), pp. 224-233 Howard M
Jackson, Why the youth Shed His cloak and Fled Naked: The Meaning and Purpose
of Mark 14:51-52, Journal of Biblical Literature, 116(1997), pp. 273-289.
56. Brown, in my judgment, misses the irony. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II,
pp.913-917.
121
The three women who will discover Jesus empty tombMary of

Magdala, Mary the mother of James, and Salomeobserve Jesus death
from a distance. (Mk 15:40) Mark, as we have seen, identifies them as
disciples (kolouthoun aut) who took care of Jesus when He was in Galilee. Moreover, together with the three women many other women (allai
pollai) witness Jesus death from a distance. (Mk 15:41) In all the passion
narratives, the women who see Jesus die and watch him buried function
primarily as witnesses to the paschal mystery.
In Mark, Joseph of Aramatheas audacious rescue of Jesus body marks
him as a devout Jew but not necessarily as a disciple. Matthew does call
Joseph a disciple (Mt 27:57); and John portrays him as a secret disciple of
Jesus. (Jn 19:38) Mark describes Joseph as a man awaiting the kingdom
of God (Mk 15:43); and Marks phrase could suggest that Joseph had in
fact endorsed Jesus proclamation of the kingdom but without committing himself to open discipleship. Mark, on the other hand, also describes
Joseph as a member of the Sanhedrin which had unanimously condemned
Jesus. In Marks passion narrative, then, Joseph would appear in retrospect to have had second thoughts about his vote. After making sure that
Jesus has in fact died, Pilate grants Josephs request. Joseph alone buries
Jesus body and does so in haste because of the close proximity of the
sabbath.57 (Mk 15:42-7)
The Disciples and the Resurrection
Mary of Magdala, Mary the mother of James, and Salome come three
days after the crucifixion in order to anoint the body of Jesus. Jesus had
died on Friday, the sabbath had followed, and now early Sunday morning the three women come to do for Jesus body what they could not do
on Friday because of the sabbaths immanence. (Mk 16:1-2)
They find the round stone door to the tomb rolled back and the corpse
gone. Within the tomb, however, they encounter the apparition of a young
man in a white robe, the young man foreshadowed by the youth who
escaped naked from Jesus captors. (Mk 14:51-2) His white robe, as we
have seen, recalls the dazzling white garments Jesus wore in His transfiguration and thus suggests the young mans transcendent, quasi-angelic
origin. (Mk 9:3)
The empty tomb needs an explanation. The young man explains to the
women that the body has disappeared because Jesus, the crucified, has
risen. He predicts that the risen one will appear to His disciples in Galilee
and instructs the woman to carry the message to Peter and the other
57. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, p. 1213; The Burial of Jesus (Mark
15:42-47), Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 50(1988), pp. 233-245; J. Spencer Kennard,
Jr, The Burial of Jesus, Journal of Biblical Literature, 74(1955), pp. 227-238.
122
disciples, He is going before you to Galilee. There you will see Him, just
as He foretold. (Mk 16:7)
Instead of carrying the young mans message to Simon and the disciples, the women remain silent because they felt terrified (ephobounto
gar). (Mk 16:1-8) Very likely, Mark expected to startle his readers by the
womens failure to bear witness to the resurrection. In ending his gospel
on this ironic note, Mark implicitly called upon the reader to recognize
that the resurrection demands open and courageous proclamation, not
fearful hiding. Since, moreover, the reader knows that the apostles did
indeed proclaim the resurrection, the womens failure to obey the young
man in the tomb could have offered assurance to Marks readers that the
truth of the gospel will out despite human fear and weakness.58
The young man in the tomb alludes to the resurrection apparitions
soon to occur. He reminds the women of Jesus triple prediction during
the way section of Mark both of His passion and of His resurrection.
(Mk 8:31-3, 9:30-1, 10:32-4) The disciples reception of the news of
Jesus resurrection will begin their rehabilitation in faith which the cure of
Bartimaeus and other symbolic healings have foreshadowed. Indeed,
throughout Marks gospel, people seek Jesus without really understanding His true identity and mission. Only in Galilee will the disciples finally understand, when they encounter the risen Christ.59 (Mk 10:46-52)
The redactor who added an ending to Marks gospel felt no doubt dissatisfied with the abruptness with which the original gospel closed. The
author notes Jesus apparition to Mary Magdalene narrated in John
20:11-18 and adds that the disciples did not believe her testimony. (Mk
16:9-10) The author also alludes to the apparition to the two disciples
journeying to Emmaeus which Luke describes. (Mk 16:12-3; cf. Lk
24:13-35) Finally, Jesus appears to the Eleven and rebukes their unbelief.
Then, in terms reminiscent of Matthews gospel (Mt 28:11), the risen
Christ sends the disciples to proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
58. Cf. Gerald OCollins, The Fearful Silence of Three Woman (Mark 16:8c),
Gregorianum, 69(1988), pp. 489-503; Andrew T. Lincoln, The Promise and the
Failure: Mark 16: 7,8, Journal of Biblical Literature, 108(1989), pp. 283-300; Claudia
Setzer, Excellent Women: Female Witness to the Resurrection, Journal of Biblical
Literature, 116(1997), pp. 259-272; Paul Danove, The Women at the Tomb (Mark
15, 40-41. 47; 16, 1-8), Biblica, 77(1996), pp. 375-397.
59. Cf. NJBC, 41:108; Mann, op. cit., pp. 659-672; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 351-358; L.
Legrand, La finale de Marc comme rcit dannoce? Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp.
457-468; Collins, The Beginning of the Gospel, pp. 119-148; Andrew T. Lincoln, The
Promise and the Failure: Mark 16:7,8 in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 229-251;
Robert Schlarb, Die Suche nach dem Messias: zteo als terminus technicus der
markinischen Messianolgie, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft,
81(1990), pp. 155-170; J. David Hester, Dramatic Inconclusion: Irony and the
Narrative Rhetoric of the Ending of Mark, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
57(1995), pp. 61-86.
123
(Mk 16:16) Salvation flows from accepting the message, perdition from
rejecting it. (Mk 16:17)
Jesus also predicts that signs and wonders will accompany the disciples
proclamation of the good news. (Mk 16:17-8) Jesus then ascends to the
right hand of the Father in heaven, while the disciples do what the women
who met the young man in the tomb feared to do: namely, they proclaim
the resurrection with the miraculous confirmation which Jesus had foretold.60 (Mk 16:19-20)
Mark describes the relationship of Jesus to His disciples in a manner which
challenges the reader to come to terms with any ambivalence he or she
may experience in relating to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Like the disciples, the reader must answer Jesus probing question: Who do you say
that I am? Moreover, Mark in predicting the eventual transformation of
the disciples looks to their baptism in the Holy Breath to reveal to them
the answer to that question.
In Mark the kingdom lies at the heart of Jesus message. Life in the
kingdom in imitation of Jesus demands practical charity, humility, and
mutual service. It precludes any attempt to test God with Pharisaical
hypocrisy. It precludes enslavement to disordered passion in the image of
Herod. The practical demands of discipleship and of life in the
eschatological age describe the way in which Breath baptism assimilates
the disciples to Jesus.
Jesus begins to instruct the disciples about the demands of discipleship
in the sermon on the lake. They must guard against temptations against
faith, cultivate a deep and lasting commitment which will sustain them
in the face of adversity, avoid worldliness and disordered passions. They
must bear fearless witness to the faith, despite the hiddenness of the kingdom, a hiddenness which will in part perdure until the second coming.
The disciples must let the message of Jesus take root in generous hearts.
The way of discipleship demands total self-effacement and humility. It
requires one to walk the way of the cross in eschatological hope
The disciples should accept the gospel with the simplicity of small children. In their relationships to one another, the disciples must eschew the
pride and power of earthly rulers and treat the least important and most
vulnerable like the greatest. They must avoid cliquish pride and remain
open to signs of genuine faith even outside their inner circle. They can
expect their least act of charity to find a reward from God. They must
scrupulously avoid giving scandal to one another. They can expect to
experience growth in holiness as purification. In the last age of salvation,
husbands and wives must both live in lifelong mutual fidelity. Leaders
124
especially must take Jesus own service as their model. Jesus, of course,
lays down His life in service for those He has called.
Despite their sinfulness, the disciples must exhibit absolute faith in the
Fathers power to save them and raise them from the dead. As they wait
for Jesus return, the disciples should guard against the deceptions of false
prophets and false messiahs. They need to avoid setting time tables for
the second coming, which lies in the indeterminate future. They can expect catastrophes and persecutions before Jesus comes again; but they
can also expect the Holy Breath to inspire their courageous testimony to
Him.
For Mark Christological knowing has a eucharistic, ecclesial character.
It teaches one to confess the divinity of Jesus; but even more it conforms
one practically to Him in a converting community of eucharistic faith.
The life of discipleship demands a deep and solid faith commitment which
Satan and human weakness can erode. Practical, moral conformity to
Jesus demands absolute obedience to His teachings in submission to the
Father. Practical, moral conformity to Jesus also draws one inevitably into
conflict with the same forces of evil as sought to destroy Him.
In Mark faith in the paschal mystery demands a radical commitment:
the willingness to follow Jesus on the way which leads to the cross. Those,
like Peter, who deny Jesus under threat of torture and of death will, however, find forgiveness, if, also like Peter, they repent.
I have reflected in this chapter and in the two preceding ones on the
three kinds of dramatic linkages which endow Marks gospel with its basic narrative structure. The evangelist, however, embellishes these dramatic linkages with thematic and allusive ones. The following chapter
examines how Mark does this.
Chapter 5: Thematic and Allusive Linkages in Mark
125
Chapter 5
Thematic and Allusive Linkages in Mark
This chapter examines three kinds of thematic linkages: Jesus teachings,
His miracles, and His messianic secret. Each serves a different narrative
purpose. The teachings of Jesus provide norms against which ambivalent
disciples may measure their personal and corporate response to Jesus.
The miracles serve primarily a revelatory function in Mark: they disclose
different aspects of the mystery of the kingdom which Jesus embodies.
Among its narrative purposes, the messianic secret keeps Marks narrative
focused on the paschal mystery as the event which ultimately discloses
Jesus true identity. After developing these thematic linkages I shall examine how Mark uses literary allusion in order to develop the Christological
message of His gospel.
This chapter divides, then, into four parts. Part one meditates on Jesus
teachings. Part two examines His miracles and exorcisms. Part three meditates on the messianic secret. Part four traces Marks allusive linkages.
(I)
Mark stresses the distinctive way in which Jesus taught. Instead of playing off the opinions of famous rabbis against one another, Jesus, in contrast to the scribal teachers of His day, spoke with an authority which
flowed from His messianic anointing by the divine Breath.1 (Mk 1:9-11,
20)
In this section I shall first examine Marks summary of Jesus message.
Then I shall analyze the two discourses in Marks gospel. After that I shall
summarize Jesus teachings in the bread and way sections of Mark and in
pronouncement stories scattered throughout the gospel.
Although Mark prefers to allow the symbolic significance of the events
of Jesus life to disclose His identity to the reader, the evangelist also shows
a care to preserve Jesus basic teachings. As we have seen, Mark puts four
key ideas at the heart of Jesus message: 1) the approach of the end time,
2) the need for repentance, 3) the arrival of Gods reign in Jesus person
and ministry, and 4) the need to accept the kingdom in faith. (Mk 1:15)
These four themes, moreover, all imply one another. The arrival of the
kingdom marks the beginning of the end time and calls for a faith which
springs from repentance.
It characterizes Marks narrative style to portray Jesus preaching without telling you what He said. (Mk 1:22, 39, 2:13, 3:9, 33-4, 6:2, 34)
1. Cf. Richard J. Dillon, As One Having Authority (Mark 1:22): The Controversial
Distinction of Jesus Teaching, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 57(1995), pp. 92-113.
126
Mark, however, does collect sayings of Jesus into two formal discourses:
the sermon in parables on the lake (Mk 4:1-34) and the eschatological
discourse.2 (Mk 13:5-37).
The Sermon on the Lake
The parabolic discourse on the lake performs in Mark an analogous function to that which the sermon on the mount does in Matthew: viz., it
announces the mystery of the kingdom in an initial formal discourse. As
we have seen, it fits Marks sense of the gospel as a secret wisdom accessible to faith-filled insiders. Jesus announces that wisdom in cryptic
parables.3
The sermon on the lake begins the fourth chapter of Mark. Verses one
and two describe the setting of the sermon. Verses three through nine
recount the parable of the astonishing harvest. In verses ten through twelve,
Jesus instructs the disciples privately about why He speaks in parables. In
verses thirteen through twenty Mark applies the parable of the astonishing harvest allegorically to the disciples. Verses twenty-one through
twenty-five contain proverbs directed to the disciples. Verses twenty-six
through thirty two contain two seed parables. Verses thirty-three and
thirty-four conclude the discourse with the evangelists explanation of
why Jesus spoke in parables.
Both the sermon on the lake and the eschatological discourse in Mark
exhibit a chiastic structure. In the sermon on the lake, the introduction
(vv.1-2) corresponds to the evangelists concluding reflections on the
parables (vv.33-34). The parable of the astonishing harvest (vv.3-9), which
describes the scattering of seed, corresponds to the two seed parables at
the end of the discourse (vv. 26-32). Jesus private explanation to the
disciples of why He speaks in parables (vv. 10-12) corresponds to the two
proverbs which He directs especially to the disciples (vv. 21-25). That puts
the Markan allegory on discipleship at the heart of the discourse.4 (vv. 13-20).
For Mark, then, obedience to the demands of discipleship lies at the
heart of the mystery of the kingdom. As we have seen, Marks allegory on
the astonishing harvest summons the disciples to hold fast to the faith
despite any tests to which Satan might put them. As we have also seen, in
Mark Satan finds incarnation in Rome and in its legions. The disciples
must let the kingdom strike deep roots in their hearts lest they fall away
during times of persecution. They must renounce riches and all disordered
passions. Finally, they must respond to the kingdom with generous hearts.5
2. Cf. NJBC, 41:6; Dunn, op. cit., pp. 204-207; MWBC, I, pp. 40-46; Anderson, op. cit.,
pp. 83-86.
3. Cf. C.H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom (London: Nisbet & Co. Ltd., 1936).
4. Cf. Donahue, The Gospel in Parable, pp. 28-32.
5. Cf. C.M. Tuckett, Marks Concerns in the Parables Chapter (Mark 4, 1-34), Biblica,
69(1988), pp. 1-26; Gerhard Dautzenberg, Mk 4,1-34 als Belehrung ber das Reich
127
The parable of the astonishing harvest, which we have considered elsewhere, predicts that the kingdom which Jesus proclaims and embodies
will one day bear astonishingly abundant fruit. (Mk 4:1-9) It corresponds
to the two seed parables at the end of the sermon on the lake.
The parable of the mustard seed, the first of the two seed parables,
makes an analogous point. Like the tiny mustard seed which grows into
the greatest of the trees, the kingdom will grow from its humble origins
in Jesus ministry into a great and welcoming reality. Since, however, the
mustard seed encroached on other plants, the image of the full-grown
mustard tree attracting seed-eating birds into the garden has subversive
connotations. Though unwelcome to some, the kingdom will eventually
take over the whole garden.
As we have seen, the proverb about the lamp, which Mark addresses
especially to the disciples, portrays the reign of God as an illumination
which demands public proclamation, even though its full disclosure must
await the final judgment when all hidden things will finally come to light.
(Mk 4:21-3) The kingdom, therefore, has an inherently eschatological
character: manifest, yet hidden, present, yet still to come.
The second seed parable makes an analogous point. The kingdom
spreads secretly, mysteriously, spontaneously, the way crops grow and invisibly ripen night and day whether the farmer who sowed them sleeps or
wakes. The spontaneous growth of the seed also portrays the kingdom as
ultimately Gods work. The farmer sows but cannot make the seeds or
plants grow. Moreover, only when the kingdom has finished growing will
the time of reaping arrive. (Mk 4:26-9)
The evangelist probably wants the reader to see in the harvest an image
of the final judgment. If so, then one could conceivably see in the end of
the parable a reminder to believers to bring forth fruit. In insisting that
one must wait for the harvest, Mark would also probably be warning
against any prophesies of an immanent parousia.6
Gottes: Beobachtungen zum Gelichniskapitel, Biblische Zeitschrift, 34(1990), pp.
38-62; Greg Fay, Introduction to Incomprehension: The Literary Structure of Mark
4: 1-34, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 51(1989), pp. 65-80; Philip Sellew, Composition of Didactic Scene in Marks Gospel, Journal of Biblical Literature, 108(1984),
pp, 613-634; Oral and Written Sources in Mark 4.1-34, New Testament Studies,
36(1990), pp. 234-267; Marie Sabin, Reading Mark 4 as Midrash, Journal for the
Study of the New Testament, 45(1992), pp. 3-26; Derrett, The Making of Mark, pp.
9-75.
6. Cf. Donahue, The Gospel in Parable, pp. 34-39; NJBC, 41:24-32; Mann, op. cit., pp.
260- 276; MWBC, I, pp. 189-259; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 125-141; Waetjen, op. cit.,
pp. 108; J. Duncan M. Derrett, Ambivalence: Sowing and Reaping in Mark
4,26-29, Estudios Biblicos, 48(1990), pp. 489-510; Gerd Thiessen, Der Bauer und
die von selbst Frucht bringende Erd: Naiver Synergismus in Mk 4, 26-29, Zeitschrift
128
The Eschatological Discourse

The eschatological discourse begins chapter thirteen in Mark. Like the
sermon on the lake, it has a chiastic structure. In verses one through
three, Peter, James, John, and Andrew ask about the date of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple and about the signs which will accompany
it. In verses twenty-eight through thirty-seven, Jesus answers the question about the date: no one knows when Jerusalem will fall or when the
second coming will happen. Verses five through thirteen describe the tribulations of the end time, the birth pangs of the messiah. Verses twenty-one
through twenty-seven describe the second coming which terminates the
birth pangs. At the heart of the eschatological discourse, in verses fourteen through twenty-three, Mark situates Jesus prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem.
Since I have already analyzed the eschatological discourse in some detail in the preceding chapter, here it suffices to summarize its chief lessons
about life in the end time.
1) Before the second coming happens, all nations must have the opportunity to hear the gospel and to respond to it. (Mk 24:14)
2) In the meantime, false prophets and false messiahs will appear who
even lay claim to the divine name. (Mk 24:5)
3) During the birth pangs of the messiah, the disciples will experience
war, famine, and cataclysm. They will know persecution, hatred, and
martyrdom. They will witness the increase of lawlessness and the waning
of love. (Mk 24:6-13)
4) Caligulas attempt to erect his statue in the Jerusalem temple means
that its destruction and that of the city is approaching. Christians should,
then, flee the city at the first sign of approaching calamity.
5) The disciples should give no credence to false prophets who claim to
know when the messiah shall return. (Mk 24:23-28)
6) Accompanied by cataclysmic, apocalyptic signs of Gods approach,
the second coming will, when it happens, terminate the birth pangs of
the messiah. Jesus will return as Lord of the angels in order to vanquish
the powers and reveal His glory. Then He will gather the disciples to
Himself from the four corners of the earth.7 (Mk 24:29-31)
I have summarized the two discourses in Mark. The bread section of
Mark enunciates the conditions for sharing in eucharistic worship. The
way section summarizes major conditions for a life of discipleship. In
addition one finds other teachings of Jesus scattered throughout Marks
gospel. Let us reflect on each set of teachings in turn.
7. Cf. NJBC, 41:83-88; A. Feuillet, Le discours de Jsus sur la ruine du temple, Revue
Biblique, 55(1948), pp. 481-482; 52(1949), pp. 61-92; Collins, The Beginning of the
Gospel, pp. 73-91.
129
The Bread of Wisdom and the Way of Jesus

In the bread section of his gospel, as we have seen, Mark demands faith in
Jesus divinity as a precondition for eucharistic worship. In addition, Marks
Jesus requires that those who share in the eucharist renounce the leaven
of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod. (Mk 8:15) In so speaking,
Marks Jesus exacts the rejection of self-righteous legalism, judgmentalism,
and unbelief. He also calls for the willingness to live by the deep intent of
the Law instead of substituting mere human customs for the commands
of God. He repudiates any inclination to test God. Finally, He demands
the rejection of religious superstition, violence of heart, sensuality, greed,
oppression, and disordered passion.
Moreover, as we have also seen, only those who believe in Jesus divinity and who renounce the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod understand about the multiplication of the loaves. Only they, in other words,
have the quality of faith which eucharistic worship demands. Clearly, for
Mark, eucharistic faith has an inherently practical character.
The way section of Mark begins with Jesus first prophecy of the passion. (Mk 8:31-33) The other two prophecies of the passion divide the
way section into three parts. (Mk 9:30-32, 10:32-34) Since I have already commented in some detail on Jesus teachings in the way section,
once again it suffices to summarize the lessons which the disciples must learn.
In the first part of the way section, the disciples learn the following
lessons:
1) Those who follow Jesus must live in readiness to walk the way to the
cross. Far from feeling ashamed of the cross, the disciples of Jesus must
see in it the ultimate path to self-preservation and salvation. (Mk 8:34-8)
2) The disciples must recognize that Jesus, as Gods beloved Son, speaks
with a divine authority which exceeds that of the Law and the prophets.
His glorification reveals His transcendent origin and foreshadows the glorification of those who suffer with Him. (Mk 9:1-13)
3) The disciples must recognize Jesus victory over Satan, that He imparts risen life which empowers one to hear and proclaim the gospel. In
order to share in His victory over the evil one, however, the disciples must
renounce self-reliance and root themselves solidly in prayer. (Mk 9:14-29)
The second part of the way section paints for the disciples a portrait of an
ideal community of faith. That portrait contains the following lessons:
4) The disciples must renounce all ambition and competitiveness. Instead, they must learn to embrace smallness and vulnerability and to welcome the weakest and most vulnerable as they would welcome Jesus Himself. (Mk 9:33-37)
5) The community of Jesus must eschew all cliquishness and must honor
signs of genuine faith even in those who do not belong to it. (Mk 9:38-40)
6) In Jesus community, the smallest act of kindness will find its reward. (Mk 12:38-40)
130
7) Each disciple must scrupulously avoid sin and its occasions. Moreover, mutual charity requires that the disciples never cause another disciple to sin. (Mk 9:42-50)
8) Membership in the kingdom subjects one to the purifying fire of
divine holiness. (Mk 9:49)
9) The community of the kingdom seeks to impregnate others with the
salt of divine wisdom. The community can do that only if it embodies
that wisdom. (Mk 9:50)
10) The community of the kingdom lives in peace and hospitable fellowship. (Mk 9:50)
11) Membership in the eschatological community which the kingdom
creates requires life-long fidelity of spouses, in obedience to Gods original intent in creating marriage. (Mk 10:1-12)
12) The community of disciples must welcome even small children.
(Mk 10:13-16)
13) Discipleship requires that one renounce ones possessions, give them
to the poor, and follow Jesus as members of Gods persecuted family,
confident of the rewards of membership both in this life and in the next.
The disciples must, moreover, also trust Gods power to save anyone,
even the rich. (Mk 10:17-31)
In the third part of the way section, Jesus teaches two major lessons to
the leaders in the new Israel.
14) The Father alone decides ones ultimate status in the kingdom,
even in the case of those who give their lives for it. (Mk 10:35-40)
15) The leaders of the community must renounce the coercive power
and violence of secular rulers and serve all others in the image of Jesus the
servant messiah.8 (Mk 10:41-45)
Scattered Teachings
Other sayings of Jesus scattered throughout the gospel call attention to
other aspects of life in the kingdom:
1) Jesus in announcing the kingdom simultaneously proclaims the forgiveness of sins and demands faith that He has divine power to forgive
them. (Mk 2:1-12) He also claims authority over the sabbath. (Mk 2:23-8)
2) Like Jesus, the disciples rightly imitate His table fellowship with
sinners, which provides a prototype of the eucharist. (Mk 2:15-7)
3) The disciples must share the blessings of this life with the poor, the
outcast, and the marginal. Moreover, the breaking down of social barriers
which the kingdom requires expresses its eschatological novelty. (Mk 2:21-2)
4) The disciples of Jesus must recognize the superficiality of ritual uncleanness and that only the evil intentions of the human heart render one
unclean. (Mk 7:17-23)
8. Cf. NJBC, 41:56-58; Mann, op. cit., pp. 342-420; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 215-259.
131
5) Life in the kingdom demands that its members live united as Gods
family and that they relate to one another as Gods children living in
Jesus image. Jesus obedience to the Father, therefore, provides the pattern according to which those who enter the kingdom must live. (Mk
3:33-5, 10:45)
6) Membership in the kingdom also sets one in opposition to any form
of hypocritical piety which would teach one to pray long prayers while
oppressing the poor. (Mk 13:38-44)
7) Jesus recognizes the legitimate claims which secular authority makes
on its subjects at the same time that He deplores the coercive use of secular power. Jesus demands that obedience to God and therefore to the
reign of God comes first. That obedience demands that one reverence the
image of God in other persons. (Mk 10:41-5, 12:13-7)
8) Finally, while the two great commandments stand at the head of the
Lawtotal, all-consuming love of God and love of neighborthe disciples of Jesus must interpret the meaning of those commandments in
the light of His proclamation of the kingdom. (Mk 12:26-34) In other
words, the moral demands of discipleship define the meaning of Christian love.9
In Mark, as we have seen, discipleship assimilates the baptized Christian
to Jesus in the power of His Breath. The teachings of Marks Jesus explain
the practical meaning of discipleship. In other words, they provide a practical program for growing in what I have called Christological knowing.
The disciples will come to know Jesus by allowing His sanctifying Breath
to teach them to embody the same religious vision which He lived and
proclaimed.
This section has examined the first set of thematic linkages which embellish Marks narrative: Jesus teachings. The section which follows ponders the second set of thematic linkages: namely, Jesus miracles.
(II)
The miracles and exorcisms of Jesus all play a revelatory function in Marks
gospel. They disclose different aspects of Jesus person and of the kingdom which He proclaims.10
9. Cf. Rolf Busemann, Die Jngergeneinde nach Markus 10 (Bonn: Verlag Peter Vanstein,
1983); Willem S. Vorster, Literary Reflections on Mark 13:5-37: A Narrated Speech
of Jesus in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 269-288.
10. Cf. L. Shenke, Die Wunderzlungen des Markusevangelium (Stuttgart: Katholisches
Bibelwerk, 1974); George Aichele, Jr. Biblical Miracle Narratives as Fantasy,
Anglican Theological Review, 73(1991), pp. 51-58; Reinhold Schmcker, Zur Function der Wundergeschichten im Markusevangelium, Zeitschrift fr die
132
Wonders and Exorcisms

As we have already seen, the exorcism in the synagogue at Capernaum
parallels Jesus confrontation with Satan in the desert. (Mk 1:12, 21-28)
It inaugurates a series of such confrontations between Jesus and demons.
Those confrontations highlight the final, eschatological struggle between
God and evil which Jesus ministry inaugurates. Moreover, the disciples
by sharing in Jesus mission find themselves drawn into the same
eschatological conflict. (Mk 1:32, 34, 39, 3:15, 5:1-20, 6:13, 7:26-9,
9:38, 16:9) Mark links Jesus exorcisms symbolically and dramatically by
often making the demons behave in ways which recall Jesus first exorcism. Like the demon in the synagogue, they recognize Jesus, who silences them and forbids them to reveal His identity as messiah. (Mk
1:24-5, 34, 3:11-2, 5:7-9) Jesus power to exorcise also reveals dramatically the divine, Breath-inspired character of the authority with which
He preaches.11 (Mk 1:22; cf. Mk 2:22-30)
Jesus miracles also point symbolically to the full scope of His divine
authority (exousia): in virtue of that authority Jesus even has divine power
to impart risen life. Jesus raises three people in Marks gospel: Peters
mother-in-law, the daughter of Jairus, and the epileptic demoniac boy.
Each raising discloses a different facet of the risen life which Jesus imparts. Like the epileptic demoniac boy, those whom Jesus raises He delivers from the power of Satan and empowers to hear and to proclaim the
gospel. (Mk 9:25-27) Like Peters mother-in-law, those whom Jesus raises
from the dead He empowers to serve both Himself and others. (Mk
1:30-31) The raising of the daughter of Jairus demands more detailed
commentary.12
The cure of the woman defiled by a flux of blood parallels the raising of
the daughter of Jairus. The woman had suffered from the flux of blood
for twelve years (Mk 5:25), Jairuss daughter died at the age of twelve.
(Mk 5:42). The number twelve recalls both the number of the tribes of
Israel and the Twelve who symbolize the new Israel which Jesus founds.
The number provides, therefore, an important symbolic key to the storys
meaning. The two women symbolize Israel: the older woman symbolizes
the first Israel and life under the Law, while the younger woman, whom
Jesus raises from the dead, symbolizes the new Israel which Jesus is bringing into existence.
Jesus heals the older woman from a disease which makes her legally
impure. Jesus raises Jairuss daughter from death to life. As symbolic embodiments of the old and new Israel, the two women symbolize Jesus
11. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 648-650; NJBC, 41:9; Mann, op. cit., pp. 210-214;
MWBC, I, pp. 53-60; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 88-92.
12. Cf. NJBC, 41:10; Mann, op. cit., pp.214-220; MWBC, I, pp. 60-70; Anderson, op.
cit., pp. 92-95.
133
relationship to the two covenants: He frees people from the bondage of

the Law by establishing the new covenant. He establishes the new covenant by communicating His own risen life to others.
The kind of liberation which Jesus effects in healing the older woman
also makes a statement about the social status of women in the new Israel. Lev 15:25-27 proscribed all menstruating women as unclean. The
flux of blood which the elderly woman experienced involved, then,
more than just a physical disorder. It also left the woman socially ostracized. She defiled any person or thing she touched. Moreover, her very
femininity caused her defilement. It made her ashamed of herself as a
woman, ashamed even to touch another person publicly, as Marks story
makes clear. (Mk 5:27) Her shame and social disgrace also explain her
reluctance to confess publicly that she has violated a legal taboo and
touched Jesus. (Mk 5:33)
In healing the older woman, Jesus frees her from the social ostracism
and from the defilement which the Law prescribed for menstruating
women. Jesus also heals the woman in her wounded femininity and in
the shame which she feels. That healing happens when she testifies publicly to her healing. In narrating the story of the older womans healing,
therefore, Mark seems to suggest not only that Jesus has come to free
people from the burden of the Law but also that He has come especially
to free women from the kinds of social ostracism which the Law imposed
upon them.
If the healing of the older woman symbolizes the way in which Jesus
relates to the old covenant, the raising of the daughter of Jairus symbolizes the way in which He establishes the new covenant. Mark links the
raising of Jairuss daughter to the paschal mystery in two ways.
1) He makes Peter, James, and John its privileged witness. They will
accompany Jesus in His agony at Gethsemane and will receive a privileged revelation of His glory in the transfiguration. (Mk 9:2, 14:33) The
transfiguration, of course, foreshadows the resurrection. (Mk 13:3-5) With
Andrew, Peter, James, and John occasion the eschatological discourse and,
as disciples, learn about life in the end time which the paschal mystery
begins and the second coming ends. (Mk 13:3)
2) After raising the young girl to life, Jesus tells those present to give
her something to eat. (Mk 5:43) Jesus will give the same command to
His disciples in Marks account of the first miracle of the loaves. (Mk
6:37) As we have seen, that miracle of multiplication, like the second
miracle of the loaves, foreshadows the eucharist. The eucharist, which
introduces Marks passion narrative, interprets the meaning of the paschal mystery. In other words, the feeding of the young girl links her rising
from the dead to both the eucharist and the paschal mystery. The miracle
134
therefore transforms her into a personal symbol of those who through

their share in the eucharist possess risen life.13
Jesus miracles reveal His eschatological authority as Son of Man to
forgive sins, and they vindicate His right as Lord of the sabbath to heal
on that day. (Mk 2:1-12. 3:1-6) Jesus cosmological miracles disclose the
ultimate source of His divine authority: viz., that He bears the divine
name and speaks as God. (Mk 4:35-41, 6:45-52)
Some of Jesus miracles and exorcisms forecast the narrative future in
Mark. As we have seen, Jesus cure of the leper at the beginning of His
ministry causes Him and the leper to change places, a transformation
which foreshadows His growing marginalization and His ultimate rejection by His people. (Mk 1:40-5) Jesus persistence in healing on the sabbath consolidates the enmity of the Pharisees and Herodians against Him
and begins the plots against His life. (Mk 3:1-6)
Taken together, the first calming of the storm, the deliverance of the
Gerasene demoniac, and the self-destruction of the demons in the waters
of chaos over which Jesus has just exercised divine authority all foreshadow
His ultimate and decisive victory over the powers of Satan and of evil.
(Mk 4:35-5:20) As we have also seen, in naming the Gerasene demon
Legion, Mark also predicts Jesus victory over the Roman empire and
the oppressive secular institutions which it symbolizes.
Similarly, the faith of the Syro-Phoenician woman which mollifies Jesus
and leads Him to exorcise her daughter at a distance foreshadows the
faith of Gentile Christians. In a competitive exchange of proverbs between two peasants, the woman bests Jesus and by her persistent faith in
Him persuades Him to do the exorcism. In a sense, then, the exorcism
also foreshadows the second miracle of the loaves, which symbolically
extends the eucharist to include the Gentiles as well as Jews.14 (Mk 6:24-30,
8:1-10)
The cursing of the fig tree during Jesus Jerusalem ministry dramatizes
the barrenness and faithlessness of the temple priesthood and implicitly
of all those who refuse to put their faith in Jesus. It therefore foreshadows
Jesus final and decisive rejection by His people. (Mk 11:12-4, 20-22)
As Mark structures his gospel narrative, the two miracles of the loaves
function as the culminating miracles of Jesus Galilean ministry. We shall
examine this point more closely when we explore Marks use of allusive
linkages. Here it suffices to note that these miracles and the events in the
13. Cf. NJBC, 41:36; Mann, op. cit., pp. 281-286; MWBC, I, pp. 289-305.
14. Cf. Francis Dufton, The Syrophonoecian Woman and her Dogs, Expository Times,
100(1988-1989), p. 417; David Rhoads, Jesus and the Syrophonoecian Woman in
Mark, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 62(1994), pp. 343-375; Burkill,
New Light on the Earliest Gospel, pp. 48-120; William Loader, Challenged at the
Boundaries: A Conservative Jesus in Marks Tradition, Journal for the Study of the New
Testament, 63(1966), pp. 45-61.
135
bread section of Mark all foreshadow the last supper, the paschal mystery,
and the Christian eucharist. (Mk 6:30-8:21)
As we also saw in considering Jesus relationship to His disciples, many
miracles of healing in Mark portend the transformation which
Breath-baptism will effect in the disciples. The healing of the deaf and
dumb man foreshadows Jesus ability to empower the disciples to hear
the gospel and to loose their tongues so that they may proclaim the gospel. (Mk 8:31-7) Mark underscores the symbolic character of this miracle
by calling the demon who inhabits the epileptic demoniac boy deaf and
dumb. (Mk 9:14-26) In the boys case, as we have seen, his deliverance
from deafness and dumbness results from relaease from bondage to Satan
and from his being symbolically raised up by Jesus and given a share in
risen life. (Mk 9:26-9) The progressive healing of the blind man at
Bethsaida precedes Peters profession of faith and foreshadows the progressive healing of his blindness and that of the other disciples. (Mk
8:22-30) Finally, the healing of blind Bartimaeus at Jericho foreshadows
that those to whom the risen Christ will impart the light of faith will
have the courage to follow Him on the way, all the way to Jerusalem
and to Calvary.15 (Mk 10:46-52)
The miracle and exorcism stories advance Christological knowing in two
ways. 1) The exorcisms and cosmological miracles which reveal Jesus
divinity clarify the reality to which Christological knowing assimilates
one. 2) The miracle stories which foreshadow the state of the disciples
after Jesus baptizes them with a sanctifying Breath throw light on the
transforming power of Christological knowing.
I have considered the first two sets of thematic linkages in Mark. We
have yet to consider the third: Jesus messianic secret. Among other narrative purposes, it keeps Marks narrative focused on the paschal mystery.
To this third and final thematic link I turn in the section which follows.
(III)
Mark introduces the theme of the messianic secret implicitly in his account of Jesus baptism. After receiving Johns baptism, Jesus experiences
His messianic commissioning; but He and He alone witnesses the rending of the heavens and the descent of the Breath under the sign of the
dove. He and He alone hears the Father commission Him as Son of God,
as messiah in the image of the suffering servant, and as the beginning of
a new Israel. (Mk 1:9-11) After His baptism, then, among humans, Jesus
alone knows the messianic secret.
15. Cf. NJBC, 41:68; Mann, op. cit., pp. 420-430; Anderson, op. cit., pp. 258-259; L.
Shenke, op. cit.
136
The theme of the messianic secret serves three narrative purposes in

Mark. First, it makes a statement about the gradual, sacramental character of Jesus revelation as messiah and Breath-baptizer. Second, it keeps
Marks narrative focused on the paschal mystery. At the same time, the
messianic secret makes the reality which Easter will disclose already but
obscurely present and active in Jesus during His ministry. In this sense,
the messianic secret asserts a realized eschatology. Third, the messianic
secret keeps reminding the reader that, like the demons and Jesus, those
who have faith already know the secret. Moreover, in contrast to the obtuse disciples prior to their baptism in Jesus Breath, the reader grasps the
deeper religious implications of the secret. The theme of the messianic
secret also accords well with Marks sense of the gospel as a secret wisdom
reserved for believers.16
With the exorcism at Capernaum which follows the call of the first
disciples, the secret begins to slip out. The demon recognizes Jesus and
gives Him the messianic title Holy one of God. (Mk 1:24) Jesus, however, on this occasion as on others, muzzles the demon and forbids the
dark powers to reveal His messianic identity. (Mk 1:34, 5:7-13) After
healing the leper, Jesus also forbids him to disclose the identity of the one
who healed him. The healed leper disobeys, however, and the secret
spreads. (Mk 1:43-5) Jesus tries to keep other cures secret. He orders the
cure of the deaf and dumb man kept hidden. (Mk 8:36-7) Jesus orders
the witnesses of the raising of the daughter of Jairus to tell no one about
the event. (Mk 5:42) Jesus also forbids the blind man whom He heals at
Bethsaida to return to the village, apparently in order to keep the healing
a secret. (Mk 8:26) After Peter confesses Jesus messianic dignity, Jesus
forbids the disciples to disclose it to anyone. (Mk 8:30) Moreover, after
the Father testifies to Jesus on the mount of the transfiguration, Jesus
warns Peter, James, and John to say nothing of what they have witnessed
until He rises from the dead. (Mk 9:2-9)
Mark intertwines with the theme of the messianic secret two other
theological themes: 1) Jesus gradual revelation as suffering servant through
His progressive marginalization, His final rejection, and His crucifixion
and 2) Jesus gradual revelation as true messiah and Breath-baptizer, obscurely at first during His ministry but clearly and decisively in His resurrection. Together, these other two themes clarify the meaning of the messianic secret.
16. For a survey of scholarly debate about the messianic secret, see: James L. Blevins, The
Messianic Secret in Markan Research (Washington, D.C.: University Press of America,
1981), See also: John G. Cook, The Structure and Persuasive Power of Mark (Atlanta,
GA: Scholars Press, 1995); Philip G. Davis, Marks Christological Paradox, Journal
for the Study of the New Testament, 35(1989), pp. 3-18; T.A. Burkill, Mysterious
Revelation: An Examination of the Philosophy of Marks Gospel (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 1963).
137
As we have seen, the healing of the leper introduces the theme of Jesus
margenalization: Jesus healing of the leper causes them to trade places
and symbolically transforms Jesus into a leper, an outcast. (Mk 1:40-5)
Margenalization begins immediately in a series of conflict stories between
Jesus, on the one hand, and the scribes and Pharisees on the other. The
stories culminate in an alliance between the Pharisees and the Herodians
to destroy Jesus. (Mk 2:1-3:6; Mk 2:21)
Jesus own relatives soon join the scribes and Pharisees in rejecting Him.
They regard Him as a lunatic; and Mark underscores the fact that they
have joined the adversaries of Jesus by inserting the controversy over
Beelzebul between the relatives initial decision to restrain Jesus and their
actual confrontation with Him. In the controversy over Beelzebul, of
course, scribes from Jerusalem commit the sin against the Holy Breath by
accusing Jesus of casting out demons in the power of Beelzebul. This
narrative triptych places Jesus relatives on the side of the enemy in virtue
of their unbelief. The controversy over Beelzebul also makes it clear that
enmity toward Jesus not only exists in Galilee but also emanates from
Jerusalem. (Mk 3:20-35)
In the bread section of Mark, the conflict with the Pharisees intensifies.
(Mk 7:1-13, 11-13) The bread section also begins the conflict between
Jesus and His own disciples, whose unbelief now parallels the obtuseness
of His enemies. (Mk 8:18-21) The conflict with the disciples worsens
when Jesus calls Peter Satan. (Mk 8:31-3) The confrontation continues
when the disciples drive Jesus to exasperation by their self-reliant efforts
to exorcise the epileptic demoniac boy (Mk 9:17-9), when they squabble
among themselves about which of them is the greatest (Mk 9:34-5), and
when the ambitious James and John try to outmaneuver the rest of the
Twelve by securing for themselves the places of highest honor in the kingdom. (Mk 10:35-40)
Jesus three predictions of His own passion set the stage for His ultimate rejection by the temple priests and Jerusalem scribes. (Mk 8:31-3,
9:30-1, 10:32-4) The conflict with the temple priests culminates, of course,
in the tragic events of the passion: in Jesus trial before the Sanhedrin and
condemnation for blasphemy (Mk 14:53-65), in His condemnation by
Pilate (Mk 15:15), in His scourging and mockery by the Roman soldiers
(Mk 15:16-20), and in His crucifixion. (Mk 15:29-32)
Jesus becomes the suffering servant of God by dying the death of the
innocent poor man, in utter solitude, abandoned by all but God. That
fact goes lost on the bystanders, who with apparent malice mock His
praying of Ps 22 in Aramaic as a futile call to Elijah to come deliver Him.
(Mk 15:35-7)
Jesus dies with a loud cry which gives voice to the violence of His
eschatological struggle with evil. (Mk 15:37) Mark immediately reminds
138
the reader, however, that His very death marks the end of the old covenant and the beginning of the new. The darkness which lies over the
land of Israel symbolizes Gods judgment upon the rejection of His messiah. (Amos 8:9) As Jesus dies, the temple veil which shields the Holy of
Holies from profane eyes splits from top to bottom. The rent symbolizes
Gods voiding of the covenant with the first Israel and the temples immanent destruction. (Mk 15:38) Moreover, the centurions testimony, Surely,
this was the Son of God, echoes the first verse of Marks gospel and
foreshadows the faith which the apostolic Churchs Gentile mission will
evoke. (Mk 15:39)
One grasps only half the messianic secret, however, in learning of Jesus
transformation into the suffering servant through marginalization and
rejection; for Mark interweaves with the story of Jesus tragedy the story
of His gradual but steady manifestation as messiah, Son of God,
Breath-baptizer, and beginning of a new Israel.
Jesus manifestation begins with the prophecy of John the Baptizer who
proclaims Him the mightier one who will one day baptize with a sanctifying Breath. (Mk 1:7-8) Jesus baptism and initial conflict with Satan in
the desert apparently discloses His identity to Satan and His minions.
(Mk 1:12-3, 23-5, 34, 39) Moreover, through His ministry of proclamation, His exorcisms, and miracles, Jesus gradually discloses Himself to
more and more people: first to the disciples, then to the people of
Capernaum, then to people throughout Galilee. (Mk 1:16-39) Finally,
after the leper refuses to remain silent about who cured him, Jesus finds
Himself mobbed. (Mk 1:16) People stream to Jesus from further and
further distances (Jerusalem, Idumaea, Transjordania, Tyre, and Sidon)
and in such numbers that He must teach them from a boat in order to
escape mobbing by them. (Mk 3:7-12, 4:1) Such crowds follow Him
that He and the disciples have no time even to eat. (Mk 3:20)
As Jesus attracts more and more notice, He involves the disciples in
His mission. First, He calls the Twelve as the foundation of the new Israel
He is bringing into being. (Mk 3:13-19) Later in His ministry He sends
them to preach repentance and to exorcise. (Mk 6:7-13) The return of
the Twelve from a successful ministry inaugurates the bread section of
Mark which foreshadows the Christian eucharistic community. (Mk
6:30-1)
The testimonies to Jesus which punctuate Marks gospel also reveal progressively His true identity. The testimony of John the Baptizer had begun Jesus public manifestation as Messiah, Breath-baptizer, and beginning of a new Israel. Peters confession of Jesus as messiah reveals to His
intimate disciples the true scope of Jesus mission, although the disciples
do not yet understand that as messiah Jesus must suffer and die. (Mk
8:27-33) The Father at the beginning of the way section testifies to Peter,
139
James, and John that Jesus is indeed His beloved Son who speaks with a
greater authority than the Law and the prophets. Moreover, the Father
orders the three disciples (and implicitly anyone who seeks to walk the
path of discipleship) to obey Jesus and what He teaches. (Mk 9:1-8) Finally, Jesus testifies to Himself during His trial before the Sanhedrin. He
implicitly invokes to divine name and portrays Himself as the Son of
Man, the One who blends both divinity and humanity in His person and
as the one whom God has appointed to pass final judgment upon the
world. (Mk 14:62-3)
Even during Jesus Jerusalem ministry and passion, the messianic secret
manifests itself with greater and greater clarity. Jesus anointing at Bethany
foreshadows His death but it also discloses His messianic dignity, since
the woman anoints His head in a gesture which proclaims His royal dignity. (Mk 14:3-9) Jesus preternatural grasp of the future in the triumphal entry into Jerusalem and in the preparation of the last supper reveals
that, despite all He will suffer, He remains the master of events. As Jesus
rides into the Holy City in the image of the messianic prince of peace,
the crowds publicly proclaim Him messiah. (Mk 11:1-4, 14:13-6) Moreover, during His Jerusalem ministry, Jesus, in expressing reservations about
the Davidic character of the messiah, makes it clear that the messiah relates to David as Lord, rather than primarily as His heir. (Mk 13:35-7) In
other words, because Jesus messianic dignity rests on His Lordship, on
His possession of the divine name, His true messianic office utterly transcends the Davidic messiah for whom most of Israel hoped.
The paschal mystery marks the culmination of Jesus revelation as messiah by manifesting Him simultaneously as suffering servant and Lord.
Jesus institution of the eucharist at the last supper reveals His coming
death as His free gift of Himself to His disciples, a gift which transforms
Him into the source of their life. The eucharist also points to the sheding
of Jesus blood both as a covenant sacrifice and as a sacrifice of atonement. (Mk 14:22-4)
Finally, as we have seen above, at the very moment when Jesus dies, the
new order He has established immediately begins to come into existence
with the rending of the temple veil and the centurions confession of faith.
(Mk 15:38-9) Moreover, Mark narrates Jesus burial in a way which foreshadows the resurrection which will soon occur. (Mk 15:40-47)
The evangelist in his own redaction of the gospel apparently ended it
with the apparition of the young man to the women in the empty tomb
and with a prediction of the manifestation of the risen Christ to the disciples in Galilee. (Mk 16:1-8) Mark wrote, however, for a worshipping
eucharistic community of people who had experienced Breath-baptism
by the risen Christ and who confessed His divinity in their eucharistic
worship. He expected therefore that his readers would read the entire
140
gospel as a foreshadowing of the graces which they were in fact experiencing. I shall explore this point in greater detail in examining the allusive
linkages in Mark.17
The theme of the messianic secret advances Christological knowing by
disclosing the full scope of Jesus person and of the eschatological age
which the paschal mystery inaugurates. In other words, this theme clarifies the true nature of the human and divine reality to which the Breath
of God conforms the believing Christian. In following Jesus, the disciples
will experience margenalization just as He did; but they will do so in the
knowledge that Jesus redefines the meaning of what constitutes inside
and outside. (Mk 1:40-45)
In this section, I have so far considered both the dramatic and thematic
linkages which structure Marks gospel. Only one other set of linkages
needs analysis: namely, Marks extensive use of allusion. As we shall see,
Mark uses this literary device quite systematically. In fact, it endows his
gospel with much of its distinctive narrative flavor. The following section
analyses Marks allusive linkages.
(IV)
By allusive linkages in Mark I mean the way the evangelist relates anecdotal events to one another by including in one event a descriptive detail
which reminds the reader of some other event in Jesus story. Because
Mark relies more on narrative events than on Jesus teachings in order to
disclose to the reader Jesus true identity and the significance of His life
and ministry, the evangelists use of allusive linkages plays an extremely
important role in conveying the evangelists central Christological message; for the allusive linkages indicate which events especially illumine
one another. Moreover, as Mark structures his narrative, virtually all of
the allusive linkages focus finally on the two miracles of the loaves. I
therefore begin this exploration of allusive linkages in Mark with the first
miracle of the loaves.
The First Miracle of the Loaves
As we have seen, immediately after the first miracle of the loaves, Jesus
walks upon the water, invokes the divine name, and stills the storm. At
the end of this incident Mark remarks that the disciples did not understand the significance of what had just happened because they had not
understood the meaning of the miracle of the loaves. (Mk 6:45-52) The
evangelists remark ties together a complex cluster of allusive linkages.
17. Cf. James L Blevins, The Messianic Secret in Markan Research: 1901-1976 (Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1981).
141
First of all, the miracle of the loaves alludes to the eucharist, since in
multiplying the bread and fish Jesus performs the four ritual eucharistic
acts of taking, blessing, breaking, and giving. (Mk 6:41, 14:22) One can
therefore comprehend the meaning of the miracle of the loaves only if
one comprehends the meaning of the eucharist.
In Mark, however, the eucharist interprets the meaning of the paschal
mystery, of Jesus death, resurrection, and mission of the divine Breath.
In the first instance, the eucharist reveals the paschal mystery as Jesus
gratuitous sharing of His life, ultimately of His risen life, with His disciples. Jesus will share risen life with the disciples when He baptizes them
with His Breath. (Mk 1:8) The eucharist, however, also reveals Jesus death
as both a covenant sacrifice and a sacrifice of atonement which takes
away sins. (Mk 2:10-11)
Moreover, as we have seen at perhaps the most dramatic moment in
Marks account of Jesus passion, viz. in Jesus confrontation with the high
priest during His trial, Jesus will once again implicitly uses the divine
name, as He had done when He walked on the water. Jesus in His trial
invokes the divine name in response to a question by the high priest.
That question recalls the first verse of Marks gospel. The first verse functions as the equivalent of a title; and in its own way summarizes Marks
message. (Mk 1:1, 14:61) In reply Jesus claims the divine judicial authority of the Son of Man. (Mk 14:61-2, 6:50)
Jesus testimony to Himself in His trial also comes as the culmination
of a series of testimonies to Him in the course of Marks narrative. The
Baptizer calls Jesus the mightier one who baptizes in a sanctifying Breath.
(Mk 1:7-8) The Father calls Jesus His beloved Son, the messiah in the
image of the suffering servant. (Mk 1:11) The Father repeats His testimony to the disciples on the mount of transfiguration. There he requires
of the disciples absolute obedience to Jesus teachings, since as Son of
God Jesus speaks with greater authority than either the Law or the prophets. (Mk 9:2-8) Peter testifies to Jesus as the messiah. (Mk 8:29) Finally,
Jesus testifies to Himself as eschatological Son of Man and bearer of the
divine name. (Mk 14:62) Clearly, Mark intends all of these different testimonies to Jesus to throw light on one another. Each of them reveals a
different facet of His person.
When, therefore, Mark states that the disciples did not understand the
significance of the fact that Jesus walked on water, invoked the divine
name, and calmed the storm because they had also failed to understand
about the multiplication of the loaves, the evangelist is making faith in
the divinity of Jesus a condition for eucharistic faith. Only one who confesses the divinity of Jesus has understood the meaning of the loaves; for
the two miracles of multiplication foreshadow both the eucharist and the
paschal mystery which gives the eucharist its meaning.
142
Second, Jesus walking on the water contains an allusive reference to

His first calming of the storm. As we have seen, after that incident the
disciples, as usual bewildered, had asked, Who is this that even the wind
and sea obey Him? (Mk 4:41) Their question contains in turn yet another allusive reference to the central question which Jesus poses to His
disciples in Marks gospel: namely, Who do you say that I am? (Mk
8:29) When, moreover, one understands the miracle of the loaves in the
light of the two miracles of the calming of the storm, one grasps immediately the inadequacy of Peters response to that question. Peter has understood Jesus messianic identity, but he has yet to recognize the messiah as
the suffering servant and as divine. (Mk 8:31-3) Like the blind man Jesus
cures in stages prior to Peters confession, Peter has begun to see but has
yet to reach the full vision of eucharistic faith. (Mk 8:22-26)
The first miracle of the calming of the storm has, however, other important allusive connections in Marks narrative; for Jesus exercise of divine power over the forces of chaos which the storm waves symbolize sets
the context for His exorcism of the Gerasene demoniac. After that exorcism, the demon-possessed pigs perish in the very waters of chaos which
He has just dominated by a word. (Mk 4:39, 5:13) In other words, Jesus
creative, divine power over the wind and waves also manifests His victorious power over all the forces of evil. Those forces include Satan and His
minions; they also include the Roman empire and its legions, as the
Gerasene demons name symbolizes. By linking the meaning of Jesus
power over the waters of chaos to eucharistic faith (Mk 6:52), Mark also
places at the heart of such faith confidence in Jesus eschatological victory.
Third, when one reads the first miracle of the loaves in the light of the
cosmological miracles in which Jesus calms the storm, then descriptive
details in the miracle of the loaves take on new meaning. Jesus stands
revealed as the divine shepherd of the new Israel who nourishes those
who relate to Him with eucharistic faith by giving them the eucharistic
bread of wisdom. The content of that wisdom derives from Jesus ministry and from the paschal mystery itself. (Mk 6:34-43)
Similarly, Jesus command to the disciples in the story of the multiplication, Give them something to eat yourselves (Mk 6:37) contains an
allusive reference to Jesus command after raising the daughter of Jairus
to give her something to eat. (Mk 5:43) In other words, Mark wants one
to read the account of the multiplication of the loaves not only in the
light of the two miraculous calmings of the storm but also in the light of
raising of the daughter of Jairus.
The raising of the twelve-year-old daughter of Jairus, however, forms a
tryptic with the healing of the woman with a twelve-year flux of blood.
(Mk 5:21-43) Moreover, in these healings the two women symbolize the
old and new covenants and Jesus relation to them. In healing the older
143
woman, Jesus reveals His power to free Jews who believe in Him, especially women, from the curse of the Law. In raising the young girl from
death to life, Jesus reveals how He establishes the new covenant: namely,
by sharing with those who believe in Him His own risen life.
In addition, the raising of the daughter of Jairus contains further allusive references to the other healings which Mark describes as resurrections: viz., to the healing of Peters mother-in-law (Mk 1:31) and to the
cure of the epileptic demoniac boy (Mk 9:26-7). In both cases, Jesus
raises up the sick person in a way which foreshadows His raising up of
all those who believe in Him.
Such raisings prefigure the transforming, empowering consequences
of sharing in the risen life of Christ. In the case of Peters mother-in-law
144
her raising empowers her to serve Jesus as well as others. In the case of
the demoniac boy, his raising not only frees him from the power of
Satan but it also assimilates him to the deaf and dumb person Jesus had
healed in Gentile territory just before the second miracle of the loaves.
(Mk 8:31-7) That miracle, as we have already seen, belongs to a series of
miracles which symbolize the transformation which resurrection faith and
Breath-baptism will effect in the disciples. In the case of the demoniac
boy, sharing in risen life enables one not only to hear the gospel to but
speak it, to bear witness to others. Jesus healing also empowers one to
see with the eyes of faith and to follow Him on the way, on the path
of discipleship which leads to Calvary and to risen glory. (Mk 8:22-6,
10:46-52) In other words, by linking the raising of the daughter of Jairus
to the first miracle of the loaves, Mark intends all these allusively connected healings and what they symbolize to throw light on the meaning
of Christian eucharistic faith.
The presence of Peter, James, and John at the raising of the daughter of
Jairus links this incident, moreover, to three others: to the transfiguration, to the eschatological discourse, and to the agony in the garden. (Mk
5:37, 9:2, 13:3, 14:33)
In the transfiguration, the three disciples find themselves drawn into
Jesus own baptismal experience. They hear the Father speak the same
words He had spoken to Jesus in His messianic commissioning after His
baptism by John. Then the Father had said to Jesus: You are my beloved
Son in whom I am well pleased and had designated Him messiah, suffering servant, and the beginning of a new Israel. (Mk 1:9-11) In the
Transfiguration the Father says to Peter, James, and John, This is my
Beloved Son, listen to Him. (Mk 9:33) In other words, in designating
Jesus as His Son, the Father commands the disciples to recognize by their
obedience to Him that Jesus speaks with a greater authority than Moses
and Elijah, than the Law and the prophets. The Fathers words also echo
what He said to Jesus in His baptismal commissioning. Hence, obedience to Jesus draws one into His original baptismal experience.
Mark also places the transfiguration at the beginning of the way section of his gospel. The evangelist thus underscores how seriously the disciples must take the demands of discipleship which Jesus is expounding
to them. The transfiguration also foreshadows the resurrection.
The presence of Peter, James, and John in Gethsemane makes it clear
that those who witness the resurrection and know the risen glory of Christ
must also accompany Him in His humanity and vulnerability. (Mk 14:33)
By connecting all these events allusively to the first miracle of the loaves,
Mark makes them all relevant to the meaning of Christian eucharistic
faith.
145
The eschatological discourse instructs the disciples on the way they

should conduct themselves during the end time. Mark also uses the figures of Peter, James, and John in order to link the eschatological discourse to raising of the daughter of Jairus and through her to the miracle
of the loaves. Mark thus implicitly portrays the eucharist as the expression of eschatological longing and readiness. The presence of Andrew
also links the eschatological discourse to the call of the first disciples and
thus underscores the eschatological character of all discipleship. (Mk
1:9-11, 16-20, 13:3)
I began by examining a single allusive reference in Marks gospel: viz.,
the evangelists allusion to the first miracle of the loaves after Jesus walks
on the water and calms the storm. (Mk 6:32) This allusion lies at the
heart of a whole cluster of other allusive references in Marks narrative.
Through these references the evangelist attempts to call attention to the
deeper, sacramental significance of the events he is narrating. He also
links them in a way which throws light on the meaning of eucharistic
faith.
The Second Miracle of the Loaves
After the second miracle of the loaves, Mark makes another such allusive
reference. It pulls together another allusive rete, a network of references
which illumine the meaning of the second miracle of the loaves and
through it the meaning of Christian eucharistic worship. After the second miracle of the loaves, Jesus warns the disciples against the leaven of
Herod and of the Pharisees. Moreover, a frustrated Jesus ascribes their
failure to understand what He is talking about to yet another failure: the
unbelieving disciples also fail to comprehend the meaning of both miracles
of the loaves. (Mk 8:14-21)
In effect, Mark is saying that those who desire to share through faith in
the Christian eucharist must purge out of their hearts the leaven, or
corrupting example, of Herod and of the Pharisees. Jesus reference to the
leaven of Herod invites the reader to ponder all the attitudes which this
tyrant has embodied in Marks narrative. Purging out the leaven of Herod
means personal repentance of any similar attitudes in ones own heart:
unbridled passion, superstition, vanity, violence, venality, sensuality, greed,
oppression. (Mk 6:14-29; cf. 1 Cor 5:6; Gal 5:9)
Similarly, Jesus reference to the leaven of the Pharisees invites the
reader to ponder all of Jesus confrontations with the Pharisees recorded
in Marks gospel and to repent of all those attitudes which Jesus censures
in them. Specifically, the disciples must refuse to test God through unbelief, legalism, hypocrisy, judgmentalism, preferring human traditions to
Gods will, testing God.
146
Moreover, after warning against the two leavens and after reminding
the disciples of the two miracles of the loaves, Jesus asks them: Do you
not yet understand? (Mk 8:21) The question contains an allusion to the
way section which follows almost immediately in Marks gospel. In the
way section, Jesus will with apparent lack of success try to communicate
to the disciples the demands of discipleship. (Mk 8:27-10:45) Jesus question, therefore, points allusively to the flip side of purging out the leaven
of Herod and of the Pharisees: namely, obedient walking in the way of
discipleship.
One can find other allusive references in Mark: 1) between the young
man stripped of his clothes in the garden and the young man who confronts the women in the empty tomb (Mk 14:51-2, 16:5); 2) the symbolic links among the miracles of healing which I examined above; 3) the
three prophecies of the passion (Mk 8:31-3, 9:30-32, 10:32-34); 4) Jesus
mysterious foreknowledge in the preparation of the triumphal entry and
in the last supper (Mk 11:1-6, 14:12-6); 5) the rending of the heavens at
Jesus baptism and the rending of the temple veil depicting the heavens
(Mk 1:10, 15:38). The allusive references which cluster around the two
miracles of the loaves, however, strike me as the most fraught with Christological significance since they illumine the meaning which Mark discovers in eucharistic faith in the risen Christ.
The allusive linkages in Mark make it clear that Christological knowingpractical assimilation to Jesus in the power of His baptismal Breath
has both an ecclesial and a eucharistic character. Indeed the allusive linkages point to the eucharist as the sacramentalization of the Christian
communitys corporate assimilation to Jesus in the power of His Breath.
Clearly, Marks narrative Christology has as its purpose to teach the
disciples of Jesus to read the deep saving significance sacramentally manifest in the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Only conformity to
the risen Christ through Breath baptism and through participation in the
eucharistic community into which Breath-baptism introduces one can
disclose to the human mind and heart the secret wisdom of faith which
grasps that sacramental significance. The very narrative structure of Mark
gives, therefore, practical meaning to Christological knowing. It defines
its conditions, its revelatory context, its moral demands, it sacramental
scope.
As we shall see in the other two sections of this volume, Matthew and
Luke both use and modify Marks basic narrative strategies. They employ
dramatic, thematic, and allusive linkages, as Mark does. Like Mark, they
seek by these means to draw the disciples of Jesus more deeply into an
experience of Christological knowing.
147
Matthew and Luke, however, tell Jesus story somewhat differently from
Mark. They address different communities with different faith needs. A
comparative dialectical analysis of their retelling of Jesus story will, then,
in the chapters which follow call attention to another facet of Christological knowing: namely, its analogical character. All those who know
Jesus through conformity to Him in the power of His Breath converge
on the same divine reality and aspire to the same kind of community of
faith. Different individuals and different communities, however, converge
on those realities out of different histories. Those historical differences, as
we shall see in the following two sections, endow Christological knowing
with its analogous character.18
18. Cf. Masson, Lvangile de Marc et lglise de Rome, pp. 51-125; Eduard Schweizer,
Marks Theological Achievement in The Interpretation of Mark, pp. 63-87.
148
Part 2: Matthews Narrative Christology
Part 2
Matthews Narrative Christology
Chapter 6
Matthews Infancy Narrative
Foundational Christology studies the ways in which justifying faith in
Jesus Christ as savior and Lord transforms the four secular forms of conversion. This volume ponders the way in which such a commitment transvalues imaginative perceptions and intuitive beliefs about reality.
This section divides into six chapters. This chapter summarizes what
historical-critical method tells us about Matthew and his community.
Then it ponders the message of Matthews infancy narrative. Chapter
seven analyzes Matthews positive dramatic linkages. Chapter eight examines the negative dramatic linkages. Chapter nine reflects on the ambiguous dramatic linkages. Chapter ten focuses on one of the most important thematic linkages in Matthew: Jesus five discourses and the message they inculcate. Chapter eleven ponders two other thematic linkages:
Jesus miracles and the theme of fulfillment. This final chapter of section
two also examines how Matthew edits Marks allusive linkages and creates a different rete of allusions which cluster around the Great Commission.
The present chapter divides into two parts. Part one summarizes what
historical critical method has to say about the evangelist we call Matthew
and about the community whom he addresses. Part two analyzes the
message of Matthews infancy narrative.
(I)
Matthew wrote his gospel in the sub-apostolic era, which followed the
death of the apostles. Scripture scholars have suggested many different
ancient cities as the source of Matthews gospel: Jerusalem, Alexandria,
Caesarea Maritima, Edessa, Phoenicia, and Antioch. In the present state
of scholarly research, however, Antioch would seem to qualify as the most
likely candidate.
The church in Antioch came into existence in the late thirties. Matthew probably wrote his gospel in the eighties. Between the communitys
founding and the composition of Matthews narrative, the church at
Antioch experienced a relatively untroubled life. It therefore had the opportunity to develop the kinds of resources on which Matthew drew in
writing his gospel.
Chapter 6: Matthews Infancy Narrative
149
Matthew, for example, almost certainly relied on the gospel of Mark as

a resource. Nevertheless, both the infancy gospel and the many sayings of
Jesus found in Matthew but absent from Mark indicate that Matthew
had access to other historical sources, both oral and written about Jesus.
That fact plus hints in Matthews text (cf. Mt 13:52) together suggest
that Matthews gospel emerged from a Christian community with an active scribal tradition.
Matthews gospel addresses a Church which practiced Petrine Christianity. In other words, in ecclesiological matters, the church at Antioch
stood to the right of center. With Peter it baptized Gentiles without requiring their circumcision. Petrine Christianity, however, dealt with such
Gentile converts as more or less the Christian equivalent of God-fearers
in Judaism. Among the Jews of the time, the term God-fearers designated Gentiles who had converted to Judaism, but frequently without
submitting to circumcision. In the Petrine churches, then, those functioned as a kind of inner circle of believers who submitted both to circumcision and baptism. These Jewish Christians obeyed the Torah while
interpreting it in the light of Jesus teachings. Baptized Gentiles participated in eucharistic communion with them; but these Gentile Christians
were not expected to shoulder the full burden of Mosaic law. Instead,
they observed certain dietary practices. In Matthews mind, Gentile Christians practiced a real but religiously diluted form of Christianity. (Cf. Mt
5:17-19)
In Gal 2:11-14, Paul describes how he confronted Peter at Antioch
when the latter, under pressure from right-wing Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, ceased eating with Gentile Christians. We have reason to believe,
however, that Peter, not Paul, won out at Antioch and that Petrine Christianity provided the Antiochene church with its founding tradition.
The fact that Ignatius of Antioch in his letters alludes three times to
Matthews gospel also tends to support its Antiochene origin. Moreover,
if Marks gospel originated in Rome, then its presence and influence in
the church at Antioch could suggest communication between the Roman and Antiochene communities.1
As in the case of Mark, we know little of the evangelist we call Matthew
beyond what we can glean from the text of his gospel. Most scholars
doubt that he numbered among the disciples who knew Jesus personally.
1. Cf. Raymond E. Brown and John P. Meier, Antioch and Rome: New Testament Cradles
of Catholic Christianity (Ramsey, NJ: Paulist, 1982), pp. 15-27; R.M. Grant, Jewish
Christianity in Antioch in the Second Century in Judaeo-Christianisme (Paris:
Editions Beauchesne, 1972), pp. 97-108; Rafael Aguirre, La Communidad de Mateo
y el Judaismo, Estudios Biblicos, 51(1993), pp. 233-249; D.C. Parker, Was Matthew
Written Before 50 C.E.? The Magdalen Papyrus of Matthew, Expository Times,
107(1995), pp. 40-43; Anthony J. Saldarini, Matthews Jewish-Christian Community
(Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1994).
150
Even if, as seems possible, the author of the present gospel did draw on
sources one could trace back to the apostle Matthew, the evangelist himself almost certainly numbered among a later generation of Christians.2
Many believe that the portrait of the good scribe which the evangelist puts on the lips of Jesus describes Matthew himself. (Mt 13:52) If the
gospel originated from Antioch and if the community at Antioch had
developed a scribal tradition, then Matthew exemplified that tradition
and may have enjoyed a certain prominence in the Antiochene church.
Themes in Matthews gospel also tell us something about its author.
He espoused a form of Petrine Christianity. (Mk 5:17-20) His strong
polemic against Pharisaism suggests that he wrote his gospel in part as a
response to the growing influence of Pharisaism in the Jewish community. Matthew sought to discourage Pharisaical influence among Petrine
Christians.
Some historians have suggested that the Jewish scholars at Jamnia finally settled the Jewish canon of inspired Biblical books between the years
90 and 100 a.d. In fact, we find no general acceptance of the present
canonical books in the Jewish community until the end of the second
century. The rise of Jamnian Pharisaism did, however, foster a movement
toward the standardization of Jewish faith and worship; and that movement also helped motivate the expulsion of Christians from the synagogue.
Matthew certainly shows concern over growing tensions between Jewish Christians and Pharisaism. His Jewish Christian community has,
moreover, achieved a separate identity within the Jewish community at
Antioch. Matthew seems concerned to recognize the de facto leadership
of the Pharisees in the Judaism of his day as long as it does not compromise Christian faith and practice. His strong polemic against Pharisaism
suggests, moreover, that he recognized that radical differences of faith
and practice divided the two groups. These differences motivated the
debate in Matthews gospel with the so-called synagogue across the street.
Matthew seems, then, to have written his gospel in response to a crisis
of identity among Jewish Christians at Antioch occasioned by the initial
emergence of the Christian community as a distinct institutional entity
within Judaism. While Mark portrays Christianity primarily as a eucharistic community, Matthew calls it a church (ekkelsia). Matthew also
shows concern that the institutionalization of Christian leadership structures happening at Antioch not yield to what he perceives as a nascent
clericalism. The evangelist fears that those clericalizing tendencies will
undermine authentic gospel living.
2. The tradition that the Greek version of Matthew has roots in an Aramaic version of the
gospel derives from Eusebius, who quotes Papias of Hierapolis to that effect. (Eusebius,
HE, 3.39.16)
151
Matthew responds to this communal crisis by a systematic retrieval of

the traditions about Jesus. In that retrieval he shows a concern to preserve
the bond of union among Gentile and Jewish Christians. At the same
time he shows an equally strong concern to preserve the Petrine identity
of the Antiochene church. Against Marks stress on the utter newness of
the revelation made in Jesus, Matthew opts for qualified newness. In
Matthews gospel, the incarnation does mark a startling new beginning
in salvation history; but Matthew sees no reason therefore to jettison the
Jewish traditions revered in the Antiochene community. Instead, Matthew interprets traditional Judaism in the light of Jesus and of the paschal
mystery. Matthew views Jesus as an unparalleled religious teacher, as one
who proclaimed the new Christian covenant with divine authority. For
Matthew, however, the new covenant illumines and makes sense out of
the old; it does not simply replace it.3
The Structure of Matthews Gospel
Matthew adapts Marks narrative freely to fit his own narrative and theological needs. Matthew departs most significantly from Mark by the enhanced importance he gives to Jesus teachings. Matthew expands the
two short discourses in Markthe sermon on the lake and Jesus apocalyptic discourse with other sayings of Jesus. In addition, Matthew adds
three other major discourses to Marks text: the sermon on the mount,
the missionary discourse, and the ecclesial discourse. That makes five
major discourses of Jesus in all, corresponding to the five books of the
Torah. The Pentateuch embedded the Mosaic covenant in the contextualizing story of Hebrew origins. Matthew retells Jesus story as the promulgation of the Christian Torah and presents Jesus moral and religious
vision as distilling the true meaning of Torah piety. Besides insisting on
the importance of Jesus teachings, Matthew also edits, re-arranges, and
rewrites Marks text when it suits him theologically.
Moreover, Matthew orders the discourses chiastically. The first discourse,
the sermon on the mount, announces the arrival of kingdom and proclaims the moral demands for entry into it, while the last discourse, the
eschatological discourse, describes its final consummation. The missionary and the ecclesial discourses also enjoy a certain parallelism, since both
describe different aspects of Church life: its missionary activity and life in
community. The parabolic discourse has no parallel among the other discourses. It provides the central discourse of Matthews gospel. In Matthew, the parabolic discourse discloses the mysterious character of the
kingdom. Its central location among the discourses suggests that the evan3. Cf. Brown and Meier, op.cit., pp. 73-86; Eduard Schweizer, Matthus und seine
Gemeinde (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1974).
152
gelist looked upon the Church primarily as a saving mystery providentially planned by God from all eternity.
The narrative sections of Matthews gospel which alternate with the
discourses serve different purposes in the overall structure of Jesus story.
The infancy narrative tells the story of Jesus birth in a way which anticipates His passion and resurrection. The infancy narrative and the account of Jesus burial display an analogous narrative structure. Accounts
of the actions of those favorable to Jesus alternate with descriptions of the
doings of His enemies.4
The first narrative section of the gospel properchapters three and
fourinaugurates Jesus public ministry. The preaching of John proclaims
Jesus Breath-baptizer and warns that His ministry will come as a judgment upon the unrepentant Pharisees and chief priests. Jesus baptism by
John begins His revelation as Breath-baptizer, a revelation which culminates in the Great Commission to baptize in the triune name which will
close Matthews gospel. Jesus temptations, as we shall see, indicate those
aspects of the Torah which His life, ministry and teaching especially fulfill.
The second narrative section which follows the sermon on the mount
confirms Jesus inaugural proclamation of the kingdom with an outpouring of miracles. They reveal the healing power of Jesus and of His message as well as His divine authority. This section also introduces for the
first time the theme of conflict which the missionary discourse, which
follows it, will develop in considerable detail.
The third narrative section follows the missionary discourse. It intensifies the theme of conflict and dramatizes Jesus rejection by the Pharisees
and by His contemporaries.
The parabolic discourse which follows Matthews third narrative section culminates in the disciples profession that they, at least, understand
the meaning of Jesus teachings. The fourth narrative section, which follows the parabolic discourse, shows how the disciples, in contrast to Jesus
own townspeople, do have faith in Him. They, however, as yet have only
weak and sometimes wavering faith.
The two miracles of the loaves occur in the fourth narrative section.
They foreshadow the universally salvific, eucharistic Church which Jesus,
the Breath baptizer, will create. So does Peters profession of faith and
Jesus response to Him. As we shall see, Matthew, in contrast to Mark,
transforms Peters confession into a promise of the Churchs founding.
This fourth narrative section also looks forward to the paschal mystery:
the death of the Baptizer anticipates Jesus passion, while Jesus transfiguration foreshadows His resurrection.
4. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, pp. 1302-1304.
153
The fifth narrative section clarifies the strenuous demands which both
discipleship and leadership in service make on those who follow Jesus.
The account of Jesus final Jerusalem ministry follows. It describes the
final confrontation between Jesus and His enemies and culminates in the
woes against the scribes and Pharisees. The woes express the curses which
rest upon those who reject the new covenant.
The sixth and final narrative section follows the eschatological discourse.
It describes the paschal mystery: the eucharist, Jesus betrayal and trial,
His crucifixion, His death, His resurrection, and His reconstitution of
the new Israel in the Great Commission.
In the following portion of this chapter, I shall reflect on Matthews
infancy narrative. As we shall see, it has a tight literary unity and provides
a thematic introduction to the gospel as a whole.5
5. One finds no scholarly consensus about the narrative structure of Matthew. Cf.
Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1977), pp.
25-56, 96-121. For different approaches to Matthews gospel see: Graham N. Stanton,
A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1992); David
B. Howell, Matthews Inclusive Story: A Study in the Narrative Rhetoric of the First Gospel
(Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990); Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew As Story
(Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1988). See also: Harold Riley, The First Gospel (Macon,
GA: Mercer University Press, 1992); R.E.O. White, The Mind of Matthew: Unique
Insights for Living Today (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1979); Daniel Patte,
The Gospel According to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthews Faith
(Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1987); Amy Jill Levine, The Social and Ethnic Dimensions
of Matthean Social History (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988); W.F.Albright
and C.S. Mann, Matthew: Introduction, Translation, and Notes (New York, NY:
Doubleday, 1971); David Hill, The Gospel of Matthew (London: Oliphants, 1972);
Warren Carter, Kernels and Narrative Blocks: The Structure of Matthews Gospel,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 54(1992), pp. 463-481; Franz Neirynck, Apo Tole Eriato
and the Structure of Matthew, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 64(1988), pp.
21-59; George Howard, The Textual Nature of Shem-Tobs Hebrew Matthew,
Journal of Biblical Literature, 108(1989), pp. 239-257; Akio Ito, Matthew and the
Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
48(1992), pp. 23-42; Donald Verseput, The Faith of the Reader and the Narrative
of Matthew 13.53-16.20, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 46(1992), pp.
3-24; Jack Dean Kingsbury, Reflections on the Reader of Matthews Gospel, New
Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 442-460; Mark Allan Powell, The Plot and
Subplots of Matthews Gospel, New Testament Studies, 38(1992), pp. 187-204;
Ronald V. Huggins, Matthean Posterity: A Preliminary Proposal, Novum Testamentum, 34(1992), pp. 1-22; Ulrich Luz, Fiktivitt und Tradtionstreue im Matthusevangelium im Lichte griechischer Literatur, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 84(1993), pp. 153-177; Paul S. Minear, Matthew: A Teachers Gospel
(New York, NY: Pilgrim Press, 1982); John P. Meier, The Vision of Matthew: Christ,
Church, and Morality in the First Gospel (New York, NY: Paulist, 1978); Christopher
R. Smith, Literary Evidence of a fivefold Structure in the Gospel of Matthew, New
Testament Studies, 43(1997), pp. 540-551; Augustine Stock, O.S.B., The Method and
Message of Matthew (Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical Press, 1994).
154
(II)
Matthews infancy gospel begins with a genealogy of Jesus A book of
origin of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham (Biblos geneseos
Iesou Christou huiou Dauid huiou Abraam) (Mt 1:1-17). Many commentators regard the genealogy as a repellant way to begin Jesus story;
but the genealogy serves several important Christological purposes within
the infancy narrative.6
The Genealogy
1) The genealogy recapitulates rapidly the story of Jewish salvation history from Abraham to Jesus. In the process, it inserts Jesus solidly in that
history. It portrays Jesus as a Jew, a son of Abraham, born of Mary, in
solidarity with other Jews.
2) The genealogy insists on the humanity of Jesus. Jesus has a genealogical history like any other human, has a family and family roots.
3) The genealogy calls attention to some of the important figures in
salvation history which the infancy gospel will endow with typological
significance: Abraham, David, and Israel as a whole.
4) The genealogy also implicitly introduces the theme of fulfillment
which plays such an important role in Matthews gospel. It does so by
using the rabbinic numerology, or gametria, which endows numbers with
symbolic significance. Matthew orders the genealogy artificially into three
sets of fourteen generations. In rabbinic gametria Davids name has the
numerical value of fourteen. In other words, Matthew presents the number of generations in Jesus genealogy as fulfilling a providential plan by
foreshadowing Jesus Davidic sonship and messianic dignity. (Mt 1:17)
5) The genealogy mentions four women: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and
Bathsheba. They seem to foreshadow the figure of Mary in that all four
had an unusual relationship with their husbands and played a significant
role in salvation history. Tamars improper union with her father-in-law
Judah reminds the reader that sin tainted the Davidic throne even in its
primary ancestor. Rahab and especially Ruth, Davids ancestress, both
Gentile women of genuine faith allude to the universal salvation which
Jesus, the new David, brings. Bathshebas adultery with King David dramatizes Davids own sinfulness. The link of all four women to the Davidic
dynasty points, of course, to Jesus, the new David, who, as Immanuel,
utterly transcends His royal ancestor.7
6. Cf. Benedict T. Viviano, O.P., The Genres of Matthew 1-2: Light from Timothy 1:4,
Revue Biblique, 97(1990), pp. 31-53.
7. Cf. John Paul Heil, The Narrative Role of the Women in Matthews Genealogy,
Biblica, 72(1991), pp. 538-545; Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, pp. 57-95; NJBC,
42"9-10; Jean Radermakers, S.J., Au fil de lvangile selon Saint Matthieu (2 vols.;
Louvain: Institute dEtudes Theologique, 1972), II, pp. 30-34; Daniel Harrington,
The Gospel of Matthew (Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical Press, 1991), pp. 27-33; W.F.
155
The Infancy Narrative

In the infancy narrative which follows, the figures of Joseph and of Herod
the Great predominate. Joseph has three dreams which ensure Jesus providential birth and survival despite the machinations of Herod. In the first,
an angel appears to Joseph in a dream and tells him not to divorce Mary,
but to take her as his wife, since she has conceived Jesus by the power of
the Holy Breath. (Mt 1:18-25) In the second, the angel instructs Joseph
to flee to Egypt in order to escape Herods plot against the infant Jesus
life. (Mt 2:13-15) In the third, the angel orders Joseph to return to the
land of Israel, but to settle in Nazareth. (Mt 2:19-23)
After Josephs first dream, Matthew inserts the story of the Magi, of
their arrival in Jerusalem, of their encounter with Herod, and their discovery of the Christ child. (Mt 2:1-12) A dream also enables them to
outwit Herod and to return home without disclosing Jesus whereabouts.
After Josephs second dream, Matthew inserts the story of the slaughter of
the innocents. (Mt 2:16-18) The motif of the dream will resurface in
Matthews passion narrative. Because of a dream, Pilates wife warns him
to have nothing to do with the just man named Jesus. Dreams in Matthew
serve an oracular function which discloses to their recipients Gods will. Unlike Joseph and the magi, Pilate will disobey the message he receives.8
Matthews genealogy proceeds by patrilinear generation. The genealogy reiterates monotonously the Greek verb egennesen (begot) as sons
turn into fathers in Jesus family tree. When the evangelist comes to tell
the story of Jesus birth, however, he makes it clear that Jesus breaks the
pattern of natural patrilinear generation. Matthew so orchestrates the story
of Jesus birth as to underscore the fact that Joseph did not in fact beget
Jesus. Matthew even insists that Joseph, after his crisis of conscience over
how to deal with Marys conception of Jesus out of wedlock, had no
relations with Mary until she gave birth to Jesus. In other words, Jesus
birth totally disrupts the line of patrilinear generation which it simultaneously terminates and fulfills. It marks a new and miraculous beginning
in salvation history. (Mt 1:18-9)
As Joseph wrestles with his conscience about the best way to deal with
his pregnant fiancee, an angel appears to him in a dream in order to
resolve his dilemma. The angel tells him that Mary has conceived Jesus in
Albright and C.S. Mann, Matthew (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1971), pp. 1-6; John
Mark Jones, Subverting the Textuality of Davidic Messianism: Matthews Presentation of the Genealogy and the David Title, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 56(1994), pp.
256-272; Brian M. Nolan, Rooting the Davidic Son of God of Matthew 1-2 in the
Experience of the Evangelists Audience, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 149-156;
John Nolland, The Four (Five) Women and Other Annotations in Matthews
Genealogy, New Testament Studies, 43(1997), pp. 527-539.
8. Cf. Richard A. Horsley, The Liberation of Christians: Infancy Narratives in Social
Context (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1989).
156
the power of a Holy Breath and that Joseph should not therefore divorce
her but take her as his wife. The angel calls Joseph son of David and
thus testifies to the fact that legally Jesus belonged to the house of David,
as the messiah should.9 (Mt 1:20-1)
Jesus conception by a Holy Breath makes two theological points simultaneously: 1) Jesus did not first enter into relationship with Gods
Breath at His baptism, as one might incorrectly surmise from the gospel
of Mark, which, as we have seen, formed one of the sources of Matthews
gospel. Mark does not explicitly defend adoptionism.10 Since, however,
Mark makes no reference to Jesus relationship to Gods Breath prior to
His baptism by John, Matthew probably wanted to clarify Mark on this
point. 2) More important still, Jesus conception by Gods Breath manifests His transcendent origin and divine sonship. It does so by foreshadowing His full revelation as Immanuel, as God-with-us, in the Great
Commission which ends Matthews gospel. When the risen Christ reconstitutes the new Israel in the Great Commission, He promises to be
with His disciples till the end of the final age of salvation. (Mt 28:20)
The angel who appears to Joseph in a dream gives Jesus His name. In
doing so, the angel explains the names etymological significance. Jesus
means God saves. As the divinely conceived Immanuel, as God-with-us,
Jesus will save His people (ton laon autou) from their sins. (Mt 1:21) This
promise of salvation foreshadows the moment in Jesus trial when the entire
people (pas ho laos) call down Jesus blood upon themselves. As we shall see,
Matthew regards Jesus innocent blood not simply as the cause of divine retribution but also as the atoning blood of divine forgiveness. (Mt 27:25)
Matthew reverences Jesus as the Davidic messiah, but the evangelist
subordinates this title to Jesus divine Sonship. Jesus miraculous generation foreshadows His resurrection, reveals His divine origin, and makes a
new beginning in salvation history. Jesus comes as much more than a
Davidic messiah; He comes as Gods Son, as God-with-us, and as the
savior who will atone for Israels sins. Joseph obediently follows the angels
command and marries Mary, who gives birth to a son. Joseph, again in
obedience to the angels instruction, names Him Jesus. If Jesus conception in the power of the Breath discloses His transcendent divine origin,
His adoption by Joseph insures that in His humanity He confronts the
9. Cf. Brian M. Nolan, The Royal Son of God (Gttingen: Vanderhoeck and Ruprecht,
1979), pp. 24-28, 116-119, 145-170; Vincent Cernuda, El Domicilio de Jos y la
Fama de Maria, Estudios Biblicos, 46(1988), pp. 5-25; Robert Gnuse, Dreams in the
NightScholarly Mirage or Theophonic Formula? The Dream Report as a So-called
Elohist Tradition, Biblische Zeitschrift, 39(1995), pp. 28-53.
10. Adoptionism teaches that Jesus was an ordinary human being whom God adopted as
Son at some point in His life.
11. Cf. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, pp. 122-164; Nolan, op. cit., pp. 29-34, 120-131;
NJBC, 42:11; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 34-38; Harrington, op. cit., PP. 34-40;
157
world (as the messiah should) as a member of the house of David.11 (Mt
1:25)
The story of the magi follows. Magoi, or men schooled in occult wisdom and in astrology, suddenly appear in Jerusalem asking where to find
the newborn king of the Jews. Their appearance throws Herod and the
whole city of Jerusalem into confusion.
Herod assembles the chief priests and scribes, the same generic group
who will one day conspire to put Jesus to death, and asks them where the
messiah is supposed to be born. Citing Micah 5:1, they tell him in
Bethlehem, the city of David. Herod then plots to use the magi to bring
about the death of the newborn messiah. The magi must find Jesus and
then report to Herod where the child lies. Herod says he wants to worship the newborn king; but subsequent events show that he really wants
the newborn messiah dead. (Mt 2:2-12)
Several narrative details in the appearance of the magi need comment.
First, the magi follow a star which leads them, as the pillar of cloud and
of fire led the Israelites in the desert, first to Jerusalem and then to the
house in Bethlehem where the holy family is staying. The star probably
alludes to the messianic prophecy in Num 24:17, which predicts the rising of a star from Jacob. If so, the appearance of the star symbolizes the
birth of the messiah.12
Second, Matthew contrasts the joy and reverence with which the magi
welcome the messiah, on the one hand, and Herods desire to destroy
Him, on the other. Presumably, the secret wisdom of the magi has enabled them to interpret the appearance of the star correctly. If so, that
secret wisdom foreshadows the faith which Gentiles will place in Jesus.
When the magi find the Christ child with Mary, His mother, they do
Him homage and offer Him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. They
thus fulfill the prophecy of Is 60:6 and of Ps 72:10. Ps 72:10 predicts that
pagan kings will pay homage to the messiah. Is 60:6 predicts the conversion of the nations to faith in Yahweh.13 (Mt 2:11)
Herod in his unbelief relates to the newborn Jesus in the same way as
the Pharaoh related to Moses. (Compare: Mt 2: 13-4 and Ex 2:15; Mt.
2:16 and Ex 1:22; Mt 2:19 and Ex 2:23; Mt 2:19-20 and Ex 4:19; Mt
2:21 and Ex 2:21 and Ex 4:20). One finds an even closer parallel between
Herods actions and those of the Pharaoh in Josephuss life of Moses.
Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 7-10; Robert Gnuse, Dream Genre in Matthean
Infancy Narratives, Novum Testamentum, 32(1990), pp. 97-120; J. Nolland, No
Son of God Christology in Matthew 1.18- 25, Journal for the Study of the New
Testament, 62(1996), pp. 3-12.
12. Cf. Kim Paffenroth, Science or Story? The Star of Bethlehem, Expository Times,
106(1994), pp. 78-79; Benedict T. Viviano, The Movement of the Star: Matthew 2:9
and Num 9:17, Revue Biblique, 103(1996), pp. 58-64.
13. Cf. Nolan, op. cit., pp. 41-46.
158
There the Pharaoh, forewarned by sacred scribes of Moses birth, seeks to

destroy the child by ordering the massacre of all male Hebrew babies.
The Egyptian people also share in the Pharaohs apprehension. (Josephus,
Ant., II, ix, 2,3 ##205-31)
Matthew assimilates the unbelieving Herod, a client king of the Jews
but a Jewish king nevertheless, to Pharaoh, to a Gentile tyrant and archenemy of Moses, the liberator. The comparison introduces a deeply ironic
twist into the evangelists account of Herods reception of the news of the
messiahs birth. In assimilating a Jewish king to Pharaoh, Matthew also
implicitly portrays Jesus as a new Moses, as the one who will lead Israel to
a new exodus, to new freedom, despite the tyrannical opposition of the
pharaohs of this world, whether Jew or Gentile.
When Herod, with pharaonic malice orders the slaughter of all Hebrew boys in Bethlehem two years old and under, Matthew depicts the
grief of their mothers poignantly as fulfilling Jer 31:15. Jeremiah describes
Rachel bewailing the exile of her sons. Matthew probably alludes to Jesus
exile in Egypt. The God who presided over Israels exile and return will
also insure Jesus return to the promised land. In citing Jeremiah, Matthew could conceivably also intend to assimilate Jesus to Jeremiah, the
suffering prophet, as he will later do in his gospel. When read in context,
the words of Jeremiah suggest that God will comfort the grieving mothers.14 (Mt 2:13)
Third, the magi receive a warning in a dream not to report to Herod
but instead to return secretly to their own country. (Mt 2:12) The warning in the dream recalls the angelic message Joseph received and foreshadows the angelic warning he will receive, again in a dream, ordering
him to flee to Egypt. (Mt 2:12-14) The messiahs divine deliverance from
Herods pharaonic plot, foreshadows the messiahs ultimate victory over
those who will crucify Him.
Moreover, Herods plot causes Jesus to relive the Exodus experience of
the first Israel. (Mt 2:15) God orchestrates the holy familys flight into
Egypt and return to the Holy Land after Herods death. The flight and
return recalls that God providentially prepared a place for Israel in Egypt
and providentially intervened in order to deliver them from Egyptian
oppression. In a sense, as the embodiment and beginning of a new Israel,
14. Cf. Bob Becking, A Voice was heard in Ramah: Some Remarks on Structure and
Meaning of Jeremiah 31,15-17, Biblische Zeitschrift, 38(1994), pp. 229-242; Julio
Trevollen Barrera, El Relato de la Huida y Regresso de Egypto (Mt 2, 13-15a,
19-21), Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 251-260; Michel Quesnel, Les citations de
Jeremie dan levangile selon Saint Matthieu, Estudios Biblicos, 47(1989), pp. 513-527;
Michael Knowles, Jeremiah in Matthews Gospel: The Rejected Prophet Motif in
Matthean Redaction (Sheffield, JSOT Press, 1993); Richard J. Erickson, Divine
Injustice? Matthews Narrative Strategy and the Slaughter of the Innocents (Matthew
2.13-23), Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 64(1996), pp. 5-27.
159
Jesus also confronts the reader symbolically as a new Abraham who will
father the new Israel in a transcendent manner. Later, in his account of
Jesus baptism Matthew will again portray Him as both Son of God and
the beginning of a new Israel.15 (Cf. Mt 3:16-17)
Fourth, in telling the story of the magi, Matthew underscores the fact,
that even though, Jesus as God-with-us embodies something greater than
the Davidic messiah of Jewish expectation, He nevertheless fulfills punctiliously the prophecies concerning the Davidic messiah. Jesus of Nazareth
is born in Bethlehem, Davids city. Divine providence insures that He
would grow up in Nazareth and thus be called a Nazarene. (Mt 2:1,
4-6, 22-3)
The name Nazareth does not occur in the Old Testament. In saying
that the prophets foretold that the messiah would come from Nazareth
(Mt 2:23), Matthew is probably punning on Isaiahs prophecy that a
branch would spring from Jesse and would bring about a universal salvation. (Is 11:1-10) The Hebrew word for branch (nesher) has the same
root as Nazareth. If Matthew does allude to the Isaian prophecy, the fact
that the branch will effect universal salvation fulfills the story of the
Gentile magi who worship the Christ child.
The portrayal of Jesus as a Nazarene may also pun on the word Nazarite, one specially consecrated to God. (Num 6:1-21) If so, Matthew is
assimilating Jesus to Samson, the Nazarite judge of Israel. (Judg 13-6) In
his gospel, Matthew will stress even more than Mark the judgmental character of Jesus ministry. Jesus lack of Nazarite asceticism, however, argues
against this interpretation.16
This chapter has examined Matthews infancy narrative. The narrative
articulates many of the themes which the evangelist will develop in greater
narrative detail in his gospel. The time has come, then, to examine how
Matthew develops the positive dramatic linkages which he finds in Mark.
To this problem I turn in the next chapter.17
15. Cf. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, pp. 219-223; Nolan, op. cit., p. 133; NJBC,
42:12; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 39-41; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 11-19.
16. Cf. Steve Willis, Matthews Birth Stories: Prophecy and the Magi, Expository Times,
105(1993), pp. 43-45; Gabriel Perez Rodriguez, Division Existential de Mt 1-2; Lc
1-2, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 161-175; Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, pp.
165-232; Nolan, op. cit., pp. 131-144; NJBC, 42:15; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
41-44; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 40-50; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 20-22.
17. Cf. Patte, op.cit., pp.16-42; Albright and Mann, op.cit., pp. 1-24; Hill, op.cit., pp.
74-88; Levine, op.cit., pp. 59-106.
160
Chapter 7
Positive Dramatic Linkages in Matthew
Matthew patterns the dramatic linkages in his gospel on Marks. In both
gospels, Jesus stands in a positive relationship to John the Baptizer as His
precursor and as a fellow prophet. As in Marks gospel, Matthews Jesus
relates more ambivalently to Johns disciples; but Jesus relates only positively to the Father and to the Holy Breath. Jesus, however, relates negatively to Satan and his demons, to the scribes and Pharisees, to the chief
priests, to Herod, to Pilate, and to the Roman empire. Finally, Jesus, as in
Mark, relates positively to the crowds and to His disciples, but they relate
ambivalently to Him.
This chapter examines the positive dramatic linkages in Matthew. It
divides into three parts. Part one describes Jesus relationship to John the
Baptizer. Part two examines His relationship to the Father. Part three
analyzes His relation to the divine Breath.
(I)
After the infancy narrative, Matthew takes up the story of Jesus where
Mark began it: with the preaching and ministry of John the Baptizer. As
in Mark, Matthews John fulfills the prophecy of Is 40:3. Matthew, however, omits most of Marks editorial embellishments of Isaiah. Mark had
written: Behold, I send my messenger before your face who shall prepare your way, the voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way
of the Lord, make his paths straight. (Mk 1:2-3) As we saw, one does not
find Marks verse 2 in the text of Isaiah. Mark has, in fact, conflated two
Old Testament texts: Mal 3:1 and Is 40:3. Matthew, with scribal care,
takes fewer liberties with the text of Isaiah, although he too does modify
it slightly. Isaiah wrote: A voice cries: In the wilderness prepare the way
of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. (Is 40:3)
Matthew writes: The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the
way of the Lord, make his paths straight. (Mt 3:3) Later, Matthew will
place the prophecy of Malachi on the lips of Jesus and will develop its
theological implications in more detail than Mark.1 (Mt 11:9-17)
John the Baptizer and Jesus
Moreover, whereas Mark had portrayed John preaching a baptism of
repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Mk 1:4), Matthew, who has already described Jesus in his infancy narrative as the one who takes away
the sins of Israel, omits the phrase for the forgiveness of sins. Instead,
1. Cf. Gerd Hfner, Jene Tage (Mt3,1) und der Umfang des Matthschien Prologs,
Biblische Zeitschrift, 37(1993), pp. 43-59.
Chapter 7: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Matthew
161
Matthews John preaches only a baptism of repentance. In Matthews theology, only the paschal mystery forgives sins. (Mt 26:26-28)
In other respects, however, Matthew describes Johns ministry as Mark
does. He situates it in the desert where popular expectation located the
dawning of Israels final salvation. Moreover, like Mark, Matthew describes the Baptist as Elijah redivivus. Again echoing Mark, Matthew portrays John as a desert ascetic and insists on the enormous excitement and
popularity of his ministry. (Mt 3:4-6)
In contrast to Mark, however, Matthew gives more of a sampling of the
Baptizers teachings. Mark had contented himself with reproducing Johns
prophecy of a mightier one to come after him who would baptize in a
sanctifying Breath. (Mk 1:7) Matthew precedes this prophecy with Johns
rebuke to the Pharisees and Sadducees:
You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Bear fruit which benefits repentance, and do not presume to say to yourselves, We have Abraham as our father; for I tell you, God is able from
these stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to
the root of the trees; every tree therefore which does not bear good fruit is
cut down and throw into the fire. (Mt 3:7-9)
Johns denunciation of the Pharisees and Saducees puts them immediately in an adversarial relationship to the new salvation foreshadowed by
the ministry of John and soon to dawn in the ministry of Jesus. John
denounces the Pharisees and Sadducees as a poisonous influence in Israel: as a brood of vipers. They oppose John because they substitute racial
pride for the kind of genuine repentance which bears fruit in good works.
Later, Matthews Jesus will warn against the leaven, or false teaching,
of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Moreover, throughout his gospel Matthew will denounce Pharisaism as a shallow form of religious legalism. In
these denunciations, the evangelist probably envisages not only the
Pharisaism of his day but Pharisaical tendencies within his Jewish Christian community.
Johns excoriation of the Pharisees and Sadducees also has a strongly
eschatological tone. John warns of the immanence of divine judgment
and of the divine wrath which will overtake the unrepentant sinner. Sinners will experience the holiness of God, symbolized by fire, not as a
purification but as divine retribution. This judgmental rhetoric probably
offers an accurate feel for the tone of Johns preaching. In reproducing it,
moreover, Matthew implicitly contrasts Johns stern language with Jesus
joyful and healing proclamation of the kingdom in the sermon on the
mount.
In the prophecy of the mightier one, Matthew also contrasts the consuming fire of divine retribution which will overtake the unrepentant
162
Pharisees and Sadducees with the purifying fire of judgment which will
sanctify those whom Jesus will baptize with the divine Breath. To Marks
prophecy of the mightier one, Matthew adds the phrase and with fire.
Matthews John prophesies: I baptize you with water for repentance, but
he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not
worthy to carry (Mark had said to stoop down and untie); He will
baptize you with a sanctifying Breath and with fire. (Mt 3:11) Whether
John carries Jesus sandals (as in Matthew) or unties them (as in Mark),
the Baptizer relates to Jesus as a slave, as one who serves one greater than
himself.
The addition of the phrase and with fire to the Baptizers prophecy
may derive from a more primitive tradition about the prophecy of the
mightier one than Mark knew. The addition makes it clear that Jesus
ministry too brings judgment. Those who confront Jesus will, one way or
the other, experience the immanent judgment which John foretells. That
judgment will reveal the holiness of God. Those who believe and submit
to Jesus Breath baptism will know that holiness as a forgiving, purifying,
sanctifying force. Those who refuse faith in Jesus and harden their hearts
against Breath-baptism will burn in the unquenchable fire of divine retribution: His winnowing fork is in his hand, and He will clear His threshing floor and gather His wheat into the granary, but the chaff He will
burn with unquenchable fire. (Mt 3:12)
The image of the fire of divine holiness which either purifies the repentant or consumes the unrepentant runs like a thread through the sayings
of the Baptizer as Matthew reports them. In contrast to Mark, then,
Matthew uses the preaching of John to foretell that Jesus by His ministry
will sift Israel in eschatological judgment. True Israelites will hear His
message and accept His Breath-baptism. Those who confuse Jewishness
with racial origins instead of identifying it with obedient submission to
the demands of a Torah fulfilled by Jesus preaching will know only divine rejection and retribution.2
Matthew also modifies Marks account of Jesus baptism in another
way. He inserts a little tte-a-tte between Jesus and the Baptizer prior to
the baptism itself. In that exchange John tries to dissuade Jesus from baptism. (Mt 3:13-7) Matthews John tells Jesus: I should be baptized by
you and do you come to me? (Mt 3:13) To this objection Jesus replies:
2. Cf. Robert L.Webb, The Activity of John the Baptists Expected Figure at the
Threshing Floor (Matthew 3.12=Luke 3.17), Journal for the Study of the New
Testament, 43(1991), pp. 103-111; NJBC, 42:17; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 50-60;
Harrington, op. cit., pp. 50-61; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 24-29; J. Giblet, La
promesse de lEsprit et la mission des aptres dans les vangiles, Irenikon, 30(1957),
pp. 5-43.
163
Let it be so for now for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness
(plermai pasan dikaiosynen). (Mt 3:15)
The conversation between Jesus and John lacks a certain historical verisimilitude; but the exchange bears theological witness to the fact that
Jesus baptism by John scandalized some of the first Christians. Indeed,
as we saw in the reflecting on Marks gospel, Jesus baptism by John probably served as a bone of contention between the first Christians and the
disciples of the Baptizer.
The phrase fulfill all righteousness alludes to the theme of fulfillment
which Matthew has already introduced in his infancy narrative. As we
have seen, the evangelist has punctuated the infancy narrative with four
citations of the prophets which the story of Jesus birth fulfills. (Mt 1:23,
2: 6, 15, 18) Now Jesus tells John that He intends to fulfill the meaning
of Johns own baptism just as He will fulfill the meaning of the Law and
the prophets. (Mt 5:17-19)
Jesus will, moreover, fulfill the meaning of Johns baptism by fulfilling
the Baptizers own prophecy about Him: namely, by baptizing with a
sanctifying Breath and with fire. This Jesus will do when, as risen Lord,
He sends the disciples forth and with the authority of Immanuel in order
to baptize in the triune name. (Mt 28:19-20) In other words, Matthew
justifies Jesus submission to Johns baptism as the means providentially
chosen by God to fulfill its true meaning. Jesus transforms Johns water
baptism from a baptism of mere repentance into a sanctifying baptism
for the forgiveness of sins. Matthews John, convinced by Jesus argument, proceeds with the baptism.3 (Mt 3:15-6, 26:26-28)
Like Mark, Matthew also records the confrontation between Jesus and
the disciples of the Baptizer over the issue of fasting. Matthew, however,
does not introduce this Markan material into his narrative until after the
Sermon on the Mount. Instead of plunging Jesus into immediate conflict, as Mark does, Matthew portrays the opening of Jesus ministry as
the joyful and healing proclamation of the kingdom. In postponing Marks
conflict stories until later, Matthew incorporates the theme of conflict into
his story of Jesus but, initially at least, gives it less narrative prominence.
Matthew, as he habitually does, also edits Marks version of Jesus confrontation with Johns disciples, as he habitually does. Mark describes a
confrontation between the disciples of John and a group of Pharisees.
Matthew omits the Pharisees from the delegation who comes to Jesus,
although with Mark he alludes to the fact that the Pharisees, like Johns
disciples, observed non-obligatory fast days on Mondays and Thursdays.
Matthew also edits Marks version of Jesus response, deleting unnecessary words.
3. Cf. NJBC, 42:18; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 60-64; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 61-65;
Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 30-32.
164
Matthews terser version of the encounter preserves important elements

of Marks account. Neither Jesus nor His disciples observed optional fasts.
In this they contrasted with the more ascetical John, with Johns disciples,
and with the Pharisees.
Matthews Jesus responds like Marks: As long as the bridegroom is
with them, His disciples cannot fast for joy. (Mt 9:15; Mk 2:19) In Matthew as in Mark, the image of the bridegroom has both divine and messianic overtones. Jesus identifies Himself as Israels faithful, divine spouse
(Hos 2:19, Is 54:4-8, 62:4-5, Ezek 16:7-63) and as the messianic bridegroom. (Cf. Jn 3:29, 2 Cor 11:2, Eph 5:32, Rev 19:7, 21:2)
Jesus also predicts that, when the bridegroom will be taken from them,
the disciples will fast. For Mark, fasting expresses eschatological longing
for the second coming. Matthew, however, sees fasting in more penitential terms. Matthews Jesus asks: Can the sons of the bridegroom [a Semitic
term for wedding guests] mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them?
(Mt 9:15) By equating fasting with mourning, Matthew presents it as an
expression of sorrow, probably for sin.
In addition, Matthew modifies the two sayings of Jesus which follow.
The first proverb warns against mending old clothes with a patch of
unshrunken cloth. (Mt 6:16-17) Mark calls the cloth new in order to
contrast the difference between the new order and the old. Matthew,
who sees the old order fulfilled in the new, mutes that contrast.4
Moreover, Matthews Jesus predicts that the unshrunken patch will tear
the old garment. The prediction contains two puns. The term patch
(pleroma) also means fullness, while the term tear (schisma) also means
a schism, a division within a community. Since Matthew regards Christian faith as the fulfillment of the old Law, the patch symbolizes Jewish
Christianity; the tear, the widening division between the church at Antioch
and the synagogue. The latters refusal to recognize that the new Law
fulfills the old has, Matthew warns, caused the rift between the Christian
community in Antioch and the synagogue across the street. Matthew,
pursues his polemic in the second proverb as well, which asserts that if
one puts new wine into new skins both are preserved. The fulfillment
of the old Law in the new preserves the old. The new does not supplant
the old because it demands more, not less, than the old.
Elsewhere in his gospel, Matthew edits Mark in such a way as to focus
issues exclusively on the Pharisees, who symbolize the Pharisaical leaders
of the synagogue across the street. Matthew could have done the same
in editing this confrontation between Jesus and Johns disciples. Instead,
Matthew has Johns disciples pose the question about fasting to Jesus.
The inclusion of Johns disciples suggests that Matthew wants Jesus pro4. Cf. J.A. Zeisler, The Removal of the Bridegroom: A Note on Mark II. 18-22 and
Parallels, New Testament Studies, 19(1972-1973), pp. 190-194.
165
nouncements to apply to the Johannine movement as well. Jesus fulfills

Johns prophetic ministry, just as He fulfills the other prophets. Any split
between Johns disciples and Jesus results from the formers failure to
recognize that Christian baptism fulfills Johannine.5
In addition, Matthew introduces new material into His account of the
relation between Jesus, on the one hand, and John and Johns disciples,
on the other. While in prison, John, hears of Jesus and His ministry. The
imprisoned prophet sends a delegation of disciples to ask Jesus if He is
indeed the one who is to come. (Mt 11:2-6) The title has messianic
connotations, although it could also allude to Johns prophecy of the coming mightier one who would baptize with a sanctifying Breath and with
fire. In the evangelists mind the question would very probably have had
both connotations. Interpreted from the Baptizers viewpoint, the question suggests that John in his own mind identified the mightier one
whom he foretold with the messiah.
Jesus interprets the question in a messianic sense and answers it as directly as He could without getting arrested. He does not say outright I
am the messiah, but He points to His ministry as containing the signs
which would accompany the arrival of the messianic era:
Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and
the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the poor have the good news preached
to them. And blessed is he who takes no offense at me. (Mt 11:2-6; cf. Is
29:18-9, 35:5-6; 61:1)
In pointing to His ministry of healing and proclamation as a sign that

the messianic era has arrived, Jesus revises popular messianic hopes. Not
the prophet of eschatological wrath and judgment envisaged in John
prophecy of the mightier one, Jesus also eschews a Davidic messianism,
which would forcibly establish Israels political dominion over all the nations of the earth. Jesus instead focuses His ministry on the poor and
disenfranchised, on the broken and suffering. Nevertheless, He responds
to John by saying in effect: Anyone with eyes to see will recognize in me
and in my ministry the arrival of the messianic era.
At the same time, Jesus recognizes that His repudiation of Davidic
messianism will prove a stumbling block to many. He also acknowledges
that His message of forgiveness and of hope rather than of judgment and
of divine retribution has even raised doubts in Johns mind as to Jesus
messianic identity. For that reason, Jesus adds: Blessed is he who takes
no offense at me.
5. Cf. NJBC, 42: 62; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 128-130; Albright and Mann, op. cit.,
107-109.
166
Matthew also follows this incident with Jesus encomium of John and
of Johns ministry. Marks Jesus pronounces no such encomium. Matthews
Jesus addresses His words to the crowds who had gone to listen to Johns
preaching. Jesus asks six rhetorical questions about John. Three questions
repeat the same query: When you went to listen to John, what did you go
out to see? Each time the question recurs, a second question follows which
suggests an answer to the first. The second question proposes the wrong
answer in the case of the first two doublets of questions, the right answer
in the case of the last:
What did you go out into the wilderness to behold? A reed shaken by the
wind? Why then did you go out? To see a man clothed in soft raiment?
Behold. Those who wear soft raiment are in kings houses. Why then did
you go out? To see a prophet? Yes, I tell you and more than a prophet. This
is he of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before your face,
who shall prepare the way before you. (Mt 11:7-15)
Jesus portrays John as a person of enormous strength and unshakable

resolve. The Baptizers fidelity to His prophetic mission has led him to
denounce Herod and to put his very life on the line. Johns ascetical garments underscore his difference from the Herodians, and especially from
the sensual, self-indulgent Herod. (Mt 11:2, 14:5-6) In testifying to the
prophetic character of Johns mission, therefore, Jesus endorses the substance of Johns message. Jesus also, implicitly, sanctions Johns denunciation of Herod by His satirical reference to self-indulgent royalty.6
Jesus, however, goes further. He regards John as more than an ordinary
prophet. Jesus sees in John the eschatological prophet foretold by Malachi
who would prepare the way for the coming of the angel (messenger) of
the covenant. In the text of Malachi the angel of the covenant probably designates Jahweh Himself, who will come to purify the levitical
priesthood and the worship it offers to God by bringing to judgment
sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor. In Matthew, the
angel designates Jesus. As for John, Jesus is about to inform his disciples,
He regards the Baptizer as Elijah redivivus. (Mt 17:13)
As a final encomium Jesus asserts, Truly I say to you, among those
born of women, there has risen no one greater than John the Baptizer.
(Mt 11:11) Jesus offers no immediate explanation for singling out John
as unsurpassed in the whole history of the human race. One may, however, read this hyperbolic praise as a summary of what preceded and as a
foreshadowing what Jesus is about to say about John. John stands unsurpassed among humans because the Law and the prophets all culminate in
6. Cf. Stephen Llewelyn, The Traditionsgeschichte of Matt 11:12-13, Par. Luke 16:16,
167
His preaching and because, through his courageous and unswerving fidelity to his eschatological mission as Elijah, John announces the arrival
of the end time and the divine judgment accomplished in Jesus and in
His ministry.
What follows re-enforces this interpretation, since Jesus immediately
contrasts Johns mission with His own.
Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has risen no one
greater than John the Baptizer; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven
is greater than he. From the days of John the Baptizer until now the kingdom of Heaven has suffered violence (biazetai) and people of violence take
it by force (kai biastai harpazousin auten). For all the prophets and the Law
prophesied until John; and, if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who
is to come. He who has ears to hear let him hear. (Mt 11:11-3)
We find here the recurrence of themes Matthew has already introduced

into his account of Jesus ministry: namely, for all of Johns dignity as
eschatological prophet, Jesus ministry surpasses the Baptizers because
Jesus ministry fulfills not only Johns own ministry but also the entire
Law and the prophets. (Mt 2:14-5, 5:14) Moreover, Jesus does this by
being Immanuel, God-with-us. (Mt 1:23) Jesus thus fulfills the prophecy
of Malachi that the angel of the covenant, God himself, would one day
come to purify His people, his priests, and the worship they offer Him.
Presumably, Jesus will do this when He baptizes His disciples with a
sanctifying Breath and with fire, as John had prophesied. (Mt 3:11,
28:19-20) The fact that the least in the kingdom outrank John suggests
that the latter never did put faith in Jesus and in His mission.
The verb biazetai in verse 12 can mean either suffers violence or does
violence. If one takes it in the latter sense, then this obscure saying would
seem to refer to the radical demands made by the kingdom, demands
which require an equally radical response on the part of those accept the
kingdom (and in this sense take it by force.)
If, however, one takes biazetai to mean suffers violence, then Jesus
refers to the opposition which Johns ministry and His own have provoked among the strong and powerful. In that case, the kingdom suffering violence alludes to Johns forcible imprisonment by Herod, the client
king of the occupying Romans. The latter interpretation has a bit more
verisimilitude and pits the work of the kingdom against the principalities
and powers of this world, symbolized now by Herod Antipas. Antipass
father had, of course, symbolized the same dark powers in Matthews
infancy narrative.
Moreover, Jesus close linkage of His own mission to Johns suggests
that He Himself regarded His ministry as prolonging and extending the
work of John. Jesus therefore provokes hostility from the same enemies:
168
namely, from the Herodians. The allusion to Malachis prophecy, moreover, implicitly includes the temple priesthood among the adversaries
whom Jesus confronts.
Finally, Jesus warns the crowds: Whoever has ears to hear, let him
hear! The warning underscores the urgency of Johns message of repentance and of judgment. Even more, Jesus warning voices the crucial urgency of taking Jesus Himself even more seriously than John.7 (Mt 11:15)
In challenging the crowds to hear His message, Jesus also calls upon
them to listen deeply to the wisdom which He proclaims. Matthews tacit
allusion to the deep wisdom present in Jesus and in His ministry also
forms a transition to the parable which follows. It contrasts works of the
children in the market place with the works of wisdom.
But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in
the market place and calling to their playmates: We piped to you and you
did not dance; we wailed, and you did not mourn. For John came neither
eating nor drinking, and they say, He has a demon; the Son of Man
came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners. And wisdom is justified by her
works. (Mt 11:16-9)
The parable underscores both the contrast and the continuity between
Jesus mission and Johns. Both announce the coming of the end time;
but Jesus proclaims a kingdom which fulfills the Law and the prophets.
John comes as a fire-breathing ascetic, Jesus as the joyful messenger of the
kingdom who gathers the sinners and the marginal back into the fold of
the new Israel which He begins. Both Jesus and John find among this
generation, not acceptance, but unbelief, ridicule, and slander. This
generation will hear neither Johns stern summons to repentance nor
Jesus joyful proclamation of good news.8
Luke in his version of this parable refers to the children of wisdom
rather than to the works of wisdom. Luke probably records the original
version of the parable, which sets up a contrast between the foolish, mocking children in the market place, who stand for this generation, and
the children of wisdom who stand for those who hear the messages and
John and of Jesus and respond appropriately.
7. Cf. Gerd Hfner, Gewalt gegen die Basileia? Zum Problem der Auslegung des
Strmerspruchs, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 83(1992), pp.
21-51.
8. Cf. O. Linton, The Parable of the Childrens Game, New Testament Studies,
22(1975- 1976), pp. 158-179; Harold Clark Lee, Jesus a Glutton and a Drunkard,
New testament Studies, 42(1996), pp. 374-393; NJBC, 42:73; Radermakers, op. cit., II,
pp. 153-160; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 154-162; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp.
135-141.
169
Matthew, however, changes the phrase children of wisdom to read

works of wisdom. The term works serves as a biblical inclusion by
referring back to the works of Jesus (ta erga tou Jesou) which had originally prompted John to ask Jesus if He is the one who is to come. For
Matthew, these works serve as a rebuttal to the mockery and slander of
this generation. Matthews Jesus has, moreover, proclaimed those works
as signs of the arrival of the messianic age, even though Jesus embodies
something very different from Davidic messianic expectations. By proclaiming the kingdom to the poor and the marginal, Jesus radically revises Jewish messianic hope. As a consequence, Jesus meets mocking unbelief among the unrepentant. Clearly, those do the works of wisdom
who heed the message of John and of Jesus.9
Matthew abbreviates Marks account of Johns martyrdom. Moreover,
he underscores the parallel between Jesus rejection at Nazareth and Johns
execution by juxtaposing the two events temporally. (Mt 14:1) Despite,
the terseness of his account of the Baptizers demise, however, Matthew
preserves the fundamental elements of Marks narrative: 1) Herod superstitiously believes that Jesus is John the Baptizer come back from the
dead. 2) Herod imprisons John because the Baptizer publicly rebuked
the king for marrying his brothers wife, Herodias. 3) Herod promises
publicly to give Herodias daughter whatever she asks as a reward for her
dance at Herods birthday party. 4) The girl requests the head of John
which is grotesquely delivered to her on a serving platter. As in Mark, she
gives it to her mother, who presumably was attending the feast. (Mt
14:1-12, Mk 6:14-29)
Matthew, however, modifies Marks account in two details. Mark contrasts the hatred Herodias feels for John to Herods own ambivalent attitude toward the Baptizer. (Mk 6:19-20) Matthew portrays Herod as a
murderous villain, who from the beginning lusts from Johns blood. Only
fear of the crowds, who idolize John, restrains Herods hand in Matthew.
(Mt 14:5) Matthews account accords better than Marks with Josephuss
portrait of Herod. (Josephus, History of the Jewish Wars, 75:165) Matthew, moreover, in portraying Herod as pure villain also implicitly assimilates him to his villainous father, Herod the Great, who had sought
Jesus life in the infancy narrative.
Mark ends his account of Johns death with the burial of the Baptizers
corpse by his disciples. Matthew, however, subtly stresses both the similarity and contrast between Johns and Jesus death. The evangelist does
so by having the disciples of John also inform Jesus of the Baptizers mar9. Cf. W. Wilkins, Die Tuferberlieferung des Matthus und Ihre Verarbeitung durch
Lukas, New Testament Studies, 40(1994), pp. 542-557; Volker Schoenle, Johannes,
Jesus, und die Juden: Die theologische Position des Matthus und des Verfassens der
Redenquelle in Lichte von Mt 11 (Frankfurt am Mein: Verlag Peter Lang, 1982).
170
tyrdom. Jesus responds to the news by retiring into the desert, where He
works the first miracle of the loaves. That miracle, as in Mark, foreshadows the eucharist, which, of course, derives its full meaning from the
paschal mystery. By thus implicitly linking the paschal mystery to his
account of the Baptizers death, Matthew tacitly contrasts Jesus death
with Johns. John dies a martyrs death; but John does not rise again, as
Jesus will in the paschal mystery.10
We find three other references to John the Baptizer which echo the
gospel of Mark. First, when Jesus at Caesarea Philippi asks His disciples
who people say He is, the disciples reply, among other things, John the
Baptizer. (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-30) The response indicates that others
shared Herods superstitious belief that Jesus was John risen from the
dead. It also suggests that the Palestinian populace acknowledged the
continuity between Jesus ministry and Johns.
Second, as Jesus and His disciples descend the mount of the transfiguration, Jesus informs them that John the Baptizer is Elijah. As in Mark,
Jesus says this after predicting that He will rise from the dead. As in
Marks account, the disciples do no understand how anyone can rise until
Elijah returns; and in this context Jesus tells them that Elijah has returned in the person of John. (Mt 17:1-8; Mk 9:9-13) Matthew edits
Marks text slightly and eliminates repetition; but apart from greater terseness, Matthew reduplicates Mark. In Matthew, of course, Jesus statement echoes His encomium of John. (Mt 11:13-15)
Third, during Jesus Jerusalem ministry the chief priests challenge Jesus
to name the authority which justifies His actions. As in Mark Jesus replies by saying that he will do so if the chief priests tell him by what
authority John baptized. The priests know that if they acknowledge the
divine authority of Johns prophetic ministry, Jesus will respond: Why
then did you not believe in him? If they deny divine authority to Johns
prophetic ministry, they fear the anger of the crowds. (Mt 21:23-7; Mk
11:27-33)
Once again, Matthew edits superfluous verbiage from Marks version
of the incident; but he preserves the essence of Marks account. Both
versions of the story underscore the continuity between Johns prophetic
ministry and Jesus proclamation of the kingdom. Jesus implicitly claims
to speak and act with the same authority as John, namely, with the
Breath-inspired authority of a prophet. In both gospels, the chief priests
refuse to credit either prophet.11
10. Cf. J.D.M. Derrett, Law in the New Testament (London: Darlon, Longmans, and
Todd, Ltd., 1970), pp. 339-358; NJBC, 42:95; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 201-202;
Harrington, op. cit., pp. 214-218; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 175-176.
11. Cf. Walter Wink, The Baptist in the Gospel Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1968), pp. 27-41; John P. Meier, John the Baptist in Matthews
Gospel, Journal of Biblical Literature, 99(1980), pp. 383-405; NJBC, 42:107, 127;
171
The Analogy of Christological Knowing

Like Mark, Matthew uses the figure of John inorder to insist on the saving importance of the Breath-baptism which conforms the believing Christian to Jesus. Matthew, however, stresses even more than Mark the unique
efficacy of Jesus baptism. Johannine baptism seals repentance, but it does
not forgive sins. Only Jesus baptism, which communicates the sanctifying Breath of God, does that. Moreover, Matthews inistence on the judgmental character of Jesus ministry focuses the attention of the disciples
on the purifying character of the baptismal Breaths activity. Matthew
concedes that in John one encounters the greatest of the prophets; but in
Jesus, Immanuel, God Himself visits His people. In all these ways Matthew develops and underscores the uniqueness of Christian baptism and
of the knowledge which the Breath of Jesus imparts to the baptized.
This section has considered the first of Matthews positive dramatic
linkages. It highlights the unique character of Christian baptism and the
sovereign, saving efficacy of the Breath it communicates. Let us begin to
examine how Matthew develops Marks account of Jesus relationship to
the Father and to the Breath; for in both gospels that relationship yields a
normative insight into the practical demands of Christological knowing.
(II)
In Matthew as in Mark the term God (ho Theos) refers to the Father. I
shall therefore consider together the passages in which both God and
Father appear.12
The Father in the Infancy Narrative
One finds only one reference to God in Matthews infancy narrative and
no explicit reference to the Father. In his account of the birth of the
messiah, Matthew explains in Greek the meaning of the Hebrew name
Immanuel: namely, God with us (meth hemn ho Theos). (Mt 1:24)
As we have seen, Jesus virginal conception manifests His divine origin
and anticipates His resurrection, which will bring his revelation as
Immanuel to its culmination. Jesus, as we have also seen, will stand fully
revealed as God-with-us when He fulfills John the Baptizers prophecy of
Radermakers, op. cit., II, p. 225; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 253-256, 298-301; Albright
and Mann, op. cit., pp. 202-207, 258- 261; Justin Taylor, The Coming of Elijah,
Revue Biblique, 98(1991), pp. 107-119; Hubert Frankemoelle, Johannes der Tufer
und Jesus im Matthusevangelium: Jesus als Nachfolger des Tufers, New Testament
Studies, 42(1996), pp. 196-218.
12. In Matthews gospel, the term God occurs in contexts which add little fresh insight
into His relationship with the Father. For example, when Jesus cures the paralytic in
order to prove His authority to forgive sins, the bystanders all glorify God. (Mt 9:1-8)
After He cures the multitudes, they praise the God of Israel. (Mt 15:31)
172
the coming Breath-baptizer by sending the disciples to baptize all creatures in the triune name. (Mt 23:20)
At one level, therefore, God with us designates Jesus divinity and
connotes His equality with the Father. Since, however, the term God
designates the Father, one may also interpret God-with-us in the more
dispensational sense that Jesus, as the Son of God, reveals the Father and
makes Him present in a unique, saving way.13
The Father in the Baptizers Preaching
One also finds a single use of the term God in the teachings of Matthews
Baptizer. In rebuking the high priests and the Pharisees for their shallow
legalism and racial pride, John warns them I tell you, God is able from
these stones to raise up children to Abraham. (Mt 3:9) John is calling
the priests and Pharisees to abjure their self-righteous trust in their
Jewishness and to recognize that salvation has nothing to do with racial
descent. Salvation results instead from works which flow from repentance. (Mt 3:8) John warns that God alone saves and can create members
of the true Israel in miraculous and unexpected ways. Matthew would
probably have seen Johns words fulfilled in the repentance and baptism
of Christian Gentiles, who thereafter belong to the new Israel founded by
Jesus. The evangelist therefore implicitly prefers the repentance and righteous living of Gentile Christians to the self-righteous legalism of the
Pharisees and Sadducees.14
In Marks account of Jesus baptism, the evangelist speaks of the Breath
descending on Jesus like a dove. Matthew, however, explicitly designates
the Breath as a Breath of God. The genitive designates God as the source
of the Breath who descends on Jesus in order to begin His manifestation
as Son of God and beginning of a new Israel. (Mt 3:16-17; cf. Mk 1:10-11)
In addition, Matthew also insists more explicitly than Mark that the Father sends Her to Jesus. In Mark, Jesus sees the Breath descending like a
dove. (Mk 1:10) Matthew writes: He saw the Breath of God descending like a dove, and alighting on Him.15
13and Mann, op. cit., pp. 7-10.
15. In Mt 12:28, Jesus claims to exorcise in the power of the Breath of God. The phrase
reasserts something Matthew has already made clear: the Father functions as the
ultimate source of the Breath. See also: Leander E. Keck, The Spirit and the Dove,
New Testament Studies, 17(1970-1971), pp. 41-67; A. Feuillet, Le symbolisme de la
colombe dans les recits vangelique du baptme, Recherches de Science Religieuse,
46(1958), pp. 524-544.
173
As we have seen, Matthews John predicts that Jesus will baptize with a
sanctifying Breath and with fire. The fact, therefore, that the same Holy
Breath descends on Jesus under the sign of a dove suggests that He relates
differently to Her from the way the disciples do. Since the Breath comes
to Jesus from the Father, a difference in His relationship to Her also implies a difference in His relationship to the Father. The sign of fire indicates that the Father sends the Breath to the disciples in purification and
in judgment. Matthews dove, like Marks, symbolizes Israel as the pet,
the beloved of God. The Father sends Her to Jesus in order to manifest
Him as the beloved Son of God and as the beginning of a new Israel, as
the Fathers commissioning words make clear. (Mt 3:17; cf. Ps 74:19)
In both Matthew and Mark, the Father commissions Jesus messiah in
the image of the suffering servant of Deutero-Isaiah. Matthew, however,
changes slightly the Fathers commissioning words. Marks Jesus hears the
Father say: You are My beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased. In
Matthew, the voice proclaims, This is My beloved Son; with You I am
well pleased. (Mt 3:17) In Matthew, therefore, the voice from heaven
does not only address Jesus but also the reader and through the reader the
entire world. In other words, Matthew revises Marks account of Jesus
baptism and transforms the personal hierophany which Jesus experiences
secretely in Mark into the Fathers universal proclamation to the world of
Jesus divine Sonship.
Matthew, therefore, assimilates Jesus baptism to His transfiguration
more closely than Mark. On both occasions, the Father speaks the same
words: This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. In the
transfiguration, the Father speaks to Peter, James, and John and adds:
Listen to Him. (Mt 17:1-5) In other respects Matthew reproduces Marks
account of the baptism and endorses Marks theological reading of that
event.16
Matthew, however, significantly revises Marks temptation narrative.
First, Matthew downplays the force with which the Breath causes Jesus to
confront Satan. In Mark, the baptismal Breath drives (ekballei) Jesus into
the desert; in Matthew She leads (anechthe) Him. As we shall see, Matthew mutes the theme of demonic conflict so prominent in Mark. Matthew also omits all reference to desert beasts. This editorial omission also
downplays the note of conflict; for, as we have seen, in Mark the desert
beasts symbolize both demonic forces and (probably) the beasts of the
Roman arena. The omission of the desert beasts eliminates as well Marks
16. Cf. Moran D. Hooker, Jesus and the Servant (London: SPCK, 1959); NJBC, 42:18;
Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 60-64; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 60-65; Albright and
Mann, op. cit., pp. 30-32; Robert L. Mowery, Subtle Differences in Matthean Son
of God References, Novum Testamentum, 32(1990), pp. 193-200.
174
Adamic symbolism, since Jesus in the midst of the beasts recalls Adam
surrounded by the beasts in Eden and giving them names.
Matthew, however, modifies Marks temptation narrative most significantly by turning Marks cryptic reference to Satan into an extended dialogue between Jesus and Satan. Satan tempts Jesus three times; and three
times Jesus responds by citing the Torah. I shall return to this point in
other contexts. Here it suffices to note that in each citation of the Torah,
Jesus invokes the name of God. His replies, therefore, make a statement
about His relationship to the Father.
As in Mark, Matthews Jesus stays in the desert forty days. The forty-day
sojourn reasserts an idea which Matthew has introduced in His infancy
gospel: namely, that, as messiah and God-with-us, Jesus confronts the
reader as the personal embodiment of the new Israel which He begins.
(Mt 2:15) His temptations, as we shall see, foreshadow the temptations
of the corporate Israel He will found. His responses, therefore, typify the
way the members of that Israel should respond to temptation.
Jesus responds to each temptation by citing a precept of the Law which
His person and teaching fulfill. (Mt 5:17-19) Matthews Jesus will demand that His disciples imitate the attitudes expressed in each of His
responses to Satan. Jesus responses, as a consequence, provide an important key to the moral demands of new covenant living. The fact that in
each response Jesus cites a verse of the Torah which contains the name of
God also transforms His relationship to the Father under temptation into
the prototypical way in which the members of the new Israel sould relate
to the Father in similar circumstances.
Satan first tempts Jesus to sinful self-reliance. (Mt 4:3-4) He does so by
urging Jesus to break His fast by turning stones into bread and eating
them. Devout Jews fasted, not in order to get control of their appetites,
but as a way of recalling the desert wanderings of Gods people during
which they depended on the Lord God from day to day to provide the
food they needed in order to survive. Jesus, through His baptismal commissioning by the Father as messiah in the image of the suffering servant,
begins the new Israel by reliving the desert experience of the first Israel.
His fast symbolizes that He undertakes His mssion from the Father trusting in the Fathers provident care over Him.
Jesus response to Satan makes His motives for fasting clear. When Satan tempts Him to break His fast by using His miraculous powers in
order to change stones into bread, Jesus replies: One shall not live by
bread alone, but by every word which proceeds from the mouth of God.
(Mt 4:3; Dt 8:3) Jesus looks to the Father, not to bread or to the other
physical supports of life as the ultimate source of His life. Jesus makes
this response as the beginning of a new Israel and under the inspiration
of the Breath with whom He will baptize its members. Hence, they too
175
must look to the Father and not to physical possessions as the ultimate
source of their lives.
Satan next takes Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple and urges Him to
throw Himself off in order to see if the Father will come to His rescue.
The second temptation builds on the first. In effect, Satan tempts Jesus
to test God. Testing God means setting the conditions under which
one is willing to trust Him. In effect, Satan says, Very well, if you intend
to trust the Father, then at least set the conditions under which you will
trust Him. Test Him and make sure He is really on your side. Jesus
answer goes once again to the heart of the temptation. Jesus replies, Again,
it is written, You shall not tempt the Lord your God. (Mt 4:5-7; Dt
6:13) In refusing to test God, Jesus responds that He will relate to the
Father in an attitude of unconditioned trust. Once again, Jesus models
for the members of the new Israel how they ought to relate to God in
times of testing.
Finally, Satan tempts Jesu to found the kingdom of God on secular
messianism. Satan shows Jesus the kingdoms of the world and tells Him,
All these I will give you if you will fall down and worship me. Jesus
replies, Begone, Satan! For it is written: The Lord your God shall you
adore and Him only shall you serve. (Mt 4:8-10; Dt 6:13) Clearly, in
the eyes of Matthews Jesus, to found the kingdom on coercive violence
and on the laws of the nations amounts not only to idolatry but to devil
worship. Jesus rejects this option categorically and replies that He will
found the reign of God only on authentic worship of the Father. Once
again, when similarly tempted, the disciples of Jesus must respond in
similar ways.
As we shall see below, these three responses provide an important key
to the moral demands of life in the kingdom. Here, however, it suffices to
note that Jesus in His temptations relates to the Father in an attitude of
absolute and unconditioned trust and in fidelity to His commission as
messiah in the form of the suffering servant. He rejects the principalities
and powers of this world and insists on founding the kingdom on authentic worship of the Father. The members of the new Israel must relate
to the Father in a similar manner.17
Jesus Teaches About the Father
Matthew, as we have seen, desires to portray Jesus as the one who brings
a new covenant. He, therefore, stresses much more than Mark the teach17. Cf. J. Dupont, Les tentations de Jsus au desert (Paris: Descle de Brouwer, 1968), pp.
11-42; Birger Gerhardson, The Testing of Gods Son (Matt 4:1-11 & Par.) (Lund:
Berlingska Bortrickereit, 1966); NJBC, 42:19; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 64-68;
Harrington, op. cit., pp. 65-70; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 33-37; Mark McVann,
Uno de los Profetas: Interpretacion del Relato de las Tentaciones in Mateo como Rito
de Iniciacion, Estudios Biblicos, 49(1991), pp. 191-208.
176
ings of Jesus. As a result, in Matthew, God the Father figures more prominently in Jesus teaching.
The sixth and seventh beatitudes discuss a believers relationship to
God. The sixth beatitude reads: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they
shall see God. (Mt 5:8) In the Old Testament, purity of heart implies
both legal and moral cleansing. The sixth beatitude, therefore, promises
that those who live righteous lives in accord with the legal and moral
demands of the Law as fulfilled by Jesus, will one day enjoy the vision of
God.
The seventh beatitude reads: Blessed are the peacemakers, for they
shall be called the children of God. (Mt 5: 9) Peace in the Old Testament signifies total well-being. In Matthew, then, the peacemaking which
the seventh beatitude urges implies the love of ones neighbor and therefore stands close to the fifth beatitude: Blessed are the merciful, for they
shall obtain mercy. (Mt 5:7) Peacemaking, caring for the total well-being
of others, transforms one into a child of God: i.e., it conforms one to
Jesus.
Except in the first and eighth beatitude the verb promising the reward
stands in the future tense. The beatitudes in Matthew, therefore, have a
strong eschatological flavor. The rewards they promise will come in their
fullness with the final establishment of the kingdom. The fact, however,
that poverty of spirit and persecution make one into a present possessor
of the kingdom, suggests a realized eschatology. In Jesus and in the Church,
the kingdom has already arrived in some measure but will arrive in its
fullness at some future date.18
In prohibiting oaths, Jesus in the sermon on the mount refers to heaven
as the throne of God, the place where God sits in majesty and from
which God reigns. (Mt 5:34) The image recurs in the woes against the
scribes and Pharisees. There Jesus says, One who swears by heaven, swears
by the throne of God and by Him who sits upon it. (Mt 23:22) In
Matthew, therefore, the term heaven, when it designates the place where
God dwells rather than functioning as a euphemism for the divine name,
has a double connotation. As the dwelling place of God, it designates the
ultimate goal of the pure of heart, the place where they will see God. As
the throne of God, however, heaven designates the ultimate source of
Gods reign, whose influence reaches down into the earth, the dwelling
place of humans.19
18. Cf. I. Brr, Die Seligpreisungen der Bergpredigt (Bonn: Peter Hanstein, 1986); NJBC,
42:24; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 83-85; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 77-81; Albright
and Mann, op. cit., pp. 45-53.
19. CF.Jo-Ann A. Brant, Infelicitous Oaths in the Gospel of Matthew, Journal for the
Study of the New Testament, 63(1996), pp. 3-20.
177
In the sermon on the mount, moreover, the perfection of the Fathers

love provides the measure and pattern of Christian love. Love of ones
enemies and the willingness to pray for ones persecutors transform one
into a child of the Father. In other words, they conform one to Jesus.
Since the Father sends blessings on both good people and evil people, His
children must do the same. Even sinners and tax collectors love their
own; but the child of God, living in Jesus image, loves even sinners with
the universal perfection of the Father.20 (Mt 5:43-8)
In the course of correcting abuses in traditional Jewish piety during
His inaugural sermon, Jesus warns that the Father will not reward hypocritical, egocentric religious behavior which seeks only to impress others
with ones religiosity. (Mt 6:1) Indeed, the Father will ignore both alms
and prayer performed for that reason, because both have already received
the reward they seek: self-adulation.
One should, then, perform all such acts of piety in secret, as a proof
that one is doing them sincerely for Gods sake and not for the sake of
oneself. Only then will they merit a reward from God. (Mt 6:1-6) By
contrasting the present reward of religious hypocrites with the prayers
which the Father will hear and the almsgiving which He will reward,
Matthew once again endows both acts with a eschatological character.
The Father will reward sincere prayer and almsgiving offered in secret,
but whether in this life or in the next remains vague. (Mt 6:5-6)
Jesus also discourages the superstitious multiplication of words in prayer
in the hope of controlling or manipulating God. Such superstition characterizes pagan prayer. The true child of God approaches the Father in an
attitude of trust, confident that the Father knows the needs of His children even before they ask Him. The expression of personal and communal needs in prayer does not, therefore, tell God anything new; rather it
disposes the one praying to receive the boon for which one prays.21 (Mt 6:7-8)
The Our Father provides the child of God with a model of Christian
prayer. Luke begins the Our Father more simply than Matthew. Luke
writes: Father, hallowed be Your name. (Lk 11:2) Matthew writes Our
Father in heaven (Pater hemon ho en tois ouranois). In calling the Father
Our Father, Matthew makes it clear that one addresses the Father, not
as an isolated individual, but in solidarity with all of Gods children.
The Father in heaven contrasts with ones earthly father. Moreover,
since Matthew, as we have seen, regards heaven as the throne of God the
image endows the Father with an awesome majesty which attenuates the
easier familiarity of the Abba which opens Lukes prayer. In fact, Luke
20. Cf. NJBC, 42: 35; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 94-95; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 85-90;
178
reproduces not only a terser but probably a more accurate version of the
Father prayer.22
In both Matthew and Luke, the petitions of the Our Father express the
way a child of God ought typically to relate to the Father in prayer. The
petition Your kingdom come (eltheto he basileia sou) expresses longing
for the final and full arrival of the reign of God. The second petition,
Your will be done on earth as in heaven describes what the final and full
coming of the kingdom demands: namely, perfect obedience of faith on
the part of all people. Like the first petition, the second expresses
eschatological longing. It contrasts the unchanging order in the stars with
the chaotic disobedience to Gods will on earth. The second petition longs
for the day when human conduct will imitate the obedient movement of
the heavenly bodies.
Give us today our daily bread (ton arton hemon ton epiousion dos hemin
semeron) Like Jesus fasting in the desert, the child of God must look to
God for food and for the other necessities of life. This petition, like all
the petitions of the Our Father, expresses corporate longing and implicitly commits the child of God to the sharing of bread with others, especially with those in need.
The Greek term epiousion can mean tomorrows, daily, needful,
or future. Given the strong eschatological tone of the Our Father, Matthew may have intended all of these meanings. Christians long for earthly
bread, the daily bread of the poor and of the needy. At the same time,
eschatological longing transforms the bread we eat today into a symbol of
the bread of tomorrow, the bread we shall one day share at the messianic banquet. The eschatological character of the bread which the Father
gives led the first Christians to endow this petition with eucharistic connotations, although it seems unlikely that Jesus would have had the
eucharist in mind when He composed this petition.
Two teachings in the sermon on the mountthe proverb about God
and mammon and the parable about the birds of the airimplicitly comment on the fourth petition of the Our Father by making clear what
attitudes the petition ought to express. (Mt 6:24-34) No one can serve
God and mammon (the Semitic word for riches) at the same time. (Mt
6:24) In other words, life in the kingdom demands a radical choice between God and wealth.23
22. Cf. Kari Syreeni, Between Heaven and Earth: On the Structure of Matthews
Symbolic Universe, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 40(1990), pp. 3-13;
Warren Carter, Recalling the Lords Prayer: The Authorial Audience and Matthews
Prayer as Familiar Liturgical Experience, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 57(1995), pp.
514-530.
23. Cf. Hans Christol Brennecke, Niemand kann zwei Herren dienen Bemerkungen
zur Auslegung von Mt 6,24/Lk 16,13m Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 88(1997), pp. 157-169.
179
The parable of the birds of the air ponders the consequences of abjuring riches. The renunciation of wealth implicitly demands that one look
to God as the source of ones bread and of all the other physical needs.
(Mt 6:25-34) Trust that the Father will fulfill all ones needs requires in
turn an attitude of heart which excludes any anxiety about physical possessions. One must seek first the reign of God and its righteousness, confident that God, who knows well the physical needs of His children, will
provide for them. Absence of anxiety about possessions frees one to share
them with others. (Mt 6:2-4) Gods concern to clothe the lilies of the
field more sumptuously than Solomon implicitly censures that monarchs
excessive wealth and asserts Gods special concern for the anawim. (Mt
6:29) Trust in God does not, however, require one to ignore either ones
needs or the difficulty of survival in this world: Let the days trouble
suffice for the day.24 (Mt 6:34)
Forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors. The two
verses which follow the Our Father in the sermon on the mount comment on this petition:
For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will
forgive you; but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will
your Father forgive you. (Mt 6:14-5)
Since God forgives repentant sinners, sinners who refuse to forgive others set themselves in opposition to the divine will and by their own lack
of repentance close their hearts to Gods gift of forgiveness.
After the parable of the unjust steward, Matthews Jesus makes the same
point. In the parable, a stern lord forgives one of his servants an enormous sum of money. Subsequently, however, the same lord delivers the
same steward to the jailers for his failure to forgive the much smaller debt
owed him by one of his fellow servants. (Mt 18:23-34) Jesus then re24. Cf. Juan Jos Bartolome, Los Pjaros y los Lirios: Una Aproximacion a la Cuestion
Ecologica desde Mt 6,24-34, Estudios Biblicos, 49(1991), pp. 165-190; Jos
OCallaghan, Dos Variantes en la Parabola des Sembrador, Estudios Biblicos,
48(1990), pp. 267-270; Richard J. Dillon, Ravens, Lilies, and the Kingdom of God
(Matthew 6:25-33/Luke 12:22-31), Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 53(1991), pp.
605-627; Joop van Banning, S.J., Il Padre Nostro nell Opus Imperfectum in
Mattheum, Gregorianum, 71(1990), pp. 293-313; J.F. Healy, Models of Behavior:
Matt 6:26 (//Luke 12:24) and Prov 6:6-8, Journal of Biblical Literature, 108(1989),
pp. 497-498; Robert K. McIver, One Hundred-Fold YieldMiraculous or Mundane? Matthew 13.8, 23; Mark 4.8,20, Luke 8.8, New Testament Studies, 40(1994),
pp. 606-608; Warren Carter, Solomon in All His Glory: Intertextuality and
Matthew 6.29, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 65(1997), pp. 3-25; J.
Duncan M. Derrett, Light on Sparrows and Hairs (Mt 10, 29-31, Estudios Biblicos,
55(1997), pp. 341-353.
180
marks: So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do

not forgive your brother from the heart.25 (Mt 18:35)
And do not lead us to the test has two possible meanings, both probably intended. It can mean do not let us succumb to the trials of the end
time or do not let us sin when we are tempted. If one takes this phrase
in the first sense, then the petition may include an implicit desire to
avoid divine judgment. In that case, one is asking God not to judge one
according to ones deserts but according to divine mercy and condescension.26
The final petitionbut deliver us from the Evil Onedevelops the
one which precedes it. Satan, the demonic personification of evil and
eschatological opponent of Jesus will test His disciples just as he tested
Jesus. In other words, the final two petitions of the Our Father place the
disciples of Jesus in solidarity with Him in His desert temptations and in
His final ordeal on Calvary. In the midst of such trials, the disciples must,
as Jesus did, look to the Father as the source of their strength, courage,
and obedient fidelity to life in the kingdom.27 (Mt 6:13)
The disciples should, moreover, also trust the Father to strengthen them
in times of persecution. In His ecclesial discourse, Jesus warns the disciples not to worry about what to say when they are haled before either
Jewish or Gentile courts of law, because it is not you who speak but the
Breath of your Father (to pneuma tou Patrou hymon) speaking through
you. (Mt 10:20) The Father functions here as elsewhere as the Breaths
ultimate source. As She inspired Jesus witness, so too will She inspire the
disciples. In addition, Jesus promises, So everyone who acknowledges
me before humans, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in
heaven; but whoever denies me before humans, I also will deny before
my Father in heaven. (Mt 10:32) Fearless testimony to Jesus, even in
times of persecution, will save one when one stands before the throne of
judgment. On that day Jesus will claim as His own those who testified to
Him under threat. Indeed, reverence (literally, fear [phobeisthe]) of the
Father should take away fear of mere humans who can only kill the body,
while the Father can destroy (apolesai) soul and body in Gehenna. (Mt
25. Cf. Beat Weber, Alltagswelt und Gottesreich: berlegungen zum Verstehehintergrund
des Gleichnisses vom Schalksknecht, Biblische Zeitschrift, 37(1993), pp. 161-182.
26. Cf. P.S. Cameron, Lead us not into Temptation, Expository Times, 101(1990), pp.
299- 301; Stanley E. Porter, Lead us not into Temptation, Expository Times,
101(1990), pp. 359- 362.
27. Cf. Joachim Jeremias, The Lords Prayer, translated by John Reumann (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1964); Ernst Lohmeyer, Our Father: An Introduction to the Lords Prayer
(New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1965); NJBC, 42: 39; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
181
10:28) One should probably interpret destroy hyperbolically to mean

punish.28
Jesus even assures His disciples that the Father takes into account every
hair on their balding heads. This ironic pronouncement suggests that the
Fathers providence includes things which humans cannot even count,
much less comprehend. The all-encompassing character of Gods providence calls, then, for utter trust.29
The same kind of trust must inform prayer of petition. Jesus, invoking
a spirituality of the off day,30 argues that, if human parents, despite
their sinfulness love their children enough to give them only good things,
how much more will the heavenly Father give the disciples only good
things when they come to Him in petition. (Mt 7:7-11) By a spirituality
of the off day, I mean one which builds, not on some spiritual or religious high, but on the day-to-day experience of human sinfulness. Jesus
does not in this saying specify what the Father will give, nor does He say
that the Father will give exactly what a person requests. Jesus does, however, promise that the Father will give only good things. Later in the
gospel, however, He promises the disciples: Again I say to you, if two of
you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by
My Father in heaven. (Mt 18:19) The agreed-upon petition expresses
presumably shared commitment to the way of discipleship as its precondition.31
Jesus also demands obedience to the Fathers will as a condition for
entry into the kingdom. (Mt 7:21) Moreover, Matthews Jesus discourages charismania. The charisms without the obedience of faith count for
nothing.32 (Mt 7:22-3)
28. Cf. Rudolf Pesch, ber die Autoritt Jesu: Eine Rckfrage anhand des Bekennenund Verleugnerspruchs Lk 12, 8f par. in Die Kirche des Anfangs, edited by R.
Schnackenburg et al. (Leipzig: St. Benno Verlag, 1977), pp. 25-55; I.H. Marshall,
Uncomfortable Words VI: Fear Him who Can Destroy Soul and Body in Hell (Mt
10:28 RSV), Expository Times, 81(1969- 1970), pp. 276-280; NJBC, 42:70;
Radermakers, op. cit., II, p. 143; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 149-154; Albright and Mann,
op. cit., pp. 127-128; John G. Cook, The Sparrows Fall in Mt 10:29b, Zeitschrift
29. Cf. Dale C. Allison, The hairs of your head are all numbered, Expository Times,
101(1990), pp. 334-336.
30. I derive the term spirituality of the off-day from a dear friend and colleague, John
Boyle, S.J., who to the best of my knowledge has never used it in print.
31. Cf. NJBC, 42: 47; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 101-104, 237-244; Harrington, op.
cit., pp. 100-106, 268-272; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 83-85, 220-221.
32. Cf. NJBC, 42: 49-50; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 104-106; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
107- 111; Albright, op. cit., pp. 86-89.
182
Jesus Reveals the Father

Matthews Jesus claims a privileged knowledge of the Father and a privileged ability to reveal the Father to others. After excoriating the lake towns
who greeted His ministry with unbelief (Mt 11:20-4), Jesus exclaims:
I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth that you have hidden these
things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yes,
Father, for such was your gracious will. All things have been delivered to
me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one
knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to
reveal Him. Come to Me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will
give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle
and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is
easy and my burden light. (Mt 11:25-7)
Here several points need noting. First, this saying of Jesus divides into
three parts. In verses 25 and 26, Jesus praises the Father for the revelation
He has made in sending His Son. In verse 27, Jesus indicates the content
of that revelation: the unique and intimate relationship which Jesus as
Son of God has with the Father and the Father with Him. In verses 28
and 29, Jesus invites others in the name of divine wisdom to acknowledge that revelation by entering into the same obediential relationship to
the Father which He enjoys.
Second, in Matthew, the Father typically appears as the ultimate source
of religious enlightenment. Later in the gospel when Peter proclaims Jesus
the Christ, the Son of the living God, Jesus will also attribute this insight to the Fathers enlightenment. (Mt 16:17) The Breath of God functions as an immanent source of enlightenment; but the Father, who empowers Jesus Breath-baptism (Mt 3:16-17), functions as Her ultimate
transcendent source.
Third, the claim to a privileged relationship with the Father which
Jesus here makes finds an echo in the way He speaks about the Father. In
Matthews gospel, Jesus will say My Father and your Father; but He
never joins the disciples in saying Our Father. The fourth gospel reproduces the same pattern of discourse. (Cf. Jn 20:17)
Fourth, in claiming unique access to the Father and in promising rest
to those who bare the yoke of the new covenant, Jesus speaks in this
passage as divine Wisdom made visible, and therefore as the spoken word
of God who communicates that Wisdom. (Cf. Wis 2:13, 9:17; Sir 6:28,
24;19; Prov 3:17; Jer 2:20, 5:5) Since the Breath of God inspires wisdom, by incarnating a liberating divine wisdom Jesus reveals Her to His
disciples.33 (Cf. Wis 7:22-24, 9:17)
33. Cf. B. Charette, To Proclaim Liberty to Captives: Matthew 11.28-30 in the Light
of Old Testament Prophetic Expectations, New Testament Studies, 8(1992),
183
Fifth, Jesus rejoices that the little ones of this earththe poor, the
underprivilegedshow a willingness to live as the Fathers children by
acknowledging the wisdom which Jesus incarnates even though others
reject Him in disobedience and unbelief.
Sixth, in the Old Testament, the yoke symbolized submission to the
covenant, the Torah. (Cf. Jer 2:20, 5:5) Hence, Matthew depicts Jesus
teachings as Christian Torah which unlocks the true meaning of the Law
and prophets. (Cf. Mt 5:17-19) Jesus divine sonship enables Him to
speak for the Father and with divine authority: All things have been
delivered to Me by My Father. (Mt 11:27; cf. 17:5)
Seventh, if, as seems possible, Jesus had in mind the double yoke which
linked two oxen together in the work of plowing, then He is portraying
Himself in the humble image of the other ox who is pulling the plough
along with the disciple. The lowliness of the image would re-enforce Jesus
claim to humility of heart.34
Following Mark, Matthew recounts how Jesus relatives sought Him
out. In Mark, the family does so because they believe that Jesus has gone
mad. (Mk 3:20-1) Matthew omits this humiliating detail and thus writes
out of his gospel the conflict between Jesus and His relatives on which
Mark insists. Instead Matthew portrays Jesus relatives as merely desirous
of speaking with Him. (Mt 12:48)
Matthew, however, reproduces the substance of Jesus response. In
Matthew, Jesus stretches out His arms to His disciples in a gesture of
both pointing and embrace. (In Mark, He gives them a hard look.) Jesus
then proclaims that anyone who does the will of His Father is my brother,
and sister, and mother. (Mt 12:48-50) In Matthew as in Mark, therefore, the obedience to the Fathers will which Jesus proclaims incorporates one into the family of God and draws one into an intimate sibling
relationship with Jesus and (implicitly) with all the other members of
Gods family.35
Jesus, who requires perfect obedience to the Father, reproaches the scribes
and Pharisees for their disobedience to God. They hypocritically invoke
the authority of human customs in order to nullify the clear demands of
the Law. Here again, Matthew follows Mark. (Mt 15:1-9) In Matthew,
however, when the disciples reproach Jesus for having offended the Pharipp.290-297; Celia Deutsch, Wisdom in Matthew: Transformation of a Symbol,
34. Cf. M. Jack Suggs, Wisdom, Christology, and Law in Matthews Gospels (Cambridge,
MA: Harvard 1970), pp. 71-97; Benedict Thomas Viviano, O.P., Study as Worship:
Aoth and the New Testament (Leiden: Brill, 1978), pp. 183-192; NJBC, 42:75;
Mann, op. cit., pp. 144-146.
35. Cf. W. Trilling, Das Wahre Israel: Studien zur Theologie des Matthus Evangeliums
(Munich: Ksel, 1964), pp. 29-32.
184
sees by His remarks, Jesus dismisses them as blind guides who lead others
to fall in the same pit as themselves. Jesus warns: Every plant which My
heavenly Father has not planted will be rooted up. (Mt 15:10-12) The
hypocritical legalism of the Pharisees manifests the fact that their teaching has
no root in true knowledge of the Father or in obedience to His will. The final
judgment will unmask and discredit all such religious hypocrisy.36
In warning His disciples against scandal, Jesus tells His disciples:
See that you do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell you that in
heaven their angels always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven.
(Mt 18:10)
The phrase behold the face derives from courtly etiquette. It portrays
the angels standing like courtiers in the presence of God the Father.
When the Hebrews conquered the Holy Land, they found other nations who worshiped national deities which also symbolized natural forces.
The Hebrews felt unwilling to reduce these gods to nothing; for natural
forces have reality and the nations sometimes triumphed over Israel. At
the same time, they did not want to make pagan gods equal to Jahweh.
They therefore transformed the gods of the nations into courtiers of
Jahweh, creatures subservient to Him. The angels, especially in
intertestamental Judaism and afterward, also functioned as Jahwehs messengers and thus symbolized His presence to the world despite His divine
transcendence.37
Here Jesus alludes to the popular Jewish belief that every individual has
an angelic look-alike standing before the throne of God. (Cf. Acts 12:15)
These guardian angels symbolized the particular providence which God
has over every individual in the world.38 (Mt 6:25-34)
In Matthew as in Mark, Jesus repudiates Mosaic divorce practices by
appealing to Gods original intent in creating the institution of marriage.
Jesus asserts that God originally intended marriage to remain monogamous and that only because of the hardness of the male Jewish heart did
Moses permit them the luxury of divorce. (Mt 19:6-9) In contrast to
Mark, however, Matthew, the conscientious, scribal interpreter of Torah,
portrays Moses as merely permitting rather than commanding divorce.39
(Cf. Mk 10:1-12)
36. Cf. NJBC, 42: 99; Radermakers, op. cit., pp. 209-210; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
228-234.
37. Cf. G.B. Caird, Principalities and Powers (Oxford: Oxford at Clarendon, 1956).
38. Cf. NJBC, 42: 114; Radermakers, op. cit., II, p. 240; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 263-267;
39. Cf. Quentin Quesnell, Made Themselves Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven (Mt
19, 12), Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 30(1968), pp. 335-358; Alexander Sand, Reich
Gottes und Eheverzicht im Evangelium nach Matthus (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk,
1983), pp. 45- 60.
185
In his account of the rich man who could not bring himself to renounce his riches in order to follow Jesus, Matthew edits Marks text for
reasons of style. Marks Jesus replies to the man in a way which could be
interpreted as a denial of His own divinity. Matthew revises Jesus response so as to preclude such a reading. Marks Jesus says, Why do you
call Me good? No one is good but God. (Mk 10:18) Matthews Jesus
responds: Why do you ask me about what is good. One there is who is
good. (Mt 19:17)
As in Mark, the disciples express dismay over Jesus statement that the
rich will find it virtually impossible to enter the kingdom. They protest:
Who then can be saved? Jesus replies in Matthew as in Mark: With
humans this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. (Mt
19:25-6) In both gospels, therefore, Jesus calls upon the disciples to have
a radical trust in the Fathers ability to overcome human sinfulness and to
save even rich people in spite of themselves.40
In Matthew, as in Mark, Jesus tells the ambitious James and John that
only the Father can tell them to sit at His side when the kingdom arrives.
(Mt 20:23) The saying reflects Jesus sense of standing in an obediential
relationship to the Father in whatever concerns His mission. During His
Jerusalem ministry, Jesus will insist that only the Father knows the day
and hour of the final judgment. It remains hidden from Jesus and even
from the angels in heaven. Persumably, only the Father knows the date of
the final judgment, because, as the ultimate source of all, He sets the
date. (Mt 24:36)
The Father in the Jerusalem Ministry
During Jesus final Jerusalem ministry, when the Pharisees and Herodians
try to trap Him into forbidding the payment of Roman taxes, in Matthews
account, they hypocritically flatter Jesus as one who teaches the way of
God. (Mt 22:16) Jesus, however, confounds them in the same way as
He does in Marks account. He makes them show Him a Roman coin
with Caesars image on it and then replies: Render therefore to Caesar
the things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are Gods. (Mt
22:15-22) As in Mark, Jesus equivalently says, if you are willing to use
Roman money to your profit, then you should be willing to pay Roman
taxes. At the same time, He calls the Pharisees beyond their hypocritical
resistance to His message to acknowledge the claims which God makes
upon them through faith in Jesus and in His proclamation of the kingdom. Jesus response also implicitly challenges those who recognize the
40. Cf. Jos OCallaghan, Examen critico de Mt 19,24, Biblica, 69(1988), pp. 401-405;
NJBC, 42: 119; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 259-261; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
277-281; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 230-235.
186
image of Caesar without difficulty to honor the image of God in others.41

(Gen 1:26)
In Matthew as in Mark, Jesus rebukes the Saducees for their lack of
faith in the resurrection. Jesus tells them that in denying the resurrection
they understand neither the Scriptures nor the power of God to raise
from the dead. The Sadducees misunderstand the power of God because
they confuse resurrection with resuscitation. In fact God will endow the
risen body with an angelic character. In calling the risen body angelic,
Matthews Jesus, like Marks, adopts the position on the resurrection defended by the Pharisees, namely, that the risen body would have a different character and exist in a different order from physical bodies. Jesus
here also endorses belief in angels, which the Sadducees also denied.42
Matthew offers a terser account than Mark of Jesus enunciation of the
great commandment. In both accounts, however, Jesus demands of His
followers an all-consuming love of the Father: with all your heart, and
with all your soul, and with all your mind. (Mt 22:37; cf. Mk 12:29-31)
Like Mark, Matthew also makes it clear that one must interpret love of
God and of neighbor in the light of Jesus proclamation of the kingdom;
but Matthew does so differently from Mark. Mark has Jesus tell the scribe
who approves of His reply, You are not far from the kingdom of God.
(Mk 12:34) In other words, Jesus proclamation of the kingdom provides
the ultimate context for understanding the two great commandments.
Matthew omits this exchange between Jesus and His interlocutor and has
Jesus say after enunciating the two great commandments. On these two
commandments depend all the Law and the prophets. (Mt 22:40) In
the sermon on the mount, Matthew has already made it clear that Jesus
fulfills both the Law and the prophets. His person and message, therefore, provide the ultimate context for understanding the two great commandments.43 (Mt 5:17)
41. Cf. Oscar Cullmann, The State in the New Testament (New York, NY: Scribners
1956), pp.3-49; F.F. Bruce, Render to Caesar, in Jesus and the Politics of His Day,
edited by Ernst Bammel and C.F.D. Moule (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1984), pp. 249-263; Sean P. Kealy, C.S.Sp., Jesus and Politics (Collegeville, MI:
Liturgical Press, 1990); NJBC, 42: 131; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 281; Harrington,
op. cit., pp. 309-311; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 271-275.
42. As in Mark, the Sadducees misunderstand the Scriptures, because in proclaiming
Himself to Moses as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:6), the living God
revealed that they continue to live with Him in His presence. In arguing that Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob now live with God, Jesus in both gospels asserts personal survival after
death prior to the final resurrection. Cf. NJBC, 42: 131; Radermakers, op. cit. , II, p.
281; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 309-311; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. lxxxvi-xcix,
271-275.
43. Cf. William F. Moran, S.J., The Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Love of
God in Deuteronomy, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 25(1963), pp. 77-87; NJBC, 42:
133; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 283-284; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 314-317; Albright
187
Only Matthew records the parable of the sheep and the goats. The
parable describes Jesus judgment of all the nations, the outcome of the
Great Commission which closes the gospel. At the final judgment Jesus
will tell Gentiles who showed compassion to His brethren, i.e., to the
Christian members of Gods family: Come, O blessed of My Father,
inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
Jesus will count any compassionate act performed toward a Christian as
done to Himself. (Mt 25:31-40)
The same Jesus, acting as divine, eschatological judge, will consign to
eternal hellfire with the devil and his angels those who failed to show
compassion. (Mt 25:41-4) Jesus reply to the damned suggests, however,
that the failure to act compassionately toward anyone at all, Christian or
not, has brought about their damnation. In explaining His judgment
Jesus omits the term brethren and says simply: Truly, I say to you, as
you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did it not to Me. (Mt
25:45) In this parable the Son of Man, Jesus, acts with divine authority.
In judging the human exercise of compassion, the eschatological judge
seems finally not to care whether or not the needy person belongs to the
Christian community.44
In Matthew as in Mark, the Father requires the death of Jesus as an integral part of His messianic mission. (Mt 16:21-3) As in Mark, when
Matthews Jesus institutes the eucharist, He tells the disciples that He will
not drink wine again until He drinks it new in My Fathers kingdom.
(Mt 26:29) The new wine refers to the wine drunk at the final, messianic
banquet. Jesus, therefore, goes to His death obediently; but He dies in
the eschatological hope of divine vindication.
As in Mark, Jesus prayer in Gethsemane expresses both His horror at
His coming ordeal as well as His complete submission to the Fathers
will: My Father if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless,
not as I will, but as You will. (Mt 26:39, 42; cf. Mk 14:35-6) In Matthew, however, one hears in this petition an explicit echo of the Our
Father, which Mark fails to record. (Mt 6:10)
44. Cf. John Donahue, S.J., The Parable of the Sheep and Goats, Theological Studies,
47(1986), pp. 3-31; Victor Kossi Agbanou, Le discours eschatologique de Matthieu
24-25: Tradition et rdaction (Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1983), pp. 173-198; Egon
Brandenburger, Das Recht des Weltenrichters: Untersuchung zu Matthus 25:31-46
(Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1980), pp. 98-138;Daniel Marguerat, Le jugement
dans lEvangile de Matthieu (Paris: Librairie Protestante, 1981), pp. 495-520; Edmond
Farahian, S.J., Relire Matthieu 25:31-46, Gregorianum, 72(1991), pp. 437-457;
NJBC, 42:145; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 315- 317; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
188
Matthew reproduces Marks account of Jesus arrest. One of the disciples draws a sword and cuts off the ear of the High Priests servant. In
Matthew as in Mark, the severed ear could have symbolic meaning, if the
servant in question functioned as Vice-President in the Temple administration. In such a reading of the phrase servant of the high priest, the
mutilated man represents the high priest and temple priesthood generally; and the mutilation disqualifies him from performing any further priestly
functions. Any priest who would lay violent hands on the Son of God does
not deserve the honor of presiding over divine worship. (Cf. Lev 21:18 LXX)
Both Matthew and Mark record the assault on the servant of the high
priest, but Matthews Jesus also rebukes the violent disciple with the words:
Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish
by the sword. Do you not think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and
He will at once send Me more than twelve legions of angels? (Mt 26:5253) The reply expresses Jesus endorsement of non-violent resistance to
evil. (Mt 5:39)
Jesus response also reasserts His submission to the Fathers will. It expresses too His confidence that the Father would in fact save Him if Jesus
chose to ask it. Jesus claims more powerful assistance than anything the
disciples can offer: namely, twelve legions of angels; but He eschews even
angelic help. He submits freely to arrest while asserting His own ultimate
control over the events of His passion.45
As in Mark, during Matthews account of Jesus trial, false witnesses
accuse him of saying, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to
build it up in three days. (Mt 26:61)46 When the High Priest invokes the
name of the living God to force Jesus to say whether or not He is the
Messiah, the Son of God. (Mt 26:63) Marks Jesus implicitly invokes the
divine name and responds clearly, I am. (Mk 14:62) Matthews Jesus
answers somewhat more ambiguously, You have said so. The response
expresses Jesus hesitations about Davidic messianism. Matthew, then,
edits out Marks allusion to Jesus invocation of the divine name while
walking on the water. In both Matthew and Mark, however, Jesus then
predicts His coming glorification and is condemned for blasphemy.47 (Mt
26:64-6; Mk 14:62-4)
As Jesus hangs on the cross, His enemies taunt Him, saying: You who
would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! If you
45. Cf. B. Gerhardsson, Jesus livr et abandonn daprs la passion de Saint Mattieu,
Revue Biblique, 76(1969), pp. 206-207; NJBC, 42:153; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
46. Jesus refers to the temple as house of God. (Mt 12:4) The phrase suggests the
reverence He felt for the temple that motivated His purification of the house of God.
(Mt 21:12-6)
47. Cf. NJBC, 42:155; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 337-340; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
189
are Son of God, come down from the cross....He saved others; He cannot
save Himself. He is the king of Israel; let Him come down now from the
cross, and we will believe in Him. He trusts in God; let God deliver Him
now, if He desires Him; for He said, I am the Son of God. (Mt 27:40,
42-3) The taunts mock basic Christian beliefs: Jesus divine Sonship, His
power to save, His messianic dignity, His trust in God. The mockery
underscores the unbelief of Jesus enemies.
As in Mark, Jesus dies with the prayer of the innocent poor man on His
lips: My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me? (Mt 27:46; Mk
15:34) As in the case of Mark, Matthew probably expects the reader to
remember the rest of the psalm which begins with these words and ends
with an expression of confidence in Gods saving power.48 (Ps 22)
The Father and the Risen Christ
Matthews final reference to the Father in his gospel occurs in the command given by the risen Christ to go and baptize every creature in the
triune name. (Mt 28:19) As we have seen, this event in Matthew functions as the culminating revelation of Jesus as both Immanuel and
Breath-baptizer.
In Matthew as in Mark, then, Christological knowing draws the Christian community into the same kind of relationship to the Father as in
Mark. Matthew, the Jewish Christian scribe, insists, however, much more
than Mark does, on the moral consequences of entering into the same
kind of filial relationship with the Father as Jesus exemplified. That insistence proceeds in no small part from Matthews concern to interpret Jesus
teachings as Christian Torah.
In both gospels the Breath teaches the Christian community to relate
to the Father in an attitude of trust. Matthew, however, in the Our Father
insists more explicitly on the kinds of commitment which must ground
that trust. Both evangelists believe that trust in God commits one to
sharing ones bread with the poor; but Matthew, in his the temptation
narrative, makes that connection more explicit than Mark does.
The beatitudes also spell out in greater detail the ways in which the
Christian community must relate to the Father: as reconciling
peace-makers, with purity of heart, and with a longing to see the Father
face to face.
48. Cf. Donald Senior, The Death of Jesus and the Resurrection of the Holy Ones,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 38(1976), pp. 312-329;NJBC, 42:155; Radermakers, op.
cit., II, pp. 345- 348; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 393-398; Albright and Mann, op. cit.,
pp. 349-353.
190
Mark writes for a community confronted with persecution and its disturbing aftermath. In telling the story of Jesus, therefore, Mark stresses
eschatological conflict and makes commitment to follow Jesus even to
Calvary central to His Christological message. Matthew, by contrast, writes
for a community of Petrine Christians in a polemic relationship with the
Pharisaism of its day. He acknowledges Marks themes of eschatological
conflict and of witness unto death. Matthew, however, in explaining the
meaning of assimilation to Jesus in the power of His Breath stresses with
greater centrality than Mark the moral demands of day-to-day gospel
living.
I have considered the second positive dramatic linkage in Matthews
gospel: Jesus relationship to the Father. The following section reflects on
the third: namely, Jesus relationship to Gods Breath. As in Mark these
three relationships articulate the realistic conditions and fundamental
moral consequences of Christological knowing.
(III)
As we have seen, Matthew, in contrast to Mark, insists on Jesus virginal
conception in the power of the Holy Breath. (Mt 1:18-20) As we also
saw, that miraculous event breaks sharply the patrilinear descent catalogued in Jesus genealogy and marks Jesus as a startling, new beginning
in salvation history. In addition, Jesus conception by the Breath points
to His divine origins: that He is the divine Immanuel, God-with-us, the
one who makes the Father present in a special way. Jesus miraculous
conception also foreshadows the miracle of the resurrection, which reveals Jesus as Immanuel finally and fully.
Jesus and the Breath
As we also saw, Matthew in His baptismal narrative insists more than
Mark that the Holy Breath who descends on Jesus in His baptism comes
from the Father and is sent by the Father specifically to Jesus. (Mt 3:16)
Matthew distinguishes in a way in which Mark does not between Jesus
relation to the Breath and His disciples relation to Her. She comes to
Him under the sign of a dove to reveal Him as the beloved of God and
beginning of a new Israel; but She comes to the disciples under the sign
of fire, i.e., in purification and in judgment. (Mt 3:10-2, 16)
In other respects, however, Matthew endorses the rest of Marks portrayal of the baptismal Breath. She descends from an apocalyptic rent in
the heavens which signifies the end time, although Matthew, as we have
just seen, excludes an adoptionist reading of Mark by making it clear that
Jesus stood in relationship to the Breath from the first moment of His
conception. The dove over the waters recalls the first flood and the covenant with Noah. The image foreshadows the new covenant which Jesus
191
will seal and which will take away sin. The Breath over the water recalls
the first creation and reveals Jesus as the beginning of a new creation.49
As we have also seen, Matthew attenuates the violence with which the
Breath conducts Jesus into the wilderness. In Mark, She drives Him; in
Matthew, She leads Him. The mitigation of violence reflects Matthews
general tendency to downplay Marks theme of demonic conflict. (Mt
4:1; Mk 1:12-13)
Moreover, by having the Breath of God preside over Jesus desert temptations and strengthen Him to overcome them, Matthew implicitly portrays Her as the immediate source of inspiration for Jesus replies to Satans
wiles. (Mt 4:1-2) Although, as we have seen, in Matthew the Father functions as the ultimate transcendent source of enlightenment, Jesus and the
Breath also enlighten. She enlightens both Jesus and His disciples, especially in moments of trial and testing. (Mt 3:16-7, 10:20) Jesus enlightens by embodying the divine wisdom which She inspires. (Mt 11:25-7)
Since Jesus replies to Satan provide, as we have seen, a foreshadowing of
His whole complex relationship to the Father, the Breath in inspiring
those replies also inspires that relationship and the morality of discipleship which it grounds.50 (Cf. Mt 3:16-7)
In promising that the Holy Breath will inspire and strengthen the disciples in times of persecution by teaching them what to say, Matthew
stresses in a way in which Mark does not that the Breath comes to them
from the Father. This insistence parallels Matthews revision of Marks
baptismal account. That account also stresses that the Breath comes to
Jesus from the Father; and it underscores the analogous way in which the
Breath acts in the disciples and in Jesus. She comes to Him as Son of God
and beginning of a new Israel; She comes to the disciples in purification
and judgment.51 (Mt 10:20)
Matthew handles the controversy over Beelzebul somewhat differently
from Mark by invoking the theme of fulfillment. (Mt 12:15-21) Prior to
the controversy, Matthew describes an outpouring of miracles which fulfills the first of the servant songs of second Isaiah (Is 42:1-4) The allusion
to second Isaiah links Jesus miracles of healing to the cross and portrays
both as aspects of His ministry of atonement. The allusion also depicts
Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 31-33; A. Feuillet, Le symbolisme de la colombe dans
les rcits vangeliques du baptme, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 46(1958), pp.
524-544; Lender E. Keck, The Spirit and the Dove, New Testament Studies,
17(1970-1971), pp. 41-67.
192
atonement, the re-establishment of a relationship with God ruptured by

sin, as an act of divine healing.
Matthew also uses the prophecy to underscore the fact that Jesus performs His miracles in the power of Gods Holy Breath. (Mt 12:18; Is
42:1) This insistence throws the Pharisees sin against the Holy Breath
into even sharper dramatic relief than in Mark. By linking Breath-blasphemy to the theme of fulfillment, Matthew also implicitly suggests that
the Pharisees unbelief results from their inability to recognize in Jesus
the one who fulfills the Law and the prophets.
In Matthew, as in Mark, Jesus replies to the charge that He exorcises by
the power of Beelzebul by insisting that the Breath of God inspires His
exorcisms. Jesus warns the Pharisees that if they continue blaspheming
Gods Breath by calling Her the devil, they commit an unforgivable sin.
They stand convicted of unbelief in this life and court damnation in the
next. (Mt 12:22-32)
Matthew underscores the heinousness of Breath-blasphemy in yet another way. After Matthews Jesus issues the same warning about the unforgivable sin as He gives in Mark (Mt 12:32), He calls the Pharisees a
brood of vipers, a dangerous source of poisonous beliefs and attitudes.
(Mt 12:34) Matthews Baptizer had used the same epithet in His confrontation with the Pharisees and Saducees. Now in the controversy over
Beelzebul Jesus confronts the same self-righteous unbelief as John had.
Moreover, in His final denunciation of the Pharisees, Jesus will again
invoke John epithet. In thundering woes against the Pharisaical brood
of vipers, Matthews Jesus will warn both the Pharisees and Christian
leaders that both clericalism and hypocritical lack of repentance subject
one to the curses of the new covenant.
Matthews Jesus also declares that the malice in the Pharisees hearts,
their stubborn rejection of the sanctifying Breath who dwells in Him,
motivates their commission of the unforgivable sin. They speak poison
from the poisoned sinfulness of their own hearts, and they will answer for
every sinful word they utter.52 (Mt 12:33-7)
Like Mark, Matthew recognizes that the Breath of God inspired the
psalms of David, and implicitly all of the Hebrew scriptures (Mt 22:43;
Mk 12:36) which Jesus fulfills. (Mt 5:17-19)
52. Cf. Owen E. Evans, The Unforgivable Sin, Expository Times, 68(1956-1957), pp.
240- 244; Gottfried Fitzer, Die Snde wider den Heilegen Geist, Theologische
Zeitschrift, 13(1957), pp. 161-182; James G. Williams, A Note on the Unforgivable
Sin Logion, New Testament Studies, 12(1965-1966), pp. 75-76; I. Howard Marshall,
Hard SayingsVII, Theology, 67(1964), pp. 65-69; NJBC, 42:79; Radermakers, op.
cit., II, pp. 164-167; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 182-187; Albright and Mann, op. cit.,
pp. 152-157.
193
Finally, Matthew goes beyond Mark when he discovers in the Great

Commission to baptism in the triune name Jesus revelation as Immanuel
and as the Breath-baptizer promised by John.53 (Mt 28: 19-20, 1:23, 3:11)
Matthews narrative portrait of the Breaths role in Christological knowing develops Marks in important ways. Matthew makes it much clearer
than Mark does that the Breath of God relates differently to the disciples
from the way in which She relates to Jesus. She reveals Him as the beloved of God, as the suffering servant, as the beginning of a new Israel,
and as Immanuelas God with us. She comes to the disciples, however,
under the sign of purifying fire, of the holiness of God burning away the
dross of human sinfulness. For that reason Matthew stresses more than
Mark does the moral demands of standing in a life-giving relationship to
Gods Breath: one must endorse the same values and realities as Jesus did
in His temptations. Moreover, one must respond to the tempter exactly
as He did. Matthew makes it clearer than Mark does that Breath-baptism
and Christian sacramental baptism coincide. More emphatically than
Mark, Matthew attributes the unforgivable sin against Gods Breath to
the kind of poisonous religious hypocrisy which the Pharisees embody.
This last point brings us to the negative dramatic linkages in Matthew,
which the following chapter examines. As in Mark they dramatize the
negative limits of discipleship, the kinds of realities and values of which
the Breath-baptized must repent and to which they must stand prophetically and unalterably opposed.54
This chapter has pondered Matthews adaptation of Marks positive
linkages. The chapter which follows considers Matthews modified rendering of Marks negative dramatic linkages.
53. Cf. J. Giblet, La Promesse de lEsprit et la mission des aptres dans les vangiles,
Irenikon, 30(1957), pp. 5-43.
54. Cf. Kingsbury, op.cit., pp. 115-127.
194
Chapter 8
Negative Dramatic Linkages in Matthew
Matthew both adopts and adapts the negative dramatic linkages which
he finds in Mark. In both gospels, Jesus confronts the same forces of evil:
Satan, his demons, and his human and institutional instruments: The
latter include the scribes and Pharisees, Herod and the Herodians, the
chief priests, Pilate, and the Roman empire. Matthew, however, develops
these negative relationships in His own distinctive way.
This chapter divides into five parts. Part one treats Jesus confrontation
with Satan. Part two examines Jesus conflicts with the scribes and Pharisees. Part three describes how Jesus and Herod relate. Part four analyzes
Jesus conflict with the chief priests. Part five details His relationship to
Pilate.
(I)
As we have seen, Mark portrays Jesus entire ministry as an eschatological
conflict with the powers of evil, with Satan and His minions. Matthew
recognizes the conflict but gives it much less prominence in His gospel.
Jesus and Satan
Matthew, as we saw above, downplays the violence of Jesus desert confrontation with Satan by having the Breath lead rather than drive Him to
the confrontation. (Mt 4:1; Mk 1:12) Moreover, in his account of Jesus
temptations, Matthew identifies Satan as the devil (tou diabolou), i.e.,
as the chief of the demonic powers, as the Evil One. (Mt 4:1, 5, 8, 11,
6:13, 13:39, 25:41) Mark sees Satan in the same way, but does not make
that clear until his account of the controversy over Beelzebul. (Mk 3:26)
Matthew, therefore, by identifying Satan from the first as the chief of all
the devils stresses more than Mark the cosmic significance of Jesus desert
confrontation with Satan.
Moreover, in the course of the three temptations, Matthew lays bare
Satans strategy for destroying Jesus and His work. Mark portrays Satan
as the enemy of faith. (Mk 3:4, 15) Matthew makes the refusal to trust
God Satans first and most fundamental temptation. Matthews temptation narrative also clarifies what that refusal involves. Satan tempts Jesus
to renounce the fast He has undertaken and with it the trust in the Father
which His fasting signifies. Were Jesus to use His miraculous powers to
change stones into bread, He would, then, yield to a sinful self-reliance
which would cause Him to value bread (the physical supports of life)
more than the obedience of faith and trust in the Fathers providential
Chapter 8: Negative Dramatic Linkages in Matthew
195
care. (Mt 4:1-4, 6:25-34) In other words, a sinful self-reliance which

expresses itself in self-serving attachment to the physical supports of life
constitutes Satans first and most basic strategy for undermining practical
faith in the kingdom.
Satans second temptation builds on the first. He tempts Jesus to test
God. (Mt 4:5-6) The second temptation and Jesus response to it go beyond the first in that they make clear the absolutely unconditioned character of the trust in the Father which Jesus demands and embodies.
Moreover, since in the first temptation lack of trust takes concrete form
in selfish attachment to the physical supports of life, unconditioned trust
in God demands the corresponding willingness to set no limits, even as
the Father sets no limits, on ones willingness to share ones bread with
others, even with ones enemies and with sinners. (Mt 4:7, 5:43-8) Unconditioned trust in the Father seeks, therefore, to bring into existence a
community of universal compassion which shares unrestrictedly with
others the good things of this world. Satans second strategy, testing God,
sets him in opposition to such a community.
In the first two temptations, Satan quotes Scripture to Jesus. Matthew
thus dramatizes the hypocrisy of the Evil One. He masks sin as piety and
seeks to subvert the true intent of the word of God. Jesus, by contrast, in
rejecting Satans wiles, enunciates and embodies the true meaning of the
Torah.
The first two temptations present Satans fundamental strategy: namely,
his intention to subvert faith and trust in God. In the final temptation,
Satan throws aside Scripture and speaks in his own name. The last temptation reveals Satans ultimate purpose in opposing Jesus: He desires to
dominate this world through the coercive violence of its principalities
and powers, and he schemes in order to supplant God idolatrously as the
object of human adoration.
The third temptation, therefore, confronts Jesus and implicitly all the
members of the new Israel which He begins with a stark and fundamental option: either God or Satan, either the lust for power or authentic
worship of God, either the kingdom of God or the kingdoms and principalities of this world. Moreover, since mutual forgiveness provides the
final test of authentic worship of the Father (Cf. Mt 2:5, 6:13-5), the
final temptation confronts Jesus and His disciples with a fundamental
choice between mutual hostile domination, on the one hand, and mutual forgiveness and peacemaking on the other.
Clearly, Matthews temptation narrative shifts attention from the fact
of conflict between Jesus and Satan to the moral and religious issues which
make the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan irreconcilably opposed.
196
Matthew ends his temptation narrative as Mark does with the image of
angels ministering to Jesus. In Mark, the angels apparently come to support Jesus in His battle with Satan. In Matthews temptation narrative,
however, the angels do not come to Jesus until He has thoroughly routed
Satan. (Mt 4:10-1) Their appearance confirms the victory which Jesus
has just single-handedly won. Moreover, as we shall see, throughout his
gospel Matthew depicts Jesus triumphing over Satan with easy authority.
The final petition of the Our Father begs, as we have seen, for deliverance from the Evil One, from Satan. This final petition follows a prayer
that God spare the disciples both the final eschatological battle against
evil as well as the other temptations of this life. (Mt 6:13) In that struggle,
the disciples can expect to confront Satan and his temptations in the
same way in which Jesus did. Moreover, as they join in Gods final conquest of evil, they, like Jesus, must look to the Father to strengthen and
protect them.1
In Matthew, the Pharisees twice accuse Jesus of exorcising in the power
of Beelzebul. (Mt 9:32-34, 12:22-37) On another occasion, Matthews
Jesus alludes to the Pharisees slander. Mark, as we have seen, puts the
same slander on the lips of scribal spies from Jerusalem. (Mk 3:22)
Matthews handling of the controversy over Beelzebul illustrates his tendency throughout his gospel to heighten the opposition between Jesus
and the Pharisees.
Matthew precedes his account of the first accusation with the story of
an exorcism. After Jesus casts out a demon which has rendered a man
mute, the man begins to speak. (Mt 9:32-3) The story has symbolic intent. Jesus victory over Satan and his minions empowers people to speak,
i.e., to proclaim the good news. The healing implicitly contrasts the proclamation of the gospel which the miracle symbolizes with the vicious
slander of the Pharisees. Moreover, the crowds bear verbal witness after
Jesus performs the miracle: Never was anything like this seen in Israel.
(Mt 9:33) The faith response of the crowds to the exorcism also contrasts
starkly with the slanderous unbelief of the Pharisees, who attribute Jesus
power to exorcise to Satan himself. (Mt 9:34)
Later in Matthews narrative, but before the controversy over Beelzebul
actually occurs, Jesus warns His disciples that they can expect even worse
treatment from the Pharisees than He has received: If they have called
the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those
of His household. (Mt 10:24-5)
1. Cf. Jacques Dupont, Les tentations de Jsus au desert (Paris: Descle de Brouwer, 1968);
Birger Gerhardsson, The Testing of Gods Son (Mt 4, 1-11 par) (Lund: CWK Gleerup,
1966); NJBC, 42:19; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 64-68; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
65-70.
197
This saying of Jesus implicitly recalls that, earlier in the same chapter of
Matthew, He sends the disciples out to proclaim the good news and to
exorcise. The commissioning occurs in Matthews missionary discourse.
That discourse develops theologically the theme of conflict which the
preceding narrative section introduces. (Mt 10:8, 34-9) Jesus here warns
the disciples to expect in their ministry of proclamation to encounter
from the Pharisees the same kind of slanderous unbelief with which they
greeted Jesus own ministry and exorcisms. The Pharisaical leaders of the
synagogue across the street prolong in Matthews day their slanderous
opposition to Jesus during His ministry.
Matthew even extends the Pharisees slanderous accusation of demon
possession to John the Baptizer. In Matthews version of the parable of
the children in the market place, the children of folly say of John: He is
possessed. The accusation recalls the confrontation in Matthew between
John and the unbelieving Pharisees and Saducees. (Mt 11:18; cf. 3:7-12)
Matthew, then, implicitly parallels the slander against John (He is possessed.) with the slander against Jesus (He is Beelzebul).
As we have just seen, Matthew prefaces the Pharisees first slanderous
attack on Jesus with a symbolic exorcism. (Mt 9:32-3) He also prefaces
his account of the controversy over Beelzebul itself with a similar exorcism. This time Jesus exorcises a blind and dumb demoniac to the amazement of the crowds, who begin to suspect that Jesus is the messiah. (Mt
12:22-3) Again, the exorcism has symbolic intent. By freeing from the
power of Satan, Jesus enables those He delivers to see (to believe, to recognize the revelation He brings) and to speak (to bear witness to it).
The case of the delivered demoniac contrasts sharply, then, with the
state of the Pharisees, who remain blind and who only utter slanders
against Jesus. They again repeat the accusation to which Matthew has
already alluded twice: It is only by Beelzebul the prince of demons, that
this man casts out demons. (Mt 12:24)
After this second slanderous attack, Jesus points out the absurdity of
the accusation: it makes Satan act at cross purposes. (Mt 12:26) Here
Matthew echoes Mark. (Mk 3:22) Jesus then asserts the irreconcilable
opposition between the kingdom of God which He proclaims and the
kingdom of Satan, to which the slanderous brood of vipers belong. In
Matthews gospel, of course, Jesus teaching about the two kingdoms also
echoes His third temptation in the desert.
In addition, Matthews account of the controversy over Beelzebul expands Marks account of Jesus response. After pointing out that the Pharisees accusation presupposes implausibly that Satan is acting to defeat
himself, Marks Jesus says, But no one can enter a strong mans house
and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man; then indeed
he may plunder the house. (Mk 3:27) Matthews Jesus says the same and
198
then adds: One who is not with me is against me, and one who does not
gather with Me scatters. (Mt 12:30) If the Pharisees aline themselves
with Satan and against Jesus, like Satan they will find themselves routed
by the divine authority with which Jesus triumphs over the demons.
Both evangelists therefore recognize that Jesus has conquered Satan,
that He has in fact bound the strong man. In binding the strong man,
Jesus demonstrates the superiority of His power over the devil. Matthew,
however, insists even more than Mark on the radical character of the
choice between Jesus and Satan. Jesus warns the Pharisees that in resisting the kingdom they, not He, have allied themselves with Beelzebul. He
then warns them that they are committing the unforgivable sin of
Breath-blasphemy and court damnation in the next life.2
Later in Matthew, Jesus adds a further warning to His adversaries: one
delivered from demonic possession needs to replace the evil spirit with
something else if the former demoniac hopes to prevent repossession by
more numerous and more powerful devils. (Mt 12:43-5) Matthew appends this saying to a series of incidents in which the Pharisees demonstrate their malice and unbelief. Presumably, only the presence of the
good Spirit, the Holy Breath of God whom the Pharisees are blaspheming, provides adequate protection against demonic invasion and possession. I shall consider this passage in greater detail in the next section.3
In interpreting allegorically the parable of the wheat and the weeds,
Matthew alludes to the devil, Satan, as an enemy of the faith. The allegory therefore implicitly alludes to Jesus first two desert temptation.
In its original formulation, the parable of the wheat and the weeds calls
attention to the patience of an ultimately victorious God in suffering
sinners to live without destroying them. In the parable, a farmer sows
good seed in his field; but, while he sleeps, an enemy sows weeds among
the sown wheat. When the weeds and wheat appear simultaneously, the
farmers servants want to pull the weeds up; but surprisingly the farmer
forbids the weeding. He allows the good seed and the bad seed to flourish
side by side until the harvest time. (Mt 13:31-2)
2. Cf. Scroggs, loc. cit.; NJBC, 42:79; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 164-167; Harrington,
op. cit., pp. 182-187; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 152-157; James G. Williams,
A Note on the Unforgivable Sin Logion, New Testament Studies, 12(1965-1966),
pp. 75-76; I. Howard Marshall, Hard SayingsVII, Theology, 67(1964), pp. 65-69;
Owen E. Evans, The Unforgivable Sin, Expository Times, 68(1956-1957), pp.
240-244; Gottfried Fitzer, Die Snde wider den heiligen Geist, Theologische
Zeitschrift, 13(1957), pp. 161-182; Robert Schurock, Whose Exorcists Are They:
The Referents of hoi huioi hymon at Matthew 12.27/Luke 11.19,Journal for the Study
of the New Testament, 46(1992), pp. 41-51.
3. Cf. Barbara Reid, Puzzling Passages (Matthew 12:43-45), The Bible Today, 33(1995),
p. 49.
199
The parable of the wheat and the weeds has some resemblance to another parable which Mark records. In both parables a farmer sows seed
and something happens without the farmers acting. In Mark, however,
the seed grows without any help from the farmer. Marks parable, therefore, makes a very different point from Matthews. Mark stresses in his
parable that the kingdom spreads, not through the human efforts of those
who sow the seed, but only because God makes the seed grow.
Matthews parable by contrast, takes a more polemic tone. It teaches
that, despite opposition, God will eventually reap the harvest He has
sown. In the meantime God suffers with astonishing patience the unbelief and opposition of those who, like the Pharisees, refuse to enter the
kingdom.
Matthew, in addition, allegorizes the original parable of the wheat and
the weeds. Matthews Jesus teaches the allegory in private to His disciples
to whom it especially applies. In the allegorization, the sower turns into
the Son of man, i.e. into Jesus viewed as final eschatological judge of
the nations. The enemy turns into the devil and the weeds he sows, into
his sons. Satans children oppose the sowing of the good seed, which
Matthew equates with the sons of the kingdom. The servants of the
sower turn into apocalyptic angels who carry out the Son of Mans final
judgment upon the world. (Mt 13:36-43)
The allegory, then, envisages conflict between Jesus disciples and the
Satanic enemies of the kingdom. Those enemies include the Pharisaical
leaders of the synagogue across the street. Matthews allegory, therefore, downplays the theme of Gods patience in favor of the militant opposition between the kingdom of God and its children, on the one hand,
and Satan and his children, on the other.4
The same prophetic call for a radical choice between Jesus and the
powers of evil surfaces in the parable of the sheep and the goats with
which Matthew closes Jesus eschatological discourse. In the parable, the
goats, those who refused to show mercy and who ignored the basic human needs of others suffer banishment into the eternal fire prepared for
the devil and his angels. (Mt 25:31-46) Once again fire symbolizes the
holiness of God which consumes His enemies in judgment. The fact that
God has prepared this fire for the devil and his angels suggests that from
the beginning God foresaw His final victory over the forces of evil.
As we have seen, Mark at the beginning of his account of Jesus public
ministry describes His confrontation with a demoniac in Capernaum.(Mk
4. Cf. John Dominic Crossan, The Seed Parables of Jesus, Journal of Biblical Literature,
92(1973), pp. 244-266; Nils Alstrop Dahl, Jesus in the Memory of the Early Church
(Minneapolis, MI: Augusburg Publishing House, 1976), pp. 141-166;NJBC, 42:88-89;
Mann, op. cit., pp. 163-171.
200
1:21-8) The incident follows the call of the disciples. (Mk 1:16-20) As
we have also seen, in Mark the call of the disciples parallels Jesus baptism
in the Jordan, just as Jesus exorcism of the demoniac in Capernaum parallels His desert temptation. Empowered by the Holy Breath who descended on Him in His baptism, Marks Jesus through His first exorcism
advances the eschatological struggle against the powers of evil which His
confrontation with Satan in the desert began.
Matthew, however, omits entirely the exorcism in Capernaum and thus
destroys Marks parallelism. Indeed, Matthew edits out of Marks text
many of the latters repeated references to exorcism. These omissions provide another instance of Matthews downplaying the theme of demonic
conflict so dramatically prominent in Mark.
Matthew replaces the story of the exorcism at Capernaum with a summary description of an outpouring of miracles and of exorcisms. Jesus
cures every variety of disease and casts out demons whenever he confronts them. Matthew includes demoniacs in the list of those whom Jesus
helped: So His fame spread throughout all Syria, and they brought him
all the sick, those afflicted with various diseases and pains, demoniacs,
epileptics, and paralytics, and He healed them. (Mk 4:24)
This great outpouring of divine healing serves as an introduction to the
sermon on the mount, Jesus inaugural proclamation of the kingdom.
Moreover, as we shall see in another chapter. Matthew clusters most of
Jesus miracles in the narrative section which follows the sermon on the
mount. In other words, in contrast to Mark, who views Jesus ministry as
Gods final eschatological conflict with Satan and the forces of evil, Matthew initially presents Jesus ministry as a joyful message of healing and
of hope. Matthew ultimately acknowledges with qualifications the role
which demonic conflict played in Jesus ministry, but initially he does
not give it as much dramatic prominence as Mark.
Mark begins his gospel with the gradual spread of the gospel from Jesus
to his disciples, then to Peters family, then to the people of Capernaum,
and finally to the rest of Israel. Matthew, however, locates these incidents
after the sermon on the mount. Jesus has already proclaimed the kingdom publicly. As a consequence, Matthew transforms Marks story into
something like part of a day in the life of the messiah. (Mt 8:14-7) In
both accounts Jesus exorcises; but Matthews Jesus does so, as He always
does, with an effortless command. (Mt 8:16) Matthews Jesus never
wrangles with demons, as Marks does.
Moreover, Matthew further transforms Marks text with the theme of
fulfillment. Jesus miracles and exorcisms at Capernaum on the evening
after He cures Peters mother-in-law fulfill one of the servant songs of
Deutero-Isaiah: He took our infirmities and bore our diseases. (Mt
8:17) Deutero-Isaiah had written: Surely he has borne our griefs and
201
carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and
afflicted. (Is 53:4) As we have already seen, Matthew sees a continuity
between Jesus ministry of healing and exorcism, on the one hand, and
the cross, on the other. Healing and exorcism both belong to Jesus ministry of atonement for two reasons: 1) Through them, Jesus enters deeply
into the pain of the human condition and suffers the consequences of sin
without sinning; and 2) His atoning death brings both deliverance from
Satan and healing.5
Matthew records a slightly modified and highly edited version of Marks
account of Jesus exorcism in the country of the Gentile Gerasenes. Matthew, who restricts Jesus ministry to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, (Mt 10:6) transforms the Gerasenes into the inhabitants of the town
of Gadara, six miles east of the Sea of Galilee. (Mt 5: 1-14)
In Matthew, Jesus confronts two demoniacs, not one. Matthew also
omits many of Marks colorful descriptive details. Matthew mentions
nothing about the demoniacs power to break the chains with which people
bound them. (Mk 5:3) He makes no mention of the demoniacs screaming day and night and bruising themselves with stones. (Mk 5:5) Finally,
Matthew edits out Jesus battle of wits with the demoniac.
As a result of the last omission, Matthew fails to give the demon the
symbolic name of Legion. (Mk 5:7-8) In the process, Matthew mutes
the subversive political implications of Marks narrative. For Mark, Rome
the persecutor embodies the Satanic forces of evil. Matthew, however,
tends to find Satanic opposition to the gospel in the Pharisaical leaders of
the synagogue across the street.
In Mark the exorcism takes a while, a detail which heightens the sense
of conflict and struggle. (Mk 5:6-10) In Matthew all the images of conflict typically drop out. Matthews Jesus again exhibits effortless power
over the demons. He speaks only one word in the narrative. When the
demons ask to enter the herd of swine, Jesus says the single word. Go.
(Mt 8:32) Matthew does mention, however, that the demoniacs lived in
the tombs, the place of death. (Mt 8:28)
While the exorcised man functions in Mark as a forerunner of the evangelization of the Gentiles, Matthew omits this detail entirely; but like
Marks Gerasenes, Matthews Gadarenes beg Jesus to leave them after He
works the miracle. (Mt 8:34; Mk 5:14-20)
Apart from these omissions and modifications, Matthew reproduces
the other features of Marks account of the exorcism. It follows the calming of the storm. (Mt 8:23-7; Mk 4:35-41) Matthew, like Mark, portrays
the calming as a theophany, as a revelation of the fact that Jesus shares in
5. Cf. Claude Tassin, Matthieu Targumiste?: Lexemple de Mt 12.18(=Is 42.1),
Estudios Biblicos, 48(1990), pp. 119-214; NJBC, 42:55-56; Radermakers, op. cit., II,
pp. 111-132; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 112-117; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 90-94.
202
Gods creative domination of the forces of chaos. (Gen 1:1-3) As in Mark,

the calming of the storm sets the stage for the exorcism of the demoniacs,
since the possessed swine rush headlong to their destruction in the waters
of chaos over which Jesus has just exercised divine sovereign authority.6
(Mk 5:14-20)
Matthew narrates two other exorcisms: 1) the exorcism of the daughter
of the Canaanite woman, whose faith foreshadows the faith of the Gentiles7 (Mt 15:21-8) and 2) the cure of the moonstruck (epileptic demoniac) boy. Mark calls the woman a Syro-Phoenician; Matthew calls her a
Canaanite, even though the Canaanites had long since ceased to inhabit
Palestine. As the prototype of the believing Gentile, the woman foreshadows not only their inclusion in the new Israel but the end of the
enmity which separated Israel from their Gentile, Canaanite enemies,
who here symbolize all Gentiles.8
The second exorcism exhibits typical Matthean editing. In it, Matthew
omits any detail suggesting conflict. The demon does not convulse the
boy and leave him looking dead, as in Mark. (Mk 9:20-7) Matthews
Jesus, does not struggle with the demon but dismisses it instead with
sovereign authority. Unlike Mark, Matthew does not assimilate the boys
deliverance implicitly to resurrection. In Matthew, Jesus simply rebukes
the demon and the boy experiences an instant cure. (Mt 17:14-8)
As in Mark, however, the story makes it clear that the disciples can lose
the power of exorcism which Jesus has given them through a self-reliant
lack of faith. Matthew makes an analogous point in the sermon on the
mount. There Jesus cautions against charismania. Toward the end of the
sermon, He warns that those who value their charismatic prowess more
than the obedience of faith will face rejection by Jesus in the final judgment. Among the charismatic gifts one might covet, Matthew mentions
the power to exorcise. (Mt 7:22) Implicitly, Jesus is teaching that the true
victory over Satan happens when people respond to Gods word with
expectant faith.9
6. Cf. NJBC, 42:59; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 118-125; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp.
100- 101.
7. Cf. Alice Dermience, La pericope de la cananenne (Mt 15:21-28), Ephemerides
Theologie Lovaniensis, 58(1982), pp. 25-49; NJBC, 42:100; Radermakers, op. cit., II,
pp. 210- 212; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 234-238; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp.
186-188.
8. Cf. Waetjen, op. cit., pp. 167-169; J. Martin C. Scott, Matthew 15.21-28: A Test Case
for Jesus Manners, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 63(1996), pp. 21-44;
Alice Dermience, La pericope de la Cananeenne,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis,
58(1982), pp. 25-49.
203

Mark wrote his gospel to shore up Christian commitment in the face of
persecution. The theme of demonic conflict therefore looms large in his
account of Jesus relationship to Satan. Matthew, the Jewish Christian
scribe, prefers to warn the church at Antioch of the wiles which Satan
employs in undermining their day-to-day living of Christian Torah.
Moreover, Matthew stresses more than Mark that effective opposition to
Satan demands moral fidelity to Jesus teaching more than charismatic
prowess. Matthew also uses Jesus desert temptations in order to alert his
community to Satans typical strategies in tempting both Jesus and the
members of the new Israel which Jesus begins and symbolizes. Matthew,
moreover, repeatedly assures his community that Jesus has indeed already
won a decisive victory over Satan, a victory in which they can confide.
Matthews polemic relationship toward Pharisaism causes him to stress
even more than Mark that the unbelief which the Pharisees symbolize
closes ones heart to the divine Breath and causes one to commit the
unforgivable sin of Breath-blasphemy. Matthew also lays more narrative
stress than Mark on the fact that Pharisaical unbelief places one on Satans
side.
I have considered the most fundamental negative linkages which both
Matthew and Mark discuss: namely, Jesus relationship to Satan and his
demons. In both gospels, Jesus adversaries each embody in a somewhat
different way the Satanic forces of anti-Christ. In Matthews gospel, however, Pharisees play a more prominent role among Jesus adversaries than
in Marks. The following section considers Jesus bitter conflict with the
Pharisees and scribes.
(II)
In both Mark and Matthew, Jesus enters into conflict with the Pharisees
and the scribes, but Matthew portrays that confrontation in even more
embittered terms than Mark. In Matthew the conflict culminates in Jesus
calling down the woes of the new covenant on the hypocritical scribes
and Pharisees.10
10. Urban C. von Hahlde argues that Josephus paints a plausible account of the
relationship of the Pharisees and chief priests and that the gospels reproduce the same
pattern of relationship. He seems to believe that this argues against the evangelists
retrojecting onto the Pharisees traits derived from concerns in the communities they
address. I find his argument unconvincing since it ignores the different theological
handling of the Pharisees and chief priests which occur in the gospels. See: Urban C.
von Wahlde, The Relationship between Pharisees and Chief Priests: Some Observations on the Texts in Matthew, John and Josephus, New Testament Studies, 42(1996),
pp. 506-522.
204
Jesus and the Pharisees

As we have seen, the Pharisees make their first appearance in Matthews
gospel when they join the unbelieving Saducees and come to hear John
preach. On that occasion, John calls them a brood of vipers, a dangerous and poisonous presence in Israel. (Mt 3:1-12) Jesus will again use the
same epithet when He rebukes the Pharisees for Breath-blasphemy (Mt
12:34; cf. Mt 23:33); and it surfaces a third time in the woes against the
scribes and Pharisees which precede Jesus eschatological discourse. (Mt
23:33) As we have also seen, when Matthew invokes this epithet in the
controversy over Beelzebul, he clarifies what it means: namely, that the
sinful poison in the unbelieving hearts of the Pharisees leads them to sow
poisonous doubts about Jesus in the minds of others and to blaspheme
Gods Holy Breath.
Moreover, in the confrontation between John and the Pharisees and
Sadducees, the Baptizer rebukes the Pharisees for looking to racial pride
to save them rather than to repentance of heart and to the obedience of
faith. Only repentance and obedient faith can deliver them from the act
of judgment which God is about to perform in sending Jesus to baptize
with a Holy Breath and fire. (Mt 3:8-12)
The conflict between John and the unrepentant Pharisees foreshadows, Jesus own confrontation with them. In the sermon on the mount,
Jesus warns His disciples: For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom
of heaven. (Mt 5:17-20) The warning comes in the context of Jesus
claim to have come, not to abolish (katalysai) the Law and the prophets
but to fulfill (plersai) them. (Mt 5:17) True righteousness for Matthews
Jesus consists in interpreting the Law in the light of His person, His mission, His teachings. Gentile Christian God-fearers rank behind Jewish
Christians in the kingdom but far in advance of the unbelieving Pharisees. (Mt 5:18-9) The scribes and Pharisees by cultivating a false righteousness refuse even to enter the kingdom.11
Not every scribe responds negatively to Matthews Jesus. After the sermon on the mount and the cures at Nazareth, a scribe, apparently a disciple, tells Jesus that he will follow wherever Jesus goes. Matthew locates
the incident on the shores of the Sea of Galilee. The magnitude of the
crowds forces Jesus to escape by crossing the sea. Before He can embark,
however, two people approach Him with requests: the scribe and a young
man recently bereaved by his fathers death. I shall consider the case of
the young man in pondering Jesus relationship to His disciples. Here I
focus on the scribe.
11. Cf. NJBC, 42:26-28; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 88-89; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
205
Jesus does not immediately sanction the scribes request. Instead He

warns the man of the demands of discipleship. If the scribe follows Jesus,
he must lead the same kind of vagabond life as Jesus Himself, who has
nowhere to lay His head. Even birds and animals have better homes. (Mt
8:18-22) In Matthews gospel, moreover, Jesus takes to the road when
confronted with hostility and opposition. (Mt 2:13-14, 12:14-15,
14:12-13, 15:12-14, 21) If the scribe wants to follow Jesus, he must accept in advance a share in the animosity which Jesus Himself endures.
Matthew does not tell us whether the scribe followed Jesus or not.12 (cf.
Lk 9:57-8)
As we have seen, Matthew postpones the conflict stories which open
Marks gospel. He locates some of them in the narrative section which
precedes the missionary discourse. While Mark tells five conflict stores,
Matthew further mutes the theme of conflict by telling initially only the
first three. Matthew, as he habitually does, also edits Marks text and writes
a leaner version of these confrontations at the same time that he preserves
the substance of Marks narrative.
As in Mark, in the first conflict narrative, scribes take scandal at Jesus
words to the paralytic, Take heart, my son, your sins are forgiven. (Mt
9:1-3; cf. Mk 2:1-5) Matthew omits several colorful details which Mark
records: that friends of the paralytic lowered him through the roof, that
their faith moved Jesus to heal the paralytic, and that Jesus reads the
hearts of His adversaries. As we have seen, however, Matthew makes an
important point which Mark does not make: namely, not only does Jesus
as Son of Man have the divine authority to forgive sins, but He also
communicates it to His Church.13 (Mt 9:1-8; Mk 2:1-12)
The second conflict story in Matthew concerns Jesus table fellowship
with sinners. In Mark, scribes belonging to the Pharisee party express
shock to Jesus disciples when they see Jesus eating with sinners and tax
collectors. (Mk 2:16) Matthew focuses the conflict on the Pharisees
only. (Mt 9:11)
As in Mark, Matthews Jesus turns upon the Pharisees and rebukes them.
In Matthew, however, Jesus also names the reason for the Pharisees
judgmentalism: namely, they have no mercy or compassion in their hearts
12. Cf. Jack Dean Kingsbury, On following Jesus: the Eager Scribe and the Reluctant
Disciple (Matthew 8:18-22), New Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 45-59; Jarmo
Duelunen, Der Nachfolgewillige Schriftgelehrte: Matthaeus 8.19-20 im Verstndinis
der Evangelisten, New Testament Studies, 37(1991), pp. 268-279; Robert H. Gundry,
On True and False Disciples in Matthew, New Testament Studies, 40(1994), pp.
433-441;NJBC, 42:57; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 118-125; Albright and Mann, op. cit.,
pp. 95-96.
13. Cf. Jos OCallaghan, Tres Casos de Armonizacion en Mt 9, Estudios Biblicos,
47(1989), pp. 131-134; U. Luz, The Son of Man in Matthew: Heavenly Judge or
Human Christ, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 48(1992), pp. 3-21.
206
for those who have sinned. As a consequence, they transform the worship
of God into hypocrisy and their righteousness into self-righteousness.
As for Jesus, His mission from the Father to call sinners to repentance
takes precedence over concern with ritual purity. (Mt 9:10-3; cf. Mk
2:15-7)
Matthew then narrates the confrontation between Jesus and some of
Johns disciples over fasting. (Mt 9:14) In Mark the confrontation did
not involve Johns disciples directly but people scandalized that Jesus disciples did not observe the same optional fast days as Johns disciples and
as the Pharisees did. (Mk 2:18) As in Mark, however, Matthews Jesus
responds by identifying Himself with the divine messianic bridegroom
whose presence brings only infectious joy to His disciples. As in Mark,
He rebukes His interlocutors for failing to recognize the radical newness
of what He embodies and proclaims. As we have seen above, Matthew
attributes the rift between his community and the local synagogue to the
latters failure to recognize that Jesus fulfills the Law and the prophets.14
(Mt 9:14-7; cf. Mk 2:18-22)
Three chapters later, Matthew tells the fourth of Marks inaugural conflict stories, the story about Jesus disciples eating corn on the sabbath.
Here Matthew both edits and expands Marks text. He omits non-essential
details, like the fact that Abiathar functioned as high priest when David
and his men at the bread of the Presence in violation of the law. (Mt 12:4;
cf. Mk 2:26) Matthew also edits out what he seems to consider useless
verbiage in Mark.
In addition, Matthew lengthens Jesus response to the Pharisees.
Matthews Jesus adds a second argument to justify His disciples violation of the sabbath. Even the Torah allows the temple priests to reap the
offering of the first sheaf on the sabbath. (Lev 23:10-4) Matthew, the
Christian student of Torah, seems to have realized that Marks allusion to
David does not involve a sabbath violation as such. Hence, Matthew
cites a legally sanctioned sabbath violation in an attempt to buttress Jesus
original argument. In the process, Matthew portrays Jesus, not as abrogating Torah, but as instructing the Pharisees on its true interpretation.15
Moreover, Matthews Jesus follows this second argument with the claim
that the Pharisees confront something greater than the temple. (Mt
12:6) Matthew, moreover, clearly parallels Jesus claim to embody some14. Cf. J.A. Zeisler, The Removal of the Bridegroom: A Note on Mark II, 18-22 and
Parallels, New Testament Studies, 19(1972-1973), pp. 19-194; NJBC, 42:60-62;
Mann, op. cit., pp. 102-109.
15. Cf. Ethan Levine, The Sabbath Controversy According to Matthew, New Testament
Studies, 22(1975-1976), pp. 480-483; David Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic
Judaism (London: Athlone Press), 1956, pp. 67-71.
207
thing greater than the temple with His original reply in Mark that the
Son of Man functions as Lord of the sabbath. (Mt 12:8)
What does the something greater mean? The proclamation of the
kingdom? Possibly. That Jesus speaks as the messiah? The messiah, while
important, would never have ranked even on a par with the temple, the
very house of God. Matthew, moreover, we have already seen, derives
Jesus messianic authority from the fact that He is Immanuel, God-with-us.
Matthew also parallels the something greater with Jesus Lordship over
the sabbath. As a believing Christian, Matthew would almost certainly
have recognized in the term Lord a Jewish euphemism for the divine
name. Jesus, then, as Son of Man, embodies something greater than the
temple because as God-with-us His divine authority exalts Him above
the temple at the same time that it gives Him jurisdiction over the sabbath.
The preceding interpretation finds confirmation in Matthews account
of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem and the cleansing of the temple.
The Old Testament allusions which Matthew weaves into that account
portray Jesus as God entering and reclaiming His temple. (Mt 21:1-17)
The phrase the Son of Man could, as we have already seen, mean the
same as I, or yours truly. In context, however, Matthew, like Mark,
almost certainly intends it to connote much more and would almost certainly have expected his Christian readers to have heard the phrase the
Son of Man as a reference to the eschatological Son of Man of Dan 7:13
whose person blends heavenly and human characteristics.
Matthew, then, uses this conflict story both in order to develop his
theology of Jesus as Immanuel and in order to contrast that theology
with the sinful unbelief of the Pharisees. Their sin goes beyond carping
over the breaking of the Sabbath. It results from their failure to recognize
that Jesus speaks with the eschatological authority of the Son of Man.
That failure stems from a deeper one. They refuse to recognize in Jesus
the very presence of God. As a consequence, the Pharisees also fail to
recognize His authority over the sabbath and His superiority to the temple
itself.
Although Matthew has separated this conflict story from the conflict
over table fellowship with sinners, he alludes to the earlier conflict by
having Jesus repeat to the Pharisees the rebuke He spoke to them on that
occasion: And if you had known what this means, I desire mercy, and
not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the guiltless. (Mt 12:7,
cf. 9:13)
The reiteration of Jesus rebuke not only ties the conflict over picking
grain on the sabbath to the earlier conflict story, but it also underscores
the reason for Pharisaical opposition to Jesus: namely, the Pharisees
208
self-righteous formalism, judgmentalism, legalism, and their unrepented

lack of mercy and compassion.
The citation also sharpens the social issues at stake in the dispute. The
Pharisees despise the laxer piety of the people of the land. Excessive
Pharisaical legalism, however, transforms the consolation which religion
offers to the oppressed peasantry into a needless burden. In Gods merciful eyes, the little ones whom the Pharisees censure for gleaning food
on the sabbath have not in fact sinned.16
Matthew follows the conflict over breaking the sabbath with the last of
Marks inaugural conflict stories. Again Matthew edits and simplifies
Marks text but preserves its substance. Jesus scandalizes the Pharisees by
healing a man on the sabbath. Moreover, as in Mark, Jesus justifies his
action by appealing to Torah piety. The Law forbids physical work on the
sabbath, but it never forbids doing good deeds. (Mt 12:9-14; Mk 3:1-6)
In Mark, the Pharisees respond to Jesus by going out and beginning to
plot with the Herodians how to have Jesus killed. (Mk 3:6) Matthew
omits any mention of the Herodians and attributes the conspiracy exclusively to the Pharisees, thus underscoring their malice and opposition.17
(Mt 12:14)
Matthew further dramatizes the unbelief of the Pharisees by following
the account of their Breath-blasphemy with another expression of hostility and lack of faith. Some scribes and Pharisees come to Jesus as ask Him
to perform some striking miracle, apparently in the expectation of embarrassing Him when He fails. (Mt 12:38-42)
Mark, as we saw in the preceding section, locates this incident right
after the second miracle of the loaves. Mark has Jesus rebuke the scribes
and Pharisees unbelief and tell them that this generation will receive
no sign. (Mk 8:11-13) Matthew places this incident at the end of a series
of stories about Pharisaical unbelief. Moreover, Matthew expands Jesus
reply in order to put their lack of faith in its ultimate context. While
Marks Jesus denies His enemies a sign, Matthews tells the Pharisees that
they shall receive only one sign: viz., the sign of Jonah:
An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign will be
given to it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three
nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of Man be three days and
three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will arise at the
judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the
preaching of Jonah, and, behold, a greater than Jonah is here. The queen
of the South will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn
17. Cf. NJBC, 42:77; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 171-179.
209
it; for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon,
and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here. (Mt 12:39-42)
This remarkable passage makes several points simultaneously: 1) The

passage transforms Jonahs three day ordeal in the belly of the fish and
subsequent deliverance into a foreshadowing of Jesus three days in the
tomb and subsequent resurrection. The comparison contextualizes further the Breath-blasphemy of the Pharisees. Their unbelief has blinded
them to the fact that Jesus heals and exorcises in the power of the divine
Breath. The same unbelief will blind them to the ultimate miracle of the
resurrection, which, as we have see, reveals Jesus as Breath-baptizer. 2)
Indeed, as in the case of the queen of Sheba and the Gentile city of
Nineveh, the Gentiles generally will respond in faith to the good news of
Jesus resurrection more readily than the unbelieving Pharisees. 3) The
resurrection, as we have seen more than once, will reveal Jesus as Immanuel,
God-with-us. (Mt 23:20) It will thus demonstrate why Jesus can claim
more than prophetic authority and more authority than the wisdom of
Solomon. As God-with-us, Jesus reveals the Father in a special way and
embodies Breath-inspired wisdom. (Mt 11:27) 4) Even Gentile women
will respond to the ultimate revelation of God in the risen Christ and will
seek His wisdom. This last point could implicitly rebuke Pharisaical sexism.18
Matthew then repeats a point he made in his account of the controversy over Beelzebul: namely, that by not gathering to Jesus the scribes
and Pharisees stand instead with Satan and with his doomed minions.
(Mt 12:30) Jesus warns:
When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. Then he says, I will return to
my house from which I came. And when he comes he finds it empty,
swept, and put in order. Then he goes and brings with him seven other
spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last
state of that man becomes worse than the first. So shall it be also with this
evil generation. (Mt 12:43-5)
Luke also records this saying of Jesus but fails to add the warning. So
shall it also be with this evil generation. In its original form, this teaching of Jesus warns that after an exorcism another reality must replace the
expelled demon, otherwise the one exorcised remains vulnerable to repossession by many more demons even more powerful than the one expelled. To what reality does Jesus refer?
18. Cf. Santiago Guijarro Oporto, El Signo de Jonas, Estudio Agustiniano, 18(1983),
pp. 39-50; NJBC, 42:81; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 167-169; Harrington, op. cit.,
pp. 187-190; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 158-160.
210
By adding the phrase So shall it be also with this evil generation,

Matthew links this teaching of Jesus to the Pharisees cynical and faithless
demand for a sign. There Jesus had called them an evil and adulterous
generation. (Mt 12:39) The scribes and Pharisees need to side with Jesus
against Satan by repenting, believing, and producing the works of righteousness. Since the malice of their unbelief has caused them to blaspheme the Holy Breath, they need to acknowledge the meaning of the
sign of Jonah and open their hearts to the Breath-baptism of the risen
savior. (Mt 28:19-20) Unless they do, they shall find themselves more
and more dominated by the Evil One.19
Like Mark, Jesus inserts a confrontation with the faithless Pharisees
between the two miracles of the loaves. As in Mark, Pharisees from Jerusalem censure Jesus for not requiring His disciples to obey unwritten traditions surrounding the Law. (Mt 15:1-3, Mk 7:1-13) Once again, Matthew prefers a much leaner version of the incident than Mark, who has to
explain to his Gentile Christians the context of the dispute.
Nevertheless, Matthew once again preserves the basic kernel of Marks
narrative. In both gospels, Jesus rebukes the hypocrisy of the Pharisees
for using unwritten traditions to subvert the manifest intent of Torah. As
a consequence, they commit the very sin which Isaiah warned them against:
namely, giving lip service to God while not only disobeying the Law but
teaching others to rationalize their disobedience as well.20 (Mt 15:7-9,
Mk 7:6-8, Is 29:13)
After rebuking the Pharisees, Jesus summons the crowds to Him and
warns them that nothing which goes into the mouth defiles one but only
what comes out the mouth. (Mt 15:10) Matthew, as a circumcised Jew,
obeyed Mosaic dietary laws and required dietary restraint of Gentile Christians. Hence, in contrast to Mark, Matthew does not interpret this saying
of Jesus as declaring all foods clean. (Mk 7:19) Instead, Matthew uses the
incident primarily to intensify the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees.
Jesus disciples come to Him and warn Him that what he has just said
offends the Pharisees. Jesus dismisses their warning: Let them alone,
they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall
into the pit. (Mt 15:12-4)
Peter then asks Jesus to explain the parable. Jesus replies:
Are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes
into the mouth passes into the stomach, and so passes on? But what comes
out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For
19. Cf. Richard Allen Edwards, The Sign of Jonah in the Theology of the Evangelists and Q
(Napierville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, Inc., 1971), pp. 67-71; NJBC, 42:82; Harrington,
20. Cf. Joseph Fitzmyer, Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament (London:
Chapman, 1971), pp. 93-104.
211
out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft,
false witness, slander. These are what defile a person: but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a person. (Mt 15:15-20)
Once again Matthew edits Marks text but reproduces its substance. In
Matthews gospel, however, Jesus reply takes on connotations which it
does not have in Mark. In Matthew, Jesus warning recalls His stern rebuke to the Pharisees: You brood of vipers! How can you speak good
when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth
speaks. (Mt 12:34) In Matthew, Jesus reply to Peter also echoes His call
for interiorized religion in the sermon on the mount.21
This confrontation with the Pharisees before the second multiplication
of the loaves sets the stage in Matthew for Jesus warning against the
leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Marks Jesus, as we have seen,
warns against the leaven on the Pharisees and of Herod.
In Mark, the leaven of the Pharisees means the religious attitudes they
symbolize: their superficial legalism, religious hypocrisy, unrepentance,
their subversion of the true intent of the Law by invoking human customs, their self-righteousness, their judgmentalism, their hostility and
violence of heart, ultimately, their unbelief. In Mark, as we have seen,
Herod symbolizes sensuality, violence, self-indulgence, vacillation, vanity, and unscrupulocity. (Mk 8:15) Matthew, however, explicitly identifies the leaven of the Pharisees and Saducees with their teachings. Mark,
moreover, endows Jesus warning against bad leaven with explicit eucharistic connotations. The evangelist insists that anyone who understands
the meaning of the two multiplications of the loaves will also understand
about the need to avoid the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod. As we
have seen, the miracles of the loaves in Mark foreshadow the eucharist.
Matthew in handling the image of leaven departs from Mark on all
of the above points and does so in significant ways. First of all, Matthews
Jesus warns: Take heed and beware the leaven of the Pharisees and
Sadducees. (Mt 16:6) As in Mark, the disciples misunderstand at first
what Jesus means and think Him upset because they forgot to bring bread
with them. (Mt 16:7) While Marks Jesus rebukes the disciples at this
point for failing to comprehend the significance of the miracle of the
loaves, Matthews Jesus rebukes them for their lack of faith:
O men of little faith, why do you discuss among yourselves the fact that
you have no bread? Do you not yet perceive? Do you not remember the
five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? Or
the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? How is it that you fail to perceive that I did not speak about bread?
212
Beware the leaven of the Pharisees and Saducees. Then they understood
that He did not tell them to beware the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Saducees. (Mt 16:8-12)
In effect, Matthews Jesus says: I have twice fed miraculously thousands of people with more food than they needed. If you are now worrying about bread, you show a lack of faith in Me and in My ability to feed
you if need be. I am not talking about physical bread, so get the point.
Instead of pointing to the deep eucharistic symbolism in the multiplication of the loaves, as Mark does, Matthew here treats the two miracles as
exercises of divine power which should put to rest the disciples concern
about lack of food. (Cf. Mt 6:25-34)
Moreover, unlike the obtuse disciples in Mark, who at this point stand
in something like an adversarial relationship with Jesus because of their
lack of understanding, Matthews disciples actually get Jesus original point.
They understand that, when Jesus warns them about the leaven of the
Pharisees and Sadducees, He means their false teaching.
Matthews concern with erroneous Jewish teaching seems to have led
him to substitute the Sadducees for Herod in Jesus warning to the disciples. Herod did not teach; but the Sadducees, who here stand for the
temple priesthood, did have a teaching function. For Matthew, then, the
true disciple holds fast to the teachings of Jesus and resists the false instruction of Pharisaism, which Matthew may well equate with the emerging rabbinate. The disciples must also avoid the Sadducees skeptical denial of the resurrection and of angelic ministers at the divine throne.The
Pharisees endorsed bodily resurrection and Old Testament angelology;
but in other ways they, in leading the synagogue across the street, function as the heirs of priestly unbelief.22 (Mt 22:23- 33)
In Matthew as in Mark, Pharisees raise the issue of divorce. In Mark,
Jesus questioners ask Him in effect to side between Rabbi Hillel and
Rabbi Shammai. In Matthew, the Pharisees want to know whether or not
Jesus endorses the laxist interpretation of Leviticus concerning divorce.
They pose their question in the following terms: Is it lawful to divorce
ones wife for any cause? (Mt 19:3; cf. Mk 10:2)
In Marks account of the incident, Jesus questions the Pharisees for
their own reading of the Law. Moreover, in the course of their exchange
Marks Jesus and the Pharisees disagree about whether Moses permitted
or commanded divorce, with Jesus taking the latter position. (Mk 10:3-5)
Marks Jesus then gives His own magisterial rendering of the Mosaic code,
by saying that Moses commanded divorce because of the hardness of the
male Jews heart. (Mk 10:6)
22. Cf. NJBC, 42:104; Radermakers, op. cit., II, p. 215; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 243-246;
213
In Matthew, however, Jesus answers the Pharisees question directly.

He appeals, as He does in Mark, to Gods original intent to create marriage monogamous: in blending their lives husband and wife become the
equivalent of one moral person, one flesh. Jesus issues same the prohibition which He enunciates in Mark: What therefore God has joined
together let not man put asunder. (Mt 19:3-9) In other words, the directness of Jesus response not only precludes any laxist interpretation of
the Mosaic divorce code but it also enjoins the ideal of monogamy.
Matthew then has Jesus explain why Moses permitted (not commanded)
divorce:
For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but
from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his
wife, except for unchastity (m epi porneia) and marries another commits
adultery. (Mt 19:8-9)
This response echoes a saying of Jesus in the sermon on the mount:

It was also said, Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of
divorce. But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on
the ground of unchastity (parektos logou porneias), makes her an adulteress;
and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (Mt 5:31-2)
The fact that Matthew repeats twice Jesus prohibition of divorce suggests that he regarded it as a fundamental moral ideal of the new covenant, one which fulfills the old covenant by its more stringent demands.
Exegetes generally agree that Matthew has inserted the exceptive clause,
except for unchastity, into Jesus prohibition against divorce; but they
have yet to agree about its meaning. Theodore Makin notes five different
interpretations of the term porneia: 1) an invalidating impediment, 2)
premarital intercourse, 3) incest, 4) adultery, 5) an infertile marriage.23
Of the five suggestions incest has the most plausibility. If Jesus meant
the firstan invalidating impediment, the disciples would have found
nothing to shock them in the legal reality of invalidating impediments.
(Mt 19:10-2) The idea that the second explanationnamely, premarital
intercoursejustifies divorce would sanction Josephs decision in the infancy gospel to divorce Mary because He believes that she has lost her
virginity. Through an angel, however, God forbids the divorce. In addition, using such a lapse as a pretext for divorce ill accords with Jesus
teaching on the unlimited forgiveness of the repentant. Finally, the term
porneia signifies neither the third explanation, adultery, nor the fifth,
23. Cf. Theodore Makin, Marriage in the Catholic Church: Divorce and Remarriage
(Ramsey, NJ: Paulist, 1984), pp. 60-6.
214
infertility. A process of elimination, therefore, disposes of every suggestion except the fourth: incest.
It seems extremely unlikely that Matthew would deliberately set out to
contradict Jesus teaching on the indissolubility of marriage. By their reaction, Matthews disciples certainly see in the exceptive clause no hint
that Jesus has mitigated His stance on the unacceptability of divorce. It
seems probable, then, that Matthew, the Christian scribe, is making a
fine legal point. He allows divorce only in the case of a sinful, incestuous
union, whose immorality would preclude its counting as a true marriage.
This passage focuses on Jesus prohibition of mosaic divorce practices,
but it also suggests less than good will on the part of the Pharisees who
approach Jesus. Matthew says that they asked about the laxist position
in order to test Him (peirazontes auton). (Mt 19:3) Legal rigorists themselves, the Pharisees assume that Jesus, who interprets the Law with much
more latitude than themselves, will also endorse the laxist position when
it comes to divorce. They discover to their surprise that He does not. In
Matthew, the stringency dramatizes how He fulfills the Law: namely, by
holding up more demanding ideals that the Jewish Torah.24
The Pharisees in the Jerusalem Ministry
Only in Matthew does the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees reach
its high point during Jesus Jerusalem ministry. At that point, moreover,
the conflict takes on a more explicitly eschatological character. Jesus addresses two parablesthe parable of the two sons and the parable of the
wicked tenantsto both the chief priests and the Pharisees. Mark records
only the parable of the wicked tenants and aims it exclusively at the chief
priests and Sanhedrin. (Mk 11:28)
Matthews parable of the two sons associates the Pharisees with the
chief priests in their unrepentant failure to recognize John the Baptizers
prophetic authority as willingly as the tax collectors and harlots had. In
the parable, one son promises to work for his father and does not. The
second son refuses at first to work, then changes his mind and does so.
On Jesus lips, the parable inculcated the importance of actually living
the good news.
24. Cf. A. Sand, Reich Gottes und Eheverzicht im Evangelium nach Matthaus (Stuttgart:
Katolisches Bibelwerk, 1983); Michael W. Holmes, The Text of the Matthean
Divorce Passages: A Comment on the Appeal to Harmonization in Textual Decision,
Journal of Biblical Literature, 109(1990), pp. 651-664; Dale C. Allison, Divorce,
Celibacy and Joseph (Matthew 1.18-25 and 19.1-12), Journal for the Study of the New
Testament, 49(1993), pp. 3-10; Markus Bochmhl, Matthew in the Light of
Pre-rabbinic Halakah, New Testament Studies, 35(1989), pp. 291-295; NJBC,
42:117; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 255-259; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 272-277;
215
Matthew applies the parable to both the chief priests and the Pharisees
as a way of suggesting that the Pharisees now wear the mantle of religious
leadership which the chief priests once wore. (Cf. Mt 23:1-3) Moreover,
the Pharisees of Matthews day, like the chief priests in Jesus day, find
themselves in the position of promising to obey God and then reneging
on their promise.25 (Mt 21:28-32)
Matthew next reproduces Marks parable of the wicked tenants. In it, a
householder plants a vineyard and leases it to tenants to cultivate. They
however beat, murder, and stone the householders servants who come to
collect the rent. Finally, thinking that the tenants will respect his son, the
extraordinarily patient householder sends the young man to collect the
rent. The wicked tenants, however, delude themselves into believing that
if they murder the householders son, they will get his inheritance. When
the young man arrives, they kill him. (Mt 21:33-46)
Matthew handles this parable somewhat differently from Mark. In Mark,
Jesus response to the chief priests ends with a citation of Psalm 118. The
citation warns the chief priests that despite their rejection of Jesus, God
will choose to exalt Him. Matthew, however, allegorizes the parable into
a more extended reflection on salvation history. Matthew notes that the
householder began sending servants to the wicked tenants when the season of fruits drew near. (Mt 21:34) The addition assimilates the time of
the parable to the eschatological approach of the kingdom. The addition
also alludes to the priests and Pharisees failure to produce the fruit of
conversion and of good works. (Cf. Mt 7:15-20)
Matthew identifies the owner of the vineyard as a householder; and the
evangelist describes the householders son as beloved. Matthew thus
identifies the son of the parable with Jesus whom the Father has twice
proclaimed His beloved Son. (Mt 3:17, 17:5) Matthew also has the wicked
tenants cast the son out of the vineyard before they kill him. The evangelist thus alludes to Jesus death outside the walls of Jerusalem. In addition, Matthew interprets the fall of Jerusalem as the fulfillment of Ps
118:22-23. Finally, by directing the parable against the Pharisees as well
as against the high priests, Matthew explicitly excludes both from the
kingdom, which the Gentiles are entering.
In Matthews revision of the parable, then, the eschatological approach
of Gods reign in Jesus requires a response of conversion and good works.
Instead, the Pharisees join the chief priests in casting out Jesus, Gods
beloved Son, and killing Him. The destruction of Jerusalem has brought
divine judgment to the temple priests; yet the Pharisaical leaders of the
synagogue across the street continue to reproduce the temple priests
unbelief. What the chief priests did in Jesus time, the Pharisees continue
25. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 87-89; NJBC, 42:128; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
274-275; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 298-301.
216
to do in Matthews day. Both therefore deserve the same fate: exclusion

from the kingdom. In targeting the Pharisees for rebuke along with the
priests, Matthew is, however, as we shall soon see in greater detail, also
rebuking Pharisaical tendencies in his own community, especially among
its leaders.26
In Matthew as in Mark, the chief priests, infuriated, want to arrest
Jesus but fear the reaction of the crowds who regard Jesus as a prophet.
Matthew has the Pharisees sharing the chief priests frustration and fear
of the multitudes.
Matthew reproduces Marks single reference to the Pharisees during
Jesus Jerusalem ministry. As in Mark, the Pharisees conspire with the
Herodians to trap Jesus into forbidding the payment of Roman taxes.
(Mt 22:15-22; Mk 12:13) Matthew, however, adds other confrontations
as well. Matthew identifies the lawyer who asks Jesus about the great
commandment as a Pharisee. Matthews Pharisee, moreover, puts the question to Jesus as a test. (Mt 22:34-40) Matthew also has Jesus question
some Pharisees concerning Davids son. Marks Jesus addresses this query
to the crowds. (Mt 22:41-6) In both Matthew and Mark, Jesus distances
himself from Davidic messianism by implicitly claiming divine Lordship. Matthews Jesus, however, specifically challenge the Pharisees on
this point.
All these additions almost certainly elaborate Matthews argument with
Pharisees of his own day. The Pharisaical leaders of Judaism seek to pit
the gospel against Roman authority. They fail to grasp the true meaning
of the great commandment. They need to recognize Jesus as both messiah and Lord. The fact that Jesus final silencing of the Pharisees during
His Jerusalem ministry introduces the litany of woes against the hypocritical scribes and Pharisees tends to re-enforce such an interpretation.27
Matthew also prefaces this Markan incident with a parable not found
in Mark, the story of the king who gave a marriage feast for his son. Some
of the invited guests, however, refuse to take the royal invitation seriously
and prefer to go about their ordinary business of farming and bartering.
26. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 89-92; Michel Hubaut, La parabole des vignerons homicides
(Paris: J. Gabalda, 1976); Richard J. Dillon, Towards a Tradition History of the
Parables of the True Israel (Matthew 21,33-22,14), Biblica, 47(1966), pp. 1-42;
Akira Ogawa, Parabole de lIsrael veritable? Reconsideration critique de Mt
XXI,28-XXI,14, Novum Testamentum, 21(1979), pp. 121; NJBC, 42:129;
Mann, op. cit., pp. 262-267.
27. Cf. Herbert Loewe, Render Unto Caesar: Religious and Political Loyalty in Palestine
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1940); Mark Matt, The Things of God
in the Question Concerning Tribute to Caesar (Lk 20:25; Mk 12:17; Mt 22:29),
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 33(1971), pp. 510-511; NJBC, 42:131; Radermakers, op.
cit., II, p. 281; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 309-311; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp.
271-275.
217
Other invited guests turn vicious. They mug and lynch the royal servants
who carry the invitation. Surprisingly, however, the king does not retaliate. Instead, he sends out more servants into the streets and fills the feast
with ordinary, lowly folk, both the bad and the good. (Mt 22:1-11)
The parable dramatizes the inclusiveness of Jesus kingdom of nuisances
and nobodies, which even invites sinners to share in the celebration. At
the same time, the parable rebukes Jesus enemies who refuse Gods invitation either from preoccupation with mundane concerns or from violence of heart. As Matthew narrates Jesus final Jerusalem ministry, this
parable apparently so exasperates the Pharisees that they conspire with
the Herodians to trick Jesus into opposing Roman taxation and lay Himself open to the charge of sedition; but to their astonishment, Jesus turns
the tables on them. (Mt 22:15-22)
In Mark, one finds a brief diatribe against the scribes during Jesus
Jerusalem ministry. (Mk 12:38-40) Matthew, however, expands the invective into a major discourse possibly by drawing on Q and possibly on
other sources. In an opening salvo, Matthews Jesus warns:
The scribes and the Pharisees sat (ekathisan) on Moses seat; so practice
and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do. They bind heavy
burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on peoples shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be
seen by others; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes
long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the
synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by
others. But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher and
you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have
one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called masters, for you have one
master, the Christ. He who is greatest among you shall be your servant;
whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself
will be exalted. (Mt 23:1-12)
Here several points need noticing. Matthew describes the scribes and
Pharisees as having sat on the seat of Moses. Sitting on Mosess seat means
succeeding to Moses in leadership authority. In Jesus own time, the chief
priests and Sanhedrin sat on the seat of Moses in Palestine, not the Pharisees, even though the latter may have tried on occasion to influence the
course of political events. Matthews Jesus, however, here portrays the
scribes and Pharisees as succeeding the chief priests within the Jewish
community in the authoritative interpretation of the Law. Jesus words,
therefore, envisage not so much the Palestine of His own day as the situation of Matthews community in its relationship to the Jewish community in Antioch and its Pharisaical leaders.
218
Matthews Jesus distinguishes between the realm of external discipline

and the deeper demands of Christian living. He is warning Jewish Christians at Antioch that, in what concerns the formal governance of the
Jewish community, the scribes and Pharisees have in fact taken over juridical leadership and within the legitimate limits of their authority deserve obedience.
Having made this disciplinary point, however, Matthews Jesus then
goes on to insist that Christians, especially Christian leaders, must never
take the scribes and Pharisees as role models. Matthew, who was watching the Jesus movement turn itself into an institutional Church, here
voices genuine concern about signs of an incipient clericalism among the
Christian leaders in Antioch. The evangelist censures ostentatious public
piety, coveting public honors and attention, and assuming honorific titles.
Jesus condemns all such pious actions as hypocrisy. (Mt 23:8-12)
It seems unlikely that Matthews Jesus really expected children to stop
calling their male parents father. Instead, the evangelist employs hyperbole in order to underscore the fact that no Christian leader should use
any title in order to condescend hypocritically to others. Egalitarianism
and self-abasement in mutual service must characterize the new Israel.28
The ambivalence toward Pharisaical authority which Matthew expresses
in this passage finds confirmation and further qualification in an earlier
incident in his gospel which he alone of all the evangelists records. The
incident concerns Peter and the tax. Pharisees ask Peter whether Jesus is
going to pay the tax. Peter replies that Jesus will do so. (Mt 17:24-7)
Many authors assume that the Pharisees refer to the Temple tax. If this
story roots itself in an incident in Jesus life, the Pharisees could indeed
refer to the tax for the upkeep of the temple. The story, however, does not
call the tax in question a temple tax. Other commentators believe that
this story does not derive from Jesus but relates to the situation of the
Matthean church. They suggest that the Pharisees are inquiring whether
Jewish Christians pay a civil tax, possibly for the upkeep of pagan temples.
Since the Pharisees themselves would have found such a tax unacceptable, the enquiry could exemplify an attempt on their part to get conscientious Christians who resisted such taxes in dutch with the Roman authorities. Still other exegetes question the plausibility of the preceding
explanation. They suggest instead that Matthew is really referring to an
28. Cf. David E. Garland, The Intention of Matthew 23 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1979), pp.
1-64; Steve Mason, Pharisee Dominance before 70 CE and the Gospels Hypocrisy
Charge (Matt 23:2-3), Harvard Theological Review, 83(1990), pp. 363-381; Benedict
T. Viviano, O.P., Social World and Community Leadership: The Case of Matthew
23.1-12, 34, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 39(1990), pp. 3-21; NJBC,
42:135; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 286-288; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 319-325.
219
tax leveled in the Jewish community by its Pharisaical leaders. In my

judgment, this last suggestion enjoys the greatest probability.29
In the second half of the story about the tax, Jesus rebukes Peter for
committing Him to pay the levy. Jesus asks Peter whether kings tax their
own sons or whether they tax other people. When Peter replies that they
tax other people, Jesus replies, Then the sons are free. In other words,
in virtue of His position as Son of God, Jesus claims exemption from the
tax. The fact, moreover, that Jesus uses the plural form sons extends the
same exemption to all of Gods children, including the Christian community at Antioch. Moreover, having made the point that He stands
under no obligation to pay the tax, Jesus nevertheless helps Peter save
face. He instructs him to go fishing and that the first fish he catches will
have a coin, a stater, in its mouth. Peter should pay the tax with that coin
for both himself and for Jesus lest they scandalize the Pharisees. (Mt
17:24-7)
Why then did Matthew spin this strange and somewhat legendary story
about fish swimming around the Sea of Galilee with Roman coins in
their mouths? If one takes the story as a gloss on the situation of the
Matthean church vis a vis the synagogue across the street, then Peter
probably functions here, as elsewhere in Matthews gospel, as a symbol of
the Petrine leadership of the Antiochene church. If so, then the story
could be admonishing Christian leaders in Antioch for having agreed to
pay a synagogue levy which in Matthews eyes they had no obligation to
pay. The evangelist concedes, however, that, for the sake of maintaining a
good relationship with the Jewish community, Christians can, if they
choose, contribute freely to the support of the local Jewish synagogue,
but only on the condition that they realize that the payment in no way
binds them in conscience.
Under such an acknowledgedly speculative interpretation, the story of
the tax could illustrate tensions between the church at Antioch and local
synagogue authorities. If, moreover, one reads this fish story in the light
of Jesus rebuke to clericalism during His Jerusalem ministry, then the
tale of the tax could re-enforce Jesus insistence that Christian leaders
should eschew the Pharisaical practice of imposing needless burdens on
their community. The alleged synagogue tax would exemplify a needless
29. Cf. Thomas Brodie, O.P., Fish, Temple Tithe, and Remission: The God-Based
Generosity of Deuteronomy as one Component of Matt 17:22-18:23, Revue Biblique,
99(1992), pp. 679- 718; G. Schwarz, Anoithas to stoma autou? (Mattheaus 17.27),
New Testament Studies, 38(1992), pp. 138-141; Richard J. Cassidy, Matthew
17:24-27A Word On Civil Taxes, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 41(1979), pp.
571-580; NJBC, 42:110; W. Horbury, The Temple Tax, in Jesus and the Politics of
His Day, edited by Ernst Bammel and C.F.D. Moule (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1984), pp. 265-286; NJBC, 42:110; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
220
burden which Church leaders had unjustifiably laid upon the Antiochene
church.
In Matthews account of Jesus Jerusalem ministry, the seven woes follow His indictment of both clericalism and Pharisaism. As we have seen,
the woes parallel the beatitudes which begin the sermon on the mount.
(Mt 5: 3-10) The beatitudes summarize the blessings of living the new
covenant; the woes denounce the evils of rejecting it. The term woe
(ouai) has judgmental connotations, but not necessarily vindictive ones.30
Jesus first indicts the scribes and Pharisees for giving scandal by not
entering the kingdom themselves. Not content with that, however, they
also hinder others from entering and seek to convert others zealously to
their own hypocrisy and unbelief. Matthew calls the proselytes converted
by the Pharisees twice as much a child of hell as the Pharisees themselves. This harsh phrase suggests that the converts to the synagogue
across the street, possibly former Christians, may with the zeal of neophytes have shown even greater hostility to Jewish Christians than synagogue leaders. (Mt 23:13-5) This first woe makes it clear, however, that
in Matthews day the scribes and Pharisees had begun to regard the
Antiochene church with hostility and suspicion.
Matthews Jesus has already warned His followers against the leaven, or
false teaching of the Pharisees. The next woe accuses the scribes and Pharisees of disseminating false teaching which undermines the binding power
of oaths. Jesus gives two examples of the kind of false teaching He means.
He accuses the Pharisees of placing more value on oaths which swear by
the gold of the temple than on oaths which swear by the temple. He also
blames them for placing more value on oaths which swear by the gift on
the altar than by the altar itself.
In point of fact, one finds no teachings parallel to these in the Talmud.
Matthews Jesus, however, is doing more than condemning the use of
casuistry to invalidate binding oaths. Valuing gold more than the temple
and the gift on the altar more than the altar suggests that cupidity motivates such legalistic slight of hand. The cupidity in question blinds the
legalistic scribes and Pharisees to what is truly sacred:
You blind men! For which is greater, the gift on the altar or the altar which
makes the gift sacred? So one who swears by the altar swears by it and by
everything on it; and one who swears by the temple, swears by it and by
Him who dwells in it; and one who swears by heaven, swears by the throne
of God and by Him who sits upon it. (Mt 23:16-22)
In this second woe, Matthew is warning the community at Antioch and

especially its leaders against the hypocrisy of imagining that they can
reconcile greed and authentic religious faith.
30. Cf. Garland, op. cit., pp. 64-90.
221
The third woe excoriates the scribes and Pharisees for showing more
concern with the tithing of produce than with the weightier matters of
the Law: justice and mercy and faith. (Mt 23:23-4) Here Jesus does not
condemn the practice of tithing. Rather, He takes issue with the legalistic
value system which causes the scribes and Pharisees to find such externals
more important than the cultivation of the virtues which the Law inculcates. The blindness of the Pharisees manifests itself in the fact that they
strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. They focus on superficial trivialities
and ignore the truly important and morally binding aspects of the Law.
Pharisaical blindness also results from a lack of faith. Here the third
woe echoes the first. Matthew is implicitly asserting that shallow legalism
results from a failure to interpret Torah in the light of Jesus teachings,
which demand both an interiorization of the Law and a recognition of its
true intent. (Mt 23:24; cf. Mt 5:17 ff.)
The fourth woe chides the scribes and Pharisees for substituting a concern with external ritual purity for lack of repentance. He cites two sins
especially: plunder (haparges) and intemperance (akrasias). One should
probably see the two as related; for the fourth woe denounces concrete
expressions of the greed which the second woe condemned. Greed expresses itself in the covetous and illegitimate appropriation of the goods
of others. (Mt 23:25-6)
The final woes make it clear that Pharisaical lack of repentance springs
from more than greed. By pretending to possess a righteousness they lack,
the scribes and Pharisees remain filled with moral and religious iniquity.
(Mt 23:27-8) They posture hypocritically, pretending that they, unlike
their fathers would have listened to the prophets, when in fact they are
plotting Jesus death and persecute His followers. In fact, therefore, the scribes
and Pharisees show themselves as violent and hardhearted as their fathers.
Their murderous intentions will plunge them into the fires of hell.
Thus you are witnesses against yourselves that you are the sons of those
who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers.
You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced
to hell? Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of
whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, that upon you may come all the
righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of the innocent Abel to the
blood of Zechariah the son of Berachiah, whom you murdered between
the sanctuary and the altar. Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this
generation. (Mt 23:31-6)
In this final and longest woe, Jesus parallels His own death with the
persecution and murder of the ancient prophets, which it fills up. He
also assimilates His impending execution to the persecution of Chris-
222
tians by the synagogue. In other words, synagogue leaders who persecute

Christians imitate both those who hounded Jesus to His death and all the
violent, hard-hearted hypocrites in the history of Israel who rejected and
persecuted the prophets. Matthews Jesus warns that by filling up the
measure of their fathers in murdering Him and in persecuting His followers, the scribes and Pharisees must answer for every murder in the
history of the human race from Abel to Zechariah. The retribution which
Jesus promises probably alludes to the destruction of Jerusalem and its
temple in 70 a.d. If so, Matthew is implicitly using the tragic fate of the
temple priests in order to warn the Pharisees who have succeeded to their
leadership that they court a similar retribution through their unrepented
violence of heart.
One finds parallel inditements of the scribes and Pharisees scattered
throughout the gospels of Mark and of Luke. (Mk 7:1-13, 12:38-40,
9:33-7, 10:41-5; Lk 11: 37-40, 45-54, 20:45-7) Nothing in the other
two synoptics, however, matches the sustained condemnation which one
encounters in Matthews woes. Matthews dramatic piling on of woe upon
woe, all of them directed at the Pharisaical brood of vipers suggests a
truly embittered confrontation between Matthew and his community,
on the one hand, and the scribal and Pharisaical leaders of the synagogue across the street, on the other. By rejecting the kingdom and by
obstructing its spread, by false zeal, by legalism, by cupidity, by skewed
and superficial religious values, by lack of repentance, by an intemperate
exploitation of others, by religious hypocrisy, and by violent opposition
to the word of God, the Pharisaical leaders of the old Israel are calling
down upon themselves the curses of the new covenant. In effect, Matthew accuses the leaders of the synagogue across the street of a perverse
and malicious misreading of Torah. At the same time, the evangelist sternly
warns Christian leaders to have none of it.31
Jesus lament over Jerusalem follows:
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are
sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a
hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Behold, your
house is forsaken and desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again,
until you say, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. (Mt
23:37-9)
31. Cf. Anthony J. Salderini, Deligitimation of Leaders in Matthew 23, Catholic

Biblical Quarterly, 54(1992), pp. 659-680; Ulrich Luz, LAntiguidaismo nel Vangelo
di Matteao come Problema storico e teologico: imo schizzo, Gregorianum, 74(1993),
pp. 425-445; NJBC, 42:135; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 288-290; Harrington, op.
cit., pp. 324-330; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 276-278.
223
One finds a parallel lament in Lukes journey discourse; but it precedes

Jesus entry into Jerusalem and foreshadows it. (Lk 14:34-5, 19:38) Matthew places the same lament after Jesus triumphal entry into Jerusalem,
at the end of the woes, and just before Jesus eschatological discourse.
(Mt 24:3 ff.) He thus transforms Jesus prophecy, For I tell you, you will
not see me again, until you say, Blessed is he who comes in the name of
the Lord, into a prediction of the second coming. Now that Jesus prophecy of the destruction of the temple has come to pass, the hope of the
true Israel lies in repentant longing for Jesus second coming and for the
parousia. The fact that Matthew uses this saying of Jesus differently from
Luke does not in and of itself prove its inauthenticity.
Matthews theological reading of Jesus lament makes a smooth rhetorical transition, however, from the woes to the eschatological discourse
itself. It also puts the woes in a clear eschatological context. The scribes
and Pharisees in their persistent resistance to the kingdom, in their unbelief and persecution of Jesus disciples will face the consequences of their
conduct when Jesus returns as the eschatological judge to whom they
must one day answer.32
Matthew does not assign any special role to the Pharisees in the trial
and death of Jesus. After Jesus death, however, when Pilate grants permission to Joseph of Aramathea to bury Jesus body, Matthew has Pharisees join the chief priests in requesting Roman soldiers to guard the tomb
of Jesus lest His disciples steal the body and claim that He has risen from
the dead. (Mt 27:62-6) By joining the chief priests in their petition, the
Pharisees manifest that their enmity against Jesus goes beyond the grave.
They stand with the temple priests in their stubborn refusal to believe in
Jesus resurrection. The surprising presence of Pharisees as co-petitioners
with Pilate implicitly portrays them as the heirs to the religious leadership which the high priests exercised in Jesus time. Matthew also regards
the leaders of the synagogue across the street as the historical heirs of
the chief priests malice and unbelief.33
Matthew seems to have written his gospel for a Petrine community trying to preserve its Christian identity while adhering to the faithful practice of Torah. Much of its identity crisis seems to have resulted for conflicts and tensions with the Pharisaical leaders of the local Jewish community. As a Jewish Christian, Matthew regards Jesus as the fulfillment
32. Cf. Garland, op. cit., pp. 90-215; NJBC, 42:136; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
291-292; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 228-230; Albright and Mann, op. cit., p. 284.
33. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, pp. 1284-1313; NJBC, 42:166; Radermakers,
op. cit., II, pp. 349-350; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 404-408; Albright and Mann, op. cit.,
pp. cvi- cxxiii, 354-356.
224
of the Mosaic Law. Jesus fulfills the Law by demanding more, not less,
than traditional Torah piety. Jesus compassionate reading of the Law grasps
its original intent.
Matthew finds himself of a double mind when he confronts both the
Pharisaical leaders of the synagogue across the street, on the one hand,
and the official leaders of his own community, on the other. The evangelist vindicates the right of Christians to claim their Jewish identity without harassment and persecution by local synagogue leaders. At the same
time, he recognizes that the scribal and Pharisaical leaders refuse to believe fundamental Christian doctrines, like the resurrection and Lordship of Jesus. Matthew therefore portrays them as standing in historical
continuity with the chief priests and elders who occupied the seat of
Moses in Jesus day. The Pharisaical leaders of the local synagogue manifest the same hostility and unbelief as killed Jesus, only now they vent
their wrath on His followers. As far as Matthew is concerned therefore,
the Pharisees of his day share in the guilt and unbelief of the chief priests
which led to the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple.
Matthew reiterates the Pharisees stubborn refusal to confess both Jesus
resurrection and His divinity. The evangelist condemns their blasphemy
of the divine Breath who enlightens Christians and inspires their faith in
Jesus. With prophetic courage, the evangelist denounces the scribes and
Pharisees as a brood of vipers who seek to undermine Christian faith in
Jesus by their poisonous attacks upon Him. They resist Jesus teaching
about divorce and about the two Great Commandments. Cupidity and
unrepentant violence of heart ultimately motivate their unbelief. Matthew therefore challenges the Pharisees of his generation to repentance
and to a faith which carries them beyond a superficial legalism and a
self-righteous judgmentalism. That challenge echoes the challenge to
Pharisaism which Jesus had voiced in His own day.
Two things caused Matthew to recast and intensify the opposition between Jesus and the Pharisees: 1) the Petrine character of the community
at Antioch and 2) its conscious, institutional self-definition over against
an increasingly hostile synagogue. Matthews diatribes against Pharisaism,
however, also target the leaders of his own Christian community. As the
Christian community at Antioch began to define itself institutionally over
against the Jewish community, Matthew feared that uncritical aping of
Jewish leadership structures would betray Christian leaders into abandoning Jesus egalitarian vision of a community in which the greatest
function as slaves to the least. Matthew denounces nascent Christian clericalism because he perceives it as a Christian version of Pharisaical hypocrisy.
In Matthew as in Mark, the Pharisees function as negative role models
both for Christians and especially for their leaders. The specific pastoral
225
and ecclesial situation of the Petrine community at Antioch, however,

caused Matthew to handle that confrontation differently from Mark.
Matthew not only enhances the Pharisees dramatic role in Jesus story
but portrays the conflict between the two as even more embittered than
Mark had. Polemic concerns lead Matthew to specify in greater detail
than Mark the faith differences between Jesus disciples and the Pharisees. The same polemic concerns lead him to transform Jesus attacks on
the Pharisees into a rebuke to Christian clericalism.
In all these ways, Matthews telling of Jesus tale illustrates the analogy
of Christological knowing. Assimilation to Jesus in the power of His Breath
raises different issues in different ecclesial, pastoral, and doctrinal contexts. In consciously transforming and intensifying Marks account of
Jesus confrontation with the Pharisees, Matthew gives evidence of having grasped quite clearly this basic Christological insight.
This section has considered how Matthews handling of Jesus relationship to the scribes and Pharisees differs from Marks. The following brief
section describes Jesus relationship to Herod and the Herodians.
(III)
Matthew mentions Herod Antipas in only three passages of his gospel.
Like Mark, he notes that Herod superstitiously regarded Jesus as the
murdered John the Baptizer returned to life. Like Mark he records that
Johns denunciation of Herod for incestuous adultery led Herod to arrest
the Baptizer. Unlike Mark, however, who portrays Herod as having mixed
feelings toward John, Matthew, as we have seen, states that Herod lusted
for Johns blood. Only fear of the crowds, who regarded John as a prophet
held the kings hand temporarily from killing him. (Mt 14:1-5) The same
fear would for a time stay the chief priests hands in their plot against
Jesus. (Mt 26:5)
Matthew, as we have seen, edits Marks account of the dance of Herodiass
daughter and of her connivance with her mother to have the Baptizer
killed; but Matthew preserves the main lines of Marks account. Paradoxically, having portrayed Herod as wanting John dead, Matthew follows Mark and describes Herod, quite inconsistently, as sorry to order
Johns beheading.34 (Mt 14:6-12)
Matthew differs from Mark, however, chiefly by depriving Herod of
explicit ethical and eucharistic symbolism. Both evangelists link Herods
murder of John symbolically to the miracle of the loaves. Matthew, however, does so in order to make a doctrinal point. The miracle of the loaves
follows upon Johns martyrdom. By foreshadowing the paschal mystery,
the miracle contrasts the Baptizers death with Jesus own. The disciples
226
of both men will bury their master. Jesus will rise, but the Baptizer will
not.
Mark links Herod to eucharistic faith by insisting that those who would
share in the Lords supper must first purge themselves of Herods leaven.
For Mark, the leaven of Herod alludes metaphorically to the vices which
the tyrant king incarnated. Matthew speaks of the leaven of Saducees
instead of the leaven of Herod. Matthew apparently makes the substitution because he deems the Saducees denial of the resurrection as pernicious as the objectionable doctrines of the Pharisees. Moreover, the unbelief of the Sadducees finds an echo in the Pharisees denial of Jesus resurrection.
I have in this brief section pondered how Matthew treats the figure of
Herod. The following section reflects on Jesus confrontation with the
chief priests.
(IV)
Apart from Matthews infancy gospel, members of the high priesthood
make their first appearance in his gospel when Sadducees join some Pharisees in seeking the Baptizers baptism. The Sadducees in question probably belonged to the high priestly caste. They find themselves, however,
rejected by the Baptizer for approaching his baptism without the needed
repentance. (Mt 3:7) Matthew, therefore, makes it clear from the very
start of his gospel that the unrepentant high priests, like the Pharisees,
stand in an adversarial relationship to John.
Jesus and the Priests
In Matthew, Sadducees join with the Pharisees in asking Jesus to perform
some miraculous sign. Both groups act in bad faith and apparently seek
to embarrass Jesus when He fails. Jesus replies that they know how to
read the signs of changing weather but cannot read the signs of the times.
Matthew means by the signs of the times the manifest signs of the
in-breaking of Gods reign in Jesus person and ministry. Matthews Jesus
tells them again that they will receive only one sign: the sign of Jonah,
which Matthew, as we have seen, interprets as Jesus resurrection. (Mt
16:1-4; cf. 12:38-42)
This story points to the paschal mystery as the sign from heaven which
the Pharisees and the Sadducees both need to acknowledge but will reject. The confrontation in Matthew recalls the confrontation between
John the Baptizer and the same two groups of hypocrites. (Mt 3:7-12) It
also anticipates Jesus warning against the leaven (teaching) of the Pharisees and Sadducees. (Mt 16:6-12; 22:23-34) When read in context, therefore, Matthews association of the Sadducees with the Pharisees in testing
Jesus gives yet another indication that in the evangelists eyes, the
Sadducees denial of the resurrection made them particularly reprehensible. It also suggests that, in Matthews judgment, Pharisaical denial of
227
Jesus resurrection linked them doctrinally to the Sadducees even though

they defended belief in bodily resurrection.35
As in Mark, Jesus predicts three times that He will suffer crucifixion at
the hands of the chief priests and the scribes in Jerusalem but that He will
rise from the dead on the third day. In his first prediction, Jesus includes
the whole Sanhedrin in the list of His executioners. In His second prediction of the paschal mystery Jesus does not mention the chief priests and
scribes by name. He says that men will crucify Him; but Matthew clearly
has the chief priests and scribes in mind, although the more generic term
probably includes Pilate and his soldiers as well. (Mt 16:21-3, 17:22-3,
20:17-9)
As in Marks gospel, the most important confrontations between Jesus
and the temple priesthood occur during His final Jerusalem ministry. In
both gospels, those confrontations dramatize the issues which divided
Jesus and the chief priests, issues for which Jesus died. Matthew, however,
modifies Marks account of the cleansing of the temple in three ways.
Mark, as we have seen, inserts the temple cleansing between Jesus cursing of the fig tree and the disciples discovery later that same day that the
tree has withered. Mark, therefore, makes the barrenness of the fig tree a
symbol of the barrenness of the temple priests who use the house of God
as a means of fattening their own pocketbooks. Mark then contrasts the
hypocritical worship of the priests with authentic, faith-filled Christian
prayer. (Mk 11:12-25)
Matthew, as we have seen, mutes Marks symbolism. In Matthew, Jesus
curses the tree the day after he cleanses the temple. By destroying Marks
triptych, Matthew transforms the cursing of the tree into a story about
the efficacy of prayer and blurs Marks reference to the sinfulness and
cupidity of the temple priests.
Marks Jesus says as he overturns the money-changing tables and the
seats of the pigeon sellers, It is written, My house is a house of prayer
for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves. Matthews Jesus
omits the words for all nations. (Mk 11:15-19; Mt 21:13) The text
from Isaiah which Jesus cites actually says for all peoples. (Is 56:7) The
fact that the temple no longer existed may have motivated Matthews
editorial omission.
Finally, Mark portrays the cleansing of the temple as the event which
turned the temple priests decisively against Jesus; for he adds that from
then on the chief priests wanted to destroy Jesus and refrained only our
243- 246; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 191-192; Jean Le Moyne, O.S.B. Le
sadducens (Paris: Librairie Le Coffre, 1972), pp. 123-127, 129-135; F. Dreyfus, O.P,
Largument scripturaire de Jsus in faveur de la resurrection des morts (Marc XII,
26-27), Revue Biblique, 66(1959), pp. 213-224; Xavier Quinza Lleo, La Reflexion
biblica sobre los Signos de los Tiempos, Estudios Biblicos, 48(1990), pp. 317-334.
228
of fear, because of Jesus popularity with the crowds. (Mk 11:15-9) Matthew, by contrast, postpones the priests decision to do away with Jesus
until after a series of subsequent confrontations. (Mt 21:45-6) Matthew,
therefore, seems to have desired to make it clearer than Mark that other
motives besides the cleansing of the temple motivated the high priests
animosity toward Jesus. By postponing his assertion that the chief priests
had decided to kill Jesus, Matthew implicitly points to those other motives: 1) Jesus messianic pretensions, however He qualified them; 2) Jesus
claim to speak with divine authority; 3) Jesus denunciation of the temple
priesthood for failing to repent at His own and the Baptizers preaching;
and 4) Jesus prophecy that the priests intransigence would lead to the
transfer of Gods kingdom to other people and to other leaders. All these
things together, Matthew seems to say, caused the chief priests to seek
Jesus life.36
After the cleansing of the temple, Matthew inserts an incident completely absent from Marks account. After cleansing the temple, Jesus remains there and heals the blind and the lame. As he does so children
shout, Hosanna to the Son of David, event though the Davidic messiah was not supposed to heal as Jesus does. The chief priests react with
indignation and ask Jesus if He hears what the children are saying. The
question indicates that they desire Jesus to deny the messianic title with
which the children are greeting Him.
In His reply, Jesus alludes to two Scripture texts: Ps 8:2 LXX and Wis
10:21. Jesus answers that He does hear what the children are saying and
then asks the chief priests and scribes: Have you never read, Out of the
mouths of babes and sucklings you have brought perfect praise? (Mt
21:12-7) This text from the Septuagint translation of Psalm 8 contrasts
the exalted majesty of God with the weak ones on earth who proclaim it.
The psalm calls Gods little ones mere babes. That Jesus would have cited
the Septuagint version of Psalm 8 has little historical probability. Matthew, however, in this text alludes to Jesus divinity, since Jesus Himself
receives the praise of the babes just as God does in the psalm. The citation also contrasts the spontaneous, childlike faith of Gods little ones
with priestly unbelief. Finally, Jesus reply to the priests alludes to His
response to the Baptizers disciples that He represents a different kind of
messiah from the Davidic messiah of popular apocalyptic. (Mt 11:2-6)
The text from Wisdom says: Wisdom opened the mouth of the dumb
and gave speech to the tongues of babes. The text from which this verse
comes alludes to Exodus. The Wisdom text points, then, to Jesus person
36. Cf. F.M. Braun, O.P., Lexpulsion des vendeurs du temple, Revue Biblique,
38(1929), pp. 178-200; Donald J. Verseput, Jesus Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and
Encounter in the Temple: A Geographical Motif in Matthews Gospel, Novum
Testamentum, 36(1994), pp. 105-121.
229
and ministry as effecting a new exodus, a new liberation of Israel. Having

rebuked the priests and scribes, Jesus withdraws to Bethany.37
The next day the chief priests and members of the Sanhedrin return to
the attack and confront Jesus a second time. This time, as in Mark, Jesus
first challenges the chief priests to acknowledge the prophetic Breath
present in both Him and John. (Mt 21:23-27) Jesus then tells the parable
of the two sons and the parable of the wicked servants who slay the servants and the son of the owner of a vineyard. As we saw, in examining
Jesus relationship to the Pharisees, Matthews Jesus applies both parables
simultaneously to the chief priests and to the Pharisees.38 (Mt 21:33-46)
Matthew includes a slightly edited version of Marks account of Jesus
exchange with the Saducees over the resurrection of the body. (Mt
22:23-33) As in Mark, the Sadducees confuse resurrection with resuscitation. At the heart of their mockery lies their lack of faith in Gods power
to raise the dead. (Mt 22:29-33)
In Matthew, though not in Mark, however, the crowds greet Jesus teaching with astonishment. (Mt 22:33-4) The astonishment calls attention to
the importance of the confrontation. Erroneous teaching about the resurrection exemplifies the leaven of the Sadducees.39 (Mt 16:1-4)
Marks Judas betrays Jesus out of pure malice (Mk 14:10-11); Matthews
Judas does it for money, for thirty pieces of silver. As we shall see, the
evangelist endows the sum with prophetic meaning. (Mt 26:14-16,
27:3-10)
The mob takes the arrested Jesus to the palace of Caiphas, where the
whole Sanhedrin has assembled. (Mt 26:47-51) Matthew reproduces the
substance of Marks account of Jesus trial by the Sanhedrin. 40 (Mt
26:59-68; Mk 14:53-65) Matthew, as we have seen, mutes the implicit
theological significance of Jesus response to the high priest by editing
out Marks allusion to the calming of the storm. Matthews high priest
finds, however, sufficient motive for pronouncing a judgment of blasphemy in Jesus reference to the Son of Man. As we have seen, the refer37. Cf. NJBC, 42:125-126; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 269-272; Harrington, op. cit.,
38. Cf. Jean Le Moyne, O.S.B., Les sadducens (Paris: Librairie Le Coffre, 1972), pp. 123127; 129-135;Daube, op. cit., pp. 151-157, 217-223; NJBC, 42:127; Radermakers,
pp. 259-261.
312- 314; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 217-275.
40. Jo-Ann A. Brant argues that in Matthew Herods oath to the daughter of Herodias
and the high priests adjuration of Jesus under oath during the trial before the
sanhedrin both dramatize why Jesus forbids His disciples the use of oaths. See: Jo-Ann
A. Brant Infelicitous Oaths in the Gospel of Matthew, Journal for the Study of the
New Testament, 63(1996), pp. 3-20.
230
ence conflates the coming of the Son of man in Dan 7:13 and Ps 110:1,
a royal psalm of enthronement.
Matthew also adds the term hereafter (ap arti) to Jesus response to
the high priest as Mark reproduces it. The term marks Jesus very trial by
the Sanhedrin as already beginning the final divine judgment which He
will one day pronounce when He returns as the apocalyptic Son of Man.
Jesus, then, in claiming the judicial authority of the Son of Man implicitly asserts that He has the power to reverse the judgment which the
Sanhedrin is about the pass upon Him. The high priest responds to this
claim to divine prerogative with a charge of blasphemy. As in Mark, the
Sanhedrin condemns Jesus to death, after which they spit upon Him,
strike Him, and slap Him.41 (Mt 26:63-8)
As in Mark, the chief priests and elders assemble the following morning and decide to hand Jesus over to Pilate, the Roman governor, for
execution. At this point, Matthew abandons Marks version of the passion and inserts the story of Judass remorse and despair. Judas again confronts the high priests and declares that he has sinned in betraying innocent blood. The high priests reply contemptuously: What is that to us?
See to it yourself. Judas then throws at their feet the thirty pieces of
silver which his treachery has earned, departs, and hangs himself.
The chief priests betray the same kind of shallow legalism which Jesus
denounced in the Pharisees. They debate how they should dispose legally
of the blood money. They procure a potters field as a burial ground for
strangers. Matthew notes that the field still bears the name, The Field of
Blood. (Mt 27:3-10)
Matthew then links the thirty pieces of silver and its use by the high
priests to his theme of fulfillment. In buying the field, the chief priests
fulfill an incident described in Zech 11:12-13.42 There the prophet receives a wage of thirty shekels for tending sheep. Zecharaiah is performing a prophetic gesture. God deems the paltry wage a sign that His people
41. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Jesus as Seducer, Theology Digest, 42(1995), pp. 26-29;
Donald Senior, C.P., Matthews Special Material in the Passion Story: Implications
for the Evangelists Redactional Techinque and Theological Perspective,Ephemerides
Theologicae Lovaniensis, 63(1987), pp. 272-294; Revisiting Matthews Special Material in the Passion Narrative: A Dialogue with Raymond Brown, Ephemerides
Theologicae Lovaniensis, 70(1994), pp. 417-424; NJBC, 42:154-155; Radermakers,
pp. 328-336.
42. The fulfillment prophecy which Matthew cites does not occur in the Old Testament
as such. Although Matthew derives some of its content from Zech 11:12-13, the
evangelist attributes the prophecy to Jeremiah. It would appear that in formulating the
fulfillment prophecy, Matthew conflated elements from both Jeremiah and Zechariah
but possibly chose to cite Jeremiah as his source because Jeremiah occupies a place of
greater eminence among the Old Testament prophets. Cf. Brown, The Death of the
Messiah, I, pp.637-652.
231
fail to value both God and His word properly. Zechariah breaks two shepherds crooks, one symbolizing good will and the other symbolizing union.
The first act predicts the ending of the covenant with Israel; the second,
the separation of Israel and Judah. The citation implicitly points to the
chief priests as worthless shepherds and as the cause of Jerusalems eventual downfall.43 (Zech 11:15-7)
As in Mark, Pilate senses that the chief priests are asking him to execute
Jesus for legally dubious motives. He tries to release Jesus by asking the
crowds whether to release either Him or Barabbas; but the chief priests
outfox the Roman.44 (Mt 27:15, 20)
As Jesus hangs on the cross dying, the chief priests, scribes, and elders,
all of those responsible for His death, mock Him blasphemously. (Mt
27:42-43) The priests deride the salvation which Jesus has offered to Israel, they contemn His messianic pretensions, and they mock Him as
someone beyond saving. Finally, the priests ridicule Jesus claims to be
Son of God and take pleasure in the fact that God has abandoned Him.
Their conduct recalls that of the godless men in Wis 1:16-2:20, who murder
the virtuous because their innocent lives reproach the wickedness of the godless. The priests mockery also derides cherished Christian beliefs.45
The Chief Priests and the Resurrection
After Jesus dies, Matthew records another incident not found in either
Mark or Luke. The chief priests, joined by Pharisees, recall Jesus predictions of His own resurrection and ask Pilate to post guards at the tomb,
lest Jesus disciples steal the body and then claim that He has risen and
the last fraud will be worse than the first. Pilate grants them a detachment of soldiers to guard the tomb. (Mt 27:62-4)
When the requested guards actually witness the descent of an angel
and see the empty tomb, they report all they have seen to the chief priests
who bribe them to spread the lie that the disciples stole the body. The
priests promise to protect the guards from punishment by Pilate should
he hear of what they have done. The chief priests remain intransigent and
maliciously unrepentant to the bitter end. (Mt 28:11-5)
It would also appear at least plausible that Matthew tells this story of
priestly and Pharisaical perfidy in refutation of one of the arguments
43. Cf. Pierre Benoit, Jesus and the Gospel, translated by Benet Weatherhead (New York,
NY: Seabury, 1973), I, pp. 189-207; Donald Senior, The Passion Narrative According
to Matthew: A Redactional Study (Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1975), pp.
343-397; NJBC, 42:158; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 340-342; Harrington, op. cit.,
45. Cf. Terence L. Donaldson, The Mockers and the Son of God (Matthew 27.37-44),
Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 41(1995), pp. 3-18.
232
against Jesus resurrection bruited about in the synagogue across the

street. (Cf. Mt 28:15) If so, the allegation that Jesus disciples had actually stolen His body and then lied about the resurrection would exemplify the leaven of false teaching which Matthew has repeatedly deplored.46
Matthew reproduces Marks account of the relationship between Jesus
and the chief priests with only minor variations. If anything, he stresses
even more their perfidy and the Sadducees lack of religious faith in the
resurrection.
Still, Matthews handling of this linkage in Marks gospel acquires slightly
different connotations in that, for reasons already considered, Matthew
associates more closely than Mark does the unbelief and hypocrisy of the
chief priests and that of the Pharisaical leaders of the Jewish community
in Antioch. Moreover, Matthews insistence on the need for Christians to
reject the leaven of the Sadducees transforms them into a special type of
religious unbelief.
Matthews concern with incipient clericalism in Antioch also gives his
portrait of the priests more explicit ecclesial connotations. Besides avoiding Pharisaical greed and hypocrisy, Christian leaders must eschew all the
vices which the chief priests incarnate: religious compromise and unbelief, the simoniacal exploitation of the poor, the intransigent refusal to
repent, corrupt and irresponsible religious leadership.
In this chapter, I have analyzed all but one of the negative dramatic
linkages in Matthew. The final section meditates Jesus relationship to
Pilate and to the empire he represented.
(V)
Although Pilate makes no personal appearance in Matthews gospel until
Jesus trial, as in Mark, one finds a tacit allusion to him in Jesus repudiation of the mode of governance of the kings of the Gentiles. As in Mark,
Jesus makes this point in correcting the ambition of the apostles after the
ten become indignant at the attempt of James and John to secure a special place of honor for themselves in the kingdom. Matthew reproduces
Marks text with inconsequential editorial adjustments. In both gospels
Jesus insists that those in a position of leadership in the new Israel must
not lord it over others as the kings of the Gentiles do. Instead they must
rest content to serve one another, to act as the slaves of the community,
and to follow a servant messiah even to the cross. (Mt 20:24-8; Mk
10:41-5)
357- 360.
233
Jesus and Pilate

When Mark first names Pilate, he assumes that the reader will recognize
him as the Roman governor; but Matthew makes no such assumption
and supplies Pilates title. (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1) In Matthew, when Pilate
asks Jesus whether or not He claims the title King of the Jews, Jesus
replies with the same diffident response He gave to the high priest in His
trial before the Sanhedrin. Jesus says: You have said so. (Mt 27:11) One
could, however, interpret Jesus answer to mean either You have said it,
not I or You have answered your own question.
As in Mark, Pilate wonders at Jesus silent refusal (as suffering servant)
to defend Himself against the high priests accusations against Him. As
in Mark, Pilate tries to outwit the high priests by asking the crowds to choose
between Jesus and Barabbas, only to find that the high priests have persuaded
the crowds to choose Barabbas. (Mt 27:15-7, 21-3; Mk 15:6-15)
Matthew, however, includes an incident in Jesus trial which Mark omits.
The wife of Pilate sends him a message as he sits on the throne of judgment awaiting the crowds choice between Jesus and Barabbas. Pilates
wife urges him to have nothing to do with that righteous man, for I have
suffered much over him today in a dream. (Mt 27:19) Her dream recalls
the dreams in Matthews infancy narrative which there, and probably
here, communicate a divine message. Matthew thus underscores Pilates
malice more than Mark. Pilate will accede to the crowds and order Jesus
crucified, despite the fact that God has warned Him not to do so. The
incident, however, also gives Pilate a clearer motive than Mark does for
resisting initially the crowds call for Jesus blood.
The dream highlights as well the hypocrisy with which Matthews Pilate
seeks to exonerate himself of any guilt for Jesus death. In Matthew, though
not in Mark, Pilate, before condemning Jesus, calls for a bowl of water
and washes his hands in it, saying, I am innocent of this mans blood; see
to it yourselves. (Mt 27:24) Still, when the crowds persist in calling for
Jesus blood, as in Mark, Pilate accedes to their demands and orders Jesus
scourging and crucifixion. (Mt 27:25-6)
Pilates reference to Jesus innocent blood recalls Judass protest to the
high priests that he has betrayed innocent blood. (Mt 27:3-10) Pilates
words also foreshadow the cry of the crowd that Jesus blood be upon
them and their children. By insisting on the innocence of the blood which
the whole people call down upon themselves, Matthew underscores
both their guilt in calling for Jesus execution as well as the atoning character of Jesus sacrifice. Repentance and faith can, then, turn the blood of
judgment into the reconciling blood of atonement.47
47. Cf. NJBC, 42:159-160; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 342-343; Harrington, op. cit.,
pp. 387-393; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 342-345; Barbara Reid, Puzzling
Passages (Matthew 27:24), The Bible Today, 34(1996), pp. 94, 120.
234
The Roman soldiers execute Pilates order. They strip Jesus, scourge
Him, crown Him with thorns, cover Him with a scarlet cloak, and mock
Him as king of the Jews. Matthew takes Jesus blindfolding by the soldiers for granted. I shall consider the symbolism of the scarlet cloak in
reflecting on Jesus relationship to the crowds.
After mocking Jesus, the soldiers lead Him to Golgotha, the hill of
execution. Mark describes the soldiers offering Jesus wine mixed with
myrrh, a pain-killing drug. Jesus refuses it. In other words, Marks Jesus
embraces His sufferings. Matthew replaces the drug with gall. This bitter
drink dramatizes in Matthew the bitterness of Jesus death and symbolizes the cup which the Father requires Jesus to drink. (Mt 27:27-34; cf.
Mk 15:16-23)
As in Mark, the soldiers crucify Jesus and then divide His garments
among them by casting lots. They post above His head His crime: Jesus
of Nazareth the King of the Jews. As in Mark, both the crowds and the
two robbers crucified with Jesus mock and revile Him. Executed by Pilate
as an insurrectionist, Jesus dies a death of abandonment, degradation,
and ultimate rejection. (Mt 27:33-44; Mk 15:22-32)
In Matthew as in Mark, a darkness portending Gods judgment on
Israel enshrouds the land from the six to the ninth hour, while Jesus hangs
on the cross. Mark mentions that Jesus was crucified at the third hour
and so suffered for six hours in all. Matthew, however, omits this detail.48
(Mt 27:45; Mk 15:25, 33-9)
As in Mark, at the ninth hour Jesus prays the first line of Psalm 22, the
prayer of the innocent poor who trusts in Gods power to vindicate Him.
As in Mark, the mocking bystanders say He is calling on Elijah. One of
the bystanders, seemingly out of sympathy, then offers Jesus sour wine on
a sponge. After drinking Jesus dies. (Mt 27:45-50; Mk 15:33-7)
Matthew, however, uses a different verb from Mark in order to describe
Jesus death. In Mark, Jesus cries out with a loud voice and expires
(exepneusen). Matthew says that after Jesus cried out, He handed over
His breath (apheken to pneuma). (Mt 27:50; Mk 15:37) In Mark, then,
Jesus suffers death; in Matthew He actively hands over His breath, or life
principle, to God.49
As we have seen, in Mark only a single sign follows Jesus death: namely,
the rending of the temple veil. Matthew adds other apocalyptic signs,
both positive and negative, to Marks single sign. Three negative signs
the rending of the veil, the earthquakes, and the splitting of rockssym48. Cf. Rufino Maria Grandez, Las Tinieblas en las Meurte de Jesus: Historia de la
Exegesis de Lc 23:44-45a (Mt 27:25, Mc 15,33), Estudios Biblicos, 47(1989), pp.
177-223.
49. Cf. Gerard S. Sloyan, Jesus on Trial (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1973), pp. 74-88;
NJBC, 42:161-163; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 344-345; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
235
bolize divine judgment and anticipate the earthquake which will accompany the discovery of Jesus empty tomb. They designate both the death
and resurrection, therefore, as judgmental, apocalyptic acts of God. The
positive signsthe opening of the tombs and the resurrection of devout
Jewsalso foreshadow Jesus resurrection. The fact that those who rise
fail to appear to the residents of Jerusalem until Jesus rises from the dead
dramatizes the fact that His resurrection effects resurrection in others.
The rending of the temple veil has slightly different connotations in
Mark and in Matthew. In Mark it signifies more the replacement of the
Mosaic order with the new Christian covenant. Matthew sees the old
covenant fulfilled in the new. Hence, in his passion narrative, the rending
of the temple veil probably foreshadows more the destruction of the
temple.
Overawed at these apocalyptic signs, one of the Roman soldiers testifies, Truly this was the Son of God. (Mt 27:51-54; Mk 15:39) In both
Mark and Matthew the soldiers testimony foreshadows the conversion
of the Gentiles.50 (Mt 14:33)
While Matthew recognizes with Mark that Jesus died a cruel death of
rejection and abandonment, his interpolations of Marks account of Jesus
death transform it into something more than the grim and violent
eschatological struggle with the forces of evil which Marks narrative depicts. Matthew in no way denies either the eschatological character of the
struggle or its grimness. In fact, he underscores the eschatological significance of Jesus death with the apocalyptic signs which follow upon Jesus
death. Matthew also insists on its bitterness.
The rock splitting earthquake and resurrections which follow Jesus
death dramatize its cosmic, eschatological, and apocalyptic significance.
In Matthew, Jesus inaugurates the end time by choosing to die for sins in
utter abandonment by humans. In choosing to die, however, Jesus acquires the power to raise others from the dead, as the immediate resurrection of many saints symbolizes. His saving death, therefore, begins the
final resurrection. It has revelatory significance for the whole cosmos and
makes the earth shudder at its disclosure.51
As in Mark, Joseph of Aramathea secures Pilates permission to bury
Jesus. (Mk 15:42-47, 27:57-61) Matthew, however, adds that Pilate also
acceded to the request of the chief priests to post a guard at Jesus tomb
lest His disciples steal His body and claim He has risen. (Mt 27:62-6)
50. Cf. Jacques Winandy, O.S.B., A Psychology of Faith: Matt 27:54 in the Light of
Exod 14:30-31, Revue Biblique, 104(1997), pp. 368-372.
51. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, pp. 1118-1140; Donald Senior, The Death
of Jesus and the Resurrection of the Holy Ones, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
38(1976), pp. 312- 329; NJBC, 42:166; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 350-352;
236
When, moreover, the terrified soldiers tell the chief priests of the descent of the angel and the opening of Jesus empty tomb, the chief priests,
in paying the soldiers to spread the lie that the disciples stole the body
also promise to patch things up with Pilate, if what the soldiers are saying
comes to his attention. The remark suggests that Pilate would willingly
connive with the chief priests to undermine faith in the resurrection. (Mt
28:11-5) Mark makes no mention of these last two events. Matthew,
therefore, suggests that Pilate believes as little in Jesus resurrection as the
chief priests.52
Matthew like Mark has Jesus insist that leaders in the kingdom of God
cannot function in the oppressive, autocratic way of Gentile kings. Instead they must serve the community as its slave in imitation of a servant
messiah who lays down His life for the ransom of others. As in Mark,
then, Pilate serves as a negative role model for all Christians but especially for all Christian leaders. Besides vacillation, moral compromise,
cruelty, and authoritarian, oppressive behavior, Matthew names other vices
which Pilate exemplifies: disobedience to God and hypocrisy.
In this section I have considered so far the positive and negative linkages which structure Matthews story of Jesus. The next chapter meditates the crucial ambivalent linkages for what they tell us about Matthews
narrative purpose in retelling Jesus story.
404- 408; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 354-356. For a study of Matthews
redaction of Marks passion narrative, see: Donald P. Senior, The Passion Narrative
According to Matthew: A Redactional Study (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1975).
237
Chapter 9
Ambivalent Dramatic Linkages in Matthew
This chapter analyzes Jesus ambivalent relationship to the crowds and to
His own disciples. As in Mark, Jesus relates only positively to both groups;
but they relate ambivalently to Him. As in Mark, the time of decision
comes for both groups with the paschal mystery.
This chapter divides into two parts. Part one ponders Jesus relationship to the crowds. Part two examines His relationship to His disciples.
(I)
In Matthew as in Mark the crowds relate ambivalently to Jesus. Sometimes they react with astonishment and enthusiasm; but they fail finally
to grasp the full significance of either His person or His mission. In the
end, the Judean crowds turn on Him. Jesus for His part never wavers in
His relationship to the crowds and regards them with zeal and with compassion.1
The Crowds in Jesus Galilean Ministry
In Matthew as in Mark, crowds from Jerusalem and Judea flock to John
the Baptizer in order to submit to his baptism of repentance. (Mt 3:5-6;
Mk 1:4) They also flock to Jesus. Jews come to Him from Galilee and the
Decapolis and from other places beyond the Jordan. (Mt 4:23-5) In Mark
the cure of the leper first draws the crowds to Jesus. (Mk 1:40-45) Matthew postpones the cure until after the sermon on the mount. (Mt 8:1-4)
Moreover, as we shall see, Matthews story of the lepers cure serves different narrative ends from Marks. In Matthew, Jesus many acts of power
His teaching, healing, and exorcismssymbolize the arrival of the kingdom and initially attract the crowds to Him. In Mark, the lepers cure
foreshadows Jesus impending marginalization and the paschal mystery.
Sight of the crowds motivates Jesus to ascend the mountain where He
makes His inaugural proclamation of the kingdom. (Mt 5:1-2) Jesus proclaims the new covenant from the mountaintop, the same place from
which God proclaimed the Mosaic covenant. Now, however, from this
exalted and symbolically privileged place, Jesus Immanuel dictates to the
crowds the terms of the new covenant with personal divine authority.
After Jesus cures Peters mother-in-law, crowds gather at Peters house
in the evening to hear Jesus teach and to experience His healing. (Mt
8:16-7; cf. Mk 1:32-4, Is 53:4) The sight of the crowds the following day
1. Cf. Warren Carter, The Crowds in Matthews Gospel, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
55(1993), pp. 54-67.
238
motivates Jesus to cross the Sea of Galilee in order to escape them. The
incident suggests that the crowds had grown to unmanageable size. The
escape also serves as a narrative transition to the story of the calming of
the storm. (Mt 8:18, 23-7)
As Jesus tours Galilee proclaiming the kingdom and healing every kind
of infirmity, He looks with compassion on the crowds who swarm to
Him, because they seem to Him like sheep without a shepherd. (Mt
9:35-8) As in Mark, the pastoral imagery indites the leaders of Israel for
failing to care for the masses of the people. The same imagery depicts
Jesus as the good shepherd who faithfully tends His sheep. (Cf. Num
27:16-7, 1 Kgs 22:17, Zech 10:2)
Matthews Jesus pastoral compassion for the crowds finds vocal expression in His instruction to the disciples: The harvest is plentiful, but the
laborers are few; pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into the harvest. (Mt 9:35-8) One finds no parallel saying in Mark.
Jesus pronouncement underscores the divine origin of any pastoral vocation and encourages prayer for such vocations. Jesus instruction also
implicitly characterizes the call of the Twelve, which prefaces the missionary discourse. (Mt 10:1-4) In Matthew, moreover, Jesus mission of
the Twelve to the crowds foreshadows the Great Commission to evangelize the nations which ends Matthews gospel. After calling the Twelve
and instructing them, Jesus continues His tour of evangelization in which
they as fishers of men now share. (Mt 11:1)
After telling the disciples of John that the messianic age has arrived in
His ministry, even though He does not play the part of a Davidic messiah, Matthews Jesus, as we have seen, turns to the crowds and testifies to
Johns asceticism, courage, and prophetic greatness.2 (Mt 11:7-19)
Jesus also reproaches His contemporaries for their lack of faith in both
Himself and John. Matthews Jesus singles out for special condemnation
the places where He has worked the most miracles: namely, Chorazin
and Capernaum. The woes which Jesus calls down upon the lake towns
foreshadow His final woes against the scribes and Pharisees.3 Jesus admonishes the lake towns that sinful Gentiles, the people of Tyre, Sidon,
and Sodom, would have responded more readily than they to the signs
which He has worked in their midst. Hence, on the day of judgment the
unbelieving lake towns will find themselves cast down into Hades for
their unbelief. (Mt 11:20-4)
Jesus discourse to the crowds after his testimony to John ends with
thanks to the Father for hiding the truth of His message from the wise
3. Cf. Joseph A. Comber, C.F.X., The Composition and Literary Characteristics of Matt
11:20-24, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 39(1977), pp. 497-504.
Chapter 9: Ambivalent Dramatic Linkages in Matthew
239
and understanding and for revealing it to mere babes, to the weak and
small of the earth. The faith of the disciples contrasts with the unbelief of
the unrepentant lake towns. Finally, as we have seen, speaking with the
voice of divine wisdom, Jesus invites the crowds to bear the yoke of the
new covenant He proclaims.4 (Mt 11:25-30) These discourses to the
crowds find no parallel in Mark.
Large numbers of people follow Jesus after He heals the man with a
withered hand on the sabbath. Here as elsewhere, Matthew portrays the
healings which flow from Jesus as part of His mission of atonement. (Mt
12:15-37)
The crowds prevent Jesus relatives from seeing him. Matthew, as we
have already seen, omits the humiliating detail from Mark that Jesus
relatives regarded Him as mad and came to take Him in hand. In Matthew, Jesus relatives merely desire to converse with Him. Matthew, however, uses the incident as Mark does in order to have Jesus proclaim to the
crowds that whoever does the will of the Father in heaven is His sibling
and relative. Jesus comes, therefore, to transform the crowds into the
family of God. (Mt 12:46-50)
Jesus directs the first part of His parabolic discourse principally to the
crowds and teaches them, as in Mark, from a boat on the Sea of Galilee.
(Mt 13:1-2) Matthew, however, in contrast to Mark, introduces the theme
of fulfillment in order to explain why Jesus addresses the crowds in parables.
Matthew interpolates Ps 78:2-3, which states, I will open my mouth in
a parable; I will utter dark saying from of old, things that we have heard
and known, which our fathers have told us. Matthew rewrites the Psalm
to have it say: I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter what has
been hidden since the foundation of the world. (Mt 13:35) For Matthew, then, the obscurity of Jesus parables makes them a fitting way for
Him to discourse about the saving secrets of the divine mind, to which
He has privileged and conscious access. (Mt 13:51-52) The citation transforms the parabolic discourse from Marks inaugural proclamation of the
kingdom into a meditation on the deep, providential, and mysterious
wisdom which the kingdom embodies.5
Jesus explains this secret divine wisdom to His disciples in private. (Mt
13:36-52) In Matthew as in Mark, their understanding of His message
contrasts with the unbelief and skepticism which Jesus encounters in the
crowds. Matthew stresses this point even more than Mark. (Mt 13:10-7;
Mk 4:10-2)
4. Cf. M. Jack Suggs, Wisdom, Christology, and Law in Matthews Gospel (Cambridge, MA:
Harvard, 1970), pp. 33-61; NJBC, 42:74; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 163-166; Albright
5. Cf. Edwards F. Siegman, C.PP.S., Teaching in Parables (Mk 4, 10-12; Lk 8, 9-10; Mt
13, 10-15, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 23(1961), pp. 161-181.
240
First, Matthew inserts a saying of Jesus which explains why He responds

to the unbelief of the crowds with obscure stories: For to the one who
has will more be given, and such a one will have abundance; but from the
one who has not even what such a one has will be taken away. (Mt
13:12) Mark directs this saying to the disciples and treats it as a teaching
on the need for generosity. Matthew, however, aims the same saying at
the crowds and uses it in order to warn that unbelief breeds unbelief,
since the rejection of divine favor leads to its withdrawal.
Second, Matthew immediately invokes the theme of fulfillment twice
in order explain why Jesus hides His message from the crowds with
parables. Matthew sees in Jesus parabolic discourse a fulfillment of Is
6:9-10. Moreover, the proverb in verse twelve, considered in the preceding paragraph, colors the citation from Isaiah. The Isaian text deplores
Israels dullness of heart and resistance to Gods word. Matthew therefore
uses the obscurity of the parables in order to warn the synagogue across
the street that in resisting the gospel they risk a withdrawal of divine,
gracious enlightenment which will leave them mired in unbelief.
In a second invocation of the theme of fulfillment, Matthew stresses
the blessedness of the disciples who possess the enlightenment of faith.
They see what prophets and righteous Jews have for centuries been longing to see. (Mt 13:16-7; cf. Lk 10:23-4) The second citation heightens
the contrast between the unbelieving crowds and the believing, insightful
disciples at the same time that it implicitly develops the theme of fulfillment.
Matthew dramatizes the popular unbelief which Jesus encounters in
other incidents. As in Mark, the people of Nazareth reject Jesus. Their
skepticism foreshadows Jesus ultimate rejection by His own people. (Mt
13:53-8) At Caesarea Philippi, Matthews Peter, like Marks, makes it clear
that Jesus is evoking a variety of responses from the crowds. People commonly look on Him as John the Baptizer returned from the dead, as
Elijah, or as a major prophet. (Mt 16:13-14) After the transfiguration,
Jesus, Peter, James, and John find crowds of people witnessing the disciples failure to exorcise an epileptic demoniac boy. In Matthew as in
Mark, Jesus rebukes the unbelief of the crowds, who seem to have gathered out of simple curiosity.6 (Mt 17:14-20)
The crowds follow Jesus when He withdraws into the desert on hearing
news of the Baptizers death. Despite their obtuseness, Jesus looks on
them with compassion and heals their sick. He then feeds them by working the first miracle of the loaves. As in Mark, the miracle foreshadows
193- 210; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 163-171; David S. New, The Occurrence
of Auton in Matthew 13.15 and the Process of Text Assimilation, New Testament
Studies, 37(1991), pp. 478-480.
241
the eucharist, and the crowds who partake of this first miraculous meal
foreshadow Jewish Christian communities like Matthews who will one
day break eucharistic bread together. After the crowds eat, Jesus dismisses
them and retires to a mountain to pray by Himself. (Mt 14:15-23)
Another outpouring of healings precedes the second miracle of the
loaves, this time in Gentile territory. Jesus again climbs a mountain, where
crowds of people seek Him out. Moreover, the abundance of the healings
He works evokes wonder from the crowds who glorify God for what they
see. (Mt 15:29-31) This outpouring of miracles and ascent of a mountain recall the outpouring of healings and exorcisms which introduced
the sermon on the mount. The miracles and the ascent therefore link the
second miracle of the loaves, which foreshadows the eucharist of the Gentiles, to Jesus inaugural proclamation of the kingdom. (Mt 15:32-39) In
Matthew, of course, the Gentile crowds prefigure especially Gentile,
God-fearing Christians.7
After a story of conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees over ritual
purity, Jesus calls the crowds to Himself and warns them against the hypocrisy of the Pharisees by telling them that an unrepentant heart defiles
them, not the failure to observe ritual purity. (Mt 15:10-1) This warning
will find an echo in Jesus Jerusalem ministry. Just before His eschatological
discourse, Jesus will again warn the crowds against the hypocrisy and bad
example of the scribes and Pharisees. Then, in the presence of the crowds,
He will call down upon the Pharisees the woes of the new covenant. (Mt
23:13-36) The double warning envisages the pernicious teachings of the
Pharisees which keeps the crowds from converting.
The Judean Crowds
After Jesus ecclesial discourse, He retires to the Judean deserts beyond
the Jordan. Large crowds follow Him there, and He heals them. (Mt
19:1-2) A great crowd follows Jesus and witnesses His healing of two
blind men. Matthew reproduces the substance of Marks account of the
triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The Judean crowds spread their garments
on the road in front of Jesus and pave His way with cut branches as He
enters the Holy City with both humility and messianic authority. (Mt
21:4; Zech 9:9) As in Mark, the crowds acknowledge Jesus publicly as
messiah.
Matthews crowds cry: Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he
who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest! The crowds
words have enhanced liturgical connotations in Matthew. Mark, in his
account of the triumphal entry, uses the liturgical term Hosanna. It
functioned as a word of acclamation in Jewish liturgy. It means Save, I
7. Cf. NJBC, 42:96, 102; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 202-204, 212-213; Harrington,
op. cit., pp. 218-223, 240-242.
242
pray. Matthew, however, adds two other liturgical acclamations. The

phrase the highest probably refers to God. The phrase blessed is he
who comes in the name of the Lord alludes to Ps. 118:26, which pilgrims to Jerusalem sang during a gate, or entrance, liturgy.
In Matthew, Jesus triumphal entry throws the whole of Jerusalem into
turmoil. The turmoil recalls the general consternation with which the
holy city greeted the magi in Matthews infancy narrative. (Mt 21:10-1)
After the cleansing of the temple, as Jesus heals the blind and the lame
within the temple precincts, small children echo the cry of the crowds.
(Mt 21:14-17) Neither Mark nor Luke mention this incident. As we
have seen, in justifying the childrens behavior to the chief priests, Jesus
cites Psalm 8, which addresses God. (Ps 8:1-2) The citation puts into a
theological context the liturgical allusions implicit in the crowds acclamations during the triumphant entry. God has entered His holy city and
has reclaimed His temple. The children, the little ones see and acknowledge that fact; the priests refuse.
In Matthew as in Mark, the chief priests recognize the threat which
Jesus poses to the status quo. They wish to do away with Him; but they
fear to act because of His popularity with the crowds, who persist in
interpreting Jesus actions and authority (inadequately) as prophetic.8 (Mt
21:45-6, 26:1-2)
As in Mark, when Judas betrays Jesus in the garden, a large group of
people armed with swords and clubs come to arrest Jesus. They come
from the chief priests and elders and accompany the betrayer. (Mt 26:47)
The crowds, however, begin to function as more than a backdrop to the
passion in Jesus trial before Pilate.
When Pilate during the trial of Jesus offers to release either Jesus or
Barabbas, the crowds, incited by the chief priests and elders call for the
release of Barabbas and for the crucifixion of Jesus. Matthew, however,
gives the incident his own theological twist. Mark calls Barabbas a rioter
and an assassin. (Mk 15:7) Matthew calls him a notorious criminal. (Mt
27:16) In Mark, Pilate ironically asks the crowds to choose between
Barabbas and the king of the Jews. (Mk 15:7) Matthews Pilate asks the
crowds to choose between Barabbas the criminal and Jesus the Messiah.
(Mt 27:17) By calling attention to Jesus messianic mission, Matthew
underscores the religious implications of the crowds choice. They prefer
a criminal to Gods anointed.
When Pilate protests to the blood-thirsty crowds that Jesus has done
nothing worthy of death, the people begin rioting. Pilate then calls for a
bowl of water and washes his hands in a hypocritical gesture of
self-absolution for guilt of Jesus blood. The crowds, whom Matthew here
243
designates as the whole people (pas ho laos), then call down Jesus blood
upon themselves and their children. (Mt 25:15-26)
Only Matthew records this incident and fills it with both prophetic
meaning and theological irony. The crowds prayer will find fulfillment
in the destruction of Jerusalem. Nevertheless, while the crowds make themselves and their children accountable for Jesus death, they do not realize,
though Matthew wants the reader to know it, that they are really calling
down upon themselves the blood of atonement. The phrase the whole
people recalls the angels prophecy that Jesus will save His people from
their sins. (Mt 1:21)
Moreover, Matthews repeated insistence in the course of Jesus trial
that in dying He sheds innocent blood calls attention to both dimensions of the whole peoples action. In murdering Jesus they do something heinous; but the very innocence of Jesus blood transforms Him
into the suffering servant who has the power to reconcile a sinful people
to God: i.e., to save His people from their sins. If, therefore, the people
repent and believe, they will experience the blood of Christ, not as the
blood of judgment, but as the blood of atonement.
Moreover, in the scourging and mocking of Jesus which immediately
follows. Matthew changes the color of the robe which the soldiers put
around Jesus when they mock Him. Mark speaks of a purple cloak, which
derides Jesus royal, messianic claims. Matthew, however, has the soldiers
robe Jesus in a scarlet cloak. (Mt 27:28; Mk 15:17)
Roman soldiers wore scarlet cloaks; but Matthew is probably doing
more than correcting historically Marks account of the color of the cloak
with which the mocking soldiers robe Jesus. The scarlet cloak probably
alludes to a moment in the Jewish rite of atonement, when the priests
girded a pillar of the temple with a scarlet cloth. As the year passed, the
sun would bleach it white. Its bleaching symbolized Jahwehs cleansing of
the sins of Israel, which, though scarlet, became through the forgiveness
of God, white as snow. (Is 1:18)
In other words, the crowds, in sinfully calling for Jesus death, have in
fact unwittingly called down upon themselves the atoning, forgiving blood
of Christ, who by His dying and rising will save His people from their
sins. (Mt 1:21) Only the peoples unrepentant rejection of Jesus transforms them into the objects of divine retribution. In calling for Jesus
death, the crowds are unwittingly advancing Gods secret plan of salvation. To experience that salvation, they need only repent and believe.9
9. Cf. Vincent Mora, Le Refus dIsrael (Paris: ditions du Cerf, 1986). For a scholarly
study of patristic exegesis of this passage, see: Rainer Kampling, Das Blut Christi und
die Jden (Mnster: Aschendorff, 1984); NJBC, 42:159; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
340-345; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 387-393; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 343-345;
Timothy B. Cargal, His Blood be upon Us and upon our Children: A Matthean
Double Entendre? New Testament Studies, 37(1991), pp. 101-112.
244
As Jesus hangs on the cross, passersby join in the mockery of the chief
priests. The passersby taunt: You who would destroy the temple and
build it in three days, save yourself! If you are the Son of God, come
down from the cross. (Mt 27:39-40) The passersby function as the instrument of Satan. Their words echo the tempters words when he confronted Jesus in the desert: If you are the Son of God.... (Cf. Mt 4:3, 6)
Matthew thus portrays Jesus crucifixion both as His moment of supreme
testing and as His ultimate confrontation with Satan. In Jesus crucifixion, moreover, the unbelief of the crowds takes on a Satanic character.10
The Great Commission
Finally, one may find a cryptic allusion to crowds of people in the Great
Commission which ends Matthews gospel. The risen Christ once again
speaks from the mountain top with divine authority. He joins Himself to
the Eleven as the twelfth apostle and sends forth the reconstituted new
Israel with the command: All power in heaven and on earth has been
given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Breath,
teaching them to observe everything which I have commanded you; and
lo, I am with you all days even to the close of the age. (Mt 28:18-20)
The Great Commission weaves together a remarkable number of themes
in Matthews narrative; and I shall return to it yet again in discussing
Jesus relationship to His disciples. Here it suffices to note that the nations have replaced the all-Jewish crowds as the multitude which the disciples must now evangelize through the rite of Breath-baptism and through
instruction in the obedience of faith.11
One finds important nuances in Matthews handling of Jesus relationship to the crowds, nuances which mirror the situation which the evangelist addressed. Matthew uses the crowds both to rebuke the unbelief of
the synagogue across the street and to invite them to acknowledge Jesus
as more than a prophet, as more than a secular messiah, as Immanuel,
God-with-us.
The evangelist employs a variety of narrative strategies in order to accomplish this end. He contrasts the unbelief of the Jewish crowds whom
Jesus and the disciples evangelize with the belief of the disciples themselves. He draws a sharper contrast between the unbelief of many Jews
and the readiness of Gentiles to hear the gospel. Moreover, the evangelist
invites his Jewish adversaries to recognize that in crucifying Jesus, the
349- 353;
414- 417; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 361-363,
245
crowds in Jerusalem unwittingly called down upon Israel His saving, atoning blood which has the capacity to free Gods people from their sins. In
a word, in his handling of the crowds, Matthew, like Mark, rebukes the
general failure of the Jewish community to respond in faith to the gospel.
At the same time, however, Matthew makes a greater effort that Mark to
urge his Jewish contemporaries to repent and recognize Jesus power to
save them. The Great Commission expands the disciples initial restricted
mission to the lost sheep of the house of Israel to a world-wide mission
of evangelization.
I have considered the first of the ambiguous dramatic linkages in Matthew: namely, Jesus relationship to the crowds. The following section
turns to Jesus relationship to His wavering disciples.
(II)
Matthew, as we have already seen, paints a more positive portrait of the
disciples than Mark; but in both gospels the disciples respond ambivalently
to Jesus during His mortal ministry. While the disciples on more than
one occasion profess faith in Jesus, their faith remains weak; and they
often misunderstand what Jesus says.
In both Mark and Matthew, Jesus as His first public act calls to Himself
first Simon and Andrew, then James and John as disciples. Although
Matthew pares down Marks prose with minor editing, both accounts of
the call of the first disciples make the same basic points. In both, Jesus
makes the same promise: Follow me and I will make you fishers of men.12
(Mt 4:19; Mk 1:17) As in Mark, the call has a prophetic quality to it. In
draws the disciples authoritatively into the mission He has just received
from the Father in His baptismal commissioning. It requires instant and
unhesitating obedience as well as the sacrifice of possessions and of family. Despite the stringent demands of discipleship the four men leave everything and follow Jesus. (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-20)
In Mark, as we have seen, the call of the disciples parallels Jesus own
baptismal commissioning, and the exorcism at Capernaum which follows parallels His confrontation with Satan in the desert. Matthew omits
the exorcism and shatters Marks parallelism. Matthew also omits Marks
reference to Peter, Andrew, James, and John at the beginning of the eschatological discourse. In Mark, the explicit naming of the first disciples at the
beginning of that discourse underscores the close connection between
the call of discipleship and eschatological readiness. Matthews omission
of the names mutes this Markan theme, although Matthew makes up in
12. Cf. Wilhelm Wuellner, The Meaning of Fishers of Men (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster,
1967).
246
part for Marks allusion by expanding Marks original eschatological discourse.

As we shall see, Matthew gives even more prominence to Peter in his
gospel than Mark does. In describing Peters call, for example Matthew
names Simon Peter. (Mt 4:18) The name alludes to Jesus response to
Simons testimony to Jesus as the messiah. On that occasion, Jesus gives
Simon his nickname Peter (Rock) with the promise that He, Jesus, will
build His Church upon that Rock. (Mt 16:17-8) As we shall see in greater
detail below, Matthew alone among the evangelists transforms Peters
confession into a promise of Church founding.13
After the sermon on the mount, Matthew returns to the theme of the
demands of discipleship. When the overeager scribe asks permission to
follow Jesus wherever He goes, Jesus admonishes the man that he will be
following a homeless vagabond: Foxes have holes, and the birds of the
air have nests; but the Son of man has nowhere to lay His head. As we
have seen, the reply warns of poverty, of hardship, and of the persecution
which discipleship demands. It also implicitly portrays Jesus living by the
same radical trust in the Fathers providential care as He had demanded
of the disciples in the sermon on the mount. He will require the same
trust of His missionaries. (Mt 8:18-20; cf. 6:25-34, 10:5-15)
When another disciple next asks permission to go home and bury his
father, Jesus replies sternly: Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their
own dead. (Mt 8:21-2) Jesus summons the grieving disciple with a peremptory charismatic authority which recalls His call of the first disciples.
If, moreover, Jesus harsh reply refers to the first burial of a parent, it
would have deeply shocked Jesus contemporaries; but it leaves no doubt
that the kingdom takes precedence over even the most solemn and traditional family obligations. Jesus reply also asserts the life-giving power of
the kingdom: only those within it qualify as truly alive. Those outside it
might as well be dead.14
14. Is the young man really asking for time to rebury his fathers bones, as recent
scholarship has suggested? Apparently, after the body had decayed, Palestinian Jews
did rebury the bones in a funeral urn. If the young man desires to rebury his fathers
remains, he could be asking for as much as a year, the time it would take for the body
to decay. The text, however, says bury not rebury or bury again. Did, then, Jesus
really say to the young man, Let the corpses with whom your father lies buried take
care of the second funeral? I, for one, do not find a great deal of plausibility in the
suggestion. Cf. Byron R. McCane, Let the Dead Bury Their Own Dead: Second
Burial and Matthew 8:21-22, Harvard Theological Review, 83(1990), pp. 31-43; Jack
Dean Kingsbury, On Following Jesus: The Eager Scribe and the Reluctant Disciple
(Matthew 8.18-22), New Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 45-59; Jarmo Klunen,
Der Nachfolgewillige Schriftgelehrten: Matthus 8.19-20 im Verstndnis des
Evangelistin, New Testament Studies, 37(1991), pp. 268-279; Robert H. Undry, On
247
The disciples ascend a mountain with Jesus and gather around Him in
order to hear His inaugural discourse on the kingdom: the sermon on the
mount. (Mt 4:23-5:2) Matthew, then, directs the sermon on the mount
especially to the disciples, although, as we have seen, Jesus inaugural
proclamation of the kingdom envisages the crowds as well. I shall consider the structure and content of the sermon in reflecting on Jesus teachings in Matthew.
In Matthews second narrative section, Jesus cures Peters mother-in-law.
Then He heals and exorcises the people of Capernaum. Peter, James, and
John witness the raising of the daughter of a ruler. Mark names him Jairus
and describes him as the ruler of a synagogue. (Mt 9:18-19; Mk 5:22) As
in Mark, Peter, James, and John will also witness both the transfiguration
and Jesus ordeal in Gethsemane. (Mt 17:1, 26:37; Mk 9:2; 14:33)
The first calming of the sea occurs when Jesus, finding that the crowds
who follow Him have grown to an unwieldy size, decides to cross the sea
of Galilee. A storm arises. Mark calls the storm a wind squall (lailaps
anemou). Matthew describes it as a great agitation in the sea (seismos megas
in t thalass), either a violent surface agitation of the sea or, perhaps, an
earthquake at the bottom of the sea which stirs up giant waves. As in
Mark, waves nearly swamp the boat.
The noun seismos can mean an earthquake; and in Matthew apocalyptic quakes accompany both Jesus death and the angels rolling back
the stone from the empty tomb to reveal the resurrection. (Mt 27:51,
28:2) Finally, after Jesus triumphal entry Matthew describes the Jerusalem crowds as agitated and depicts that agitation with a verb possessing
the same root as seismos. I find it plausible that Matthew is here using
literary allusion in order to link these four events. The quakes which
accompany both Jesus death and the rolling back of the stone at the
tomb endow both events with apocalyptic, revelatory significance. For
Matthew, the paschal mystery reveals the full mystery of Jesus person,
reveals Him as Immanuel, God-with-us, and as Breath baptizer. (Mt
28:19-20) By assimilating Jesus calming of the storm and the consequences of His reclaiming of the temple to earthquakes, Matthew indicates that the apocalyptic, revelatory significance of both events must
await the paschal mystery.
Jesus sleeps calmly through the storm which threatens to swamp the
boat and drown both Him and the disciples. When the disciples finally
wake Him, they use a different formula from the one they use in Marks
True and False Disciples in Matthew 8.18-22, New Testament Studies, 40(1994), pp.
433-441; Martin Hengel, The Charismatic Leader and His Followers, translated by
James Grieg (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1981); Herman Waetjen, The Origin and
Destiny of Humanness (San Rafael, CA: Crystal Press, 1976), p. 120; NJBC, 42:57;
248
version of the story. In Mark they rebuke Jesus with the self-preoccupied
complaint: Teacher, do you not care if we perish? (Mk 8:38) Matthew
again paints a somewhat more favorable portrait of the disciples than
Mark. Matthews disciples approach the sleeping figure of Jesus with a
fear-filled faith. They call Him Lord (Kyrie) not teacher; and they plead
with Him: Save [us], we are perishing! (Mt 8:25) Their faith in the
Lords power to save them finds instant response. Matthews Jesus, however, first rebukes them for their fear and for the lack of sure confidence
which their fear expresses. Then He also rebukes the wind and sea, which
immediately subside. (Mt 8:26-7)
As in Mark, the story points to the divinity of Jesus. Matthews awestruck disciples ask, What sort of man is this that even the winds and sea
obey Him. (Mt 8:27) In the Bible, the wind and sea obey only God.
Like Mark, Matthew expects the reader to know the correct answer to the
disciples question.15
Moreover, as in Mark, the first calming of the storm foreshadows the
calming of the storm which follows the first multiplication of the loaves.
In Matthew as in Mark, this second cosmic miracle answers the question
the disciples had put after the first calming: What sort of man is this,
that even the wind and sea obey Him? As in Mark, after the miracle of
the loaves, Matthews disciples set sail and leave Jesus alone praying on a
mountain. When a sudden storm threatens to swamp them, Jesus comes
walking to them over the water. The terrified disciples mistake Jesus for a
ghost. As in Mark, Jesus corrects them by invoking the divine name. He
says, Take heart, I am; have no fear (Tharseite, ego eimi; me phobeithe).
(Mt 14:26-7)
Mark, as we have seen, ties the significance of this event intimately to
the deeper significance of the miracle of the loaves and therefore to eucharistic faith. In other words, Mark insists that eucharistic faith requires
the ability to recognize the divinity as well as the humanity of Jesus.
Matthew clearly regards Jesus walking on the water, calming of the storm,
and invocation of the divine name as a theophany which reveals His divinity. Matthews Jesus walks on the water right after the first multiplication miracle. His miraculous action therefore implicitly throws light on
the multiplication. Matthew, however, does not explicitly connect the
two miracles as Mark does.
Moreover, in Matthews version of the second calming, Peter plays a
prominent role. Matthews Peter tests Jesus claim to divinity. Peter cries
out: Lord, if you are (Kyrie, ei su ei), bid me come to you on the water.
(Mt 14:28) Peters challenge has two levels of meaning. At one level, one
could read it as Peters attempt to make Jesus prove His identity. In that
98-99.
249
case one would translate the Greek to mean: Lord, if it is you.... In context,
however, Matthew almost certainly wants the reader to find a deeper meaning in Peters words. Peter uses the divine title Lord and is asking Jesus to
work a miracle which only God could do. Moreover, he desires Jesus to prove
thereby that He can indeed use the divine name: If You are....
In Mark, the obtuse disciples fail to recognize the meaning of Jesus
miraculous power to walk on water and calm the waves of chaos. Matthews
disciples, however, acknowledge the theophany openly and candidly. When
Jesus joins them in the boat and the winds subside, they kneel to Him
(proskynesen) and confess, Truly, you are the Son of God (alethos, Theou
hyios ei). (Mt 14:33) The words have messianic significance and foreshadow the confession of Peter; but once again Matthew would have expected the reader to grasp another deeper meaning: namely, that Jesus
divine Sonship exceeds mere messianic dignity. In other words, Matthew
rewrites the story of the second calming of the storm in a way which
underscores that Jesus truly is Immanuel, God-with-us. The disciples
adoration recalls that of the magi and foreshadows the womens adoration of the risen Christ. (Mt 2:11, 28:9-10)
Matthew also uses the story to call attention to Peters brashness and
his weakness of faithtwo traits which will lead to his betrayal of Jesus
in the passion. (Mt 26:58, 69-75) Peters question has overtones of Satans
temptations in the desert. (Mt 4:3, 5) In putting Jesus to the test, Peter
already betrays his weakness of faith. When, moreover, Jesus summons
Peter to step out of the boat and walk on the waves, Peter begins to come
to Jesus, then fears the high winds, and begins to sink. (Mt 14:29-31)
Peters near drowning, however, also foreshadows Peters salvation by
Jesus, despite his weakness of faith. As Peter begins to sink beneath the
waves of chaos, He cries out, Lord, save me (Kyrie, soson me). Jesus
immediately clasps his hand and keeps him from sinking with the same
gentle rebuke He made to the disciples after the first calming of the storm,
Man of little faith, why did you doubt? (Mt 14:31-2) Clearly, for Matthew Jesus power to calm storms and walk on water while invoking the
divine name not only reveals His divinity but also manifests that, as
Immanuel, He also has the power to save Peter and others who waver in
their faith.
The story probably has ecclesial significance as well. Peter figures even
more prominently in Matthews gospel than in Marks because Matthew
is telling Jesus story for a community of Petrine Christians. Matthews
Peter often symbolizes a certain way of being Church. He also symbolizes
Church leadership in the Petrine community.
As we have already seen, Matthew wrote his gospel partly out of a concern to counter a nascent clericalism in the Antiochene church. Read in
that context, the story of Peters weakness of faith contains a cautionary
250
lesson for Antioch Church leaders. It says in effect: Do not attempt to do

on your own power what God alone can do in you. Sustain your faith in
Jesus and in His power to save you in spite of your human weakness and
lack of faith. Take care, however; for, if you test God and if you take your
eyes away from Jesus, you will find yourselves overwhelmed by the forces
of chaos. Even if you waver, however, you need only call on the Lord to
save you; and He will draw you out of the waters of chaos.16
Matthew, as we have seen, postpones the Markan theme of the conflict
between Jesus and His enemies until after the sermon on the mount. He
foreshadows it with the hostility of the Gadarenes and begins overt conflict with the call of Matthew. As we shall see later and in greater detail,
the missionary discourse, which follows the second narrative section, makes
a decisive turn to the cross and Calvary. Here I focus on the way in which
Matthews disciples relate to conflict.
As in Mark, Jesus calls Matthew the tax collector to follow Him in
discipleship. (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:14) Moreover, as in Mark, Matthew celebrates
the event with a dinner to which he invites other tax collectors.17 On that
occasion, the disciples find themselves drawn into the conflict which begins to surround Jesus. Pharisees complain to the disciples that Jesus should
not be dining with tax collectors and sinners. (Mt 9:10-13; Mk 2:15-7)
Matthew differs from Mark chiefly in postponing this conflict story until
chapter nine of his gospel. Mark, as we have seen, plunges both Jesus and
the disciples into instant conflict.
Shortly thereafter, Jesus, the true shepherd of Israel, moved by the harassed and helpless crowds, who resemble shepherdless sheep, feels compassion for them. He tells the disciples to pray that the Lord of the
harvest (i.e., the Father) send more laborers into the plentiful
eschatological harvest which Jesus ministry has inaugurated. (Mt 9:35-8)
As we have already seen, Matthew insists more than Mark on the heavenly origin of the call to apostolic ministry and Church leadership. Having made this point, Jesus immediately summons the Twelve to him,
gives them authority to heal and exorcise, and then sends them out to
proclaim the kingdom. (Mt 10:1-4; Mk 3:13-9)
Matthew expands Marks commission to the Twelve. Jesus sends them
to proclaim the kingdom exclusively to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel, not to the Gentiles, not to the Samaritans. This command so
contrasts with the Great Commission at the end of Matthews gospel that
16. Cf. John Paul Heil, Jesus Walking On the Sea (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981),
pp. 84-117; J. Duncan M. Derrett, Der Wasserwandel in christlicher und buddistischen
Perspektive, Zeitschrift fr Religions- und Geistgeschichte, 41(1989), pp. 193-214;
NJBC, 42:97; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 204-206; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
17. Cf. John R. Donahue, Tax Collectors and Sinners: An Attempt at Identification,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 33 (1971), pp. 39-61.
251
one must suppose that it originally came from Jesus Himself. (Mt 10:5-6)
By the lost sheep, Jesus means primarily the people of the land, the
marginal Jews whose poverty, disreputable occupation, and lack of education excluded them from the Jewish power elites. The universality of
the great commission dramatizes the fact that the paschal mystery expands the scope of Jesus and of the disciples mission so that it includes
all people.18
Jesus sends the disciples out into a violent and hostile world: Behold,
I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and
innocent as doves. (Mt 10:16) Jesus distinguishes here innocence from
naive gullibility. The disciples must face a hostile world realistically but
must not respond to sin by sinning themselves. Jew and Gentile will accuse them, hail them to court, scourge them, put them to death. The
disciples, however, can expect that the Breath of your Father will empower them to bear witness to Jesus under persecution, even in the face
of death. (Mt 10:16-23)
A disciple is not above his teacher, Jesus warns, nor a servant above his
master; it is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher and the servant
like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how
much more will they malign those of his household. (Mt 10:24-5) Jesus
warning about hostility implicitly points to the Pharisees (read the Pharisaical leaders of the synagogue across the street) as the disciples chief
enemies. In Matthew, as we have seen, the Pharisees especially stand convicted of the unforgivable sin against the Holy Breath. (Cf. Mt 9:34,
12:24-37)
The secret wisdom which Jesus imparts to the disciples they must proclaim from the rooftops. They should have no fear of their enemies. Those
who oppose the kingdom can only kill the body; but God can consign
soul and body to hell. As we have seen, the disciples under persecution
must trust the Fathers providential care for each of His children. Indeed,
nothing can happen to them which lies beyond the Fathers care and
control. Finally, Jesus promises that, if they confess Him boldly before
others, He will testify on their behalf to the Father.19 (Mt 10:26- 33)
18. Cf. F.W. Beare, The Mission of the Disciple and the Mission Charge: Matthew 10
and Parallels, Journal of Biblical Literature, 89(1970), pp.1-13; Paul D.Meyer, The
Gentile Mission in Q, Journal of Biblical Literature, 89(1970), pp. 405-417; Schyler
Brown, The Matthean Community and the Gentile Mission, Novum Testamentum,
22(1980), pp. 193-221; The Two-Fold Representation of Mission in Matthews
Gospel, Studia Theologica, 31(1977), pp. 21-32; Martin Hengel, Between Jesus and
Paul, translated by John Bowden (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1983), pp. 48-64;
Joachim Jeremias, Jesu Verheissung fr die Vlker (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1956);
Blaine Charette, A Harvest for the People: An Interpretation of Matthew 9:37f,
116- 122.
252
The public confession of Jesus will draw enmity from others besides
the Pharisees. The disciples public witness to Jesus will set them into
conflict even with members of their own family.
Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to
bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father,
and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her
mother-in-law; and a mans foes will be those of his own household. He
who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who
loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does
not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. He who finds his
life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it. (Mt
10:34-9)
Jesus does not bring the sword of violence but of division. Christians
can anticipate that unbelieving relatives will turn on them because of
their faith in Jesus. Matthew is probably alluding to the social ostracism
which some Jewish converts encountered among their families In the
end, however, the disciples must value their relationship to Jesus more
than their own flesh and blood, more than their very lives. They must
regard even opprobrium and death for the sake of the gospel as the true
pathway to life.20
While discipleship draws one into conflict with the enemies of Jesus, it
also brings its privileges. Discipleship, when founded on the obedience
of faith, introduces one, as we have seen, into the family of God and
transforms one into a brother or sister of Jesus. (Mt 12:46-50) The disciples also have access to the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, which
Jesus hides from the unbelieving crowds in parables.21 Jesus discloses that
wisdom to the disciples because their response of faith opens them to
receive more and more insight; while the unbelief of the crowds causes
them to lose what little insight they may have had into Jesus message.
(Mt 13:10-13)
Jesus so identifies with His disciples that He takes any hospitality shown
them as done to Himself. He will reward the least kindness shown to one
of his followers. Jesus especially commends hospitality among the dis20. Cf. NJBC, 42:71; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 149-154; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp.
116- 122.
21. Matthew, the urban scribe, like Mark, apparently fails to recognize the true purpose
of parabolic discourse: namely, that it tells a story in order to subvert ones familiar
world and open one to the world of the kingdom. Instead, Both evangelists see in the
parables only enigmas and conundrums which conceal the secret wisdom of the
kingdom from the unbelieving crowds. Once abstracted from their original context,
Jesus parables seem to have puzzled both evangelists. That does not mean, of course,
that Jesus did not use parables in part in order to conceal the subversive character of
His teaching from the secular and religious authorities and from hostile unbelievers.
253
ciples, promising that one who welcomes a prophet will enjoy the reward
of a prophet and that one who welcomes a righteous person will share the
reward of the righteous. (Mt 10:40-2)
Like Mark, Matthew transforms the parable of the astonishing harvest
into an allegory about temptations against faith. As in Mark, those temptations result for Satans animosity, from personal shallowness, from
worldly cares, and from covetousness. The one, however, who receives
the word with understanding and lives it bears a harvest of astonishing
fruitfulness. (Mt 13:18-23)
As we have seen in considering Jesus relationship to Satan, Matthew
also allegorizes the parable about the wheat and the weeds. The second
allegory exhorts disciples to expect conflict with those who side with Satan; but the disciples will experience vindication when Jesus returns in
glory and in judgment. (Mt 13:36-43)
Matthew applies three other parables explicitly to the disciples. The
first two call for unstinting generosity. They compare the kingdom to a
priceless reality worth sacrificing all to acquire. The first parable compares the kingdom to a field containing buried treasure. The one who
finds the treasure sells everything and buys the field in which the treasure
lies. The second parable compares the kingdom to a pearl merchant who
sells all he has in order to obtain a single pearl of great value. (Mt 13:44-46)
In both parables, the two protagonists joyfully perform the foolhardy act
of alienating their entire fortunes in order to possess a single valuable
reality. The parables dramatize the importance of the kingdom, the total
sacrifice it demands, and the joy which its possession brings. Moreover,
while the first parable compares the kingdom to the priceless reality, the
second parable compares it to the quest for that reality. The treasure and
the quest, therefore, designate different aspects of the kingdom.22
Matthew allegorizes the third parable. It describes the familiar Galilean
scene of fishermen sorting out the catch which their nets have taken. On
Jesus lips the parable warns that not everyone qualifies as a member of
the kingdom. Membership demands repentance and the obedience of
faith. In Matthews allegory, the fishermen become angels of judgment,
who will separate the just from the unjust at the last judgment. After the
sorting, the good go to their reward, while evildoers burn in the retributive fire of divine holiness, wail, and gnash their teeth. (Mt 13:44-50)
Unlike the obtuse disciples in Marks gospel, however, Matthews disciples actually grasp the meaning of these three parables and even merit
Jesus praise for their insight. Good scribes trained not only in Torah but
in the wisdom of the kingdom, they, like good Petrine Christians, know
how to blend ancient wisdom with the new vision of faith which the
22. Cf. Jacques Dupont, Les parabole du trsor et de la perle, New Testament Studies,
14(1967-1968), pp. 408-418.
254
kingdom discloses. (Mt 13:51-2; cf. 5:19-20) In Mark, the disciples never
display any such precocity.23
As in Mark, the disciples twice minister the multiplied loaves and fishes
to the crowds, a symbol and foreshadowing of their future eucharistic
ministry. (Mt 14:15-19, 15:32-59; cf. Mk 6:35-44, 8:1-10)
As in Mark, Jesus defends His disciples from Pharisees who take scandal that the former eat without performing rituals of purification. As we
have seen, Jesus charges the Pharisees with a formalistic legalism which
invokes mere human traditions in order to subvert the compassionate
intent of the Law. He also finds their legalism a rationalization of cupidity. (Mt 15:1-9) After this encounter, Jesus warns the crowds that nothing
which goes into the mouth defiles a person but what comes out of the mouth.
Matthews disciples then warn Jesus that this saying has offended the
Pharisees. (In Mark, they do not.) Jesus in reply warns the disciples to
ignore the Pharisees as blind guides. Since they put no faith in the Father,
like useless weeds they will eventually be uprooted and discarded. Then,
at Peters request Jesus explains privately to the disciples His warning to
the crowds: malice of intent, not external ritual impurity, defiles one.
(Mt 15:10-20; cf. Mk 7:14-23) Matthews allusion to Pharisaical blindness focuses the story on the unreliability of the Pharisaical leadership of
the synagogue across the street.24 (Mt 16:5-12)
The Confession of Peter
Matthew introduces major modifications into Marks account of the confession of Peter. Like Mark, Matthew locates the event at Caesarea Philippi.
As in Mark, Jesus asks the disciples what opinion the crowds have formed
of Him. As in Mark, Peter responds that they look on Him as John the
Baptist risen from the dead, as Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the classical
prophets returned. When Jesus asks who the disciples take Him to be,
Marks Peter replies simply: You are the Christ. (Mk 8:29) Matthews
Peter answers: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. (Mt 16:16)
The title Son of the living God connotes Jesus unique knowledge of
and relationship to the Father which transforms Him into Immanuel.
(Cf. Mt 11:27, 1:23, 28:20)
In his account of this event, Mark has Jesus then warn the disciples not
to reveal His messianic identity to others. Matthews Jesus, by contrast,
replies with an extended encomium of Peters faith:
23. Cf. Dieter Zeller, Zu eine Jdische Vorlage von Mt 13, 52, Biblische Zeitschrift,
20(1976), pp. 223-226; Jacques Dupont, tudes sur les vangiles synoptiques (2 vols.;
Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1985), II, pp. 920-928; NJBC, 42:92; Radermakers,
pp. 163-171.
24. Cf. NJBC, 42:104; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 215; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
255
Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonah! For flesh and blood have not revealed
this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter
and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades shall not
prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and
whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you
loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. (Mt 16:13-20)
Neither Mark nor Luke record any such words of Jesus to Peter. Most
questers for the historical Jesus would hold that during His mortal ministry Jesus historically headed a movement rather than founded a Church,
although in calling the Twelve to labor at His side and in (perhaps) promising them judicial authority when the kingdom arrived, Jesus did give
rudimentary institutional shape to the movement He headed. The Jesus
movement apparently sought to effect a religious transformation of Israel
which would enable it to serve as Gods instrument for effecting a universal salvation.
That Jesus actually saw Himself as the founder of a Church seems historically improbable. Matthew, however, wrote his gospel as Church institutions were crystallizing in the sub-apostolic era. He therefore shows
concern to ground those institutions in the person and event of Jesus.
The reflections which follow clarify the purpose of this theological gambit.
Some assimilate these Church-founding words of Matthews Jesus to
the risen Christs commissioning of Peter to feed His lambs and sheep in
the gospel of John. But the two events have little similarity to one another apart from the commissioning of Peter. In John, Jesus rehabilitates
Peter after his triple denial, while in Matthew Jesus rewards Peter for his
profession of faith. The Petrine trajectory in the New Testament suggests
that Peter did it fact play a significant leadership role among the disciples. Jesus words in Matthew, however, appear nowhere else in the New
Testament; and they almost certainly express the evangelists own interpretation of Peters significance for the sub-apostolic Church. By placing
these words on Jesus lips, Matthew is pointing to Petrine Christianity as
the solid rock on which the emerging Christian Church must rise. (Cf.
Mt 5:19) The Johannine tradition has more affinity with Hellenistic
Christianity, which saw Jesus as replacing the Torah and the forms of
Jewish worship.
Jesus attributes to the Father Peters recognition that in Jesus he confronts not only the messiah but the Son of God who reveals the Father in
a privileged way. As we have seen, in Matthew, the Father, as the ultimate
source of Son and Breath, functions as the ultimate source of all religious
enlightenment. By insisting on the transcendent origin of Peters insight
and that it exceeds anything possible to mere human nature, Matthew
underscores the profound significance of what Peter has just said. He has
256
glimpsed and recognized Jesus unique relationship to the Father, a truth

which only the Father could reveal to him.
Jesus then changes Simons name to Peter (Rock) and endows the name
with ecclesial symbolism. Jesus promises that He will build His Church
on the rock of Peter and that the powers of deaththe gates of Hades
will not conquer it. Jesus Church triumphs over death itself.
Jesus further promises that He will give Peter the keys of the kingdom
of heaven. Jesus does not here confer the power of the keys on Peter;
instead He promises to do so at some future date. The keys symbolize
rabbinic authority to decide community issues. When, in the ecclesial
discourse which follows this narrative section in Matthew, Jesus actually
confers the power of the keys, He confers it collegially on all of Twelve.
Jesus thus transforms the Twelve into the rabbis who will lead the Petrine
church. (Mt 18:18) Moreover, as we shall see, Matthew also makes it
clear that the exercise of the power of the keys engages the entire Christian community. Here Jesus promises Peter that, when He founds His
Church, Peter will function within it as its chief rabbi. The promise also
expresses Matthews predilection for Petrine Christianity. Since the papacy did not take imperial shape until the eleventh century, any attempt
to read this text as divine endorsement of papal imperialism within the
Church counts as eisegesis, as shallow and indefensible proof-texting, not
exegesis. When Matthew wrote, Rome did not even have a monepiskopos.25
As in Mark, the first prediction of the passion and resurrection follows
the confession of Peter. Jesus predicts that the elders, chief priests, and
scribes will murder Him but that after three days He will rise again. (Mt
25. Cf. B. Willaert, La connexion entre la premire prdiction de la passion et la
confession de Pierre chez les synoptiques, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis,
32(1958), pp. 24-45; Richard H. Heirs, Binding and Loosing: The Matthean
Authorization, Journal of Biblical Literature, 104(1985), pp. 233-250; Jacques
Dupont, La rvlation du fils de Dieu en faveur de Pierre (Mt 16,7) et de Paul (Ga
1,16), Recherches de Science Religieuse, 52(1964), pp. 411- 420; Joseph Fitzmyer, S.J.,
To Advance the Gospel (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1981), pp. 112-124; Raymond E.
Brown, et al., Peter in the New Testament (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1973), pp. 86-101;
William J. Tobin, The Petrine Primacy: Evidence of the Gospels, Lumen Vitae,
23(1968), pp. 27-70; Andre Mehat, Quand Kephas vint a Antioch.... que sest-il
pass entre Pierre et Paul, Lumire et Vie, 192(1989), pp. 29-43; Joel Marcus, The
Gates of Hades and the Keys of the Kingdom (Matt 16:18-19), Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, 50(1988), pp. 443- 445; Herbert W. Basser, Marcuss Gates: A Response, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 50(1988), pp. 307-308; Rafael Aguirre, Pedro
en el Evangelio de Mateo, Estudios Biblicos, 47(1989), pp. 343-361; U. Luz, Das
Primatwort Matthus 16.17-19 als Wirkungsgeschtlicher Sicht, New Testament
Studies, 37(1991), pp. 415-433; Klaus Pantle-Schieber, Anmerkungen zur Auseinanderstezung von ekklesia und Judentum im Matthusevangelium, Zeitschrift fr die
257
16:21-3; Mk 8:31) Peter, shocked, takes Jesus aside and rebukes Him for
suggesting that anything of the sort will happen to Him.
Mark has Jesus include the disciples in his rebuke to Peter; Matthews
Jesus addresses Peter alone. In other words, Mark uses the incident to
stress that discipleship means walking with Jesus on the path to Calvary,
if necessary. Matthew, however, treats the incident as a personal confrontation between Peter and Jesus, possibly as a way of admonishing in a
special way the leaders of the Petrine church at Antioch.
Matthew also embellishes Jesus rebuke to Peter. Marks Jesus says: Get
behind me Satan! For you are not on the side of God, but of humans.
(Mk 8:33) Matthews Jesus adds after the command, Get behind me
Satan! the phrase: You are a stumbling block (skandalon) to me. (Mt
16:23)
In other words, in Matthews version of the confrontation, Jesus explains why He has applied the harsh name of Satan to the apostle. Peter,
like Satan, is putting Jesus to the test. He gives scandal to Jesus by urging
Him to avoid a fate to which His mission from the Father is impelling
Him. Moreover, Peter tempts Jesus because he fails to recognize Gods
saving purpose. Instead, Peter thinks only in a human way of sparing
Jesus suffering and death.
Having portrayed the incident as a personal confrontation between
Jesus and Peter, Matthew then immediately applies its lesson to the disciples as a group. Jesus assures them that discipleship includes following a
servant messiah, to Calvary, if necessary. Discipleship demands, then, the
willingness to walk the way of the cross. (Mt 16:24-26) Moreover, as he
has done on other occasions, Matthew underscores the importance of
embracing the cross by repeating this same teaching elsewhere. It recurs
in Jesus missionary discourse. (Mt 10:16-23)
Moreover, Matthews Jesus, like Marks, puts readiness for martyrdom
in an eschatological context. He warns:
For the Son of Man is to come with His angels in the glory of His Father,
and then He will repay every person for what he has done. Truly, I say to
you there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see
the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. (Mt 16:24-8)
Marks Jesus promises in addition that, when He returns as Son of Man,

He will be ashamed of anyone in this adulterous and sinful generation
who is ashamed of Him and of His teaching. Matthew edits out this
Markan allusion to apostasy. Some scholars find in Jesus promise that
some people standing before Him would see the Son of Man coming into
His kingdom a reference to the transfiguration which follows this saying.
258
Others see it as a reference to the resurrection. Matthew could have intended both allusions.26
As in Mark, the transfiguration foreshadows the resurrection and provides counterpoint to the suffering which discipleship entails. It gives a
glimpse of the glory to which the cross leads. Matthew edits slightly Marks
account of the transfiguration, but reproduces its fundamental assertions.
(Mt 17:1-2; Mk 9:2-3)
In both gospels, the transfiguration represents a theophany, a revelation of Jesus share in the Fathers glory in virtue of His divine Sonship.
Moreover, in both accounts the revelation begins to draw the disciples
into Jesus baptismal experience. The Father speaks to them as He spoke
to Jesus in His messianic, baptismal commissioning. By obediently listening to Jesus, as the Father commands, the disciples begin to share in
His baptismal mission.
When, however, in Matthew, the Father commands Peter, James, and
John to listen to Jesus as a greater authority than the Law or prophets, the
command takes on different theological connotations from Mark. In
Matthew, the Fathers command binds the disciples to interpret the Torah in the light of Jesus teachings, which fulfill both the Law and the
prophets. (Mt 17:3-8; Mk 9:4-8)
As the four descend the mountain Matthew records the same conversation between Jesus and the three disciples as Mark. Jesus warns them to
tell the vision to no one until He rises from the dead. Jesus also assures
the three disciples that Elijah has come. In Mark, Peter, James, and John
have no reaction to this announcement; but Matthew, once again more
sympathetic to the disciples than Mark, has the three recognize immediately that Jesus is speaking about John the Baptizer.27 (Mt 17:9-13; Mk
9:9-13)
I have already reflected on Matthews account of the epileptic demoniac boy when I examined Jesus relationship to Satan. Here it suffices to
note that, as in Mark, the other disciples have tried unsuccessfully to
exorcise the boy. Mark attributes their failure to their self-reliant omission of prayer. Matthew attributes it to their insufficient faith. The two
responses differ in nuance, but both point to the disciples self-reliance
rather than to their trust in God.
Moreover, Matthews Jesus assures the disciples hyperbolically: For truly,
I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to
26. Cf. Heinz Schrmann, Jesu ureigene Tod (Freiburg: Herder, 1975), pp. 16-65; NJBC,
42:106; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 220-222; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 346-353;
27. Cf. J.W.C. Ward, Transfiguration (London: The Faith Press, 1967); Daniel Vlter,
Das Bekenntnis des Petrus und die Verklrung Jesu auf dem Berg (Strassburg: Heitz and
Mndel, 1911); Johannes M. Neutzel, Die Verklrungserzlung in Markusevangelium
(Wurtzburg: Echter Verlag, 1973), pp. 275-288.
259
this mountain, Move from here to there, and it will move. Nothing will
be impossible to you. (Mt 17:14-20; Mk 9:14-27) In both accounts,
therefore, the disciples failure to exorcise the boy successfully flows from
their self-reliance; but Matthew contrasts their impotent unbelief with
the power with which true faith in God endows prayer.28
The second prophecy of the passion follows the cure of the epileptic
boy. Jesus foretells His own betrayal, murder, and resurrection. This time
no one contradicts Him; but the second prediction leaves the disciples
greatly distressed. They still look on the passion with human eyes and
have yet to see it from Gods standpoint. (Mt 17:22-3) Matthews disciples, however, in contrast to Marks, seem to understand well what Jesus
is saying. In Mark they greet the second prediction with incomprehension. (Mk 9:30-2)
The disciples then occasion the discourse on the Church by asking
Jesus who ranks greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I shall consider that
discourse in reflecting on Jesus teachings in Matthew. Here it suffices to
note that the discourse targets the disciples in a special way.
After Jesus repudiates Mosaic divorce practices in an exchange with the
Pharisees (Mt 19:3-9), Matthew, in contrast to Mark, has the disciples
voice their dismay. They protest to Jesus: If such is the case of a man
with his wife, it is not expedient to marry. (Mt 19:10-2) Typically, Matthew uses the objections which the disciples raise to Jesus teachings as a
literary device which allows Jesus to clarify what He is saying. In this case
Jesus replies:
Not all men can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For
there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs
who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have
made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to
receive this, let him receive it. (Mt 19:11-2)
Jesus speaks of three kinds of eunuchs: the physically malformed, those

castrated, and those who become eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom.
As we saw in volume one, becoming eunuchs for the kingdom could
refer historically to Jesus option for celibacy. Matthews Jesus, however,
makes it clear that becoming a eunuch for the sake of the kingdom
refers not to celibacy but to this saying, i.e., what He has just said about
the indissolubility of marriage. Moreover, after His statement about eunuchs, Jesus again refers back to what he has just said about marriage. In
Matthews text, then, becoming a eunuch for the sake of the kingdom
asserts hyperbolically that recognizing the indissolubility of marriage con28. Cf. NJBC, 42:108; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 225-227; Harrington, op. cit., pp.
260
stitutes a condition for entry into the kingdom. Celibacy provides a hyperbolic image for the constraints on male sexuality which the abolition
of divorce entails. The disciples, however, must not try to live such marital continence with Stoic self-reliance. They must expect continence as a
gift, presumably from God.29
When parents bring their children to Jesus for Him to bless them, the
disciples rebuke them and seek to prevent the blessing. Jesus, however,
ignores the disciples and accedes to the parents wish, saying: Let the
children come to Me and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the
kingdom of heaven. (Mt 19:13-5)
In Mark the parents want Jesus to touch their children. (Mk 10:13)
In Mark, then, it would appear that the parents offer Jesus their children
for healing. Matthew transforms this therapeutic touch into a solemn
blessing. In both versions of this incident, however, allowing the children
to come to Jesus probably envisages the baptism of infants in the apostolic church, which seems to have occurred initially in the baptism of
entire households.
Jesus pronouncement on this occasion also holds a lesson for adults:
they must learn to accept the kingdom which Jesus proclaims with the
simplicity of children, like the children who greet Jesus joyfully after his
triumphal entry. (Mt 21:14-17) Here again, the disciples function as a
foil to Jesus. Their blunder forces Jesus to correct them and to clarify His
own attitudes.30
Matthew, in contrast to Mark, describes the rich man who asks Jesus
what he must do to attain eternal life as young, apparently a young
idealist looking for something more in his life.31 (Mt 19:20) Matthews
Jesus replies to the youths question by telling him to keep the commandments. When the young man asks which commandments, Jesus first cites
several of the commandmentsthe prohibition of murder, theft, false
witness, and the practice of filial pietyand then adds the second Great
Commandment: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Mark makes
no mention of the second Great Commandment. Matthew includes it
here as a way of reminding the reader that the two Great Commandments sum up the whole of the Law and prophets which Jesus teaching
in turn fulfills. (Mt 19:17-19, 23:34-40, 5:17-9; cf. Mk 10:19)
29. Cf. Sand, loc. cit.; NJBC, 42:117; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 255-259; Harrington,
30. Cf. S. Legasse, Jsus et lenfant: enfants, petits, et simples dans la tradition
synoptique (Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1969); NJBC, 42:118; Radermakers, op. cit., II,
p. 259; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 272-277; Albright and Mann, op. cit., p. 229; Walther
Zimmerli, Die Frage nach dem ewigen Leben, Evangelische Theologie, 19(1959), pp.
90-97.
31. Cf. Walther Zimmerli, Die Frage nach dem ewigen Leben, Evangelische Theologie,
19(1959), pp. 90-97.
261
The young man protests that he already does all these things and wants
to know what he still lacks. In Mark, Jesus responds to this act of generosity with love. Matthew omits this touching detail and has Jesus reply
more austerely: If you would be perfect (teleios), go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come,
follow Me. (Mt 19:16-22; Mk 10:17-22) As in Mark, the young man
hears these words with sorrow and departs, unable to follow Jesus because of his attachment to his wealth.
Jesus presents the renunciation of ones possessions and their sharing
with the poor as the condition for close discipleship. The perfection, or
completeness, to which He invites the rich young man in Matthews account recalls the perfection, or completeness of the Fathers love to which
Jesus has already alluded in the sermon on the mount. The perfection of
the Fathers love consists in the fact that He sends the blessings of this life
impartially to all, whether saint or sinner. (Mt 5:43-8) Jesus, in other
words invites the rich youth to imitate the universality of the Fathers
love by sharing his possessions impartially on the basis of need and not of
merit only.
After the young mans departure, Matthew presents a slightly edited
version of Marks account of Jesus exchange with the disciples. In it,
Jesus, as we have seen, assures them that God can even save the rich
despite themselves.
Moreover, Matthews Jesus promises the Twelve that, for having abandoned all to follow Him, they will one day sit on twelve thrones judging
the twelve tribes of Israel. (Mt 19:28) The twelve thrones parallel the
throne of judgment which the Son of Man will mount when He judges
the nations. (Mt 25:31) In conferring on the Twelve a share in Jesus own
eschatological authority as judge, Matthew implicitly endows their proclamation of the risen Christ with a judgmental character. That proclamation will, then, prolong the judgment which Jesus own person and mission begins. (Cf. Mt 3:11-12) Moreover, since the apostles died before
they could complete Jesus great commission to evangelize the whole world
(Mt 28:16-20), their share in Jesus judicial authority will extend even
beyond their deaths. At the parousia, they will pass judgment on all of
Israel in Jesus name.32
After promising the Twelve eschatological, judicial authority over Israel, Matthews Jesus promises:
32. Cf. Jacques Dupont, Le logion des douze trnes (Mt 19,28; Lc 22,28-30), Biblica,
45(1964), pp. 355-392; David C. Sim, The meaning of paliggensia in Matthew
19.28, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 50(1992), pp. 3-12; Thomas C.
Schmidt, Mark 10.29-30; Matthew 19.29: Leave Houses....and Region, New
262
And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother
or children or lands, for my sake, will receive a hundredfold, and inherit
eternal life. But many that are first will be last, and the last first. (Mt
19:29)
In discussing the reward which all those receive who imitate the Twelve
and sacrifice all for the gospel, Marks Jesus promises abundant rewards
in this world as well as eternal life in the next. (Mk 10:29-31) Mark,
then, looks on the Christian community and its mutual sharing and
mutual concern as a replacement in this life for any family and possessions which one gives up in order to follow Christ. Marks Jesus also promises, typically, persecutions along with these temporal blessings. Matthews
Jesus, in contrast to Marks, omits any mention of persecutions and looks
to the next life, more than to this one, as the place where present renunciation will find its reward. In other words, Matthew apparently expects
the eschatological reversal of fortunes which Jesus promises to occur, not
so much in this life, as in the next.33
Moreover, Matthew elaborates on the meaning of this reversal of fortune by inserting the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. A householder, rather than his steward, goes personally into the marketplace to
hire workers for occasional work in his vineyard at the third, sixth, ninth,
and eleventh hour. The householder agrees to pay the first group the
usual days wage of a denarius. He promises those hired at the third, sixth,
and ninth hours to pay them whatever is right. He promises those hired
at the eleventh hour nothing.
The householder surprisingly pays the laborers in reverse order from
the way he hired them. When those who labored all day get the same
wage as those who only worked an hour, they complain to the householder that he is doing them an injustice. (Mt 20:1-12) He replies:
Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius?
Take what belongs to you, and go; I choose to give this last as I give to you.
Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you
begrudge my generosity? (Mt 20:13-15)
The parable concludes by repeating the aphorism in Mt 19:30 which it

seeks to illustrate: So the last will be first, and the first last. (Mt 20:16) The
evangelist has probably appended this proverb to the original parable.
Some commentators on this parable read it as pointing to the admission of the Gentiles into the Church with the consequence that they
receive the same salvation as Jews. It seems unlikely, of course, that Jesus
230- 235; Jos OCallaghan, Nota Critica sobre Mt 19,30, Estudios Biblicos,
48(1990), pp. 271- 273.
263
would have envisaged the baptism of Gentiles when He told this parable.
On the lips of Jesus, the parable points to the fact that one cannot earn
the rewards of the kingdom, which come from the gratuitous generosity
of God.
Matthew, however, uses the parable to illustrate the messianic reversal
of values within the Church. In Matthew, the parable continues Jesus
response to Peters question: What about us? In other words, Matthew
uses the parable in order to reflect on the kind of reward which the Twelve
will receive for following Jesus. Matthews Jesus warns that, even though
the Twelve have accompanied Jesus from the beginning and have received
the promise of sharing in His apocalyptic judicial authority, given the
gratuity and generosity of Gods love, they should expect no preferential
treatment when it comes to reward. Those who enter the kingdom later
will have the same reward from God as those who entered earlier. In
other words, the messianic reversal of values demands an egalitarian
Church order, where all share impartially in its benefits. The parable of
the laborers in the vineyard, as Matthew tells it, punctures the bubble of
clerical privilege and rebukes the ambition of the sons of Zebedee which
the evangelist will next describe.34 (Mt 20:20- 3)
As in Mark, the story of the ambitious attempt of James and John to
secure a privileged place for themselves in the kingdom follows the third
prediction of the passion. This time Matthew fails to note any reaction
on the part of the disciples to the prediction; but, like Mark, he intends
the ambition of James and John and the resentment of the other ten
disciples to illustrate that they have yet to grasp the meaning of the paschal mystery which Jesus is foretelling. (Mt 20:20-8;cf. Mk 10:35-45)
Matthew, however, as usual paints a slightly more flattering picture of
the disciples than Mark. Mark attributes to raw personal ambition the
request of James and John to sit at Jesus left and right when the kingdom
arrives. Matthew places the request instead on the lips of their mother,
who, like most mothers, wants her sons to get ahead. James and John,
however, go along with her request.
As in Marks account, Matthews Jesus replies: You do not know what
you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup which I am to drink? They
answer that they can; and Jesus replies: You will drink my cup, but to sit
at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for
whom it has been prepared by my Father. (Mt 20:22-3; Mk 10:38-40)
Matthew once again pares down Marks original text. Matthew eliminates Marks assimilation of Jesus passion to a baptism. Marks allusion
to baptism recalls Jesus own baptismal anointing in which the Father
commissions Him messiah but in the image of the suffering servant.
264
Matthew does not mention baptism. In Matthew, the cup to which Jesus
refers symbolizes suffering. It alludes both to the eucharistic cup and to
the cup which Jesus will drink in His passion. (Mt 26:27, 39. Cf. Is 51:7,
22; Jer 25:15, 17, 28; 49:12; Lam 4:21; Ps 75:8; Mt 26:39) In Matthew,
one can, then, see in Jesus reply to James and John a slightly more explicit allusion to Christian martyrdom.35
As in Mark, the other ten disciples respond with just as much ambition
as James and John. They react indignantly. Jesus responds by insisting
that the leaders in the new Israel take Jesus Himself and Jesus alone as
their model for how to exercise leadership. Again Matthew edits Mark
but preserves the substance of Jesus reply:
You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great
men exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would
be first among you must be your slave; even as the Son of man came not to
be served but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom (lytron) for many.
(Mt 20:25-8; Mk 10:41-5)
The term ransom (lytron) with which Jesus describes His impending
death often referred to the money paid for the manumission of slaves;
but it could also connote any act of rescue. It points to the paschal sacrifice of Jesus life, therefore, as a liberating rescue of those who believe in
Him. In describing the ambition of James and John and the envy of the
Ten, Matthew, then, reproduces the main lines of Marks story. Matthew,
however, treats the event as the culmination of Jesus denunciation of
clerical ambition among Church leaders.36
The Disciples in the Jerusalem Ministry
As in Marks account of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, Jesus, in
sending the disciples to prepare for this event, foresees with preternatural
clarity the circumstances of preparation. Matthew embellishes Marks
account, however, with the theme of fulfillment. He cites Zech 9:9, the
prophecy which Jesus prophetic gesture imitates. I shall consider
Matthews use of Zechariah below when I reflect on the theme of fulfillment in his gospel.
The disciples observe the withering of the fig tree in Matthew, who,
however, modifies Marks account of this strange event in several ways.
35. Cf. Jos OCallaghan, Fluctuacion textual en Mt 20,21. 26.27, Biblica, 71(1990),
pp. 553- 558.
286- 289; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 241-247; Emily Cheney, The Mother of
the Sons of Zebedee (Matthew 27.56), Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
68(1997), pp. 13-21.
265
He omits Marks observation that it was not the season for the tree to
bear fruit. That takes some of the paradox and contradiction out Marks
account of Jesus action. Moreover, when Matthews Jesus curses the tree,
it withers instantly. In Mark time lapses between Jesus prayer that no
one eat of the tree and its actual withering.
Moreover, Matthew downplays somewhat the symbolic meaning of
Jesus gesture. In Mark the story of the fig tree brackets the cleansing of
the temple. As a consequence, the withered tree dramatizes the spiritual
barrenness of the temple priesthood. Instead, Matthew undoes Marks
literary sandwich and tells the story of the fig tree as a literary unit in its
own right. Matthew uses the miracle primarily as an occasion for Jesus to
instruct the disciples once more in the efficacy of prayer, an important
theological theme in Matthew.
In Mark, Jesus teaching on prayer implicitly contrasts the authentic
efficacy of Christian prayer with the impotence of the commercialized
worship conducted in the temple. When, however, in Matthew the disciples ask Jesus why the tree withered instantly, Jesus replies hyperbolically:
Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and never doubt, you will not only do
what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain,
Be taken up and cast into the sea, it will be done. And whatever you ask
in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith. (Mt 21:18-22)
Jesus words reiterate His explanation to the disciples of why they could
not exorcise the moonstruck boy. On that occasion Jesus reproached the
disciples lack of faith and insisted on expectant faith as a condition for
driving out demons. Here Jesus words reaffirm the typical Matthean theme
of the need for expectant faith as a condition for prayer. Jesus response in
Matthew thus moralizes the cursing of the fig tree and in part, at least,
distracts the reader from the oddness of the incident. Finally, despite the
fact that Matthew gives Peter even more prominence in his gospel than
Mark, Matthew edits out Marks reference to Peter in this incident, possibly because it serves no clear symbolic purpose.37
Matthew inserts into his account of Jesus Jerusalem ministry the parable of the king who gives a wedding feast for his son. The parable targets
the chief priests and scribes and chides them for refusing to enter the
kingdom. Matthew, however, appends a postscript to the parable which
focuses on the disciples. One of the guests herded in from the streets to
attend the wedding arrives without a wedding garment. When the king
sees him improperly dressed, he orders him cast into the outer darkness
where people wail and grind their teeth. (Mt 22:1-14)
266
The postscript makes it clear that the warning against obstinacy and
against spiritual complacency applies as much to Jesus disciples as it does
to the high priests. Garments symbolize the way one relates to other persons. The lack of a wedding garment, therefore, symbolizes that the guest
came to the wedding but without the transformation of social conduct
which repentance and faith require. For this reason the king casts him
out. The parable concludes with a stern warning to the disciples: For
many are called, but few are chosen. The disciples must display the fruits
of repentance and perseverance in good works if they hope to share in the
eschatological banquet.38
As in Mark, the disciples also occasion Jesus eschatological discourse
by remarking on the wonderful stonework in the temple. I shall consider
the content of Jesus discourse when I reflect systematically on His teachings in Matthew. (Mt 24:1-2) Matthews Jesus, however, concludes the
eschatological discourse with a final prediction to the disciples of His
impending death. He warns the disciples that He has only two days left
before He is delivered up and crucified. (Mt 26:1-2)
The story of Jesus anointing at Bethany follows this prediction. Matthew again edits Mark but preserves the substance of Marks account.
The woman anoints Jesus head in apparent recognition of His messianic
dignity. When the disciples complain about the waste of the precious
ointment, whose sale could have produced money for the poor, Jesus
defends the woman, saying that the disciples always have the poor with
them, but that the woman has in fact anointed Him to prepare Him for
burial. Matthew, however, edits out the words of Jesus which in Mark
follow His statement: You always have the poor with you. Mark, as we
have seen, alludes to Deut 15 in order to make it clear that Christians
have only one proper response to poverty: namely, to alleviate it. Marks
Jesus also stresses the need for practical care for the poor by adding: ...and
whenever you will you can do good to them. (Mk 14:7)
Some commentators have suggested that Matthews deletion of this
final admonition not only impoverishes the text but leaves it open to the
misinterpretation of sanctioning indifference to the poor. Matthew, however, would almost certainly have expected his readers to recognize in
Jesus reply an allusion to Deut 15:1-11. Since, moreover, Matthew elsewhere urges care and concern for the poor, his editing of Mark on this
occasion in no way seeks to sanction indifference to the poor.39
38. Cf. NJBC, 42:130; Radermakers, op. cit., II, p. 278; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 305-308;
Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 268-270; David C. Sim, Matthew 22.13 and 1 Enoch
10.4a: A Case of Literary Dependence, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
47(1992), pp. 3- 19.
39. Cf. Robert Holst, The One Anointing Jesus: Another Application of Form-Critical
Method, Journal of Biblical Literature, 3(1976), pp. 435-446; Dale C. Allison,
Anticipating the Passion: The Literary Reach of Matthew 26:47-27:56, Catholic
267

As in Mark, the disciples prepare the upper room for the last supper.
Matthew, however, edits out of Marks text the fact that Jesus had preternatural foreknowledge of the details of the preparation. In Mark, as we
have seen, Jesus predicts that a man carrying a water jug will lead the
disciples to the cenacle. Matthews Jesus just sends them to a particular
unnamed person. Matthew emphasizes instead the disciples obedience
to Jesus in preparing the meal. Like Mark, however, Matthew portrays
the last supper as a seder. (Mt 26:17-9)
In both gospels, when Jesus sits at table with the disciples, He foretells
that one of them will betray Him and says that it would have been better
had the man never been born. Later Matthew, in contrast to Mark, will
illustrate this saying by describing Judass despair and suicide. (Mt 27:3-10)
As in Mark, the disciples ask Jesus one by one if Jesus speaks of him. In
Matthew, however, when Judas asks, Is it I, Master? Jesus replies, You
have said so. (Mt 26: 20-5) Mark makes no mention of this last detail.
(Mk 14:17-21)
The institution of the eucharist follows. Matthew reproduces Mark
version of this event with a few modifications. Matthew adds the command Eat to the distribution of the bread and the command Drink of
it to the distribution of the cup. Moreover, Matthew appends the phrase
for the forgiveness of sins to the consecration of the cup. As we have
seen, Matthew deleted the same phrase from his description of Johannine
baptism. For Matthew, the new covenant in Jesus blood alone effects the
forgiveness of sins. Then, Matthews Jesus, like Marks, says: I tell you I
shall not drink from now on (aph arti) of this fruit of the vine until that
day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers kingdom. Matthew
adds the phrase from now on to this last saying. The addition points to
the paschal mystery as the crucial turning point in salvation history. (Mt
26:26-9)
The prophetic gestures of Jesus in giving the disciples his body as bread
to eat and his blood as wine to drink have, then, the same basic meaning
as in Mark. Jesus trusts that His death will bring life to the disciples and
will seal a new covenant between them and God. As a covenant renewal,
Jesus death takes on the character of an atoning sacrifice.40
As in Mark, they all sing a hymn and depart for the Mount of Olives.
As in Mark Jesus, also predicts that when they strike Him, the shepherd,
the sheep, the disciples, will scatter; but that after He is raised from the
dead He will precede the disciples into Galilee. As in Mark, when Peter
Biblical Quarterly, 56(1994), pp. 701-714; NJBC, 42:148; Radermakers, op. cit., II,
pp. 330-332; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 361-365; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp.
314-315.
40. Cf. Schrmann, op. cit., pp. 66-96.
268
predicts that he will never abandon Jesus, Jesus foretells his triple denial.
As in Mark, the disciples all insist they will never deny Jesus, even though
they suffer death. Matthew edits out a few words from Mark; but he
reproduces most of the latters text.41 (Mt 26:3-5; Mk 14:26-31)
The image of Jesus as shepherd of Israel resonates with other passages
in Matthews narrative. The infancy gospel proclaims Jesus the Davidic
shepherd of Israel. (Mt 2:6) Jesus feeds the Jewish crowds because their
perfidious leaders have left them without a shepherd. (Mt 9:36) Jesus
sends the disciples to proclaim the gospel in His image to the lost sheep
of the house of Israel. (Mt 10:6, 14:14, 15:24,32) Jesus views His disciples as sheep in the midst of wolves. (Mt 10:16) Ever the good shepherd, Jesus does not will to lose a single sheep (Mt 18:12-14), but as final
judge He will separate the sheep from the goats. (Mat 25:31-46) Even
after the false shepherds of Israel strike Jesus down, He will regather His
sheep in Galilee, reconstitute them as the new Israel, and send them to
evangelize the world.42 (Mt 26:31-32, 28:16-20)
Matthew modifies slightly Marks account of the agony in the garden. While Mark describes Jesus as greatly distressed and troubled,
Matthew describes Him as sorrowful and troubled. (Mt 26:37; Mk
14:33) The substitution attenuates somewhat the degree of struggle Jesus
experiences in the face of death.
Nevertheless, Matthew, like Mark, has Jesus say to Peter, James, and
John: My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here and watch
with me. (Mt 26:38; Mk 14:34) Matthews Jesus, moreover, prays basically the same two prayers to the Father: My Father, if it be possible, let
this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will but as you will and My
Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, your will be done. (Mt 26:39,
42) In Matthew, the prayers explicitly echo the Our Father. (Mt 6:10)
While Mark has Jesus address the Father simply as Abba, Father, Matthew adds the pronoun My which underscores the intimacy of Jesus
relationship to the Father.43
42. Cf. John Paul Heil, Ezechiel 34 and the Narrative Strategy of the Shepherd and Sheep
Metaphor in Matthew, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 55(1993), pp. 695-708; Domingo
Muoz Leon, Ire delantro de vosotros a Galilae (Mt 26,32 y par: Sentido mesianico
y possible Sustrado Arameo del Logion, Estudios Biblicos, 48(1990), pp. 215-241;
Dale C. Allison, Anticipating the Passion: The Literary Reach of Matthew 2647-27:56,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 56(1994), pp. 701-714.
43. As in Mark, Jesus prays three times and chides Peter the second time he visits the
sleeping disciples for his inability to pray even for an hour with Jesus. As in Mark, Jesus
expresses concern that the disciples lack of prayer will leave them unprepared to face
the eschatological test which is about to descend upon them. As in Mark, the third time
Jesus wakes them, he speaks ironically, telling them to get well rested; for the hour of
His betrayal has arrived. Matthew distinguishes more clearly than Mark does between
269
In his account of Jesus betrayal, Matthew adds a touching detail absent from Mark. When Judas arrives with an armed mob and, as previously arranged, identifies Jesus, he does so with a kiss. Matthews Jesus
then asks him: Friend, why are you here? (Mt 26:47-49) Matthews
Jesus continues to call Judas friend even in the very act of betrayal.
As in Mark, one of the disciples severs the ear of the servant of the high
priest. Marks Jesus says nothing. Matthews Jesus, however, rebukes the
disciple for this violent act:
Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish
by the sword. Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and He will
at once send Me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then should
the scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so? (Mt 26:52-54)
The rebuke not only enjoins on the disciples not to respond to violence
with further violence, but it also underscores Jesus free submission to
violence at the hands of others, violence which He could avoid, if He
chose to exercise His divine authority over the angels.
As in Mark, Matthews Jesus rebukes those arresting Him by telling
them that they are skulking around in the dark, when they could have
arrested Him openly. In addition, however, Matthews Jesus again invokes the notion of fulfillment: But all this has taken place, that the
Scriptures and the prophets might be fulfilled. Jesus words implicitly
proclaim that His death follows Gods providential plan of salvation. (Mt
26:55-56)
The disciples than abandon Jesus to His enemies. Matthew mentions
nothing about a naked young man escaping the soldiers when he slips
out of the linen cloth he is wearing. (Cf. Mk 14:51) In Mark, as we have
seen, the young man foreshadows the resurrection which will leave the
enemies of Jesus bereft of His body and with only the linens which wrapped
them. Matthew, however, typically either misses this allusive reference in
Mark or more likely chooses to omit it, since he, unlike Mark, intends to
describe Jesus appearance to the disciples instead of just obscurely symbolizing it.44
Jesus three visits to Peter, James, and John, although in both gospels Jesus returns to
them three times. Matthew also changes Marks peremptory The hour has come to
The hour has come near. The hour of Jesus ordeal will not actually arrive until His
betrayal by Judas and His arrest. (Cf. Mt 26:39-46; Mk 14:35-42; see also: Brown, The
Death of the Messiah, I, 209-210). Cf. NJBC, 42:153; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
44. Cf. R.S. Barbour, Gethsemane in the Tradition of the Passion, New Testament
Studies, 16(1969-1970), pp. 231-251; David M. Stanley, Jesus in Gethsemane: The
Early Reflection on the Suffering of Jesus (New York, NY: Paulist, 1980), pp. 155-187;
A. Feuillet, Lagonie de Gethsemani (Paris: Gabalda, 1977), pp. 77-141.
270
As in Mark, Judas and Peter symbolize the two fundamental ways a

disciple who backslides can relate to Jesus. The disciple can either despair, like Judas, or repent and experience Jesus saving forgiveness, like
Peter. As we have already seen, after the Sanhedrin condemns Jesus,
Matthews Judas, filled with remorse, flings the money which has rewarded
his treachery at the feet of the chief priests, declares Jesus innocence, and
hangs himself. (Mt 27:3-10) As in Mark, Peter alone among the disciples
follows Jesus and the arresting mob to the house of the high priest. Matthew, however, in contrast to Mark, notes that Peter expects only the
worst. He has come to see the end. (Mt 26:57-8) Like Mark, Matthew
ironically brackets the story of Jesus trial and mockery by the Sanhedrin
with the story of Peters denial. The denial itself follows the story of the
trial. Matthew edits and rewrites Marks account of the denial, but he
preserves its substance. Peter denies Jesus three times, the last time with
curses and oaths. Then Peter remembers Jesus prediction, goes out, and
weeps bitter tears of repentance.45 (Mt 26:69-75)
As in Mark, Matthew records that the soldiers forced Simon of Cyrene
to help Jesus carry His cross to execution. As in Mark, Simon, even though
constrained, functions as an ironic type of the true disciple, who follows
Jesus carrying the cross even to Calvary. (Mt 27:32, 16:24-8; Mk 15:21)
As in Mark, among Jesus disciples only the women who had ministered to Jesus and supported Him materiallyMary Magdalene, Mary,
the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee
witness Jesus death, but from a distance.
Joseph of Aramathea, whom Matthew describes as rich man and a disciple of Jesus, secures Jesus body from Pilate, wraps it in a clean linen
shroud. Mark, as we have seen, describes Joseph as a respected member of
the Sanhedrin who awaited the reign of God; but Mark makes no mention either of Josephs wealth or of his discipleship. (Mk 15:43) Matthew
may have included that detail as a way of illustrating that God can touch
even the hearts of the wealthy. (Mt 19:26) Matthew also identifies the
tomb in which Joseph buries Jesus as Josephs own. The evangelist describes it as new or hitherto unused. The mention of Josephs Christian
affiliation provides some evidence that he eventually became a Christian
and generated a developing tradition about his role in Jesus passion.
Matthew closes his account of the passion with Mary Magdalene and
Mary the mother of James and Joseph, the first witnesses of the resurrection, sitting in sorrow at the tomb. (Mt 27:57- 61) As in Mark, the women
45. Cf. David Daube, Limitations of Self-Sacrifice in Jewish Law and Tradition,
Theology, 72(1969), pp. 291-304; NJBC, 42:156; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
271
take no active part in Jesus burial and serve primarily as witnesses to

both the death and resurrection. As witnesses, they link the two events.46
The Disciples and the Risen Christ
Matthew, as we have seen, records that the chief priests and Pharisees had
requested Pilate to post a guard at the tomb lest Jesus disciples steal the
body and pretend that He had risen from the dead. (Mt 27:62-6) Since
the presence of the guards would have made anointing the body impossible, Matthew, unlike Mark, does not portray the women as coming to
the tomb to perform this charitable act. They simply come to the tomb
to see the sepulcher, presumably to mourn there. As at the moment of
Jesus death, a great earthquake occurs at the moment when they reach
the tomb. The two earthquakes link the death and the resurrection of
Jesus as flip sides of the same apocalyptic event and, as we have seen,
point to the first calming of the storm and to Jesus triumphal entry into
Jerusalem as anticipations of the paschal mystery. (Mt 28:1-2)
Matthew transforms the young man whom the women encounter in
Marks resurrection narrative into an angel of the Lord who descends
from heaven and terrifies the guards by rolling back the stone in front of
Jesus tomb. The angel ignores the guards, who fall to the ground like
dead men because of their fear. The angel speaks instead to the women:
Do not be afraid; for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is
not here; for He has risen, as He said. Come, see the place where He lay.
Then go quickly and tell His disciples that He is going before you into
Galilee; there you will see Him. Lo, I have told you. (Mt 28:5-8)
In contrast to Mark, Matthew paradoxically makes no special mention

of Peter in the command to tell the disciples what has happened. I say
paradoxically because Peter in other respects tends to play a somewhat
more prominent role in Matthew. The omission could, however, suggest
that resurrection faith claims all the disciples impartially. Otherwise Matthew reproduces the speech of the young man to the women in Mark,
although he places it on the lips of an apocalyptic angel.
The women in Matthew react very differently from the women in Mark.
The latter disobey the young mans command and say nothing to the
disciples. Matthew clearly finds this an inappropriate response to the good
news, as Mark probably intended he should. Matthew prefers to portray
the women rushing from the tomb. Despite their initial fear, they joyfully carry out the errand with which the angel has entrusted them.
46. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, pp. 1225-1226; F. Neirynck, Les femmes
au tombeau: tude de la redaction matthenne (Matt. XXVIII. 1-10), New Testament
Studies, 15(1968-1969), pp. 168-190.
272
Matthew also inserts an encounter between the women and the risen
Christ. As the women abandon the tomb, Jesus Himself suddenly appears to them. They prostrate themselves before Him, grasping His feet
in an act of worship. Their worship (proskynesan) recalls the worship of
the disciples after Jesus had walked upon the water and calmed the waves
the second time. (Mt 14:33) That miraculous event had foreshadowed
the full revelation of Jesus and His divinity which the resurrection accomplishes. The womens action also recalls the worship of the magi in
the infancy gospel which there foreshadowed the conversion of the Gentiles. (Mt 2:11) Jesus repeats the angels command to the women to tell
the disciples that He will precede them into Galilee, where they too will
see Him.47 (Mt 28:9-10)
The Eleven hasten to Galilee and ascend the mountain which Jesus
had indicated. The Twelve minus Judas the traitor here symbolize the
shattered remnant of the new Israel which Jesus had begun to found during His ministry. The mountain recalls both the mount of the beatitudes
and the mountain of the transfiguration. As in the sermon on the mount,
Jesus once again speaks as God from the mountaintop. (Mt 5:1-2) The
disciples worship Jesus when they see Him, despite the fact that some of
them doubt their very eyes. Jesus, however, brooks no doubt on their part
and immediately utters the Great Commission:
All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go therefore
and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Breath, teaching them to observe all
that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of
the age. (Mt 28:16-20)
Here several points need noting. 1) The risen Christ speaks with a divine
authority conferred upon Him by the Father. The resurrection reveals
that authority finally and decisively. 2) Despite His rejection, betrayal,
and death, Jesus remains unchanged. He still lives to fulfill His commissioning by the Father to proclaim the kingdom; but He will now do so by
acting through His disciples. He therefore commissions them to speak
and act in His name and with His divine authority. In uniting Himself to
the Eleven (Lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.), the risen
Christ reconstitutes the Twelve. He joins Himself to the Eleven as the
twelfth apostle and thus insures that the new Israel will endure until He
returns in judgment at the close of the age. Moreover, in Greek, the
risen Christ actually says, I with you am (ego meth hymon eimi). By
inserting with you between I and am, Matthew asserts that, as the
47. Cf. Olaf H. Schumann, Ein Missionsbefehl? Zeitschrift fr Mission, 20(1994), pp.
130- 132; NJBC, 42:166; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp. 350-352; Harrington, op. cit.,
273
great I AM, the risen Christ encompasses the new Israel in its evangelization of the nations. 3) Jesus had originally restricted His ministry to the
lost sheep of the house of Israel. He now proclaims a universal salvation.
4) In commissioning the disciples to baptize in the triune name, Jesus
stands finally revealed as the Breath-baptizer, as the mightier one whom
John the Baptizer had predicted would baptize with a Holy Breath and
fire. Moreover, the obedience of faith through fidelity to the moral demands of discipleship provides the authentic sign of Breath-baptism. 5)
As we have also seen, Jesus revelation as Breath-baptizer coincides with
His final and full revelation as Immanuel, God-with-us. That revelation
insures that He will take providential care of the Church He is founding
until He ends the final age of salvation by returning to judge the world.
6) Jesus commissions the disciples corporately, collegially. The great commission engages the whole of the new Israel.48
How does one account for the difference between Marks and Matthews
portrait of the disciples? The difference between the situation of two communities for whom each evangelist wrote accounts for much of the contrast.
Mark seems to have written his gospel for a Christian community either as it suffered persecution under Nero or (more likely) as it attempted
to deal with its aftermath. It seems reasonable to suppose that persecution would have evoked a broad variety of responses from different members of the community, from apostasy to martyrdom.
Mark has nothing but approval for those disciples who follow Jesus
willingly even to the cross. His negative portrait of the disciples during
Jesus ministry probably targets the opposite constituency in his community: those who out of weakness denied Jesus under persecution or wavered in their religious commitment. I find it at least plausible that Marks
negative portrait of the disciples sought to offer hope and encouragement to weaker Roman Christians who had faltered or even denied the
faith under the threat of torture and of death. Accordingly, Mark often
48. Cf. George Howard, A Note on the Short Ending of Matthew, Harvard Theological
Review, 81(1988), pp. 117-120; John Paul Heil, The Narrative Structure of Matthew
27:55- 28:20, Journal of Biblical Literature, 110(1991), pp. 419-438; Joachim Lange,
Das Erscheinen des Auferstandenen im Evangelium Matthus: Einie traditionsgeschichtliche
Unterzuchung zu Mt 28,16-20 (Wrzburg: Echter Verlag, 1973); Jane Schabert, The
Father, the Son, and the Spirit (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982); Elian Cuvillier,
Particularisme et universalisme chez Matthieu: quelques hypothses lpreuve du
texte, Biblica, 78(1997), pp. 481-502; NJBC, 42:168; Radermakers, op. cit., II, pp.
357-387; Harrington, op. cit., pp. 414- 417; Albright and Mann, op. cit., pp. 361-363;
Levine, op.cit., pp. 165-192; Reginald Fuller, The Formation of the Resurrection
Narratives (New York, NY: Macmillan, 1971), pp. 71-93.
274
portrays the disciples as obtuse, even faithless; but in a number of miracle

stories he holds out the hope that the resurrection has the power to transform even the weakest and least faithful. In this context the figure of
Peter takes on special symbolic meaning in Mark. Peter, the great apostle
who died in Neros persecution, makes his last appearance in Mark when
he denies Jesus. That one could deny the Lord, repent, and still discover
in the Breath the strength to lay down ones life for Him must have offered considerable consolation and healing to the Roman community as
it attempted to deal with its apostates.
Matthew, by contrast, deals with a very different pastoral situation. His
community does not face the trauma of actual persecution by Roman
authorities. Instead, Matthews community is dealing with the challenge
of asserting its Christian identity while clinging to its Jewish roots. The
Antiochene church must, moreover, make that assertion in the face of
growing hostility from the Pharisaical leaders of the Jewish community.
Matthew, therefore, acknowledges the weakness of Jesus disciples; but
he also goes out of his way to contrast their faith in Jesus with the unbelief of their fellow Jews. Matthew draws the sharpest contrast between
the faith of the disciples and the hostile unbelief of the Pharisaical leaders
of the Judaism of his day. The contrast helps account for Matthews more
sympathetic portrait of the disciples. Still, Matthew endorses the main
lines of Marks portrait of the demands of discipleship. He also develops
Marks portrait. Matthew, for example, stresses more the importance of
expectant faith and prayer than Mark does. Matthew also insists more on
the day-to-day living of the gospel and warns against religious and moral
complacency.
Significantly, Matthew makes different symbolic use of Peter from Mark.
Writing as he does for a Petrine community, he tends to use the figure of
Peter as a symbol of Christian Church leadership. Peters weakness and
lack of faith cautions those leaders to examine themselves and to resist
the nascent clericalism which seems to have begun to surface among the
leadership at Antioch.
Matthew alone of the three synoptic gospels talks about Jesus conferring the power of the keys on Peter and the Eleven; but in Matthews text
Jesus endorsement of the Antiochene Churchs rabbinic authority structures comes with serious qualifications. Matthew insists that the wielding
of apostolic authority in the Church does not make one more important
than later converts who do not exercise the same kind of judicial authority. Christian leadership in Matthew as in Mark means leadership in service in the image of a servant messiah. Authentic leadership also precludes ambition and lording it over others. Even more than Mark, Matthew strongly defends a non-clericalized, egalitarian Church order.
275
This chapter and the two preceding it have reflected on the dramatic
linkages which structure the plot of Matthews gospel. The time has
come to turn to the thematic linkages. The next chapter examines the
first of those linkages: namely, the teachings of Jesus, which play such a
prominent role in Matthews gospel narrative.
276
Chapter 10
Jesus Teaching in Matthew
As in the case of Mark, Matthew uses thematic linkages in order to explicate the moral demands of discipleship. To this end, however, Matthew
makes much more extensive use than Mark of Jesus teachings. Matthew,
however, discovers in Jesus basic message three of the same elements as
Mark: 1) the need for repentance, 2) the immanent coming of the kingdom, and 3) the need to submit to Gods reign. (Mk 1:14-5, 4:17)
As we have seen, Marks gospel focuses more on event than on word as
a way of disclosing to the reader sacramentally Jesus true identity and
mission. Matthew, by contrast, tells Jesus story as Christian Torah. Jesus
five discourses constitute the five books of the new Law. Moreover, like
the original Torah, the narrative in which the new Law embeds itself
contextualizes it. In this sense, Matthew subordinates the events of Jesus
ministry to His teachings.
The Jewish Torah narrates the giving of the Law during the exodus
from Egypt. The narrative contextualizes the Law and provides the key
for interpreting it. Matthew narrates the giving of Christian Torah and
the creation of the new Israel. The story of Jesus contextualizes the new
covenant and provides the key for interpreting it. Matthew clearly desires
the reader to ponder and obey the sayings of Jesus which he has culled
and arranged with scribal care. He also expects the reader to adopt the
teachings of Jesus as the lens through which to read the deep meaning of
the Jewish Torah.
Each major discourse of Jesus develops a theme. The sermon on the
mount proclaims the kingdom for the first time and describes its scope
and intent. Matthew understands the kingdom as the fulfillment of the
old Law. Fulfillment means that the new covenant demands more, not
less, than Mosaic piety.1
As we have seen, Matthew arranges the discourses chiastically. The first
discourse, the sermon on the mount, announces the kingdom; the last,
the eschatological discourse, describes its consummation. The second and
fourth discourses deals with Church matters: its missionary activity and
communal structure. The parabolic discourse, which presents the kingdom as a saving mystery, holds the central place.2
1. Cf. Gnther Bornkamm, Gerhard Barth, and Heinz Joachim, Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew, translated by Percy Scott (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1963).
2. Cf. Beda Rigaux, The Testimony of St. Matthew, translated by Joseph Oligny (Chicago,
IL: Franciscan Herald Press, 1968); Richard B. Edwards, Narrative Implications of
Gar in Matthew, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 52(1990), pp. 636-655.
Chapter 10: Jesus Teaching in Matthew
277
This chapter divides into five parts. Each part examines the overall
structure and message of one of the major discourses.
(I)
Jesus proclaims the sermon on the mount to both His disciples and the
crowds. (Mt 5:1-2) The inclusiveness of the sermons audience foreshadows in a way the universality of the Great Commission which closes
Matthews gospel.3 (Mt 28:16-20)
The Sermon on the Mount
The sermon divides into five parts: 1) The beatitudes enunciate a program for discipleship, 2) The proclamation of a new ethic fulfills rather
than abolishes the Torah, 3) Jesus instructs His disciples on how to deepen
and authenticate traditional practices of Jewish piety like prayer, fasting,
and almsgiving, 4) Jesus enunciates basic moral demands of a life of discipleship. 5) The discourse concludes with warnings and injunctions.4
The Mosaic Torah ended with blessings and curses: blessings for those
who keep the Law, curses for those who violate it. (Deut 27:9-28:69) The
Beatitudes enunciate the blessings promised in the new covenant. The
woes against the scribes and Pharisees enunciate its curses.
Luke records four beatitudes. (Lk 6:20-26) Matthew records eight. Scripture scholars suggest that Matthew has expanded the original number of
beatitudes by drawing on the psalms and other Old Testament texts in
order to expand the blessings of the kingdom. The expansion exemplifies
Matthews scribal ideal of blending old and new wisdom. (Mt 13:52) In
what follows I shall examine each beatitude in turn.5
Blessed are the poor in spirit (ptchoi t pneumati), for theirs is the
kingdom of heaven. (Mt 5: 3) The poor designates the anawim, the
physically poor who prefer the service of God to the heaping up of riches.
Matthews addition of the phrase in spirit does not seek to attenuate
the call to physical poverty but to interiorize it. One must not only renounce riches physically, one must also renounce them in ones heart.
Those who renounce not only large possessions but also the very desire
for wealth will find themselves blessed because their physical and interior
poverty will free them to accept with joy the kingdom and all the blessings it brings.
3. Cf. Lorenz Oberlinner, Wem gilt die Bergprdigt? Biblische Zeitschrift, 34(1990), pp.
104-108.
4. Cf. Dieter Betz, Essay on the Sermon on the Mount (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985);
Charles E. Carlston, Betz on the Sermon on the MountA Critique, Catholic
Biblical Quarterly, 50(1988), pp. 47-57; Watejen, op. cit.,pp. 84-114.
5. Cf. Emile Peuch, 4Q525 et les pericpes des batitudes en Ben Sira et Matthieu,
Revue Biblique, 98(1991), pp. 80-106.
278
Even more, Jesus proclaims, the kingdom of heaven is theirs. He uses

here the present tense, although He will use the future tense in all the
other beatitudes except the eighth. In other words, physical and interior
poverty yield present possession of the kingdom. This beatitude, therefore, identifies the very reality of the kingdom with a renunciation of
wealth which it calls blessed.
The first beatitude also foreshadows the story of the rich young man
and Jesus remarks on that occasion. Implicitly, then, this beatitude also
calls one to sell what one has, share it with the poor, and follow a poor
and humble messiah.6 (Mt 19:16-22; cf. Mt 12:28-30)
Blessed are those who mourn (penthountes), they shall be comforted.
(Mt 5:4) This beatitude promises divine and human consolation to all
those who grieve. It implicitly enjoins compassion for the sorrowing as a
fundamental obligation of those who live in the kingdom.
The second beatitude alludes to Is 61:2, which proclaims a day of vindication when God will comfort all who mourn. The grief in question,
therefore, involves more than just personal grief. It promises consolation
to all those who allow their hearts to empathize with and grieve for the
evil and misery present in the human condition.
Blessed are the meek (hoi praeis), for they shall inherit the land. The
meek and the anawim coincide. Both terms designate the little folk, the
people of the land, vulnerable to exploitation by the rich and the powerful. This beatitude echoes Ps 37:11, which makes the same promise. It
also recalls the promise of the land made by God to the patriarchs.
The third beatitude proclaims as well the messianic reversal of values.
In the eschatological age begun by Jesus proclamation of the kingdom
(Cf. Mt 11:2-10), the people of the land, the poor, the marginal, the
outcast, not the rich landowners and royal oppressors, shall possess the
land of Israel as their own instead of working it for the profit of others.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (peinntes
kai dipsntes tn dikaiosynn), for they shall be satisfied. (Mt 5:6) Righteousness means standing in a good relationship with God as a consequence of obedient submission to the divine will. As the sermon on the
mount will make abundantly clear, true righteousness transcends Pharisaical legalism and demands a genuine transformation of heart, a deep
hunger and thirst for authentic faith and virtue. (Cf. Mt 5:20) This beatitude promises that those who yearn for such a transformation of heart
will indeed experience it.7
6. Cf. John Christopher Thomas, The Kingdom of God in the Gospel According to
Matthew, New Testament Studies, 39(1993), pp. 136-146; David Alan Black, Conjectural Emendations in the Gospel of Matthew, Novum Testamentum, 31(1989), pp. 1-15.
7. Cf. Benno Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew and His World of Thought (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1980); Wraid Popkes, Die Gerichtigkeit im MatthusEvangelium, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 80(1989), pp. 1-23.
279
Blessed are the merciful (hoi elemones), for they shall obtain mercy.
(Mt 5:3-12) Mercy here connotes both compassion and forgiveness. It
enunciates the same principle which Jesus later pronounces after the Our
Father: only those who compassionately forgive one another will experience divine forgiveness; for those who refuse to forgive sin by setting
their hearts against a God who remains lovingly and absolutely set on the
forgiveness of anyone who repents of sin. (Mt 6:14-5)
Blessed are the pure in heart (hoi katharai t kardia), for they shall see
God. (Mt 5:8) As we saw above in reflecting on Jesus relationship to the
Father, purity of heart means avoiding all moral and legal taint or impurity. It transforms one into the very antithesis of the Pharisaical brood of
vipers whose wickedness of heart leads them to speak poisonous words
against Jesus. Impurity of heart also means murder, adultery, fornication, theft, perjury, slander. (Mt 15:1-20)
This beatitude promises that the cultivation of moral and legal purity
will one day culminate in the vision of God. It alludes to Ps 24:3-4,
which equates purity of heart with the refusal to lift ones soul up to what
is false or to swear deceitfully.
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake (hoi
dedigmenoi hekenen dikaiosyns), for the kingdom of heaven is theirs.
This beatitude echoes the first with its present promise of possessing the
kingdom. Willingness to suffer persecution for standing in a correct and
obedient relationship with God makes one here and now a member of
the kingdom. The term righteousness also connotes here, as it can, the
notion of vindication. God will vindicate Himself and those who suffer
for their obedience to His will, for through their obedience they manifest
that they do indeed belong to the kingdom and have submitted to the
divine reign.
Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all
kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for
your reward is great in heaven, for so people persecuted the prophets
before you. (Mt 11-2) This beatitude reflects more the situation of
Matthews church and of the apostolic Church in general, although Jesus
may have anticipated the persecution of His disciples. The final beatitude functions as a commentary on the eighth beatitude and applies it to
the situation of the post-resurrection Church The beatitude portrays the
Church as standing in the same prophetic tradition as Jesus Himself when
it shares the same intransigent rejection as both He and the ancient prophets experienced. Jesus, as we have seen, will make the same point in His
denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees and in His confrontation with
the chief priests and elders. (Mt 21:33-46, 23:33-6) The missionary discourse, as we shall also see, will develop the theme of constancy under
persecution in greater detail.
280
Several comparisons follow the enunciation of the Beatitudes which

make it clear that they provide a program of life for anyone living in the
kingdom.
You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its
saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown
out and trodden under foot by people. You are the light of the world. A
city set on a hill cannot be hid. Nor do people light a lamp and put it
under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. Let
your light so shine before others, that they may see your good works and
give glory to your Father who is in heaven. (Mt 5:13-6)
These teachings serve a double function in the overall structure of the

sermon on the mount. First, they transform the beatitudes into a program of life which manifests the saving power of God. The first parable
warns of the fate of those who hear the message of the beatitudes and of
the gospel as a whole and then grow tepid and complacent. Unless the
disciples salt their lives with the good works demanded by the beatitudes,
they will find themselves repudiated for their mediocrity and sinfulness.
The city on a hill could allude to Jerusalem which lay atop Mount
Zion and functioned in Jesus day as the center of Palestinian Jewish worship. If so, the parable implicitly portrays the community of disciples as
the new temple which replaces the old as the source and center of authentic Jewish worship. That worship, moreover, contributes to the light which
the disciples by living the gospel shine upon a darkened and sinful world.8
The second parable and the teachings which accompany it spell out the
proper attitudes which should motivate obedience to the beatitudes and
to the message of the kingdom: Living the gospel will make one conspicuous, but one should practice virtue in such as way as to call attention away from oneself and to God. In the third section of the sermon on
the mount, Jesus will elaborate further this theme, when he excoriates the
hypocritical practice of religion as a way of seeking self-adulation. (Mt
6:1-6, 16-8) Here I note in passing that while Matthew uses the parable
of the lamp in order to exhort the disciples to self-effacing obedience to
the Father, Mark uses the same saying of Jesus in order to assure the
disciples that the final judgment will bring all hidden truth to light.
These preliminary teachings serve a second function in the overall structure of the sermon on the mount, They mark a transition from the beatitudes to the proclamation of the new morality which the next section of
the sermon on the mount enunciates.9
8. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, The Light and the City: Mt 5:14, Expository Times,
103(1992), pp. 174-175.
9. Cf. Gerhard Schneider, Das Bildwort von der Lampe: Zur Traditionsgeschichte eines
Jesus- Wortes, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestametlische Wissenschaft, 60(1970, pp. 183-209.
281
The proclamation of a new morality develops the central message of

the sermon on the mount: Jesus in proclaiming the kingdom comes, not
to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it by demanding more, not less, than
Torah piety demands.
Think not that I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets; I have
come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till
heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law
until all is accomplished. Whoever, then relaxes one of the least of these
commandments and teaches others so shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but one who does them and teaches them shall be called
great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness
exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom
of heaven. (Mt 5:17-20)
This passage serves as the preface of the second part of the sermon. In
what follows, Jesus will give six examples of the way in which His teaching fulfills the Law and prophets by demanding more, not less, than Torah piety. A pattern emerges as one example follows another: Jesus transforms negative commands into positive ideals and demands a deep personal appropriation of these ideals, one which springs from repentance of
heart. The pattern gives concrete meaning to two affirmations in the preceding passage: 1) It clarifies in a practical way what Matthew means by
fulfillment. 2) It also clarifies what Matthew means by a righteousness
which exceeds that of the legalistic piety of the scribes and Pharisees. As
we have seen, Matthew will return to this second point in the third part
of the sermon.
The preceding passage, as we have seen, also articulates Matthews
ecclesiology, in which pride of place goes to those who keep the Torah
but interpret it in the light of Jesus teachings. Gentile God fearers
belong in the kingdom but follow a less perfect path. The warning against
Pharisaical piety makes it clear that interpreting Torah in the light of
Jesus teaching will set His disciples in opposition to the piety of the
synagogue across the street.10
Matthew gives this section of the sermon a tight literary structure. Jesus
reminds the disciples of some prohibition under Torah piety. Jesus introduces each prohibition with the phrase: You have heard that it was said
or It was also said. He then states the prohibition His teaching fulfills.
10. Cf. Paul Beauchamp, Lvangile de Matthieu et lheritage dIsrael, Recherches de
Science Religieuse, 76(1988), pp. 5-38; Wiard Popkes, Die Gerichteigkeittradition im
Matthus- Evangelium, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 80(1989),
pp. 1-23; Robert Mohrlang, Matthew and Paul: A Comparison of Ethical Perspectives
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984).
282
Jesus then calls for the interiorization of a positive ideal of conduct which
demands more than the negative prohibition He has just cited.
The pattern suggests teaching patterns in rabbinic schools, where a
rabbi first cites a verse from the Torah and then corrects its misunderstanding. At the end of the sermon, however, Matthew makes it clear that
Jesus speaks with a Breath-inspired authority which transcends utterly
ordinary scribal instruction. (Mt 7:28-9) Matthew cites six examples of
how Jesus teaching fulfills the Law and the prophets.
First, Jesus does more that just forbid murder as the Mosaic law does.
His disciples must not only refrain from killing others, but they must
uproot from their hearts any anger, ill will, or contempt which might
incline one to hurt or even to contemn another. (Mt 5:21-2) Jesus also
demands mutual forgiveness as the test of the authenticity of prayer. He
warns that a sacrifice offered to God has no value in Gods eyes when
those who offer it remain personally unreconciled with others whom they
have wronged. (Mt 5:23-4) Moreover, as He does elsewhere, Jesus also
warns that the refusal to forgive others leaves one under the stern judgment of God, who demands our forgiveness of one another as a condition for Gods forgiving us. (Mt 5:21-6) Here, Jesus is not recommending the neurotic repression of negative emotion but its healing in faith
through forgiveness.11
Second, Jesus recalls the Old Testament prohibition of adultery. Then
He Himself demands not only the avoidance of marital infidelity but the
repentance of lustful desires which lead to adulterous conduct. (Mt
5:27-30) Jesus goes further still: He demands that the disciples shun utterly any occasion of sexual sin, or any other sin, for that matter. Jesus
uses the hyperbolic language of the middle east:
If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is
better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be
thrown into hell. (Mt 5:29)
Third, Jesus cites rabbinic debate over the Deuteronomic text which
allows husbands to divorce their wives for some indecency. Jesus Himself, as He will later do when confronted on the issue by some Pharisees,
(Mt 19:3-9) repudiates divorce, except in the case of incestuous union,
and warns that the husband who divorces his wife makes her into an
adulteress. (Mt 5:31-2) The gloss on incestuous union comes, as we have
seen, from Matthews pen.
The warning about adultery suggests that this third example of how
Jesus teaching fulfills the Law functions as a commentary on the second:
11. Cf. David Alan Black, Jesus on Anger: The Text of Matthew 5:22a Revisited,
283
namely, on the avoidance of adultery. Jesus warns Hebrew men that if

they divorce their wives they equivalently accuse them publicly of adultery and thus make them liable under the Law to death by stoning (Lev
18:20, 20:10; Deut 22:20-1); but He then also warns them that, if they
marry a divorced woman, they themselves commit adultery. (Mt 5:32)
The first warning alerts the husband to the grave, even fatal consequence,
his act might have for his wife. The second warns him not to lust after a
divorced woman. These prohibitions presuppose Jesus doctrine of the
indissolubility of marriage. (Cf. Mt 19:3-9)
Fourth, Jesus alludes to the prohibition of perjury in Lev 19:12. Jesus
Himself then forbids His disciples to use oaths in ordinary conversation.
Jesus seems especially to object to oaths which substitute for the divine
name something less sacred: heaven, the temple, earth, Jerusalem. Nor
should the disciples in ordinary speech swear by themselves (by their own
heads). A yes or no should suffice. In Jesus new ethic, personal integrity of life guarantees the truth of ones words, not the rhetorical appeal
to oaths.12 (Mt 5:33-37)
Fifth, Jesus then cites Lev 24:19-20, which prescribes that anyone who
disfigures another should as a punishment suffer the same disfigurement:
an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Jesus, however, enjoins His disciples to resist evil non-violently. Jesus reflects on three typical cases of
injustice and oppression. He then suggests particular strategies for responding to oppressive violence non-violently. When masters give a slave
a back-handed slap on the right cheek, the slave should turn the left cheek
as well. This surprising response is calculated to force the master to confront his or her own violence and to recognize in the one abused a human
being with autonomy and personal dignity. (Mt 5:38-39) When in violation of the Torah (Ex 22:25-27), avaricious rich people haul the poor
into court to take the very coats off their backs in payment of a debt, the
poor should offer their shirts as well in order to dramatize and hold up to
ridicule the insatiable greed of the wealthy. (Mt 5:40) When a Roman
soldier forces a citizen to carry his pack for a mile, as Roman law allowed,
the citizen should offer to go another mile. The soldier who accepted
such an offer would, also under Roman law, have himself risked disciplinary action, possibly even flogging. (Mt 5:41-42)
In each of the above cases, Jesus does not enunciate a universal principle of moral behavior but gives an example of how to resist violence
12. Cf. Dennis C. Duling, [Do not Swear] by Jerusalem because it Is the City of the
Great King (Matt 5:35), Journal of Biblical Literature, 110(1991), pp. 291-309; Aiko
Ito, The Question of the Authenticity of the Ban on Swearing (Matthew 5.33-37),
Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 43(1991), pp. 5-13; Serbe Ruzer, The
Technique of Composite Citation in the Sermon on the Mount, Revue Biblique,
103(1996), pp. 65-75; Dernd Kollmann, Das Schwurverbot Mt 5, 33-37/Jak 5,12
im Spiegel antiker Eidkritik, Biblische Zeitschrift, 40(1996), pp. 179-193.
284
non-violently. Each strategy counsels the disciples to seize the moral initiative in a way which forces the authors of violence both to confront
those they oppress as people and to face the violence and injustice of their
own behavior. The symbolic act of non-violent resistance challenges those
who act violently to repentance and to reconciliation. These concrete
strategies do, however, illustrate a general moral principle which Jesus
next enunciates: namely, love of enemies.
Jesus, in concluding this section of the sermon, alludes to a popular
interpretation of Lev 19:17-8, which prescribes love of neighbor. Apparently, some of Jesus contemporaries interpreted this to mean that hatred
of enemies does not contradict love of neighbor. Jesus, however, demands
that His followers love even their enemies and persecutors. Jesus could
here be distancing Himself from the Essenes who exhorted their followers to love all the sons of light....and hate the sons of darkness.13
(1QS1:9-10) Those who love universally imitate the perfect (teleios),
universal love of God, who sends the blessings of nature to good and evil
alike. Jesus dismisses the idea that one should love only ones friends as
worthy of a self-serving tax collector or a Gentile. He demands much
more of His own followers. (Mt 6:43-8)
Nowhere does the Old Testament recommend universal love of enemies. The Torah describes three ways of responding to violence: 1) unlimited revenge (Gen 4:15, 24); 2) limited revenge (the lex talionis) (Deut
19:16-21); and 3) the silver rule: Do not do unto others what you would
not have them do unto you. (Tob 4:15) In calling for love of enemies,
Jesus does, then, go beyond what the Law demands.14
The third section of the sermon on the mount enunciates norms for
the Christian practice of traditional forms of Jewish piety. It also develops Jesus earlier prohibition of performing acts of piety in order that
others might see and praise ones devotion. Matthews Jesus approves of
such practices but seeks to deepen and purify them. (Mt 5:16; 6:1)
Jesus requires that one should conceal traditional acts of personal devotion from the eyes of others, trusting that the Father who knows all things,
even secret acts and aspirations, will see and reward ones piety. By contrast, Jesus denounces the hypocrisy of those who give alms ostentatiously
or pray long prayers in public in order to attract attention and have others think them pious. Since such acts of hypocrisy seek an earthly rather
than a heavenly reward, the Father will ignore them utterly.
The Father will also ignore fasting, if one draws attention to ones penance for the sake of praise. Since, as we have seen, Jesus and His disciples
did not fast with the same rigor as the Pharisees or Johns disciples, this
13. Cf. Joseph Fitzmyer, S.J., The Dead Sea Scrolls and Early Christianity, Theology
Digest, 42(1995), pp. 303-319.
14. Cf. Mohrland, Matthew and Paul, pp. 94-125.
285
teaching about the proper way to fast target ascetical practices in Matthews
community.15 (Mt 6:5-8, 16-8)
After Jesus injunction that the disciples do their praying in private,
Matthew inserts the Our Father as a paradigm of Christian prayer. (Mt
6:9-13) Since I have already reflected in some detail on the meaning of
the Our Father in the course of examining Jesus relationship to the Father, I refer the reader here to that commentary.
The fourth part of the sermon on the mount enunciates seven fundamental precepts for life in the kingdom of God: 1) the willingness to live
not just for this life but for the next (Mt 6:19-21), 2) integrity of intention (Mt 6:22-3), 3) the renunciation of riches (Mt 6:24), 3) trust in
Gods providential care (Mt 6:25-34), 4) the repentant refusal to judge
other people harshly (Mt 7:1-5), 5) reverent care for holy things (Mt
7:6), 6) faith-filled prayer (Mt 7:7-11), and 7) the willingness to abide by
the golden rule.16
Matthew probably intended these seven injunctions to illumine one
another. For example, in enjoining His disciples to live for the next life
rather than for this one, Jesus uses the image of storing up treasures in
heaven rather than on earth. (Mt 6:19-21) The renunciation of riches
expresses, then, eschatological longing. (Mt 6:1-4) The willingness to
live poorly (Mt 6:24) presupposes and expresses trust in the providential
care of the Father, who clothes the very grass with flowers and feeds the
wild birds. (Mt 6:25-34) Those who live thus value life more than possessions. They also set their hearts first on the kingdom, in confidence that
the Father will in fact tend to their physical needs. (Mt 6:24-34)
Similarly, trust in the Fathers providential care (Mt 6:24-34) also takes
concrete expression in ones willingness to bring before Him ones every
need in prayer; for if human children can trust sinful parents to care for
them, how much more will the heavenly Father care for those who turn
to Him in need! (Mt 7:7-18) Trust in the Fathers providential care does
not, however, mean that one closes ones eyes unrealistically to the needs
and hardships of this life. (Mt 6:34)
The golden rule seeks to alleviate those hardships. It enjoins active
mutual concern for one anothers needs. In citing the golden rule, Jesus
notes that it summarizes the meaning of the Law and the prophets which
He has come to fulfill. (Mt 7:12, 5:17) In other words, besides simple
living, active mutual care and concern for one another lie at the heart of
the kingdom Jesus proclaims.
15. Cf. Kari Syreeni, Separation and Identity: Aspects of the Symbolic World of Matt.
6.1- 18), Novum Testamentum, 40(1994), pp. 522-541.
16. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Christ and Reproof (Matthew 7. 1-5/ Luke 6.37-42),
New Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 271-281; Albright and Mann, op.cit., pp. c-cv.
286
Such mutual love and care must also express a mutual personal openness to one another which precludes passing judgment on one another.
Jesus warns that those who judge others can expect God to judge them by
the same standard with which they measure other people. Moreover, judgmental attitudes betray a self-righteousness which needs repentance. (Mt
7:1-5) Self-righteousness violates purity of intention. By the same token,
commitment to all of these practical ideals of life in the kingdom must
flow not only from a repentant heart but from an intention purified of all
hypocrisy and duplicity. (Mt 6:22-3)
Jesus next enunciates two proverbs. The first forbids giving dogs meat
sacrificed to God. The second forbids throwing pearls to swine lest they
turn and rend one. Both sayings probably refer to the proclamation of
the gospel. (Mt 7:6) They probably reflect Matthews belief that the gospel enunciates a secret wisdom to which the disciples of Jesus have privileged access in faith. (Mt 13:10-7) Here Matthews Jesus warns His disciples against sharing this secret wisdom indiscriminately. Rather, communicate it only to those inclined to respond favorably. The warning
could well reflect pastoral experience in Matthews community.17
Having summarized the fundamental demands of life in the kingdom,
Matthews Jesus concludes the sermon on the mount with three warnings
and an injunction. First, Jesus warns His disciples not to underestimate
the difficulty of doing what He says; but He also warns them that the
stakes are high. Like the book of Deuteronomy, Jesus is placing before
the disciples a choice between life and death. (Mt 7:13-4; Deut 30:15-20)
The second and third warnings probably target problems in the Antiochene
church. Jesus cautions His disciples against false prophets and gives them
a norm for identifying them: what they say and do will bear evil fruit.
Matthews Jesus also warns His disciples against charismania: against prizing dramatic feats of charismatic prowesslike prophesying, exorcising,
or working miraclesmore than the obedience of faith. Those who covet
such gifts but neglect the moral demands of gospel living will find themselves rejected by Jesus in the final judgment. (Mt 7:21-3; cf. 1 Cor 13)
This final warning introduces the injunction which closes the sermon
on the mount. The parable describes two men who built their homes,
one on rock, the other on sand. The first house withstood the onslaught
of nature; the second fell. The disciples must either build their lives on
the solid rock of Jesus teaching or face utter ruin under the stress of
17. Cf. Neil J. McEleny, The Unity and Theme of Mt 7:1-12, Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, 56(1994), pp. 490-500; Stephen Llewelyn, Mt 7:6A: Mistranslation of
Interpretation, Novum Testamentum, 31(1989), pp. 97-103; Hermann von Lips,
Schweine Fttert man, Hunde nicht ein Versuch, das Rtsel von Matthus 7:6 zu
lsen, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 79(1988), pp. 165-186.
287
adversity. They will build on rock, if they not only hear what Jesus says
but do what He demands. (Mt 7:24-27)
After Jesus finishes speaking the crowds marvel at the personal authority (exousian) of His discourse. Unlike other scribes and rabbis, Jesus has
no need to cite other authorities to justify His teaching. Matthew, of
course, recognizes Jesus authority as prophetic, divine, and Breath-inspired.18 (Mt 3:16-7, 21:23-7)
(II)
Jesus second great discourse, His missionary discourse, follows His admonition that the disciples should ask the Father, the Lord of the harvest, to send more laborers into the harvest. It also follows the call of the
Twelve. (Mt 9:35-38) That call fulfills in turn Jesus promise in calling
Peter, Andrew, James, and John that He would make them fishers of
men. (Mt 4:19-20) Matthew underscores this last point by having Jesus
communicate to the Twelve before He sends them to work in the harvest
of souls His own charismatic authority over demons as well as His power
to heal. (Mt 10:1, 8) Finally, the missioning of the Twelve also foreshadows the Great Commission which closes Matthews gospel. (Mt 28:16-20)
The Missionary Discourse
The missionary discourse divides into two parts: 1) the formal commissioning of the disciples and 2) warnings and counsels about the correct
fulfillment of the commission.19
As we have seen, in contrast to the Great Commission which closes
Matthews gospel, in the missionary discourse Jesus sends the Twelve exclusively to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, neither to the Gentiles
nor to Samaritans. In other words, like Jesus Himself they must seek out
especially the poor, the marginal, and the oppressed members of Israel,
the people of the land, the slaves, and the expendables. (Mt 10:5-6)
As He sends the Twelve forth to labor, Jesus explicitly tells them to
proclaim the reign of God and to confirm their message with miracles
and exorcisms, just as Jesus does. Jesus explicitly gives them the power to
cleanse lepers: i.e., to work miracles of inclusion. He even empowers them
to raise the dead, no doubt as a foreshadowing of the gift of risen life
which they will impart when they baptize in the triune name. (Mt 10:7-8)
Instructions on the proper way to evangelize follow the commissioning. First, membership in the kingdom has come to the disciples as pure
gift; hence, they must give the same gift to others free of charge, although
they can legitimately claim the hospitality of those who accept their teach18. Cf. Mohrlang, Matthew and Paul, pp. 72-93.
19. Cf. Waetjen, op.cit., pp.131-138.
288
ing in faith. Indeed, the kingdom demands such free sharing of the physical
supports of life. (Mt 10:8)
Second, the disciples must travel light and move fast because they recognize the urgency of their message and because they trust in God to
provide for their needs through those whom they will evangelize.
Third, they must not waste their breath on those who reject their message; instead, they should shake the very dust of the unbelieving town
from their feet as a sign that they share nothing in common with it. The
peace with which they greet believers will rest on them, but not upon
unbelievers. Those who refuse them faith will risk a worse judgment than
Sodom and Gomorrah on the last day. (Mt 10:11-15) As in Mark, these
instructions, like the others which Matthew later appends to Marks original discourse, provide Christian missionaries with a compendium of practical norms for the conduct of their ministry.
Jesus next warns the Twelve that they can, like Him, expect to meet
with violent opposition and hostility. With these warnings, Matthews
account of Jesus ministry which began on a note of hope and healing
takes a decisive turn toward Calvary.
Behold I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of men; for they will deliver you up
to councils, and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged
before governors and kings for my sake to bear testimony before them and
the Gentiles. When they deliver you up, do not be anxious how you are to
speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you in
that hour; for it is not you who speak, but the Breath of your Father speaking through you. (Mt 10:16-20)
Matthew situates the missionary discourse during Jesus mortal ministry; but this passage contains three clues that the evangelist intends it to
apply to the situation of the apostolic Church and, more specifically, of
His own community: 1) testifying before governors and kings contradicts Jesus earlier charge not to preach to the Gentiles. 2) Nowhere in the
gospels does one find a case of one of the disciples undergoing flogging in
a synagogue. 3) The disciples reliance on the Breath of your Father
suggests the situation of the post-resurrection, Breath-baptized Church.
Jesus next warns that hostility to the spread of the gospel will come
even from members of ones own family and that faith in Him will divide
members of ones own household against one another. This prediction
probably envisages especially the ostracism of converts by Jewish families
when they converted to Christianity. (Mt 10:21-22)
In proclaiming the gospel, the Twelve should expect to encounter a
universal hostility: you will be hated by all for my names sake. (Mt
10:22) With the wisdom of serpents (Mt 10:14), they should not resist
289
hostility but flee it. Moreover, Jesus promises that, as they move from
town to town to avoid persecution, you will not have gone through all
the towns of Israel, before the Son of Man comes. (Mt 10:23) As we
have seen, this saying of Jesus suggests that at some point in His ministry
He may have hoped that the kingdom would come soon. If so, Matthew
probably records this pronouncement because he looked upon Jesus resurrection as sufficient fulfillment of what He prophesied.
Matthews Jesus warns the Twelve to expect hostility and persecution
to come especially from the Pharisees. If the Pharisees have called Jesus
Beelzebul, they will call the disciples even worse. (Mt 10:24-5) In other
words, the conflict between the church at Antioch and the synagogue
across the street prolongs the hostility with which at least some Pharisees greeted Jesus ministry.
Having commissioned, instructed, and warned the Twelve, Jesus appends three additional norms for correct evangelization. First, despite
persecution, the Twelve must proclaim the secret wisdom of the gospel
boldly and fearlessly: from the housetops. Reverence for God and fear
of damnation must relativize any fear they have for mere humans who
can only kill the body. (Mt 10:24-9) Instead, a sure hope for vindication
at the last judgment should ensure bold proclamation: for nothing is
covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. (Mt
10:24)
Second, in a hostile world, the Twelve must in their ministry of proclamation also trust the Fathers present providential care over each one of
them, since His providence encompasses the most insignificant events,
even the fall of a sparrow. Jesus adds with peasant irony: Fear not, therefore, you are worth more than many sparrows. (Mt 10:29-31)
Third in proclaiming the gospel, the Twelve must also trust Jesus Himself. He will testify before the Father on behalf of those who testify to
Him and will deny before the Father those who deny Him. (Mt 10:32-3)
These verses again strike an eschatological note. The testimony by Jesus
of which Matthew speaks suggests the final judgment.
Jesus follows these three injunctions with a second warning that suffering and renunciation await any evangelist. In the conduct of the apostolate,
the Twelve must stand ready to renounce father and mother, son and
daughter, if required, for Jesus sake. They must even, when necessary,
sacrifice their lives for the gospel. (Mt 10:34-39)
This second warning contains Matthews first explicit reference to the
cross of Jesus: one who does not take up ones cross and follow me is not
worthy of me. (Mt 10:38) In the narrative section which precedes the
missionary discourse, Matthew, as we have seen first introduces the theme
of conflict. Here, in the discourse itself, the evangelist looks forward to
Calvary. In Mark, by contrast, Jesus faces toward Calvary from the very
290
first. Mark, as we have seen, first refers explicitly to Calvary in the third
of the five conflict stories which begin Jesus Galilean ministry. In the
fifth story, Jesus enemies begin to plot against His life.
The missionary discourse concludes on a positive note. Jesus reflects
on the privileges and rewards of the apostolate. He first promises: Whoever receives you receives Me, and whoever receives Me receives Him
who sent Me. (Mt 10:40) The apostles should realize that despite any
opposition to their proclamation of the gospel, they bear God to people.
Both the Father and the Son so identify with them that, in accepting the
disciples, people will in fact be accepting God and Gods own Son.
The apostolate will, moreover, bring a rich reward to those who engage
in it, a reward in which those who receive the gospel will share. The
smallest kindness showed to the apostles, prophets, and evangelists in
their ministry will have its appropriate reward, since the kindness associates one with and fosters the ministry of those helped. (Mt 10:41-3)
(III)
As in Mark, Jesus begins the parabolic discourse from a boat on the Sea of
Galilee in order to avoid the press of the crowds. (Mt 13:1-2; Mk 4:1) In
Mark Jesus directs some parables to the crowd and others to the disciples.
Matthew, however, clearly divides the parabolic discourse into two parts.
In the first, Jesus teaches the crowds from the boat; in the second, He
leaves the crowds behind and instructs the disciples in parables in the
secrecy of a house to which they retire.20 (Mt 13:34-6)
The Parabolic Discourse
As we have seen, Matthew adopts Marks interpretation of the parables as
conundrums designed to conceal the mystery of the kingdom from unbelievers at the same time that they disclose it to believing disciples. In
fact, Jesus used parables in order to subvert the familiar world of sympathetic listeners and to open them to the inbreaking reality of Gods reign.
Jesus may, however, have trusted in part to the ambiguity of narrative
thought in order to conceal the more revolutionary implications of His
teachings from His enemies. Matthew, however, softens somewhat Marks
teaching on this point. Mark portrays the parables as the instruments of
a mysterious providence which reveals the gospel to some and conceals it
from others. (Mk 4:11-2) Matthew, however, wants the reader to understand that lack of faith rather than an arbitrary divine decree prevents
unbelievers from grasping the message of parables. In explaining why He
teaches in parables, Matthews Jesus says:
20. Cf. Jrgen Roloff, Das Kirchenverstndnis des Matthus in Spiegel seiner
Gleichnisse, New Testament Studies, 38(1992), pp. 337-356; Watejen, op. cit.,
pp.151-158.
291
For to the one who has will more be given, and he will have abundance;
but from the one who has not even what he has shall be take away. This is
why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. (Mt 13:12-13)
In other words, Matthew insists that lack of generosity and of faith on

the part of those who hear the gospel renders the parables meaningless to
them. Mark, as we have seen, applies the proverb to the disciples. (Mk
4:5)
Moreover, Matthew embellishes Marks theological interpretation of
the parables in three other ways. First, he links the parables to the theme
of fulfillment, so prominent in his gospel. He cites the unbelief which
greeted Jesus preaching as a fulfillment Is 6:9-10. Second, Matthew insists on the blessedness which comes from grasping the mystery of the
kingdom. That knowledge fulfills the longings of all the prophets and
righteous people of the old Law. Finally, Matthew portrays the obscurity
of the parabolic discourse as a fit literary medium for conveying the secret plan of salvation conceived by God before the creation of the world
and only now revealed in the teachings of Jesus. He alone has privileged
access to the Fathers saving intentions. (Mt 13:14-7, 34-5)
The fact that the evangelist records seven parables in all probability
implicitly invokes ancient numerology, which regarded seven as a perfect
number. The seven parables symbolize, therefore, the perfection of the
salvation revealed in Christ.
In his parabolic discourse to the crowds, Matthews Jesus uses the
parables to strike largely apologetic themes. The parable of the astonishing harvest predicts that the kingdom, despite some setbacks, will bear
astonishingly abundant fruit. (Mt 13:1-2) The parable of the wheat and
the weeds predicts that hostility will not prevent the kingdom from bearing fruit; nor will its enemies escape retribution, even though God presently suffers their hostility with patience. (Mt 13:24-30) The parable of
the mustard seed foretells that despite the smallness of its beginnings, the
kingdom will develop into a great, welcoming, and subversive reality.21
(Mt 13:31- 32) Finally, in comparing the kingdom to a woman leavening
dough, Jesus foretells that eventually the kingdom will impregnate and
transform everything. (Mt 13:33)
The warnings which these parables contain suggest two motives for the
crowds failure to put faith in Jesus. First, they long for a different kind of
kingdom from the humble kingdom which Jesus proclaims. Second, they
want immediate results from Jesus ministry and lack the patience and
insight to abide Gods timing.
21. Cf. Jean Bernardi, Cent, soixante et trente: Matthieu 13,8, Revue Biblique,
98(1991), pp. 398-402.
292
In the first part of the parabolic discourse, Matthew allegorizes the

parable of the astonishing harvest and applies it to the disciples. The
parable teaches the same lessons as Mark: the need for deep faith to resist
Satan in times of persecution, the renunciation of worldly wealth and
cares. (Mt 13:18-30; Mk 4:13-20)
The second part of the parabolic discourse, which Matthews Jesus also
addresses specifically to the disciples, takes place privately, in the intimacy of a house. This part of the discourse also introduces completely
new material absent from Marks parabolic discourse.
This section of the discourse begins with an allegorization of the parable of the weeds among the wheat. As we saw in considering Jesus relationship to Satan, the allegory endows the parable with eschatological
meaning by transforming it into a description of the last judgment. Despite Satans attempt to undermine the kingdom, by sowing his children among the children of the kingdom, at the last judgment (symbolized by the harvest) Jesus will send His angels (laborers) to separate
the good (the wheat) from the evil (the weeds). He will reward the former
and cast the latter into the burning fire of divine judgment. For Matthew, the weeds refer especially to those harrassing his community and
trying to subvert its faith in Jesus resurrection. (Mt 13:36-43)
A later parable describes fishermen sorting out the edible and inedible
fish caught in an enormous dragnet. Jesus then compares the fishermen
to the angels who will assist in the final judgment by separating the good
from the wicked. They cast the wicked into a furnace of fire where they
wail and grind their teeth. (Mt 13:47-50)
Both allegories deal with the final judgment. In the allegory about the
weed and wheat, the angels sort out good from evil in the world. Since
the allegory of the fishermen targets the disciples in a special way, it warns
that the angels of judgement will also sort out those who claim to belong
to the kingdom. The parable about the fish, then, warns against complacency. One cannot assume that membership in the kingdom assures salvation unless one brings forth works of righteousness. This second allegory makes fundamentally the same point as Matthews addition to the
parable of the king who gave a banquet. (Mt 22:11-4) Clearly, Matthew
desires the disciples of Jesus to keep before them the winnowing which
will occur on the last day.22
The parables of the treasure in the field and of the pearl of great price
also target the disciples. As we have seen, both parables portray the kingdom as of incomparable value. In both a person finds something (the
treasure hidden in the field, the extremely valuable pearl) of such worth
that he willingly and joyfully sacrifices the rest of his possessions in order
22. Cf. Charles E. Carleston, Parable and Allegory Revisited: An Interpretative Review,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 43(1981), pp. 228-242.
293
to have it. (Mt 13:44-5) These parables portray the kingdom as a

once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, as something not to miss but also as something demanding the sacrifice of everything else. The reward, however,
far outstrips the sacrifice; and both the reward itself and the search for it
have priceless value.
The parabolic discourse, as we have also seen, ends with Jesus asking
the disciples if they have understood the parables He has told them. With
an insight which far surpasses the disciples in Mark, they reply that they
have. (Mt 13:51) Jesus then tells a final parable which depicts the disciples as scribes for the kingdom of heaven. He compares them to a householder who brings out from his treasure both new and old things. (Mt
13:52) A sound interpretation of the gospel, Matthew is asserting, does
not reject the Torah, but interprets it in the light of the new revelation
made by God in Jesus. (Mt 5:17-9)
(IV)
Scholars debate whether the ecclesial discourse targets all the disciples or
just Church leaders. Some take the three references to little ones in the
first part of the discourse as referring to the relationship between leaders
of the community and the rest of the disciples, who constitute the little
ones. (Mt 18:6, 10, 14) The term little ones, however, could just as
well refer to the weakest, lowliest, and most marginal members of the
community who should engage the special active concern of better
advantaged Christians. In verse 21, concern shifts from the little ones
to your brother. I do not, then, find in the references to the little ones
conclusive evidence that the first part of the discourse targets leaders only.
I therefore take the discourse as targeting all disciples, leaders included.
Such an interpretation also better accords with Matthews egalitarian vision of Church leadership.
The Ecclesial Discourse
The discourse develops several themes, all of them related to right relations among the disciples in community: 1) the need for humility and
self-effacement, 2) absolute avoidance of scandalizing another believer,
3) concern to reconcile those who stray, 4) the need for mutual forgiveness as well as proper procedures for effecting mutual reconciliation in
community, and 5) the need to offer heartfelt forgiveness no matter how
many times one needs to do it. Two teachings in the ecclesial discourse
derive from Mark: the practice of hospitality (Mk 9:33-37) and the avoidance of scandal. (Mk 9:42-50, 18:7-9) The rest of the discourse derives
from other sources.23
23. Cf. Watejen, op. cit., pp. 183-191; O Hermant, Structure litteraire du discours
communautaire de Matthieu 18, Revue Biblique, (103), pp. 76-90.
294
The disciples occasion the discourse by asking Jesus, Who is greatest

in the kingdom of heaven? (Mt 18:1) The disciples question suggests
that they have been arguing about which of them counts as greatest in
the kingdom and can find no answer. Mark, in a parallel passage makes it
perfectly clear that the disciples were indeed disputing about which of
them ranks as the greatest. (Mk 9:33) Matthew, once again, however,
paints a less negative portrait of the disciples than Mark and only hints at
the dispute.
Jesus dramatizes His response by calling over a small child. Symbolically, He puts the child in the midst of the disciples and says:
Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will
never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this
child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. (Mt 18:2-5)
This saying of Jesus does not occur in Mark.

Jesus is not suggesting that all children display spontaneous humility.
Rather He uses the child as a symbol of one who consciously experiences
personal neediness, vulnerability, and dependence. In ancient law a child
did not become a person until it reached maturity. It lacked any power of
self-assertion and independent action. Jesus makes the willingness to
embrace freely such lowly self-effacement not only the criterion for greatness in the kingdom but a condition for entering it.
The response rebukes the arrogance and ambition of any Christian by
making it clear that far from having a special claim to greatness in the
kingdom, the ambitious and arrogant have yet to comprehend the most
basic conditions for membership. They must turn, repent of all
self-promotion and lust for power, even in order to enter the kingdom.
Once in it, they must then cultivate the lowliness, vulnerability, and dependency of a child if they hope for greatness. The reply applies to all
disciples; but, as we shall see, it rebukes especially arrogance and ambition in any who lead the community. Matthew, then, puts fidelity to
Jesus egalitarian vision of community at the head of the lessons which
the disciples need to learn about Church life.
Matthew omits the touching detail in Mark that Jesus commanded the
disciples to welcome the small child while embracing one. Matthews
Jesus proclaims:
Whoever receives one such child in my name receives Me; but whoever
causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better
for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned
in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is
necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes! (Mt 18:5-8; cf. Mk 9:36, 42-50)
295
In warning against scandalizing other members of the community, Jesus

begins by reminding the disciples that He identifies personally with the
least and lowliest so totally that He regards anything done to them as
done to Himself. The reminder puts the first prohibition of scandal into
its proper Christological context. Like Mark, Matthew portrays scandalizing another member of the communitywho believes in Meas a
betrayal of Christological faith through failure to recognize Christ in ones
neighbor. Jesus recognizes the moral inevitability of scandal but holds
accountable the one who causes another disciple to sin gravely. Matthews
Jesus then echoes Marks with the hyperbolic warning that it would be
better to amputate any part of the body which becomes an occasion of
sin rather than commit the sin itself. In Matthew, this teaching echoes a
similar teaching in the sermon on the mount. (Mt 18:8-9; cf. Mt 5:29-30,
Mk 9:43-8) Its presence in two major discourses underscores the importance of avoiding sin and scandal.
Finally, Matthews Jesus warns against looking down on (kataphronesete)
one of the little ones, since their angels behold the face of Father who
is in heaven. Having an angelic look-alike who dwells in the presence of
God asserts the personal care which God takes of each individual. (Mt
18:10) If the Father shows a personal care for the smallest and the least,
the disciples can do no less.
The negative precept of avoiding scandal and arrogance now finds a
positive correlate in active concern to search out and bring to reconciliation disciples who do sin. This active concern to reconcile sinners imitates in its own way not only the Fathers providential care for each person but also Jesus proclamation of divine forgiveness and table fellowship with sinners.
What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them has
gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in
search of the one that went astray? And if he finds it, I say to you, he
rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that ever went astray. So it
is not the will of my Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones
should perish. (Mt 18:12-4)
This teaching too has no parallel in Mark and portrays the Father as
absolutely committed to forgive the repentant sinner any evil he or she
has done. (Mt 9:10-13) Accordingly, Matthews Jesus warns the Christian community never to hold grudges against those who betray it. Instead, the community should rejoice when backsliders repent and seek
reconciliation. The saying especially challenges community leaders to take
risksto leave the ninety-nine, if necessaryin order to reconcile the fallen.24
24. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 72-73.
296
Procedures for mutual reconciliation in community follow. These procedures probably reflect Church discipline at Antioch. If Christian offends Christian, reconciliation begins when the offended party seeks out
the offender. That the offended party takes the initiative exemplifies active concern to reconcile sinners. One gains the offender by bringing
the individual to repentance and recommitment to gospel living. If at all
possible, then, reconciliation should advance initially at a private, personal level and should engage only those already involved in the offense.
(Mt 18:15)
If this initial attempt at reconciliation fails, then, the one offended
should appeal to other members of the community to act as mediators. If
this mediatorial intervention fails, then the matter should come before
the entire community and its leaders for judgment.
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to
listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
(Mt 18:17)
The fact that the offense in question could occasion excommunication

suggests that Matthew has serious wrongs in mind. Moreover, Matthew
portrays the act of excommunication as not simply the act of the
communitys leaders but as an act of the entire community acting corporately and collectively.
In this context, Matthews Jesus fulfills the promise He had made to
Peter in Mt. 16:19 and confers the power of the keys, the power to bind
and loose upon the church and its leaders. In other words, Matthew makes
it clear that any rabbinic exercise of the power of the keys requires the
communitys sanction. Church leaders cannot, then, bind or loose any
member of the community out of personal whim or spite. The action
requires the community as a whole to endorse it. (Mt 18:18)
Matthews Jesus underscores both the collegial and the communal character of any exercise of the power of the keys. He does so in the following terms:
Again I say to you, if any of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it
will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are
gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Mt 18:19-20)
These two pronouncements sanction the communal exercise of binding and loosing by appealing to the experience of shared worship. Answered prayer manifests the presence of the risen Jesus in His community. That presence in turn sanctions the communitys exercise of the
power of the keys.25
25. Cf. Kilian McDonnell and George Montague, Christian Initiation and Baptism in the
Holy Spirit: Evidence From the First Eight Centuries (Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical
297
The ecclesial discourse ends with a strong insistence on the need for
limitless forgiveness as the mark of any Christian community. In a passage which again finds no parallel in Mark, Peter asks Jesus: Lord, how
often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? As many as seven
times? (Mt 18:21-2) In ancient numerology, the number seven counts
as a perfect number. Peter is therefore asking Jesus, At what point does
forgiveness reach perfection?; or, to put the matter differently, As what
point have I forgiven sufficiently so that I no longer have any further
need to forgive?
Jesus replies: I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven
times. (Mt 18:22) In effect, Jesus replies: No definite number makes
forgiveness perfect. Rather, keep on forgiving as often as you find offense. Jesus reply could possibly allude to and reverse the bloodthirsty
boast of Lamech who promises to take more than ten times as much
vengeance for any offense as Cain did. (Gen 4:24) In the kingdom limitless forgiveness, not limitless vengeance, provides the fundamental rule
of life.
Jesus then tells the parable of the unforgiving servant as a way of
re-enforcing the need for unlimited forgiveness. A servant owes his Gentile lord an enormous sum: ten thousand talents, or more than fifteen
annual salaries. When called to account, he finds himself and his family
threatened with slavery by an angry lord. Their price on the slave block
will only partially replace the debt the servant owes. When the servant
begs for mercy and for time to pay, the lord who ordinarily acts with
Gentile ruthlessness surprisingly relents and forgives the entire enormous
sum.
The forgiven servant, however, shows no such mercy to a fellow servant
who owes him a significant but comparatively trifling sum: a hundred
denarii, or one hundred days wages. When the second servant begs the
first for mercy in exactly the same way as the latter had begged the lord,
the first servant has the second servant thrown into prison.
When the other servants inform the lord, the latter in anger rebukes
the unforgiving servant for not showing the same mercy he received. The
lord then inflicts on the unforgiving servant, not slavery, but the same
Press, 1991); Jos Caba, S.J., El poder de la peticion communitaria (Mt 18:19-20),
Gregorianum, 54(1973), pp. 609-654; J. Duncan M. Derrett, Where Two or Three
Are Convened in My Name: A Sad Misunderstanding, Expository Times, 91(1979),
pp. 83-86; Jean Galot, S.J., Quil soit pour toi comme le paien et le publican,
Nouvelle Revue Thologique, 96(1974), pp. 1009-1030; Jacob Neusner, By the
Testimony of Two Witnesses in the Damascus Document IX, 17-22 and in Pharisaic
Rabbinic Law, Revue de Qumran, 8(1972-1975), pp. 197-217; Beat Weber, Schulden
erstatten, Schulden erlassen: Am matthschen Gebrauch einiger juristischer und
moneter Begriffe, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 83(1992), pp.
253- 256.
298
fate as he had decided for his debtor: imprisonment until he pays in full.
Even in his anger, however, the lord still grants the first servants original
request. He gives him time to pay the huge debt; but for his lack of mercy
the first servant will spend that time in prison.
The parable concludes on a familiar theme in Matthew: So also my
heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your
brother from your heart. (Mt 18:23-35) Because the refusal to forgive
sets one in opposition to a forgiving God, one cannot experience forgiveness unless one repents of ones own unwillingness to forgive. Compassionate mutual forgiveness among fellow servants characterizes life in
Matthews egalitarian Christian community.26
The eschatological discourse prophesies the kingdoms consummation.
The following section examines its message.
(V)
In Matthew, as we have seen, the eschatological discourse follows both
upon the woes against the scribes and Pharisees and upon Jesus lament
over Jerusalem. As in Mark, the discourse targets the disciples. As in Mark,
it predicts the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and gives the disciples instructions about how to live in the eschaton. As in Mark, the
disciples occasion the discourse by pointing out the temple buildings to
Jesus. Matthew, however, edits out Marks reference to the massive stonework of the Herodian temple.27 (Mt 24:1; Mk 13:1)
The Eschatological Discourse
As in Mark, Matthews Jesus predicts that cataclysmic events will precede
the arrival of the final judgment. They, however, only begin the trials
which will visit the earth before the parousia. (Mt 24:3-14) Like Marks
Jesus, Matthews envisages no idyllic end time for His disciples.
At this point Matthew departs from Marks text. Marks Jesus prophesies that the disciples will face fierce persecution from state and synagogue and will suffer betrayal even by members of their own families.
(Mk 13:9-13) Matthew has transposed this prediction into his missionary discourse (Mt 10:17-23) and therefore omits it here. Instead, he replaces it with a general warning to the disciples to expect tribulation,
martyrdom, betrayal, the defection of believers, and hatred everywhere.
26. Cf. Martinus C. De Boer, Ten Thousand Talents? Matthews Interpretation and
Redaction of the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
50(1988), pp. 214-232; Thomas Brodie, O.P., Fish, Temple, Tithe, and Remission:
The God-Based Generosity of Deuteronomy 14-15 as one Component of Matt
17:22-18:23, Revue Biblique, 99(1992), pp. 697-718; Dominique Hermant, Structure litteraire de discours communitaire de Matthieu 18, Revue Biblique, 103(1996),
pp. 76-90.
27. Cf. Watejen, op. cit., pp. 225-234.
299
Jesus also foresees the coming of false prophets, the multiplication of

wickedness, and the loss of religious fervor. As in Mark, however, Jesus
warns that the end will not come until all nations hear the gospel preached
to them. Here as in Mark, that warning puts the second coming off to a
very indefinite future.28 (Mt 24:9-14; Mk 13:9-13)
The prophecy of the abomination of desolation follows. In Mark, as
we saw, this prophecy could refer to Caligulas attempt to erect his own
statue in the Jerusalem temple. Matthew, however, writes after the destruction of the temple. He, therefore, probably sees that tragedy as the
fulfillment of Jesus prophecy. (Mt 24:15; Mk 13:15) Matthew reproduces with only minor editing the substance of Marks version of Jesus
advice to the disciples in Jerusalem as doom approaches the holy city.29
(Mt 24:15-22)
Matthew expands somewhat the prediction which follows in Marks
discourse. The prediction warns that many false prophets will arise and
seek to deceive, if possible, even the elect. Matthew Jesus adds:
So if they say to you, Lo, he is in the wilderness, do not go out; if they
say, Lo, he is in the inner rooms, do not believe it. For as lightning
comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of
the Son of Man. Wherever the body is, there the vultures will be gathered.
(Mt 24:25-8)
The passage provides a transition from the warning against false prophets
to the description of the day of the Son of Man which follows. The image
of lightning suggests that the second coming will happen suddenly, unpredictably, and with complete openness. The proverb about vultures
openly congregating around carrion also points to the public and unmistakable character of the second coming. One can usually espy circling
vultures from a distance, especially in the desert. The saying about the
vultures also connotes inevitability: as vultures gather with unavoidable
28. Cf. Domingo Muoz Len, Jesus y la apocaliptica pesimista (A proposito de Lc 18:8b
y Mt 24:12, Estudios Biblicos, 46(1988), pp. 457-495; Ingo Broer, Redaktionsgeschichtliche Aspecke von Mt 24:1-28, Novum Testamentum, 35(1993), pp. 209-233;
Justin Taylor, S.M., The Love of Many will Grow Cold: Matt 24:9-13 and the
Neronian Persecution, Revue Biblique, 96(1989), pp. 352-357; David C. Sim,
Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1996).
29. Cf. Nikolaus Walter, Tempezerstrung und synoptische Apokalypse, Zeitschrift fr
die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 57(1966), pp. 38-49; Graham N. Stanton, Pray
that your Flight may not be in Winter or on a Sabbath (Matthew 24.20),Journal for
the Study of the New Testament, 37(1989), pp.17-30; Eric Kun-Chun Wong, The
Matthaean Understanding of the Sabbath: A Response to G.N. Stanton, Journal for
the Study of the New Testament, 44(1991), pp. 3-18.
300
predictability to consume desert carrion, so with a similar predictability

will the day of judgment come.30
Again following Mark, Matthews Jesus next describes the second coming: after the tribulations which precede the second coming have played
themselves out, cosmic signs in the heavens will announce the arrival of
the Son of Man. At His approach the powers of heaven will be shaken,
since He comes to end their domination of the earth. (Mt 24:29; Mk
13:24-5) While Mark simply says that after cosmic portents they will see
the Son of Man coming on the clouds with great power and glory, (Mk
13:26) Matthews Jesus says:
Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven, and then all the
tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on
the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Mt 24:30)
The sign of the Son of Man and His appearance riding gloriously and
majestically on clouds probably refer to the same event. Matthews text
alludes both to the vision of the Son of Man in Daniel (Dan 7:13-4) and
to Zechariahs prophecy of the pierced one. (Zech 12:10)
Matthews vision of the second coming also differs slightly from Marks,
who portrays it in purely positive terms. Marks Jesus returns to break the
powers which oppress the earth; He also sends His angels to gather His
elect to Himself from the four corners of the earth. Matthew, by contrast,
has the appearance of the Son of Man elicit grief and mourning from all
the tribes of the earth, namely, from those who do not number among
the elect and who recognize that the time of retribution has come. (Mt
24:30-1; Mk 13:26-7)
Marks eschatological discourse ends with admonitions about the need
for watchfulness and readiness for the end whenever it comes. Matthew
repeats these warnings and expands them. As in Mark, Matthews Jesus
uses the parable of the fig tree to bring his discourse to a conclusion.
When leaves appear on the fig, one knows that summer approaches: so
too when all these things happen the disciples will know that the second coming approaches. (Mt 24:32-3; Mk 28-9) As in Mark, Jesus predicts that this generation will not pass away until all these things take
place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.
(Mt 24:34-5; Mk 13:30-1)
Like Mark, Matthew has placed the second coming at a distant future,
after the evangelization of all the nations. To what then does all these
things refer? As in Mark, the phrase could point either to the destruc30. Cf. Matthew Black, The Aramaic Dimension in Q with Notes on Luke 17.22 and
Matthew 24.26 (Luke 17.23), Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 40(1990),
pp. 33-41; Nikolaus Walter, op. cit., pp. 38-49.
301
tion of Jerusalem or to Jesus resurrection as the event which assures a

final judgment. Or Matthew, like Mark, could be reproducing a saying of
Jesus which indicates that He hoped for the rapid establishment of the
kingdom. In the last analysis, however, the disciples can have no more
certain knowledge than Jesus about the precise date for all these things
to happen.
Mark at this point concludes the discourse with a brief but urgent warning to live in watchfulness, ready for the second coming whenever it occurs. (Mk 13:33-7) Matthew, however, expands considerably on Marks
text. In a sense, all nineteen verses of the rest of the eschatological discourse in Matthew take the form of an extended meditation on verse 36:
But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor
the Son, but the Father only. (Mt 24:36; cf. Mk 13:32)
In appending several teachings about watchfulness to Marks original

eschatological discourse, Matthew shatters its chiastic structure. Moreover, Matthews Jesus repeatedly warns in the extended eschatological discourse that external appearances count for nothing in the final judgment.
Hence, all Christians, including their leaders, must live in sincere readiness for the final judgment.
Matthew compares the second coming to the flood which took the
whole human race, with the exception of Noah, by total surprise. (Mt
24:37-9) Matthews Jesus then warns:
Then two men will be in the field; one is taken and one is left. Two women
will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left. (Mt 24:40-1)
The saying warns that the second coming will bring to light the real truth
about people and the lives that they lead. Prior to the second coming,
people might look and act alike; but the second coming will make it clear
those who will in fact survive the judgment and those who will not.
A parable urging constant readiness for Gods judgment follows. A
householder who knows that thieves will assault his home on a particular
night will take precautions to see that they do not succeed. Similarly, the
disciples must take precautions to stand ready for the final judgment
whenever it dawns. Therefore you must be ready; for the Son of Man is
coming at an hour you do not expect. (Mt 24:44)
Matthews Jesus then singles out the leaders of the Church for special
warning. The warning puts into an eschatological context Matthews earlier polemic against nascent clericalism in Antioch.
Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his master has set over
his household, to give them food in proper time? Blessed is that servant
302
whom his master when he comes will find so doing. Truly, I say to you, he
will set him over all his possessions. But if that wicked servant says to
himself, My master is delayed, and begins to beat his fellow servants,
and eats and drinks with the drunken, the master of that servant will come
on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know,
and will punish him, and put him with the hypocrites; there people will
weep and gnash their teeth. (Mt 24:37-51)
Consistent with Matthews egalitarian view of the Christian community, this parable warns Church leaders that they stand in the same relationship to the Son of Man as the other members of the community. All
count as servants, or slaves, though some may have more responsibilities
than others. Once again, the parable makes it clear that the mere possession of office in the Church offers no exemption whatever from the demands of gospel living. Community leaders must display the same obedience of faith as the other members of the community. Those who use
their office in the Church to oppress the community or who exploit it for
self-indulgent reasons will find themselves judged with the hypocritical
scribes and Pharisees and will suffer the same damnation.31
Having especially warned the leaders of the community to exercise special vigilance, Matthews Jesus extends the same warning to the community in general by telling the parable of the wise and foolish maidens who
attended a wedding celebration. The wise maidens bring oil for their
lamps; but the foolish bring none. Their foolishness becomes clearer when
the bridegroom surprises everyone by arriving at an unexpected hour: the
middle of the night. The foolish maidens face another unpleasant surprise: when they return from an excursion to buy oil, the bridegroom
excludes them from the wedding feast. (Mt 25:1-13) In Matthew the
lighted lamp symbolizes good works. (Cf. Mt 13:43) The foolish maidens have no good works to show at the moment of the bridegrooms coming an so find themselves shut out of the marriage celebration.
Matthew applies this parable allegorically to his community. Unless
they live in readiness for the arrival of the divine bridegroom, the disciples will find themselves excluded from the messianic banquet. Their
failure to live the obedience of faith by producing good works will transform them into strangers whom Jesus cannot recognize as His own. Hence,
watchfulness embodied in a life of good deeds expresses authentic
eschatological hope. (Mt 25:1-13)
The parable of the talents follows. It also makes it clear that the watchfulness for which Jesus calls involves much more than passive waiting.
One must use the gifts given one by God so that one may have something to show to the Son of Man on His return.
303
In the parable a person (anthrpos) departs and leaves his property to

servants to manage. One receives five talents, another two, and a third
one. The first two double the money entrusted to them during the masters
long absence. On returning the master praises them and promises to entrust them with even greater responsibilities. The third servant, however,
buries the one talent out of fear of the masters severity. The master castigates the servant as wicked and slothful, surprisingly gives the one talent to the servant with ten, and casts the third servant outside, where
people wail and grind their teeth. (Mt 21:14-27)
The parable makes it clear that Jesus recognizes that God gives some
people more gifts than others. As a consequence, God will expect people
to bear fruit in proportion to the gifts which they have received. Although
the third servant thought his master hard, the master in fact entrusted
a magnanimous sum to all three servants. The third servants fear of failure prevented him from even trying to use the sum he received. His sloth
consists in failing to appreciate both the gift entrusted to him and the
opportunity it offered him. By falsely perceiving himself as a victim, he
unwittingly transformed himself into one by his slothful inaction. Like
the foolish maidens, the third servant has no good works to show the
master and so experiences rejection and condemnation.
Moreover, the master orders the one talent taken from him and given
to the one who has transformed five talents into ten. This twist in the
story introduces the maxim: For to every one who has will more be
given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what
he has will be taken away. (Mt 25:29) Matthew cites the same adage at
the end of the parabolic discourse; and it has here the same meaning here
as it does there. Jesus transforms the worldly wise and cynical notion that
those who have get and those who dont wont into a reflection on the
workings of divine grace in the kingdom. Gifts grow through use. The
more generously one responds to the gift of the kingdom the more fit one
finds oneself to experience more and more of its blessings.
The eschatological discourse ends with the parable of the sheep and the
goats. In concluding the eschatological discourse, Matthew has so far
reflected on the readiness for judgment expected of Church leaders and
of members of the community. In this concluding parable he turns his
attention to the judgment of the all the nations. The parable puts the
Great Commission which ends the gospel in an eschatological context by
projecting its final outcome.32
32. Cf. John R. Donahue, S.J., The Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, Theological
Studies, 47(1986), pp. 3-31; Kathleen Weber, the Image of Sheep and Goats in
Matthew 25:31-46, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 59(1997), pp. 657-678; Mohrlang,
Matthew and Paul, pp. 48-71.
304
As we have already seen, the parable asserts that anyone who performs
the works of mercy not only toward Christians but toward any in need
will not have to fear the judgment of Jesus. As we have also seen, in
welcoming the sheep into the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, Jesus makes it clear that works of mercy shown to
one of these the least of my brethreni.e. to any Christianincorporates one into the kingdom. In rejecting the goats, however, Jesus also
proclaims that the failure to minister to the neediest, to one of the least
of these, whether Christian or not, merits damnation.33 (Mt 25:31-46)
The five discourses in Matthew endow his account of Jesus with its distinctive narrative flavor by transforming his gospel into Christian Torah.
For Matthew, as for Mark, moral assimilation to Jesus in the power of
His Breath provides faith with its primary challenge. Mark, however, regards the willingness to risk ones life in testifying to the gospel as the
primary sign of Breath-baptism. Matthew acknowledges the importance
of such a witness; but Matthew shows more concern to call his community back to fidelity in the day-to-day living out of a Christian commitment as believing Jews. Accordingly, Matthew insists more than Mark on
the life-long cultivation of good works.
The five discourses focus the disciples attention on those areas of life
in which they most need to allow Jesus baptismal Breath to inspire in
them the obedience of faith. The sermon on the mount urges the church at
Antioch to place the beatitudes and the fundamental moral imperatives
of gospel living at the heart of their commitment to Christ. It summons
them to humility, to integrity of heart, and to self-effacement in the practice of traditional Jewish piety. Jesus inaugural discourse also explains
how He fulfills the Torah: namely, by transforming negative commands
into positive ideals which demand more, not less, that the old Law. The
missionary discourse challenges Church leaders especially to the courageous proclamation of the word in the face of opposition and persecution. The parabolic discourse warns unbelievers against despising the
humble origins of the gospel. The same discourse warns the disciples to
stand ready to sacrifice all for membership in Gods reign. They should
expect solid faith to bear astonishing fruit. They need to interpret the
Old Testament in the light of the New. The ecclesial discourse reminds the
Antiochene community of virtues and discipline which make for good
Church order. The discourse especially commends fidelity to Jesus egalitarian vision of community. It encourages good works, the generous use
33. . Cf.Victor Kossi Agbanou, Le discours eschatologique de Matthieu 24-25: Tradition et
rdaction (Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1983).
305
of gifts, avoidance of scandal, seeking out sinners for reconciliation, and

unlimited forgiveness of the repentant. The eschatological discourse warns
against any flagging in eschatological hope and in vigilant longing for the
second coming. It inculcates readiness for judgment by practical fidelity
to the ideals of gospel living.
For Matthew, then, the five discourses symbolize five fundamental imperatives which ought to shape Christological knowing. 1) Remain true
to the fundamental demands of gospel living. 2) Proclaim the gospel fearlessly and persistently. 3) Acknowledge the mysterious demands which
the kingdom, despite its humble origins, makes on you. 4) Preserve right
order in community and be reconciled to one another. 5) Remain constant, vigilant, and fruitful in service as you long for the second coming.34
Mark the evangelist would, no doubt, have resonated to these imperatives; but had he read Matthews gospel he would have had to concede
that this Christian scribe surpassed him in amassing and organizing teachings of Jesus which illumine each of these fundamental imperatives.
Matthews scribal zeal to preserve Jesus teaching expresses, moreover, a
central concern of his gospel: namely, that ecclesiastical structures taking
shape in Antioch embody Jesus vision of an egalitarian community of
mutual service.
This chapter has reflected on the first set of major thematic linkages in
Matthew: namely, the five discourses. The chapter which follows analyzes two other thematic linkages and ponders Matthews use of descriptive allusion.
34. Cf. Kingsbury, op.cit., pp. 105-112; Riley, op.cit., pp.37-68.
306
Chapter 11
Miracles, Fulfillment, and Allusion in Matthew
This chapter completes the analysis of the thematic linkages in Matthew.
It also reflects on what Matthews editorial pen did to Marks allusive
linkages.
This chapter divides into three parts. Part one meditates on Matthews
presentation of Jesus miracles and exorcisms. Part two reflects on how
the evangelist develops the notion of fulfillment. Part three examines his
use of allusion as a literary device.
(I)
Matthew handles the miracles of Jesus very differently from Mark. The
latter scatters the healings of Jesus throughout his narrative and endows
them with symbolic revelatory significance. Matthews editing mutes somewhat the symbolic meaning of the miracles as Mark narrates them. Moreover, Matthew clusters most of Jesus miracles around the sermon on the
mount.
As we have seen, Matthew prefaces the sermon on the mount with an
outpouring of healings and exorcisms. (Mt 4:23-5) Ten miracle stories
follow the sermon on the mount. Unlike Mark, whose narrative launches
Jesus into immediate conflict with Satan and with His enemies, Matthew
portrays the initial proclamation of the kingdom as an event of enormous healing and of hope.
Matthew begins the narrative section which follows the sermon on the
mount with two miracles of inclusion: the cure of a leper and the healing
of the centurions servant. Matthew then transforms Marks account of
the beginning of Jesus ministry into a typical day in the life of the messiah. Jesus first calming of the watery forces of chaos follows. As in Mark,
it foreshadows the revelation of Jesus divinity after the first miracle of
the loaves. Jesus power over the aquatic forces of chaos also prepares the
way for the exorcisms of the two Gadarene demoniacs. The exorcism
culminates, as we have seen, in the destruction of the possessed herd of
pigs in the very waters of chaos over which Jesus has already wielded
sovereign, divine authority. The first conflict story in Matthew follows:
the healing of the paralytic. It reveals Jesus authority to forgiven sins. A
symbolically impoverished account of Jesus healing of two women follows: Jesus delivers an older woman from a flux of blood and raises the
deceased daughter of a ruler from the dead. The cluster of miracle stories
closes with the healing of two blind men and the deliverance of a dumb
demoniac.
Chapter 11: Miracles, Fulfillment, and Allusion in Matthew
307
Matthews clustering of miracle stories after the sermon on the mount

makes a cumulative statement about the scope of the divine reign which
Jesus has just proclaimed. In what follows, I shall reflect on that scope.
Moreover, Matthews Jesus performs ten miracles in all. Matthew probably intended here an allusion to the ten wonders performed by Moses
prior to the exodus. (Ex 7:8-10:29) One suspects too a tacit allusion to
the theme of fulfillment, so central to Matthews telling of Jesus story;
for Jesus as Immanuel embodies a divine reality which far surpasses anything which Moses embodied.1
Immediately after the sermon on the mount, Matthew narrates two
miracles of inclusion. In the first miracle, the crowds follow Jesus down
the mountain and watch Him cure a leper. (Mt 8:1-4) In Mark, as we
have seen, this cure foreshadows Jesus growing margenalization. Mark
symbolizes that margenalization by having Jesus and the leper trade places.
Matthew, however, edits out this particular narrative detail from Marks
gospel. In the process, Matthew changes the symbolic meaning of the
miracle. In both gospels the cure of the leper functions as a miracle of
inclusion. Matthew, however, makes inclusiveness the primary point of
the miracle. It reveals that Jesus the healer has come to break down the
social barriers which turn Jews into lepers and outcasts. The cure of the
leper re-incorporates him into Israel.
Matthew then underscores the universal inclusiveness of the gospel by
having Jesus cure a Gentile: the servant of a God-fearing Roman centurion. Astonished by the centurions faith, Matthews Jesus predicts that
Gentiles will come in multitudes to share in the eschatological feast of
the kingdom with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, while the sons of the kingdom will weep and gnash their teeth in the outer darkness to which they
have been banished. (Mt 8:5-13) The miracles of inclusion which follow
the sermon on the mount dramatize the fact that the message of the kingdom embraces everyone, including Gentiles and marginal Jews. The second miracle also foreshadows the Great Commission which ends the gospel.2 (Mt 8:5-13)
In Mark, as we have seen, the exorcism in the synagogue at Capernaum,
the cure of Peters mother-in-law, and the evening of cures and exorcisms
which follow describe the very beginning of Jesus Galilean ministry. In
Matthew the cure of Peters mother-in-law follows the cure of the
centurions servant. By locating these events later in Jesus ministry than
1. Cf. Watejen, op. cit, pp. 115-130.

2. Cf. Robert A.J. Gagnon, The Shape of Matthews Q Text of the Centurion at
Capernaum: Did It Mention Delegations? New Testament Studies, 40(1994), pp.
133-142; Christoph Burchard, Zu Matthus 8, 5-13, Zeitschrift fr die
308
Mark does, Matthew transforms them into an account of a typical day in

the life of the messiah.
Marks Jesus raises up Simons mother-in-law, who then serves Him
and His disciples. The raising has revelatory significance in Mark: those
whom Jesus raises up by giving them a share in His risen life find themselves thereby empowered to serve Him and His disciples. Matthew, however, has the woman rise up by her own power. He thus mutes the storys
symbolic significance and transforms it into one of the many miracles
which Jesus performs in the wake of His first solemn proclamation of the
kingdom. Even in Matthews account, however, healing by Jesus bears
fruit in service.
Moreover, in the healings and exorcisms in Capernaum which follow
this event, Matthew edits out Marks reference to demonic conflict. The
editorial change reflects, as we have seen, the evangelists habitual concern to
downplay a theme which plays a prominent part in Marks narrative.
The first calming of the storm follows the healings at Capernaum. (Mt
8:23-7) As we saw in reflecting on Jesus relationship to His disciples, in
both Matthew and Mark this cosmological miracle prepares the story of
the second calming of the storm, which reveals Jesus divinity even more
clearly than the first.
In his account of the second calming of the storm, however, Matthew,
as we have already seen, alters Marks account in three significant ways.
First, he edits out Marks reference to the miracle of the loaves and with it
Marks insistence that eucharistic faith affirms the divinity of Jesus. The
omission, as we have seen, mutes the eucharistic significance of the miracle.
Second, Matthew describes how Peter, at Jesus command, walked on the
water to meet Him but wavered because of His fear and lack of faith.
This second interpolation, as we have also seen, transforms Marks story
into a cautionary tale directed to the leaders of the Petrine community.
Third, instead of responding with obtuseness and unbelief as they do in
Mark, Jesus disciples fall down and adore Him as Son of God when He
joins them in the boat. (Mt 14:22-33) Their adoration foreshadows the
adoration which the women give the risen Christ and recalls the adoration of the magi. (Mt 2:11, 28:9-10)
The exorcism of the Gadarene demoniacs follows the first calming of
the storm. As we saw in reflecting on Jesus relationship to Satan, Matthew modifies Marks account by turning the single demoniac in Mark
into a pair of demoniacs. Matthew edits out many descriptive details in
Mark, especially details which dramatize the conflict between Jesus and
the demon. Matthew also fails to name the demon Legion. As we have
seen, the omission of the demons name deprives the story of the exorcism of much of its political punch. While the persecuted Roman community saw in the empire and in its legions the Satanic incarnation of
309
anti-Christ whom Jesus treats as God treated Pharoah and his army in
the Exodus, Matthew shows more concern to excoriate the proselytizing
leaders of the synagogue across the street.
As in his other accounts of exorcism, Matthews Jesus drives the demons out with sovereign, divine authority. He expels them with a single
word: Go. As in Mark, the exorcism manifests Jesus divine authority
over the demons as they rush into the sea, the symbol of chaos, which
Jesus has just calmed with a simple command. Finally, the hostile response of the Gadarenes in Matthew introduces the theme of conflict
into Matthews account of Jesus public ministry. (Mt 8:28-33; Mk 9:1-8)
In the cluster of miracles which follow the sermon on the mount, Matthew next inserts the first of the conflict stories which open Marks gospel: namely, the healing of the paralytic and the forgiveness of his sins.
(Mt 9:1-8) Matthew also follows this initial story of conflict with the
same two conflicts which follow in Mark. The conflict stories heighten
the opposition to Jesus which the Gadarenes lack of openness began.
As in Mark, the healing of the paralytic confirms the fact that as Son of
Man Jesus has divine authority to forgive sins. Matthew, however, by
including it in the many miracles which follow the sermon on the mount
endows the story with theological connotations somewhat less prominent in
Mark. The story in Matthew dramatizes yet another facet of the healing which
the kingdom brings: namely, it effects the forgiveness of sins.
In Matthew the raising of the dead daughter of a ruler and the healing
of the woman with a flux of blood count as the eighth and ninth miracles
which follow inaugural proclamation of the kingdom. (Mt 9:18-26) As
we saw in reflecting on Jesus relationship to His disciples, Matthews
editing of Marks prose leaves this story symbolically impoverished. Matthew edits out the parallelism between the twelve year old girl and the
woman who had suffered her illness for twelve years. In the process, Matthew mutes their symbolic function in Marks story. In Mark, the number twelve recalls the twelve tribes of the first Israel and the Twelve who
symbolize the new Israel. In Mark, therefore, therefore, the two women
symbolize the two covenants and Jesus relationship to them; but not in
Matthew. Matthew also fails to mention the presence of Peter, James, and
John at the second miracle. Their absence eliminates Marks allusion to
the passion and resurrection of Jesus, since in Mark these three disciples
also witness both Jesus agony in Gethsemane and the proleptic revelation of His glory in the transfiguration. Finally, Matthew does not link
the young girls raising to life to the multiplications of the loaves and to
eucharistic faith as Mark does. (Mt 9:18-26; Mk 5:21-43)
Matthew, however, does not eliminate all symbolic meaning from his
account of the healing of the two women. The healing of the older woman
still liberates her from the curse of the Law and from the legal impurity
310
which ostracizes her. The raising of the young girl also foreshadows the
Christians participation in the risen life of Jesus.
In Mark, as we have seen, the cure of blind Bartimaeus brings the way
section of Mark to a narrative climax. The cure foreshadows dramatically
the change which resurrection faith will make in the disciples. After the
resurrection, the disciples will see Jesus truly and will follow him, like
Bartimaeus, on the way of discipleship even if it leads to Calvary.
Matthew, however, includes this miracle in the final healings which
follow the sermon on the mount. He transforms Marks blind Bartimaeus
into two blind beggars whom Jesus heals. Matthew also transforms Marks
Gerasene demoniac into two Gadarene demoniacs. The two doublings
link the two events allusively and suggest that those whom Jesus delivers
from the power of Satan He also enlightens. (Mt 20:29-34)
Matthew also omits Marks assertion that the healed blind man followed Jesus on the way. The omission mutes (without totally destroying it) the symbolic character of the miracle. In both gospels, the restoration of sight to the blind suggests the risen Christs power to heal the
blindness of unbelief through active faith. (Mt 9:27-31)
The exorcism of a dumb demoniac closes the cycle of miracle stories
which follow the sermon on the mount. The cycle ends on a note of
deepening conflict. While the crowds marvel at what Jesus has done, the
Pharisees accuse Him for the first time of exorcising in the power of
Beelzebul. (Mt 9:32-4)
As we have seen, Matthew has already included three conflict stories in
this narrative section of his gospel. The missionary discourse, which immediately follows this narrative section, will deepen and develop the theme
of conflict and make a decisive turn toward Calvary. Like the healing of
the two blind men, the healing of the dumb demoniac in Matthew also
makes a theological statement: those whom Jesus frees from Satan He
also empowers to proclaim the good news. This healing, therefore, looks
forward in a special way to the missionary discourse which soon follows.
Matthew ends this narrative section of His gospel with a final allusion
to Jesus healing of the crowds out of compassion for their confusion.
These attitudes also motivate His calling the Twelve and commissioning them
in the missionary discourse. The healing of the crowds, then, underlines the
apostolic significance of the miracles which Mark has just narrated.
The spate of healings which follow the sermon on the mount makes a
cumulative theological statement about the healing character of the kingdom Jesus proclaims. In proclaiming the kingdom, Jesus seeks to heal
social separation among Jews and between Jews and Gentiles. The kingdom mediates a universal salvation.
Jesus miracles disclose His divinity. They reveal His sovereign divine
authority over Satan and his demons. The manifest the divine source of
311
Jesus authority in proclaiming the kingdom as well as its ultimate victory

over the powers of evil. The divine healing which Jesus effects includes
the forgiveness of sins. It frees women from the curse of the Law. It communicates the light of faith by freeing one to both hear and proclaim the
good news. It imparts risen life.
As we have seen in reflecting on Jesus relationship to John the Baptizer, Jesus, in response to Johns question about His messianic identity,
explains the revelatory significance of His miracles and exorcisms. They
reveal that the messianic era has arrived, even though Jesus Himself eschews Davidic messianism in favor of a humbler ministry to the poor
and outcast. (Mt 11:2-6) For Matthew, the miracles which follow the
sermon on the mount also disclose the arrival of the messianic era. They
do so by dramatizing the saving scope of the kingdom which Jesus, the
non-Davidic messiah, proclaims to the poor.
In the narrative section which follows Jesus missionary discourse, Matthew relates the last two of the five conflict stories which open Marks
gospel. The second story contains a healing: the cure of the man with a
withered hand on the sabbath. As in Mark, Jesus justifies His act by appealing to traditional Jewish piety, which did not consider doing good on
the sabbath a violation of the sabbath prohibition of work.
As in Mark, the Pharisees take scandal at what Jesus has done and begin to plot against him. Matthew, however, once again mutes the theme
of conflict in Mark by not mentioning that the Pharisees began to plot
with the Herodians to have Jesus killed. (Mt 12:9-14; Mk 3:1-6) Typically, however, Matthew immediately underscores the malice and unbelief of the Pharisees. After a spate of miracles which reveal Jesus as the
suffering servant of God, the Pharisees commit the unforgivable sin of
Breath-blasphemy for the second time. They accuse Jesus of exorcising in
the power of Beelzebul. (Mt 12:15-21; Mk 3:7-12) In other words, Matthew combines the story of the cure of the man with a withered hand
with yet another outpouring of miracles in order to dramatize the obstinate unbelief of the Pharisees.
The two miracles of the loaves follow the parabolic discourse in Matthew, who omits Marks pastoral imagery in telling the story of the first
miracle. (Mt 14:15-21, 15: 32-9; Mk 6:35-44, 8:1-10) As in Mark the
two miracles foreshadow the eucharist, although Matthew omits Marks
repeated allusion to the symbolic importance of the multiplications for understanding the doctrinal and moral conditions for eucharistic worship.
The second multiplication in Matthew as in Mark includes Gentiles in
eucharistic communion. Indeed, like Mark, Matthew underscores this
point by prefacing the story of the second multiplication with the story
of Jesus exorcism of the daughter of the Canaanite woman. Her faith
foreshadows the faith of Gentile Christians, as does the faith response of
312
the Gentile crowds whom Jesus cures and exorcises. In response they praise
the God of Israel. (Mt 15:21-31)
Moreover, by calling the woman Canaanite rather than Syro-Phoenician,
Matthew recalls the ancient enmity between the Hebrews and the
Canaanites. The Canaanites had long since ceased to exist at the time
Matthew wrote. Matthews allusion to Israels traditional enemies indicates, however, that the new covenant ends all enmity between Jew and
Gentile. In burying that enmity, the evangelist no doubt sought to foster
harmony between his communitys Petrine Christians and its Christian,
Gentile God-seekers.
As in Mark, Matthews Jesus works His final miracle when he exorcises
the moonstruck boy. As we have already seen, Matthew severely edits
Marks text. Matthew omits all allusive references to other miracles. He
does not link the miracle to resurrection as Mark does. Matthew also
omits any reference to the wavering faith of the boys father. (Mt 17:14-8;
Mk 9:14-7) In Matthew as in Mark, Jesus rebukes the self-reliance and
lack of faith which had prevented the disciples from successfully exorcising the boy. In Matthews edited version, the story stresses, then, as Matthew does elsewhere, the efficacy of faith-informed prayer.3 (Mt 17:19-20)
Matthews editing and regrouping of Marks account of Jesus healings
and exorcisms illustrates the analogy of Christological knowing. In the
wake of persecution, Mark seeks to shore up the eucharistic faith of his
beleaguered community by using the miracle stories in two ways: they
dramatize the demands of eucharistic faith, and they confirm the church
at Rome in its belief that the risen Christ has power to heal and to deliver
them despite any lack of faith or human weakness.
Matthews telling of the miracle stories illustrates other practical theological concerns. Matthew desires his community to acknowledge the
healing power of Jesus message. The good news about the kingdom binds
together Jews and Gentiles, men and women in the same community of
faith. Jesus miracles reveal His divinity, which Christians continue to
proclaim even in the face of unbelief and Pharisaical opposition. Faith in
3. Cf. Albright and Mann, op.cit., pp. cxxiv-cxxxi; William G. Thompson, S.J., Reflections on the Composition of Mt 8:1-9:34, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 33(1971), pp.
365-388; Jack Dean Kingsbury, Observations on the Miracle Chapters in Matthew
8-9, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 40 (1978), pp. 559-573; John Paul Heil, Significant
Aspects of the Healing Miracles in Matthew, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 41(1979),
pp. 274-287; Henry Joachim Held, Matthew as Interpreter of the Miracle Stories,
in Tradition and Interpretation In Matthew, edited By G. Bornkamm et al., translated
by Percy Scott (London: SCM Press, 1963), pp. 165- 299; Birger Gerhardsson, The
Mighty Acts of Jesus According to Matthew, translated by Robert Dewsnap (Lund: CWK
Gleerup, 1979).
313
Jesus divinity also demands a corresponding confidence in His total victory and sovereign divine authority over the realm of Satan. Jesus miracles
reveal His power to enable those who put faith in Him to see the truth
about Him, to hear the good news, and to proclaim it to others. In all of
these ways, the miracles of Jesus make manifest a fundamental truth which
Jesus Himself proclaimed: namely, that His miracles manifest the incipient presence of the kingdom, which is nevertheless still coming and has
yet to arrive in its fullness.
I have considered two thematic linkages in Matthew. Two yet remain:
the theme of fulfillment and Matthews use of narrative allusion. The
next section analyzes the way in which Matthew develops the theme of
fulfillment.
(II)
As we have seen, Matthew occasionally takes note of the theme of the
messianic secret which runs throughout Marks narrative. Matthew, however, also edits out some of Marks references to the secret; and, on occasion, Matthew links the notion of the messianic secret to the idea of
atonement. Jesus desire to avoid notoriety expresses His determination
not only to bear the burdens of sinful humanity without sinning but also
to identify totally with the anonymous poor. The secret, therefore, has
considerably less significance in Matthews telling of Jesus story.
What the theme of the messianic secret does for Marks gospel, the
theme of fulfillment does for Matthews. It stitches the text together like
a single, colored thread running through an embroidery.
The term fulfill occurs fourteen times in Matthews gospel; and we
find implicit references to the notion of fulfillment in other texts as well.
In the course of examining both the infancy gospel and the dramatic
linkages in Matthew I have reflected on this or that text in which the
theme of fulfillment has prominence. In what follows, I shall attempt to
trace the theme of fulfillment more systematically through Matthews
narrative.
When at the beginning of the sermon on the mount, Matthews Jesus
warns: Think not that I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets;
I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil (plerosai) them, (Mt 5:17-8)
He enunciates a major theme, not just of the sermon on the mount, but
of the gospel as a whole. Jesus, as we have seen, fulfills the Law in the
sermon by demanding more, not less than the Law. This He does by
transforming the negative precepts of the Law into positive, interiorized
ideals of life which lure the disciple toward ever greater righteousness.4
4. Cf. M. Trimaille, Citations daccomplissement et architecture de lvangile selon S.
Matthieu, Estudios Biblicos, 48(1990), pp. 47-79.
314
As we saw above, Matthew first introduces the theme of fulfillment,

not in the sermon on the mount, but in his infancy narrative. Jesus conception by the Holy Breath of God fulfills Isaiahs prophecy of Immanuel.
(Is 7:14) Isaiah spoke the original prophecy of Immanuel to the wicked
king Ahaz. Isaiah was proclaiming the coming of the ideal Davidic prince
whose righteous rule would make God a living reality in the midst of His
people.
In Matthews eyes, Jesus fulfills this prophecy by embodying much more
than Isaiah had foreseen. Matthew presents Jesus as God made visible in
human form, although the evangelist postpones the full revelation of Jesus
divinity until His resurrection. Then, as Immanuel, Jesus pronounces the
Great Commission and promises to be with the Eleven until the end of
the age. That promise joins Him to the Eleven as the twelfth apostle and
decisively recreates the new Israel which Judass treachery had temporarily shattered. As the great I AM, the risen Christ encompasses the evangelizing new Israel in His divine reality. (Mt 28:20)
In the infancy narrative, the miraculous virgin birth of Jesus in the
power of the divine Breath foreshadows the miracle of the resurrection,
the moment when Jesus also becomes the Breath-baptizer foretold by
John by commissioning ritual baptism in the triune name. (Mt 3:11)
Nevertheless, even prior to the resurrection, Matthews Jesus makes the
Father present in His person, life, and ministry. (Mt 11:25-7)
In the course of his infancy gospel, Matthew takes up the theme of
fulfillment again in the story of the magi. The chief priests, in response to
Herods question about where the messiah would be born, respond, in
Bethlehem of Judea. They then justify their position by citing Mic 5:2.
(Mt 2:5-6) Matthew sees Jesus birth in Bethlehem as a fulfillment of this
prophecy. Once again, however, Matthew finds more meaning in Micahs
text than the prophet himself. Micah probably did not mean that the
messiah would be born in Bethlehem (or bet ephrathah) but of Davids
line. Matthew, however, situates Jesus birth quite literally in the city of
David and of Davids ancestress Ruth. (Cf. Mt 1:5) Moreover, as we have
already seen, while Matthew regards Jesus as the messiah, he subordinates Jesus messianic dignity to His divinity. Jesus reigns as messiah because He confronts us as Immanuel, God-with-us.
Matthew sees the massacre of the holy innocents as a fulfillment of Jer
31:15. As we have seen, the death of the innocents also reveals Jesus as
the new Moses. In Jeremiahs prophecy, Rachel, the mother of Joseph,
Manasseh, and Ephraim, weeps for her children because they no longer
exist. Her sorrow interrupts a series of prophecies about the joyful restoration of Israel after the exile. After the tears of Rachel, God comforts her
with the knowledge that her exiled sons will return and enjoy divine favor. In citing this prophecy, Matthew implicitly promises that God will
315
comfort the mothers in Bethlehem and its vicinity who mourn their
murdered babes. It also foreshadows Jesus return from Egypt like the
exiled descendants of Jacob. Matthews allusion to Jeremiah could also
point to Jesus as a second Jeremiah, a point which Matthew will underscore in the cleansing of the temple. (Mt 21:13; Jer 7:11) Once again,
however, for Matthew the reality of Jesus exceeds that of Jeremiah, who
called for the purification of Gods temple. In Matthews account of the
triumphal entry, God-with-us reclaims His temple to the liturgical accolades of the crowds and to the messianic proclamation of the little children. Jesus prophesies against the temple as Jeremiah once did; but He
claims to embody a greater reality than the temple itself and in a way
which parallels His divine authority over the sabbath.5 (Mt 12:7-8)
Matthew presents the flight into Egypt as a necessary condition for the
fulfillment of fourth Old Testament text, Hos 11:1: Out of Egypt have
I called my son. In Hosea the text recalls Yahwehs merciful deliverance
of Israel from Egyptian bondage and their subsequent ingratitude and
infidelity. Matthew has Jesus relive the exodus experience of the people of
God. Jesus embodies the new Israel He came to create. Moreover, the
deliverance wrought by God in Jesus effects an even greater liberation
than the first exodus. Once again, Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Hosea by
embodying more than the prophet intended.
One final fulfillment text occurs in Matthews infancy narrative. Matthew sees Jesus childhood as fulfilling the prophecy: He shall be called
a Nazarene. (Mt 2:23) As we saw above, the name Nazareth does not
occur in the Old Testament. Instead, Matthew could be punning on
Nazarene and Nazarite and comparing Jesus to another Samson. (Judg
13:5)
Matthew certainly regards Jesus as a judge, but as a far more exalted
judge than Samson. John the Baptizer warns the stiff-necked Sadducees
and Pharisees that God will transform Jesus into the instrument of a
divine judgment upon them. (Mt 3:7-12) By baptizing in a sanctifying
Breath Jesus will call down upon the world the fire of divine holiness, a
fire which will purify His disciples and destroy His enemies. (Mt 3:11-2)
Moreover, the judgmental action of the Breath-baptizer foreshadows an
even more solemn act of judgment: His return as Son of Man to sit in
judgment over all the nations of the earth. Then he will gather the righteous into the fullness of His kingdom and cast the wicked into the same
unquenchable fire as torments Satan and his demons. (Mt 24:31-46,
26:64-66)
Matthews infancy narrative both introduces the theme of fulfillment
and develops it in considerable theological depth. The initial revelation
5. Cf. M.J.J. Menken, The References to Jeremiah in the Gospel According to
Matthew, Ephemerides Theologiae Lovaniensis, 60(1984), pp. 5-24.
316
of Jesus as ImmanuelGod-with-uscreates the context for interpreting all the other fulfillments to which Matthew alludes. As Immanuel,
Jesus fulfills the saving significance of other Old Testament figures: the
messiah, Israel itself, Moses, possibly Jeremiah, possibly Samson and the
judges. This Jesus accomplishes by embodying much more than any of
the preceding figures embodied. The more in question derives from the
fact that Jesus confronts both Jew and Christian alike as God made present
in human form.
Like Mark, Matthew regards the preaching of John the Baptizer as itself a fulfillment of Is 40:3. Johns desert ministry begins the final saving
act which culminates in Jesus own ministry. As Elijah redivivus the Baptizer prepares Israel to hear Jesus message by summoning it to repentance.
The Baptizers own ministry fulfills Old Testament prophecy. As the
greatest born of woman, he brings Mosaic religion to its culmination (Mt
11:7-15); but, once again, the reality which Jesus brings, the reality which
Old Testament prophecy foresaw, far exceeds the Baptizer and his ministry. The least in the kingdom comes before John in the history of salvation. As we have seen in reflecting on Jesus relationship to the Baptizer,
in their tete-a-tete before Jesus baptism, Jesus assures John that, by baptizing Him, John will fulfill all righteousness. (Mt 3:13-5) Jesus assurance points to Christian baptism as the fulfillment of Johannine. Johannine
baptism expresses repentance but does not forgive sins. Jesus baptism
forgives sins by pouring out the purifying fire of a sanctifying, divine
Breath on those who receive it. (Mt 3:11, 26:28, 28:19-20)
One finds a tacit reference to the theme of fulfillment in Jesus desert
temptations. In the power of the Breath whom He will one day impart to
the new Israel. Jesus confronts and confounds the powers of evil and of
antichrist which Satan personifies. Satan, as we have seen, tempts Jesus to
self-reliance, to test God, and to the idolatry of founding the kingdom
on the coercive power of earthly kingdoms. Since Jesus both embodies
and begins the new Israel, its members can expect to face similar temptations and must respond as Jesus did to the wiles of the Evil One.
When one reads Matthews temptation narrative in the light of the
theme of fulfillment, the fact that Jesus replies to each of Satans temptations by citing the Torah takes on new significance. The story of Jesus
temptations in Matthew as in Mark serves as a preface to His entire ministry. As a consequence, one needs to interpret the meaning of Matthews
citations of the Torah not only in their original context but especially in
the light of everything which follows in Matthews narrative. When one
interprets Jesus responses in the light of the Christian Torah which He
will proclaim, then one can recognize in the three citations of the old
317
Law an attempt on Matthews part to point to those aspects of the original Torah which Jesus own teaching will especially fulfill.
As we have seen, Satan first tempts Jesus to abandon the fast which
expresses His trust in the Father. Jesus responds to Satans temptation by
declaring that His trust in the Father remains unshaken. That trust fulfills the meaning of Deut 8:3, which Jesus cites in confounding Satan.
As Matthews narrative unfolds, Jesus demands a similar trust of His
own disciples. (Mt 6:11, 25-34) The disciples must trust in the Fathers
providential care in a way which frees them to share their possessions
liberally with those in greatest need. (Mt 25:31-6)
Having failed to cause Jesus to commit the sin of self-reliance, Satan
next tempts Him to test God by setting the conditions under which He
will trust God. Jesus replies by citing Deut 6:16. The citation commits
Him to trusting the Father unconditionally. (Mt 4:7) That trust that will
lead Him ultimately to the cross. (Mt 26:39) In the end, therefore, Jesus
trust during His passion fulfills the meaning of Deut 6:16.
As in the case of the first temptation, Jesus requires the same unconditioned trust of His disciples. They must lay down their lives for the gospel, if necessary. (Mt 10:17-31) Moreover, because the disciples trust in
the Father expresses itself in the willingness to share the physical supports
of life with others, unconditioned trust in the Father also expresses itself
in the willingness to imitate the perfection of divine love by sharing with
saint and sinner alike, even with ones enemies. (Mt 5:38-48)
In his third and final temptation, Satan tempts Jesus to model the kingdom on the principalities and powers of this world. Jesus replies by paraphrasing Deut 6:13. In doing so He announces that He will found the
kingdom on authentic worship of the Father and not on law or coercive
violence. (Mt 4: 10) In other words, the authentic worship of the Father
which Jesus embodies and inculcates fulfills Deut 6:13.
In His own teachings, Jesus demands similar attitudes of His disciples.
The disciples mutual forgiveness must authenticate their prayer to the
Father. (Mt 6:12-5) They must serve one another in the image of a servant messiah, who lays down His life for the many. (Mt 18:21-2) In
addition, in Matthew, the Our Father provides a paradigm of the authentic worship of the Father on which the kingdom must rest. (Mt 6:7-13)
When, therefore, one reads Matthews temptation narrative in the light
of the Christian Torah which Matthews gospel narrates, Jesus replies to
His temptations indicate those aspects of the Law which He and His
vision of the kingdom especially fulfill. The kingdom demands that one
give to Jesus Father the unconditioned trust which the Law called Israel
to place in God. As an expression of that trust, the members of the new
Israel must freely share the material supports of life with one another in a
community which seeks simultaneously to break down any social barri-
318
ers which separate people from one another. In Gods kingdom, sharing
excludes no one and includes sinner as well as saint, Gentile as well as
Jew, enemy as well as friend. Sharing must also express a mutual forgiveness which in turn authenticates the worship which the new Israel offers
to the universal Father of all. In Matthew, as we have seen, this vision of
the kingdom fulfills the Torah by holding up a positive ideal which demands more, not less, than the negative prescriptions of the Law.
Matthew twice asserts that Jesus healing ministry fulfills the servant
songs of Deutero-Isaiah.6 (Mt 8:17, 12:17-18; Is 53:4, 42:1-2) In other
words, Matthew sees Jesus healing ministry as an expression of His free
desire to enter totally into the human condition by suffering the consequences of sin without Himself sinning. Implicitly, Matthew is also portraying the atonement effected by the incarnation of God as healing.
Moreover, the paschal mystery reveals an even deeper mystery than Second Isaiah foretold: namely, the atoning death of the Son of God. (Mt
27:25-44)
Matthew also believes that the Scriptures foretell Jesus rejection by His
contemporaries. The parables of Jesus fulfill Is 6:9-10 by concealing the
meaning of the kingdom from the unbelieving crowds. Their unbelief
keeps them from hearing the message of the kingdom and from experiencing the healing which the kingdom brings. Matthew, therefore, sees
in much of Israels failure to heed Jesus message a sin of unbelief which
has ample precedent in the history of Gods people. (Mt 13:10-7)
Nevertheless, despite the blindness of the Jewish crowds. Jesus parabolic discourse also fulfills Ps 78:2-3 by expressing a hidden divine wisdom to which Jesus has privileged access: in the face of human unbelief,
the parables express the saving intentions of God which the deity conceived before the foundation of the world. (Mt 13:34-5)
Jesus triumphal entry into Jerusalem fulfills Zech 9:9. The prophecy,
as we have seen, blends two Old Testament themes: Davidic messianism
and the anawim. Zechariah portrays the coming of a messiah whose meekness and identification with the little ones of this world ushers in an era
of peace. In telling the story of the triumphal entry, however, Matthew
once again makes it clear that what occurred in Jesus goes far beyond
what such messianic prophecies seemed to promise. Matthew does so by
noting that the crowds welcomed Jesus joyfully but failed to perceive the
full reality that He embodied. They regard Him as a messianic leader and
as a prophet, but fail to recognize Him as Immanuel. The acclamations
of the children, of Gods little ones, in the temple, however, clarify the
6. Cf. Claude Tassin, Matthieu Targumiste?; lexemple de Mt 12, 18(=Is 42,1),
Estudios Biblicos, 48(1990), pp. 119-214; Maartin J.J. Menken, The Source of the
Quotation from Isaiah 53: 4 in Matthew 8:17, Novum Testamentum, 39(1997), pp.
313-327.
319
liturgical symbolism which Matthew weaves into his account of the triumphal entry. In Matthews eyes, in Jesus cleansing of the temple, God
has visited and reclaimed His sanctuary.7 (Mt 21:7-11; cf. 1:23, 28:19-20).
At the moment of His arrest, Matthews Jesus insists twice that His
betrayal, suffering, and death all fulfill the Old Testament, which foresaw
their inevitability. Like the unbelief which greets Jesus message, Matthew sees His passion as part of a providential plan of salvation conceived
by God before the foundation of the world. Mt 26:54-56; 13:34-35)
Moreover, Jesus sayings place the paschal mystery at the heart of
Matthews theology of fulfillment. Not only does the vision of the kingdom go beyond what the Law demanded, but the atoning death of the
Son of God and His full revelation as Breath-baptizer in risen glory disclose realities at which the Old Testament only dimly guessed.
Finally, when the high priests use the thirty pieces of silver which Judas
threw at their feet to buy a potters field for burying strangers, the priests
fulfill Zech 11:12-3. The text points to the chief priests as incompetent
shepherds who failed to appreciate the value of the divine reality Jesus
which embodied and proclaimed. Instead, they misprized it at the trifling sum of thirty pieces of silver. In Matthews eyes, the same prophetic
text also designates the priestly aristocracy as the ones chiefly responsible
for voiding Gods covenant with Israel and for dividing the people of
God by their malice and unbelief. Since Matthew closely associates the
chief priests and the Pharisees, the prophecy also implicitly faults the
leaders of the synagogue across the street.8
The very fact that fulfillment replaces the messianic secret as the dominant theme in Matthews gospel illustrates the analogy of Christological
knowing. Mark uses the messianic secret in order to call attention to the
deeper revelatory significance of the events which he narrates; for only
with the full revelation of the secret in the paschal mystery does its content finally reach full clarity. The messianic secret in Mark, therefore,
constantly reminds the reader to see deeply into the events which the
evangelist narrates. It also keeps the faith of the reader focused on the
paschal mystery as the culminating historical revelation of God.
Both Matthew and Mark look upon the paschal mystery as the supreme revelation of Jesus person and mission. Mark, however, views it
through the eyes of a persecuted community confronting the reality of
martyrdom, while Matthew views it through the eyes of a Jewish Christian who is watching the kingdom of God begin to transform itself into
7. Cf.Walter Bauer, The Colt of Palm Sunday (der Palmesel), Journal of Biblical
Literature, 43(1953), pp. 220-229.
8. Cf. Albright and Mann, op.cit., pp. liv-lxxiii; Stanton, op.cit., pp.346-363.
320
the institutional Church. Accordingly, Matthew shows much more concern than Mark does to contextualize Jesus within the sweep of salvation
history. Like the good scribe whom he describes, Matthew keeps the church
at Antioch solidly rooted in Old Testament faith at the same time that it
acknowledges and proclaims the radical newness of what God has accomplished in Jesus. Matthews Jesus makes sense out of traditional Jewish faith. He does not abolish that faith.
Matthew also prefers the theme of fulfillment to Marks theme of the
messianic secret in part because the idea of fulfillment allows Matthew to
stress the practical demands of discipleship. Those demands, foreshadowed in Matthew by Jesus responses to Satans temptations, explicitate
the practical significance of Christological knowing.
This section has considered how Matthew uses fulfillment in order to
endow the story of Jesus with thematic unity. The following section ponders his use of narrative allusion as a literary device.
(III)
Matthew preserves some of the allusive linkages in Marks text. In both
miracles of the loaves, Jesus actions of taking, blessing, breaking, and
giving link these two miracles to the last supper and to the paschal mystery which Jesus eucharistic words and gestures interpret. (Mt 14:19,
15:36; Mk 6:41, 14:22) Like Mark, therefore, Matthew views both multiplications as a foreshadowing of the eucharist.
Like Mark, Matthew uses Jesus cosmological miracles in order to signal the correct answer to the central question which Jesus puts to His
disciples: namely, Who do you say that I am? (Mt 16:13-20) Matthew
agrees with Mark that only a man who is also God can calm with a word
the winds and the waters of chaos. (Mt 14:27, 32; Mk 6:50-1) As in
Mark, the first calming of the storm sets the stage for the exorcism which
follows. Jesus casts the demons from the Gadarene demoniacs into a herd
of swine who rush into the sea. The symbol of the forces of chaos which
Jesus with sovereign, divine authority has just conquered with a word.
(Mt 8:28-33; Mk 5:1-14)
Matthew, however, edits out many of the key allusions which tie Marks
gospel tightly together and focus it on the two miracles of the loaves. For
example, in both gospels the calming of the aquatic forces of chaos reveals Jesus divinity. Mark, as we have seen, uses allusion in order to make
belief in Jesus divinity the doctrinal condition for eucharistic faith and
the rejection of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod its moral condition. (Mk 6:52, 8:21) Matthew edits out the key, organizing Markan
allusions to the eucharist. That omission alone shatters the two complex
retes of allusion which organize Marks gospel theologically.
321
Matthew, as we have also seen, omits the presence of Peter, James, and
John at the raising of the rulers daughter; the evangelist thus fails to link
this event, as Mark does, to the transfiguration, to the agony in the garden, and to the eschatological discourse. (Mk 5:33) Matthew also edits
from the young womans raising Marks allusion to the miracles of the
loaves. (Mk 5:43) Matthew deletes as well the symbolic number twelve
which in Mark transforms the daughter of Jairus and the woman with a
flux of blood into symbols of the old and new Israels. (Mk 5:25, 42; Mt
9:18-26)
Matthew eliminates the Markan allusions which link the cure of Peters
mother-in-law to the raising of the rulers daughter, to the cure of the
moonstruck boy, and finally to Jesus own resurrection. In Mark Jesus
symbolically raises the woman up so that she can serve Him and the
disciples, while in Matthew, she rises of her own power. (Mt 8:15) Marks
Jesus also raises up the epileptic demoniac, whom the crowds erroneously think dead. (Mk 9:26-7) Matthew merely states that the rebuked
devil left the boy instantly and that he experienced a cure. (Mt 17:18)
Matthew omits too Marks symbolic and allusive reference to the boys
deafness and dumbness. (Mk 9:25) The allusion in Mark has, as we have
seen, symbolic significance: those whom Jesus raises up find themselves
empowered to hear the gospel and proclaim it. (Mk 7:31-7) Matthew
omits the reference.
Other significant Markan allusions also fall victim to Matthews editorial terseness. In Mark, Jesus invocation of the divine name in his trial
before the Sanhedrin (Mk 14:62) alludes to His use of the divine name
when He calms the storm for a second time. (Mk 6:51) Matthew omits
this cryptic Markan allusion. Matthew mutes the symbolic significance
of the healing of the two blind men by omitting Marks reference to the
fact that they followed Jesus on the way of discipleship which leads to
Calvary. (Mt 20:34; Mk 10:52) Finally, because Matthew transforms the
young man who greets the women in the tomb into a powerful angel, he
also omits mention of the young man who escaped in Gethsemane and
like the risen Christ left behind him only the garments which covered
Him. In Mark the young man in the garden alludes to the young man
whom the women encounter in the empty tomb. (Mk 14:51-2, 16:5)
Matthew, however, adds other allusive references absent from Mark. As
the crucified savior hangs on the cross, for example, the passersby deride
him and use the same words as Satan had in Jesus first two desert temptations: If you are the Son of God. (Mt 27:40, 43; 4:3, 6) In other
words, Matthew portrays the crucifixion of Jesus as the culminating test
to which Satan and the powers of antichrist put Him. He also depicts the
mocking crowds as Satanic.
322
Moreover, the epithet brood of vipers links allusively three events in

Matthews gospel: 1) the initial confrontation between John the Baptizer,
on the one hand, and the Pharisees and Sadducees, on the other; 2) the
controversy over Beelzebul; and 3) the woes against the scribes and Pharisees. (Mt 3:7, 12:34, 23:33) Clearly, Matthew wants these three events to
cast light on one another. Their linkage in his text suggests that the Pharisees commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Breath, because like
the Sadducees they refuse to repent at the message of John and of Jesus.
As a consequence, from the sinfulness of their hearts they speak venomous words which seek to undermine faith in Jesus. They therefore incur
all the woes which the new covenant visits upon the unrepentant. The
confrontation between John, on the one hand, and the unrepentant Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 3:7) also foreshadows Jesus warning against the
wicked leaven of their teaching. (Mt 16:12)
When Matthew describes the cloak the soldiers put on Jesus in mocking Him as scarlet, he alludes, as we have seen, to the Jewish rite of atonement and implicitly portrays the blood which the people call down upon
themselves in Jesus trial before Pilate as the blood of atonement. (Mt
27:25, 28) That event alludes in turn to the angels prophecy that Jesus
would one day save the people of Israel from their sins. (Mt 1:21)
The Great Commission
Finally, having shredded Marks two retes of allusions clustering around
the two miracles of the loaves, Matthew creates a rich network of allusions around the Great Commission which closes his gospel. (Mt
28:16-20) Matthews account of the Great Commission begins with the
Eleven climbing a mountain in Galilee. The Eleven, the mountain, and
Galilee all recall other incidents in Matthews gospel. Galilee recalls the
command of the apocalyptic angel at the empty tomb that the disciples
should rendez-vous with Jesus in Galilee, the scene of most of His mortal
ministry. (Mt 28:1-8)
The mount of the great commission recalls other mountaintops in
Matthews story: The mount of the temptations, where Jesus refused to
adore Satan in exchange for the kingdoms of this world (Mt 4:8); the
mount of the beatitudes (Mt 5:1, 8:1), where Jesus announced he kingdom in His inaugural discourse (Mt 5:3-7:27); the mountain of the transfiguration, where the anticipatory revelation of Jesus glory began to draw
the disciples into His baptismal commissioning (Mt 17:1-8); the mountain where Jesus prayed before walking on the water and invoking the
divine name (Mt 14:22-23).
Each of these mountains has further connotations. The mountain of
Jesus final temptation reminds the reader of His victory over Satan and
over those who act as His agents. The mount of the beatitudes recalls not
323
only Jesus first discourse but implicitly all five discourses, which in Matthew proclaim Christian Torah. So does the risen Jesus reference to all I
324
commanded you. (Mt 28:20) The mount of the transfiguration foreshadows Jesus resurrection.
The mountain where Jesus prayed, by alluding to Jesus first stilling of
a storm, implicitly recalls the other events associated with that miracle.
The miracle itself, of course, foreshadows the paschal mystery and the
revelation of Jesus divinity (Mt 14:27); but it also recalls Peters walking
on the water and near drowning. (Mt 14:28-33) That event recalls Peters
denial of Jesus and subsequent repentance and re-habilitation. (Mt
26:69-75) Jesus rebuke to Peter for his weakness of faith implicitly recalls all the other admonitions which Matthews Jesus addresses to Peter:
not only Jesus stern reprimand to Peter for trying to talk Jesus out of the
passion but also Jesus warnings against clericalism in Antioch. (Mt
16:22-23, 17:24-27; 26:33-35) The seismic agitation of the sea in Jesus
first calming of the waters foreshadows the agitation of the Holy City
when Jesus reclaims the temple of God after His triumphal entry. It also
foreshadows the two earthquakes which link Jesus death and resurrection. (Mt 27:60, 28:2)
The Eleven climb the mountain so that Jesus can join Himself to them
as the twelfth apostle in the Great Commission. (Mt 28:20) The reduced
number of the apostles recalls Judass betrayal of Jesus and the circumstances surrounding the apostles despairing suicide. (Mt 26:14-16, 47-56,
27:3-10) The reconstitution of the Twelve as a symbol of the new Israel
recalls Jesus choice of the Twelve and commissioning of them in His
missionary discourse to proclaim the good news to the lost sheep of the
house of Israel; and that commissioning, as we saw above, stands allusively linked to other texts which refer to Jesus as the divine shepherd of
Israel. The Great Commission now extends the apostles mission to include all the nations of the world. The Great Commission therefore begins a process whose termination the parable of the sheep and the goats
describes; for that parable narrates the final judgment of the nations. (Mt
25:31-46)
The Eleven fall down in adoration before the risen Christ. Their homage recalls the worship of the magi whose homage to the baby Jesus foreshadows the conversion of the nations which the Great Commission will
effect. Allusion to the magi, however, recalls the futile attempt of Herod
the Great to kill the infant Jesus with the connivance of the chief priests.
(Mt 2:1-6) Herods failure foreshadows the risen Christs victory over all
His human enemies: the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the chief priests, Pilate,
and the Roman empire. The disciples worship of the risen Christ also
recalls the worship of the women who encountered Him after finding the
empty tomb (Mt 28:9) Their worship also reminds the reader of the adoration offered Jesus after He walked on the water, invoked the divine
name, and stilled the storm for a second time. (Mt 14:33)
325
Jesus claims that all power in heaven and on earth now belongs to Him
in virtue of His resurrection. The claim recalls Jesus prayer to the Father,
the Lord of heaven and earth. In the prayer Jesus praised the Father for
revealing Him to the anawim, to the small and weak of this world, by
drawing them into His Abba experience. (Mt 11:25-27) Now the proclamation of the risen Christ will extend that revelation.
Claiming universal divine power, Jesus commissions the reconstituted
new Israel to baptize in the triune name. That commission reveals Jesus
as the Breath-baptizer foretold by John, as the mightier one who would
baptize not just with water but with a sanctifying Breath and with fire,
the fire of divine holiness and judgment. (Mt 3:11-12) The commissioning therefore also implicitly recalls that Christian baptism fulfills Johannine
baptism (Mt 3:13-17), thus revealing Jesus superiority to John. Moreover, as I have already indicated, the Great Commission recalls, expands,
and fulfills the original mission of the Twelve to Israel.
Jesus enjoins the disciples to teach all nations to obey everything He
has commanded them. That injunction transforms the five discourses in
Matthew into Christian Torah.
The conversion of the nations which the Great Commission will effect
alludes to other events in Matthew which foreshadow that conversion:
the story of the magi (Mt 2:1-12), the cure of the centurions servant (Mt
8:5-13), the exorcism of the Canaanite womans daughter (Mt 15:21-28),
the second multiplication of the loaves (Mt 15:29-39), and the testimony of the centurion at the foot of the cross.9 (Mt 27:54)
This impressive clustering of allusions around the Great Commission
endows it with enormous narrative importance. It designates the Great
Commission as the culminating event of Jesus story which sums it up
and endows it with ultimate meaning.
Mark views the Christian community primarily as a eucharistic community gathered to profess its practical faith in the risen Christ. Matthew,
however, views the Christian community more as a Church (ekklesia) in
the making. In Matthew, the Great Commission transforms the gospel
into Christian Torah, creates the Church as the new Israel, and sends it
on its mission of world-wide evangelization.
These differences illustrate the analogy of Christological knowing because they reflect the different contexts which shape each evangelists account of Jesus. Those contexts require the gospels recasting in ways which
will advance a particular communitys progress in the kind of knowledge
which Breath-baptism effects. Others may find additional allusive link9. Cf. David P. Scaer, The Relation of Matthew 28:16-20 to the Rest of the Gospel,
Concordia Theological Quarterly, 55(1991), pp. 245-266.
326
ages in Matthew; but the preceding analysis should suffice to introduce

converting adult Christians to some of the more important dialectical
contrasts between Matthew and Mark.
This chapter concludes the comparative dialectical analysis of Matthew
and of Mark. The following section ponders Lukes narrative Christology.
327
Part 3
Lukes Narrative Christology
Chapter 12
Lukes Prologues and Infancy Narrative
In this section of volume two, I undertake a comparative dialectical analysis
of Lukes two volume account of Christian origins: his gospel and the
Acts of the Apostles.1 I shall employ the same strategy as in analyzing
Mark and Matthew. I shall trace through Lukes gospel narrative his use
of dramatic, thematic, and allusive linkages. In the process I shall attempt to uncover the fundamental Christological statement which the
third evangelist makes about Jesus Christ. I shall then compare and contrast his narrative Christology with the two which I have examined so far.
This third section divides into seven chapters. Chapter one summarizes
what historical criticism can tell us about Luke and about the community for which he wrote. It also reflects on Christological themes in Lukes
infancy narrative. Chapter two examines the positive dramatic linkages
which structure Lukes gospel. As in the other synoptic gospels, Lukes
Jesus relates positively to John the Baptizer, to the Father, and to the
Holy Breath. Chapter three looks at Lukes handling of negative dramatic
linkages: namely, Jesus relationship to Satan and his demons, to the scribes
and Pharisees, to Herod, to the chief priests, and to Pilate. Chapter four
focuses on the same two ambivalent linkages which structure the other
synoptic gospels: namely, on the way in which Lukes Jesus relates to the
crowds and to His own disciples, and they to Him. Chapter five analyzes
the way in which Luke uses thematic and allusive linkages in structuring
his narrative. Chapter six meditates on the Christology of Acts. As we
shall see, Luke locates his major Christological statements in Acts in the
kerygmatic proclamation of the risen Christ. In addition, the evangelist
also portrays Peter, Stephen, and Paul as examples of Christological knowing. In the course of proclaiming Christ in the power of His Breath, all
three men find themselves assimilated to Him and drawn into His passion. Chapter seven examines how synoptic narrative Christology engages
1. For two different interpretations of the narrative unity of Lukes two volumes, see:
Robert C.Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation (2
vols.; Minneapolis, MI: Fortress Press, 1990); Charles LEplattenier, Lecture de
lvangile de Luc (Paris: Descle, 1982).
328
Part 3: Lukes Narrative Christology
the imagination in forming the Christian conscience. This final chapter

uses pragmatic logic in order to clarify how Christological knowing happens.
This first chapter of section three divides into two parts. Part one summarizes what we know at present about Luke and about the community
for whom he wrote. Part two examines major Christological themes in
Lukes infancy narrative.
(I)
Most of what we can say about the third evangelist and about the community for whom he wrote we must glean from his own writings. Some
other ancient sources do, however, yield glimmerings concerning the third
synoptic evangelist and his community.
An ancient extra-textual prologue to Lukes gospel describes its author
as a Syrian of Antioch, by profession a physician, the disciple of the
apostles, and later a follower of Paul until his martyrdom. He served the
Lord without distraction, without a wife, and without children. He died
at the age of eighty-four in Boeotia, full of the Holy Breath.2 Origen,
Eusebius, and Jerome speak of Luke in analogous terms. Tertullian describes Luke as not an apostle, but a disciple, inferior indeed to a master. Tertullian also depicts Luke as a disciple of Paul. (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem, 4.5, 3)
Lukes two volumes, however, show no direct dependence on the writings of Paul. As we shall see in reflecting on Acts, Luke uses the figure of
Paul and others in order to articulate the evangelists own theology of
salvation history. If then, Luke did know Paul at Antioch, their meeting
probably occurred early in Pauls career. Certainly, we find factual discrepancies between Lukes account of Paul in Acts and the apostles own
letters.3
Several clues allow for an approximate dating of Lukes gospel. Acts
ends abruptly with Paul preaching the gospel in Rome, perhaps between
61 and 63 a.d. (Acts 28:30) Luke reproduces about sixty per cent of Marks
narrative. Mark, as we have seen, wrote in the late sixties. Lk 13:35 almost certainly refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. Luke,
then, wrote his gospel no earlier than the eighth decade. Since Lukes
portrait of Paul in Acts shows no direct knowledge of the great apostles
letters, Luke probably wrote prior to the formation and circulation of the
2. Cf. K. Aland, Synopsis quattuor Evangeliorum (Stuttgart: Wrttembergische Bibelanstalt,
1964), p. 553.
3. Cf. Philip Vielhauer, On the Paulinism of Acts in Studies in Luke-Acts, edited by
Leander E. Keck and J. Louis Maryn (New York, NY: Abingdon, 1966) pp. 33-50;
Gnther Bornkamm, The Missionary Stance of Paul in 1 Corinthians 9 and in Acts
in Studies in Luke- Acts, pp. 194-207; John Wenham, The Identification of Luke,
Evangelical Quarterly, 63(1991), pp. 3-44.
Chapter 12: Lukes Prologues and Infancy Narratives
329
New Testament corpus of Pauline epistles. Scholars therefore deem it likely

that Luke wrote his gospel in the eighties, possibly in the early eighties.
No one knows for certain where the Lukan community lived. The tone
and rhetoric of the gospel makes its likely, however, that Luke was writing primarily for Gentile Christians. In his account of Christian origins,
Luke stresses the continuity between Jewish and Gentile Christianity;
but the evangelist portrays the Pauline Gentile mission as the culmination of early Christian evangelization.
The Prologues
No other synoptic gospel begins with the kind of formal prologue which
opens both Lukes gospel and Acts. (Lk 1:1-4; Acts 1:1-5) They yield a
solid insight into the evangelists intentions in writing. No other synoptic
evangelist tells us so clearly exactly why he is retelling Jesus story.
Lukes prologues imitate in their literary structure the prefaces to historical works by pagan historians like Herodotus, Thucydides, and
Polybius. They adopt the periodic sentence structure of classical Greek
authors. From the standpoint of stylistic elegance, the prologue to the
gospel succeeds somewhat better than the prologue to Acts.
Taken together the two prologues make it clear that Luke intended
from the beginning to write a two-volume study of the origins of Christianity. He planned his study as an account of Jesus proclamation of the
kingdom and of the Christian communitys subsequent proclamation of
the risen Christ.
The evangelist addresses both books to Theophilus, whom Luke refers
to as excellent or your Excellency (kratiste Theophile). (Lk 1:3-4; Acts
1:1) The title kratiste has parallels in pagan prologues dedicated to a
patron. In Roman society, one applied the title to a member of the equestrian order; but it also functioned as a general honorific title.
That Theophilus functioned as Lukes patron remains questionable.
Most scholars regard Theophilus as a specific individual, but debate
whether or not he belonged to the Christian community. Some regard
him as a catechumen. In both prologues, however, the name would seem
to have a symbolic function: it means friend of God. Even if the name
of an historical personage, Lukes use of the name suggests that he is
writing his two-volume study for any friend of God.
Moreover, Luke tells Theophilus why he is writing: He wants
Gods-friend to realize what assurance you have for the instructions
you have received (katchths). (Lk 1:4) The verb katchthein connotes formal instruction. In other words, Luke is trying to buttress the
oral catechesis which Theophilus has received by writing a carefully researched, well ordered, written account of the origins of the Christian
movement, one which clearly establishes the historical link between it
330
and Jesus. Luke hopes to deepen Theophiluss insight into the historical
grounds for Christian faith, into the events which gave rise to it.
Luke writes out of a sense of an oral tradition, but he recognizes that
many (polloi) (Lk 1:1) have committed the things he will narrate to
writing. How many written sources Luke draws upon apart from Mark
we cannot say for certain. If Q existed, then Luke, like Matthew, adapts
materials from Q to his own narrative purposes; but he also draws on
sources to which Matthew had no access or which Matthew chose to
ignore. Luke, however, clearly ambitions a more comprehensive account
of Christian origins than any he has examined.
Luke writes about events which have really occurred. He calls them
pragmatn (Lk 1:1) The term means facts, happenings, things done or
accomplished. Like Matthew, Luke situates the events he narrates within
salvation history, but their visions of salvation history contrast in significant ways. Matthew, as we have seen, in writing his gospel developed in a
systematic way the notion of fulfillment. The term had for him theological as well as historical connotations: Jesus fulfills the Old Testament
by providing the correct lens through which to read and interpret Torah.
As we have seen, Matthews Jesus fulfills the Law by turning negative
commands into positive ideals which demand more than the Law ever
did. He fulfills the prophets as Immanuel, as the divine embodiment of
everything which the prophets foretold and more.
Luke, if anything, has an even more evolved sense than Matthew of
salvation history as an unfolding event; but, while Matthew views the
history of salvation through the eyes of a Jewish Christian, Luke writes
primarily with Gentile Christians in mind. Like Matthew, Luke invokes
the concept of fulfillment; but in Luke the term has different connotations. While Matthew sees the past fulfilled and brought to perfection in
the eschatological present established by the Christ event, Luke portrays
salvation history as advancing in three successive, if slightly overlapping,
stages: 1) from the creation of the world up to the appearance of John the
Baptizer: the period of the Law and the prophets; 2) from Jesus conception
and baptism to His ascension: the period of His public ministry, death,
and exaltation, and 3) from Jesus ascension to the second coming: the age of
universal evangelization and of the Church.
Whereas Matthew sees the Church as an institution founded on Petrine
Christianity, Luke takes a more broadly universalist view of salvation history and portrays the proclamation of Christ as culminating in Pauls
Gentile mission.4
4. Cf. NJBC, 43:11; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke (2 vols.; New York,
NY: Doubleday, 1983), pp. 289-302 [hereafter abbreviated, Fitzmyer, Gospel]; Luke
Timothy Johnson, The Gospel of Luke (Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical Press, 1991),
pp. 27-30 [hereafter abbreviated as Johnson, Gospel]; C.F. Evant, Saint Luke (London:
331
The prologue to the Acts of the Apostles summarizes rapidly the story
of Jesus which Luke narrated in his gospel. It portrays the gospel as concerned primarily with the words and deeds of Jesus from the beginning
(achri) until the day He gave His instructions to the apostles He had
chosen through the Holy Breath, and was take up into heaven. (Acts
1:1-2) The beginning to which Luke refers means primarily the inception of Jesus public ministry, but the term embraces also Jesus birth and
childhood narrated in Lukes infancy gospel. The reference to the beginning of Jesus words and deeds implicitly portrays the events narrated in
Acts as the continuation of everything which He began. In the Breath-filled
witness of the apostles, the risen Christ continues in the paschal mystery
the work He began by His own life and ministry. One finds, then, two
significant beginnings in the latter half of Lukan salvation history: 1)
the new beginning which Jesus conception, ministry, death, and resurrection inaugurate and 2) Pentecost, which begins the era of the Church.5
In constructing his two-volume account, Luke draws a parallel between
the movement of the good news from Galilee to Jerusalem, on the one
hand, and its movement from Jerusalem to Rome, on the other. Both
cities function symbolically. Jerusalem symbolizes the center of the Jewish world; Rome, the center of the Gentile world. Luke portrays Jesus
carrying the word into the heart of the Jewish world, into Jerusalem and
its temple. There, instead of acceptance, He experiences rejection, crucifixion, and glorification.
The paschal mystery occurs in the heart of Judaism; and it begins a
counter movement of universal saving significance. In Acts the Pentecost
of the Jews functions as a prelude to the Pentecost of the Samaritans
and to the Pentecost of the Gentiles. Peter preaches the first Pentecost
and officially baptizes the first uncircumcised Gentiles, but Paul serves as
Gods chosen instrument for evangelizing the nations. Physical movement plays, then, a more important role in Lukes narrative Christology
than it does in the other synoptic gospels. Lukes two volume history
SCM Press, 1991), pp. 27-30 [hereafter abbreviated as Evans, Luke] Hans Conzelmann,
The Theology of St. Luke, translated by Geoffrey Buswell (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress,
1961); Darrell L. Bock, Luke: Volume I: 1:1-9:50 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books,
1994), pp. 51-67 [hereafter abbreviated as Bock, Luke]; Josef Ernst, Das Evangelium
nach Lukas (Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet, 1993), pp. 45-50.
5. Cf. NJBC, 44:14; F.F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988),
pp. 28-33 [hereafter abbreviated at Bruce, Acts]; Hans Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles,
translated by J. Limberg, A.T. Brabee, and D.H. Juel (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress,
1987, pp. 3-4 [hereafter abbreviated at Conzelmann, Acts]; Ernst Hnchen, The Acts
of the Apostles (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1971), pp. 135-147 [hereafter abbreviated
at Hnchen, Acts]; E. Samain, La notion de ARXH dans loeuvre lucanienne in
Lvangile de Luc, edited and revised by F. Neiryuck (Leuven: University Press, 1989),
pp. 209-238; David L. Meland, Luke-Acts and the Verbs of Dionysius of
Halicarnassus, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 63(1996), pp. 63- 86.
332
portrays Jesus ministry as an implosion within Judaism which triggers

the explosion of the gospel into the entire Gentile world.
The Structure of Lukes Gospel
Lukes gospel divides into seven sections.
1) Lukes infancy narrative and account of Jesus hidden life opens the
gospel.
2) The ministry of John the Baptizer, Jesus baptism, genealogy, and
confrontation with Satan in the wilderness provide the immediate narrative prelude to Jesus public ministry.
3) Luke then adapts the first part of Marks account of Jesus Galilean
ministry to his own purposes. Luke prefaces the Galilean ministry with
his own version of Jesus rejection at Nazareth. The unbelief and murderous hostility of the Nazarenes dramatizes the fundamental sin of many
Jewish people: namely, their refusal to recognize that God chose them,
not for their own sake, but in order to bring about the conversion and
salvation of the Gentiles. Luke, however, made place in the Christian
community for both Jewish and Gentile converts. The evangelist also
reminded his community of Christianitys roots in the Jewish tradition.
After the incident at Nazareth Luke narrates Jesus Galilean ministry.
He begins with Marks account of Jesus initial activities in Capernaum.
The five conflict stories which open Marks gospel appear in edited form.
Luke then describes the call of the disciples. Jesus preaches both the sermon on the plain and the parabolic discourse. Luke records only one
multiplication of the loaves and fish. The evangelist closes his account of
the Galilean ministry by describing various responses to it.
4) The journey discourse follows. The journey discourse transforms
the way section of Mark into a Lukan metaphor for discipleship as the
disciples accompany Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem, to the cross, and to
glory. As the disciples travel on pilgrimage with Jesus, He instructs them
at great length about life in the kingdom.
5) Luke adapts Marks account of Jesus final Jerusalem ministry, including his version of the eschatological discourse. In Lukes account of
Jesus final activities in Jerusalem, however, the temple priests function as
His only adversaries. Lukes Jesus conducts virtually all His final ministry
within the temple precincts; for Luke depicts that ministry as a struggle
between the messiah and the high priests for control of the temple. Accordingly, Lukes Jesus in contrast to Marks and to Matthews directs the
eschatological discourse primarily to the crowds in the temple and only
secondarily to the disciples.
6) As in Mark and Matthew, the passion narrative follows. At the last
supper, Lukes Jesus institutes the eucharist and delivers a brief last discourse. Moreover, as we shall see, the evangelist depicts Jesus crucifixion
as the supreme expression of divine forgiveness.
333
7) Finally, the gospel concludes with Jesus resurrection and appearances to the disciples in Jerusalem rather than in Galilee. In these accounts Luke presents his own narrative interpretation of the meaning of
Jesus resurrection. The gospel closes with a brief account of Jesus ascension into heaven.6
This section has reflected on what historical-critical method tells us
about Luke, about his community, and about his intentions in writing
his gospel and Acts. The following section examines Christological themes
in the infancy narrative.
(II)
Lukes infancy narrative tells the story of two births: that of Jesus and that
of John the Baptizer. The narrative, therefore, provides a prolonged theological reflection, undertaken in the light of the paschal mystery, on the
relationship between the two men.
The story unfolds in two major diptychs. In the first, an angel announces the birth of both John and Jesus. In the second, Luke recounts
the birth of both babies and their circumcision and naming.
The infancy gospel begins in the temple in Jerusalem and culminates
there, with the story of Jesus presentation.7 Lukes account of the finding
of the boy Jesus in the temple does not strictly speaking belong to his
infancy narrative, since it describes Jesus as an adolescent. Rather it provides a transition from the infancy narrative to the story of Jesus public
6. Cf. J. Sawsey, The Literary Unity of Luke-Acts: Questions of StyleA Task for
Literary Critics, New Testament Studies, 35(1989), pp. 48-66; Heinrich Baarlink,
Die Zyklische Struktur for Lukas 9.43b-19.28, New Testament Studies, 38(1992),
pp. 481-506; F. Gerald Dowling, A Paradigm Perplex: Luke, Matthew, and Mark,
New Testament Studies, 38(1992), pp. 15-36; Michael Goulder, Lukes Compositional Options, New Testament Studies, 39(1993), pp. 15-152; C.K. Barrett, Luke the
Historian in Recent Study (London: The Epworth Press, 1961); Stephen G. Wilson,
Luke and the Pastoral Epistles (London: SPCK, 1979), Charles H. Talbert, Literary
Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke/Acts (Missoula, MN: Scholars Press,
1974); Conzelmann, The Theology of Luke, translated by Geoffrey Buswell (New York,
NY: Harper & Row, 1960); I. Howard Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian
(Grand Rapids, MI: Academe Books, 1970); Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders,
Luke and Scripture: The Function of Sacred Tradition in Luke-Acts (Minneapolis, MI:
Fortress, 1993); Philip Francis Esler, Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social
and Political Motivations of Lukan Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1987); Robert L. Brawley, Text to Text Pours Forth Speech: Voices of Scripture in
Luke-Acts (Minneapolis, MI: Indiana University Press, 1995); Harold E. Dollar, A
Biblical- Missiological Exploration of the Cross-Cultural Dimensions in Luke-Acts (San
Francisco, CA: A. Mellen Research University Press, 1993); Michael Dmer, Das Heil
Gottes: Studien zur Theologie des lukanischen Doppelwerkes (Kln-Bonn, Verlag Peter
Hanstein, 1978); James M Dawsey, The Lukan Voice: Confusion and Irony in the Gospel
of Luke (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1986).
7. Cf. John Navone, S.J., Themes of Luke (Rome: Gregorian Press, 1970), pp. 64-70.
334
ministry. The finding in the temple also culminates in Jerusalem, as does

Lukes gospel as a whole.
As the infancy narrative evolves Luke punctuates the events he describes
with both angelic and human proclamations about the person and mission of both of the children. Gabriel in announcing each birth predicts
the future ministry of each child. An angel announces the birth of Jesus
to shepherds and interprets the circumstances of His birth. When humans
testify, the Holy Breath of God inspires their witness. Elizabeth, Zechariah,
Simeon, and Anna all prophesy about Jesus and John in the power of the
divine Breath. This outpouring of the Breath foreshadows Pentecost.
In addition to the proclamations, Luke has all the principal characters
in the infancy narrative acknowledge in faith the action of God in their
midst. Elizabeth praises God for her own pregnancy. Mary pronounces
her Magnificat; and Zechariah, his Benedictus.8
The Two Annunciations
The infancy narrative closely parallels the events of Johns and of Jesus
birth. The angel Gabriel announces both births before they occur: Johns
to Zechariah and Jesus to Mary. In both annunciations the angel foretells each childs special mission from God.
One finds several parallels between the two accounts. 1) Zechariah and
Elizabeth expect no child because of their advanced years: Elizabeth is
barren and has passed the time of child bearing. (Lk 1:5-10) Mary and
Joseph expect no child because they have not yet married. (Lk 1:26-7) 2)
The appearance of the angel leaves both Zecharaiah and Mary troubled.
(Lk 1:11-2, 28-9) 3) The angel tells both not to fear and then announces
the childs birth. In announcing the birth, the angel also names the child.
(Lk 1:13, 31) The angel recognizes greatness in both children but surpassing greatness in Jesus. (Lk 1:13-17) 4) Both Zechariah and Mary
pose questions to the angel. (Lk 1:18, 34) 5) The angel responds to the
question posed and then gives a sign of the truth of his message. As a
sign, Zechariah becomes temporarily mute. (Lk 1:19-22) The angel explains to Mary that she will conceive Jesus through the power of the Holy
Breath and gives as a sign the fact that Elizabeth has conceived John in
her advanced age. (Lk 1:35-38) 6) Both annunciation scenes end with
the departure of the angel.
8. Cf. Mark Coleridge, The Birth of Lukan Narrative: Narrative and Christology in Luke
1-2 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993); Gabriel Perez Rodriguez, Dimension existencial
de Mt 1-2; Lc 1-2, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 161-175; Domingo Munoz Leon,
Deras e Historia: La Distincion entre Acontecimiento-Base y Artificio literario en los
Relatos Derasicos, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 123-148; George, op. cit., pp.
43-50; Lou H. Silberman, A Model for the Lukan Infancy Narratives? Journal of
Biblical Literature, 113(1994), pp. 491-493; Salvatore A. Panimolle, La Christologia
di Luca 1-2, Augustinianum, 35(1995), pp. 61-73.
335
Luke uses analogous parallels in describing the birth and circumcision

of both John and Jesus. Here it suffices to note that the parallelism in the
two annunciations serves two interrelated functions. It validates the divine origin of the missions of both Jesus and of John. They will both
function as prophetic voices in the drama of salvation which is beginning
to unfold. The parallelism also serves to underscore the superiority of
Jesus to John at every point. John will function as Jesus forerunner, as the
one who prepares Israel for the coming of the messiah. Jesus will function
as messiah, savior, and Son of God.9
The miraculous births of John and of Jesus parallel other such births in
salvation history. Elizabeth resembles Sarah, Abrahams wife, in her inability to bear children because of advanced age. (Gen 18:11) Hannah,
the barren mother of the prophet Samuel, conceived miraculously and in
response to prayer. (1 Sam 1:3,17) In Judges Minoah conceived Samson
miraculously after seeing an angel. (Judg 2:1-5) As in these earlier accounts, the miraculous character of the births of Jesus and of John portends the special role both will play within salvation history. Jesuss conception, however, in contrast to Johns, results from the direct action of
the creative Breath of God. His conception by the Breath dramatizes the
special transcendent origin of His person and mission.
In his account of the annunciation of Jesus birth, Luke identifies the
angel of the two annunciations as Gabriel. (Lk 1:26) In Dan 9:24-7, the
angel Gabriel announces the prophecy of the Seventy Weeks and of the
coming of a messianic figure. Gabriel reappears with messages to Zechariah
and Mary as a sign that the births of John and especially of Jesus fulfill
that prophecy.
Although Luke does not name Gabriel in his appearance to Zechariah,
the evangelist clearly has Gabriel in mind because one finds too many
parallels between the apparition of Gabriel to Daniel and his appearance
to Zechariah. (Dan 8:17, 9:20-1, 10:7-15)
The fact that Gabriel gives John a name indicates that he has a divinely
foreordained role to play within the history of salvation. (Lk 1:13) John
means Yahweh has given grace. Johns appearance will then inaugurate
a season of grace which Jesus mission will bring to perfection. Johns
birth will bring joy to not only to his parents but to many others, presumably to those who long for the season of grace which John will announce. (Lk 1:14) Gabriel gives Jesus a different name. Jesus means
Yahweh saves. (Lk 1:31) Jesus, then, will bring a salvation which John
will only prepare the people to receive.
Gabriel predicts that both John and Jesus will achieve greatness; but
their greatness will take different forms. In the case of John, he will espouse the ascetic way of the Nazarite, and the prophetic Breath who will
9. Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp. 250-251; NJBC, 43:13; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 51-57.
336
inspire his ministry will guide him from his mothers womb. (Lk 1:15)
John will act in the spirit and power of Elijah. As Elijah redivivus, he
will prepare the way for the Lords coming. The title Lord designates
Jesus. (Lk 1:16-7) John will prepare Jesus coming by turning the hearts
of Israelites back to God. He will recall people to their fundamental religious responsibilities, as Elijah should do. (Cf. Mal 3:24; Sir 48:10) By
recalling people to obedience to the divine wisdom, John will prepare
them for the coming of the Lord. (Lk 1:17)
As Lord, Jesus manifests a more excellent form of greatness than John.
While John enjoys the dignity of an Elijah, Jesus enjoys the dignity of
Son of God from the very first moment of His conception. (Lk 1:32-3)
As messiah He will inherit the throne of David and reign there in perpetuity, just as God had once promised the house of David. (2 Sam 7:9-16)
Moreover, Jesus miraculous conception by the very Breath of God manifests His identity as Son of God. (Lk 1:35) Marys overshadowing by the
divine Breath so that she can conceive Gods Son transforms her into the
Tabernacle of God. (Cf. Ex 40:35; Num 9:18, 22)
The miraculous conception of Jesus in the power of the Breath does
not connote, however, a sexual relationship between Mary and the Breath.
Jewish tradition formed Christian sensibilities. Both would have found
such pagan conceptions of God blasphemous and abhorrent. Instead the
conception of Jesus results from a transcendent act of divine creativity.
(Cf. Gen 1:2)
Matthew tells the story of Jesus conception by the Holy Breath in a
way which makes it quite clear that Joseph did not father the child. (Mt
1:18-25) While Luke does not rule out explicitly the presence of human
seed, he clearly intends Jesus conception by the Breath of God (Lk 1:35)
to parallel and surpass Johns possession of a prophetic Breath from his
mothers womb. (Lk 1:15) He would, therefore, seem to portray Jesus
conception as both virginal and miraculous. Moreover, while Luke does
not link Jesus virginal conception to the prophesy of Immanuel, as Matthew does, he does assert that Jesus virginal conception in the power of
the divine Breath reveals His divine Sonship. (Lk 1:35)
Luke portrays the parents of John as members of the priestly class:
Zechariah belongs to the tribe of Levi, while Elizabeth descends from
Aaron. The evangelist also describes them as people who live upright and
legally blameless lives. Luke, therefore, probably desires to depict the elderly couple as representing the best of the Jewish tradition. Advanced in
age and childless, Zechariah and Elizabeth recall the aged and childless
Abraham and Sarah, who began the story of Israel. (Gen 15:1-2, 18:1-15)
In Zechariah and Elizabeth, the history of Israel comes round full circle.
(Lk 1:5-7)
337
Zechariahs responds to the angels prediction of Johns birth with a

question: How shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is
advanced in age? (Lk 1:18) His query does not differ that markedly
from Marys question, How shall this be, since I have no husband? (Lk
1:34) The angel, however, rebukes Zechariahs unbelief but finds no fault
with Mary. Moreover, the angel strikes Zechariah mute as a sign, possibly
as a way of instilling greater faith in the old man. Since the entire passage
has many parallels to the apparition of Gabriel to Daniel, the sign of
muteness probably derives from Dan 10:15, where Daniel also finds himself struck dumb. Elizabeth, after conceiving John, acknowledges the divine blessing which the conception represents, since the Lord has finally
taken away from her the reproach of barrenness.10 (Lk 1:24- 5)
Gabriel addresses Mary as highly favored (kecharitomen) and tells
her that the Lord is with her. (Lk 1:28) The greeting causes Mary to
wonder why she should stand in such a privileged relationship with God.
(Lk 1:29) The angel, however, assures her that she has found favor (charin)
with God and points to the coming birth of Jesus as proof of the fact.
Jesus dignity and accomplishmentsHis divine Sonship, His inheritance of the kingdom of David in perpetuitygive concrete meaning to
the grace which Mary has received from God. From all other women
God has chosen her to give birth to the messianic Son of God. (Lk 1:31-3)
Once Mary understands that the Holy Breath of God will conceive the
child within her, she consents and calls herself the handmaiden of the
Lord. (Lk 1:38) Her response also recalls the response of Hannah when
she discovered that God will grant her a son: Let your handmaiden find
favor in your eyes.11 (1 Sam 1:18) Jesus virginal conception begins a
new Israel in a way which dramatizes both its continuity and discontinuity with the old Israel. Jesus miraculous conception marks a new beginning in salvation history at the same time that it fulfills the ancient Israels
messianic longings.
The story of the visitation provides a narrative transition from the annunciation of the births of John and of Jesus to the events themselves. It
also contains the first human testimony to Jesus, a testimony which Luke
places on the lips of Elizabeth.
10. Cf. NJBC, 43:12-18; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 303-333; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 31-36;
Evans, Luke, pp. 137-153; Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp. 256-285; Fitzmyer, Gospel
of Luke, I, pp. 303-333; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 303-333; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 51-57.
Evans, Luke, pp. 153-166; Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp.286-329; Fitzmyer, Gospel
of Luke, I, pp. 334-355; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 102-32; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 51-57; Antionio
Vincent Cernuda, El domicilio de Jos y la fama de Maria, Estudios Biblicos,
46(1988), pp. 5-25; George, op. cit.. pp. 431-464; John J. Kilgallen, S.J., The
Conception of Jesus (Luke 1,35), Biblica, 78(1997), pp. 225-246.
338
Mary journeys to the hill country of Judea in order to assist Elizabeth

in her pregnancy. At the moment she greets Elizabeth, the infant John
stirs in her womb. (Lk 1:39-42) The Holy Breath then inspires Elizabeth
to exclaim in a loud voice:
Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And
why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in
my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would
be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord. (Lk 1:42-5)
Elizabeths testimony especially praises Mary for her faith, which contrasts with Zechariahs unbelief, and once again makes explicit Jesus
pre-eminence over John. Her prayer of blessing echoes similar prayers in
the Old Testament. (Judg 5:24; Judith 13:18) The fact that the Holy
Breath inspires her words endows them with divine authority.
Elizabeth pronounces Mary doubly blessed: blessed in being the mother
of the Lord, blessed because she believed the word of God that she would
conceive Jesus miraculously in the power of the Breath. The testimony of
Elizabeth thus defines Marys role in the infancy gospel. She confronts
the reader as the type of the true disciple, as one who hears the word of
God and heeds it obediently in faith. (Cf. Lk 11:27-8) The blessing also
assimilates Mary to Judith, the woman who had single-handedly delivered
Israel. Judith too was also called blessed among women. (Judith, 13:18)
Marys faith will, of course, mediate a transcendent kind of deliverance.
Elizabeth, moreover, makes it clear that in virtue of her divinely appointed role as Mother of the messiah Mary outranks her in dignity, even
though Elizabeth outranks Mary in age. In calling Jesus my Lord Elizabeth alludes to the messianic Psalm 110:1. Elizabeth mothers a second
Elijah; Mary mothers the messiah and Son of God.
The Holy Breath also inspires Elizabeth to recognize symbolic significance in the fact that John stirred in her womb at the sound of Marys
voice. Destined to play a subordinate role in the history of salvation to
that which Jesus will play, the infant John rejoices to find himself in the
presence of the messianic Lord he will serve. Elizabeths prophecy thus
calls attention to the contrast already implicit in Gabriels description of
the missions of John and of Jesus.12 (Gen 25:22-3)
12. Cf. Juan B. Cortes-Quirant, S.J., Bendita tu sobre todas las Mujeres: Gabriel o
Isabel, Estudios Biblicos, 49(1991), pp. 271-276; Alfonso de la Fuente, Isabel, llena
de Espiritu Santo: Lc 1,41 a la Luz de la Tradicion rabinica, Estudios Biblicos,
50(1992), pp. 73-83; Luis Diez Merino, Transfondo semitico de Lucas 1-2, Estudios
Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 35-72; Max Turner, The Spirit of Prophecy and the Power
of Authoritative Preaching in Luke-Acts: A Question of Origins, New Testament
Studies, 38(1992), pp. 66-88.
339
Mary responds to Elizabeths prophetic greeting by blessing God for

what He has accomplished in her. Her canticle nuances and deepens Lukes
portrait of her as the type of the faithful disciple. Mary speaks with the
voice of the anawim, of the lowly and dispossessed of the earth who must
look to God for their vindication.
Marys canticle divides into two parts. In the first, she blesses God for
the ways in which He has blessed her. (Lk 1:47-9) In the second part,
Mary draws a parallel between what God has done for her and His merciful vindication of all the lowly ones who place their confidence in Him.
(Lk 1:50-5) Marys canticle introduces, therefore, a major theme in Lukes
gospel: namely, Gods special care for the lowly and the dispossessed.
Luke again implicitly parallels Mary and Hannah, the mother of Samuel.
(Cf. 1 Sam 2:1-2) The first two verses of her canticleMy soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my savioralso echo Ps 35:9 and Hab 3:18. Indeed, virtually every verse in
the Magnificat has a parallel in the Old Testament. Those allusions underscore the point made in the canticles conclusion, namely, that what
God is about to accomplish in Jesus fulfills all the promises which God
has made to Israel in the course of its history.
In calling herself the handmaiden of the Lord, Mary identifies with the
anawim. She calls attention to the lowliness of her condition in life as a
way of giving God entire credit for what He has accomplished in her. (Lk
1:48) God has exalted her into a source of blessing for all generations.
They will bless Mary for the universal salvation which God has accomplished through her. Moreover, what God has done in Mary manifests
His holiness. (Lk 1:49)
In the second strophe of her canticle, Mary points to Gods action in
her as typical of His constant vindication of the lowly who reverence
Him. God has toppled the mighty from their thrones but exalted those
of low estate. He has fed the hungry but sent the rich away empty. (Lk
1:50-3) Although Luke uses the past tense to describe these saving acts of
God, one should probably also take these verses as a foreshadowing of the
social transformation which God will begin to accomplish in the ministry of Jesus. By using the past tense Luke would seem to endow the divine saving actions soon to occur with historical inevitability.
In the conclusion of the Magnificat, Mary acclaims the saving act God
is accomplishing specifically in Jesus. He will fulfill the promises He has
made to Israel over the generations. (Lk 1:54-5) The conclusion thus
locates the saving ministry of Jesus and His messianic reversal of values
within the context of salvation history. Any promise made by God in the
past will find its fulfillment now in Him.
Mary pronounces her canticle in response to Elizabeths blessing. It
therefore sanctions what Elizabeth has just said and develops it. Elizabeth
340
has proclaimed Jesus the messiah whom John will serve. Mary in response
attributes the messiahs coming to Gods constant care and concern for
the lowly of this earth. Gods choice of one of the anawim as the messiahs
mother proves that abiding concern. As messiah, Jesus will turn the social
order upside down by exalting the lowly and deposing the powerful and
rich. Finally, Jesus ministry fulfills all of Gods saving promises to Israel
and effects a universal salvation which encompasses all generations. As
we shall see, Luke will develop all these themes in the course of his gospel
and of Acts.13
Two Births
For some unexplained reason, Mary departs before Johns birth. (Lk 1:56)
Her departure probably reflects Lukes narrative concern not to include
in his account of Johns birth personages involved in Jesus birth. Different casts of characters at each birth dramatize the different providential
roles which the two infants will each play in salvation history.
After Elizabeth gives birth to John, on the day of his circumcision she
insists that he bear the name assigned him by the angel. When relatives
protest, Zechariah decides the matter by writing on a tablet: John is his
name. The dumb Zechariah then bursts into speech to the astonishment of those present and of all who hear of these events. (Lk 1:57-65)
The loosing of Zechariahs tongue confirms the name assigned the child
by the angel. It also sets the stage for Zechariahs testimony to John, the
culminating event of this incident. Zechariah utters a canticle which parallels Marys. It describes the salvation which is dawning in the births of
John and of Jesus and reasserts the fact that John will play only a subordinate role in the events which will soon unfold.
The first part of the Benedictus develops the conclusion of the Magnificat.
In raising up Jesus, God is in fact visiting Israel and redeeming it from
bondage to its enemies. This act of divine salvation fulfills all the prophecies made to Israel in ages past. Specifically, the messiahs arrival makes
good the divine promises to the house of David. Those promises include
Nathans prophecy (2 Sam 7:4-16) and other messianic prophecies.
Jesus coming also fulfills the covenant which God made with Abraham.
Luke alludes to Gen 17:1-27 where God promises to multiply Abrahams
13. Cf. Joel B. Green, The Social Status of Mary in Luke 1,5-2,52, Biblica, 73(1992),
pp. 457-472; Jesus Luzarraga, Las Versiones Siriacas del Magnificat, Estudios
Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 103-122; Joaquin Gonzales Echegaray, Las tres Ciudades de
los Evangelios de la Infancia de Jess: Nazaret, Beln y Jerusalen, Estudios Biblicos,
50(1992), pp. 85-102; Jean Irigoin, La composition rhythmique des cantiques de
Luc, Revue Biblique, 98(1991), pp. 5-50; David Peter Seccombe, Possessions and the
Poor in Luke-Acts (Linz: Studien zum Neuen Testament und seine Umwelt, 1982);
Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp. 330-366; NJBC, 43:21-23; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke,
I, pp. 356-371; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 132-162; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 65-71.
341
offspring like the stars of the heaven and sands of the seashore. Jesus
begins a new Israel by sealing a new covenant between God and humanity. That covenant effects in turn a universal salvation by drawing the
nations in to Gods saving plan. (Acts 1:7-9) The new covenant empowers the new and universal Israel to serve God without fear of its enemies
and in holiness and righteousness all the days of our life. (Lk 1:68-75)
In fact, Lukes Zechariah says that God has already accomplished all these
things. Once again, Luke probably uses the aorist tense as a way of asserting
the historical inevitability of what God is about to accomplish in Jesus.
Zechariahs canticle suddenly switches to the future tense, as the old
man addresses the infant John in prophecy. Zechariah echoes Gabriels
words concerning the child. (Lk 1: 15-7) John will himself engage in a
prophetic ministry: he will go before the Lord to prepare His ways, to
give knowledge of salvation to His people in the forgiveness of their sins.
(Lk 1:76-7) In contrast to Matthew, Luke follows Mark in attributing
the forgiveness of sins to Johns baptism. (Lk 3:3) Israel will, however,
gain full knowledge of salvation in the forgiveness of sins, when, through
the tender mercy of God, the messiah dawns upon her like the sun. In a
cryptic allusion to the resurrection, Zechariah prophesies that the messianic light will especially console those who sit in darkness and the shadow
of death. In addition, Jesus will bring the messianic gift of peace: not
just the absence of war but harmony, well-being, prosperity, security, and
right order in society. This concluding promise of peace echoes the messianic reversal of values which Marys Magnificat celebrates.14
The story of Johns circumcision closes with a summary statement about
his growth:
And the child grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness till the day of his manifestation to Israel. (Lk 1:80)
This final allusion to John in the infancy narrative ties it explicitly to

Johns preaching in the deserts east of Jerusalem. It also foreshadows the
summary of Jesus hidden life which closes Lukes infancy narrative.15 (Lk
2:39-40)
Luke has now set the stage for the birth of the messiah. While Matthews
infancy narrative seems to have assumed that Joseph and Mary lived in
14. Cf. Warren Carter, Zechariah and the Benedictus (Luke 1, 68-79): Practicing What
He Preaches, Biblica, 69(1988), pp. 239-247.
15. Fitzmyer deems it plausible that John received his education with the Essenes in the
Judean desert; Cf. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Dead Sea Scrolls and Early Christianity,
Theology Digest, 42(1995), 303-322. See also: NJBC: 43:24-26; Brown, Birth of the
Messiah, pp. 367-392; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 372-390; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 44-48;
Evans, Luke, pp. 177-188; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 63-198; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 72-79.
342
Bethlehem prior to Jesus birth and came to Nazareth only after they
returned from Egypt, Luke places Jesus conception in Nazareth and has
to explain how it came about that he was born in Bethlehem. Luke finds
his explanation in a census decree by Caesar Augustus which required all
Roman subjects to enroll in the town of their birth. As a consequence,
Joseph must take the pregnant Mary from Nazareth to Bethlehem, where
she gives birth to Jesus. (Lk 2:1-7)
Lukes census locates Jesus birth in the pax augustiniana; but secular
history remains silent about any census of the whole world under Augustus,
although more limited census taking did occur during his reign. Luke
may have known of such a limited census; but, if so, the evangelist exaggerates its scope. The universal census of which Luke speaks would have
prepared Roman tax rolls. Those taxes caused enormous suffering especially among the poor. Luke, then, in recording a world-wide census implicitly depicts the Roman empire as a world-wide system of economic
and political oppression. Later in his gospel, Luke will insist on the Satanic character of the kingdoms of this world, among which Rome held
pride of place when Luke wrote. (Lk 4:6-7) As we shall also see, the message of the angel after Jesus birth will suggest that Jesus rather than
Augustus reigns as the true imperator of the entire world. Lukes Gentile
Christians must choose between the Satanic Roman empire and the reign
of God which Jesus embodies and proclaims.16
Possibly because of the overcrowding in Bethlehem, Mary swaddles the
newborn Jesus and cradles him in a manger, although in first-century
Palestine peasants did keep animals in their homes.17 (Lk 2:7) The swaddling suggests that Jesus receives Marys loving care. The manger may
allude to Is 1:3: The ox knows its owner; and the donkey knows the
manger of its lord; but Israel has not known me; my people has not understood me. If so, Luke would be suggesting that the coming of Jesus
abrogates this divine complaint against Israel, since the shepherds to whom
the angel will announce Jesus birth seek Him out immediately and rejoice when they find Him.
I find the preceding interpretations possible, but somewhat forced. I
believe instead that the angels message to the shepherds probably provides the key for the symbolism of the manger. The humble resting place
of the infant messiah contrasts with the exalted titles with which the
16. Cf. Royce L.B. Morris, Why Augoustos? A Note to Luke 2.1, New Testament Studies,
38(1992), pp. 142-144; G.D. Kilpatrick, Luke 2:4 and Leviticus 25:10, Zeitschrift
fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 80(1989), pp. 264-265; Paul W. Walaskay,
And So We Came to Rome: The Political Perspective of St. Luke (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1983).
17. Cf. L. Paul Trudinger, No Room in the Inn: A Note on Luke 2:7, Expository Times,
102(1991), pp. 172-173; A.J. Kerr, No Room in the kataluma, Expository Times,
103(1991), pp. 15-16.
343
angel names Jesus. The humble character of Jesus first bed foreshadows
the fact that He will champion the cause of the poor. In so acting, He will
differ from the bone-crushing Davidic messiah for whom many Jews
hoped. He will also differ from Caesar Augustus and from all other imperial workers of oppression. (Lk 7:18-23) Less plausibly, some commentators see an allusion to the eucharist in the Lukes identification of Jesus
resting place with a place for food.
The shepherds near the city of David remind the reader that David
kept sheep before his anointing as King. (1 Sam 16:1-13) Their presence
at the manger therefore alludes to Jesus messianic dignity. It also identifies the new born messiah with the disenfranchised peasantry, with the
people of the land.
An angel appears to the watching shepherds as the glory of the Lord
descends upon them. (Lk 2:8-9) The appearance of the divine glory lends
special divine sanction to the angels message. The angel tells the terrified
shepherds not to fear:
Be not afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which will
come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a
Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will
find a babe wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger. (Lk 2:10-2)
With a uniquely Lukan narrative touch, the angel speaks the language
of the imperial decree which announced the birth of an heir to the emperor. The angels proclamation therefore tacitly contrasts Jesus, the poor,
humble messiah and Lord, with the proud and oppressive Caesar Augustus.
The angelic message also points to Jesus, not to Caesar, as the true ruler
of the world.
In addition, the angels message alludes to Is 9:5-6, which announces
the birth of the Wonder Counselor, Divine Hero, Everlasting Father, and
Prince of Peace. Luke, however, has substituted for these Isaian formulas
three titles from the early Christian kerygma: Savior, Christ, and Lord.
The angels message, therefore, actually begins the proclamation of the
gospel, of the good news which the angelic hymn celebrates. As noted
above, therefore, the resting place of the new born Savior contrasts sharply
with the exalted titles which the angel has just conferred on Him. The
contrast points to Jesus as a different kind of messiah, a lowly and humble
one. The titles which the angel gives to Jesus further explain that difference. As messiah, Jesus will bring a universal salvation grounded in His
divine Lordship.18
18. Cf. Jos OCallaghan, Detalle Critico en Lc 2,11, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp.
157- 160; Mark L. Strauss, The Davidic Messiah in Luke-Acts (Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, Ltd., 1995); Navone, op.cit., pp. 88-94.
344
The angel is suddenly surrounded by a multitude of the heavenly army,

who chant: Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among
those on whom His favor rests. (Lk 2:14) The appearance of the chanting angels in the midst of the divine glory gives the shepherds a glimpse
of the heavenly court of God, where angels sing the divine praises. Now,
however, the angels glorify God because Jesus has brought to humans the
eschatological gift of peace together with the justice and right order which
that peace connotes. The messianic era of peace and of justice comes to
those who receive it as Gods free gift.19
The angels first announce the divine gift of peace and justice to the
lowly, ostracized shepherds, to men whose profession rendered them legally impure. The shepherds foreshadow all the little ones, the anawim
to whom Jesus will bring good news, the ostracized whom God will gather
in. (Lk 7:22-23) The astonished shepherds obey the angel and spread the
good news about Jesus to the wonderment of all who hear their testimony. Their witness to the newborn Jesus foreshadows the apostles proclamation of the risen Lord. (Lk 2:15-20)
Luke completes his second diptych by parallelling Jesus circumcision
and Johns naming and by describing Jesus presentation in the temple.
The parallel accounts both describe a birth, a naming of the child, and
the wonderment which the birth occasions. Luke also describes briefly
each childs growth. Once again, however, the circumstances of Jesus
circumcision outstrip by far those of Johns. John the precursor must give
way before Jesus, who comes as Savior, Christ, and Lord.
After eight days, Jesus undergoes circumcision and receives the name
given Him by the angel, a name which foreshadows the salvation He will
bring. (Lk 2:21) Jesus circumcision and naming parallels Johns. Lukes
Mary treasures and ponders all these events in her heart, in the deepest
center of her being. (Lk 2:19) Mary appears again as the type of the
faithful disciple. In his portrait of Mary, the evangelist is also implicitly
instructing the reader about how to read Jesus story. One must meditate
it at the deepest center of the self, not study it with shallow, intellectual
curiosity.20
The Presentation in the Temple
The infancy narrative began in the Jerusalem temple. It ends there as well
when Mary and Joseph there present Jesus, their firstborn son. The presentation culminates in Simeons pronouncement concerning Jesus. The
19. Cf. Ross S. Kilpatrick, The Greek Syntax of Luke 2.14, New Testament Studies,
34(1988), pp. 472-475.
20. Cf. Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp. 393-434; NJBC, 43:27-30; Fitzmyer, Gospel of
Luke, I, pp. 391-417; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 199-229; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 79-90.
345
finding in the temple, which mediates between the infancy gospel and
Jesus ministry, will culminate in Jesus own pronouncement about Himself.
Although only women needed purification after childbirth, Luke says
that Mary and Joseph went up to the temple for purification. Luke also
alludes to the Torahs requirement that every first-born male be consecrated specially to God. (Lk 2:22-3; cf. Ex 13:2, 12, 15; Num 8:15-6)
Mary and Joseph sacrifice the offering of the poor: a pair of turtledoves, two young pigeons, presumably because they cannot afford the
more expensive sacrifice of a one-year old lamb. (Cf. Lev 12:8) Their
offering accords with Josephs lowly social status as tektos.
The trip to the temple creates the occasion for the holy family to encounter the old man Simeon, whom the evangelist describes as saintly:
righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel. By the consolation of Israel Luke means its redemption by the messiah. The Holy
Breath of God not only rests upon Simeon but has assured him that he
will see the messiah before he dies. The divine Breath leads Simeon to
Mary and Joseph. (Lk 2:25-7) The old man takes the child in his arms
and blesses God:
Lord (despota), now you let your servant (doulon) go in peace, according to
your word; for my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared
in the sight of all peoples, a light of revelation to the Gentiles, and the
glory of your people Israel. (Lk 2:29-33)
In the Septuagint the Greek term despota translates Adonai. Taken

together the two terms despota and doulon suggest that Simeon acknowledges Gods absolute dominion over the world and over life and
death. The Breath-inspired Simeon also recognizes Jesus as the one who
brings the salvation for which he longs. The images in the Nunc Dimittis
echo a number of passages in Isaiah which speak of Israel as Gods instrument for effecting a universal salvation. (Is 40:5, 42:6, 46:13, 49:6,
52:9-10) Jesus, the glory of Israel, shines as a saving light upon all the
nations. Simeon, then, in his holiness and Breath-inspired state, spontaneously recognizes what the people of Nazareth will refuse to acknowledge at the beginning of Jesus ministry: namely, that God has chosen
Israel for the sake of saving the Gentiles.21 (Lk 4:16-30)
In Simeons testimony to Mary, however, the infancy narrative takes a
turn toward the cross. The old man blesses both parents but says to Mary
in particular:
21. Cf. Alfonso Simon Muoz, Cristo, Luz de Gentiles: Puntualizaciones sobre Lc 2.32,
Estudios Biblicos, 46(1988) pp. 27-44.
346
Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising (anastasin) of many in Israel,
and for a sign which will be contradictedan sword shall pierce your own
soulso that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed. (Lk 2:34-5)
Jesus, the bringer of a universal salvation, will meet opposition within

Israel. Those who contradict Him will fall; but those who do not will rise
with Him. The noun anastasin connotes resurrection. The fact that many
Jews will believe in Jesus dramatizes the Jewish origins of Christian faith.
Simeon prophesies that conflict will characterize the revelation which
Jesus brings. That same conflict will dramatize where the hearts of Gods
people lie. They must either accept or reject the universal salvation which
Jesus beings.
Simeon addresses this message especially to Mary, as the one who typifies the believing disciple. The sword to which Simeon alludes has received a variety of implausible interpretations. The image seems, however, to connote discrimination and judgment rather than destruction.
(Cf. Ezek 5:1-2, 6:8-9, 12:14-6; Mt 10:34-6) Mary, as the type of the believing disciple, will face the same radical choices which confront all believers,
although as the type of the faithful disciple she will choose to rise with Jesus.
In Acts Luke will include Mary among the disciples who gather in the upper
room to pray for the coming of the divine Breath. (Acts 1:14)
Later in his gospel, Luke will insist that Marys obedient faith counts
even more than the fact that she gave birth to Jesus. A woman, on hearing Jesus refute those who accuse him of exorcising in the power of
Beelzebul, cries out: Blessed is the womb who bore you and the breasts
which you sucked! Jesus, however, replies: Blessed rather are those who
hear the word of God and keep it. (Lk 11:27-8) The woman fulfills
Marys prophecy in the Magnificat that later generations will call her blessed.
Only the willingness to do Gods will wins the blessing of God. If Mary
enjoys Gods blessing, then she does so in virtue of her obedient faith.22
Anna the prophetess, a widow of eighty-four who lives in the temple
and dedicates herself to fasting and prayer day and night, also testifies
about Jesus to all of those who, like Simeon, long for the messianic redemption of Israel. Anna foreshadows the great apostle of the Gentiles
who like her will worship God day and night and pray regularly in the
temple. (Cf. Acts 26:7) The fact that she is a prophetess filled with the
Holy Breath also foreshadows Pentecost day when the divine Breath will
come to the disciples to transform them into a prophetic community
which bears witness to Jesus. (Acts 2:1-41) Hence, Annas prophetic testimony to Jesus also foreshadows His proclamation by the apostles as the
risen Christ. (Lk 2:36-8) So, in their own way, do the other Breath-filled
22. Cf. Alfonso Simon Muoz, A Permanencia de Israel: Una nueva Lecture de Lc
2,34a, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 191-223.
347
testimonies to Jesus scattered throughout the infancy gospel.23 (Lk 1:41,

67, 25-27)
The Finding in the Temple
After Jesus presentation, Luke summarizes His boyhood in Nazareth in
terms which parallel Johns maturation in the desert. (Lk 1:80, 2:40) The
return to Nazareth after the Presentation (Lk 1:80, 2:40) sets the stage
for the finding of the boy Jesus in the temple. As we have seen, this final
story about the hidden life marks a transition from the infancy narrative
to Lukes account of Jesus adult ministry. At the age of twelve Jesus returns to the temple. He and His parents go up to Jerusalem for the feast
of Passover. Their pilgrimage foreshadows Jesus final journey to Jerusalem prior to His death at Passover time. The entire incident also provides
an opportunity for the boy Jesus to make a personal pronouncement about
Himself, one which parallels and develops the pronouncements others
have made about Him in the infancy gospel. Later pronouncements about
Jesus in the gospel proper will further enhance and clarify these early
pronouncements.
When Mary and Joseph return to Nazareth after the Passover, Jesus
remains in Jerusalem. After three days of distraught searching, Jesus parents find Him in the temple listening to the teachers of the Law and
asking them questions. Jesus has joined the ranks of disciples studying
Torah. The boy Jesus desire to study Torah with the temple teachers
foreshadows the mature Jesus debates with His adversaries about the true
intent of the Law.
When Mary complains to Jesus that He has caused her and Joseph
much anxiety as they searched for Him, He replies: Why did you seek
me? Did you not know that I would be in the things of My Father? (en
tois tou Patros mou) (Lk 2:41-9) Mary and Joseph find themselves baffled
by Jesus reply; and it continues to baffle exegetes who translate en tois
tou Patros mou in three different ways: 1) about My Fathers business,
2) among My Fathers people, or 3) in My Fathers house. The third
translation has the greatest plausibility and fits the context best. Mary
and Joseph had no need to seek for Jesus because they should have known
they would find Him in His Fathers house, i.e., in the temple.
Jesus reply, if historically grounded, indicates that by the age of twelve
He already had an experience of God as Abba. It also suggests that He
saw that relationship as making a more fundamental claim on Him than
23. Cf. J.K. Elliot, Annas Age (Luke 2:36-37), Novum Testamentum, 30(1988), pp.
100- 102; Paul S. Minear, Lukes Use of the Birth Stories in Studies in Luke-Acts, pp.
111-130; NJBC: 43:32-34; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 418-433; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
49-53; Evans, Luke, pp. 209-221; Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp. 435-470; NJBC,
43:32-34; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 418-433; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 230-258.
348
any other relationship. Moreover, as the culminating testimony of the

infancy narrative, Jesus reply places His Abba experience at the heart of
the message of salvation which He as savior, messiah, and Lord will bring.
Mary the type of the faithful disciple, once again ponders the words of
her son in her heart.
Mary and Joseph spend three days searching for Jesus. They had journeyed for a day before discovering Him missing. (Lk 2:44-5) A second
day would have brought them back to Jerusalem. They would then have
spent a third day looking for Jesus in the holy city itself. Since Jesus
journey to Jerusalem as a boy of twelve foreshadows His final journey,
crucifixion, and resurrection, Jesus three days of separation from His
parents possibly foreshadows the three days He will spend in the tomb.
Jesus sacrifices His desire to study Torah in the temple to His obedience to His parents: He returns to Nazareth, submits to their authority
and thus grows in wisdom, stature, and favor with both God and humans. (Lk 2:51-2) This final description of Jesus growth parallels Lukes
earlier account of His maturation (Lk 2:40) and for a second time recalls
Johns coming of age in the desert.24 (Lk 1:80)
Both Matthew and Luke depict Jesus birth as a radical new beginning in
salvation history. Matthew, the Jewish Christian, portrays Jesus as
Immanuel and therefore as the fulfillment of Jewish salvation history.
Luke, writing as he does for Gentiles, focuses on Jesus relationship to
John the Baptizer. As Lukes story unfolds, John the Baptizer emerges as
the last and greatest Old Testament prophet, while Jesus, the son of God
and Breath-baptizer foretold by John, stands at the center of salvation
history.
Moreover, the outpouring of the Holy Breath which accompanies Jesus
birth foreshadows the Breath-baptism which He, not John, will effect.
The Breaths Pentecostal arrival inaugurates the final age of salvation, the
age of the Church. It also reveals the universal scope of Gods saving will
by incorporating the Gentiles into the new Israel.
This chapter has compared and contrasted Lukes and Matthews infancy narratives. Let us now turn to Lukes account of Jesus public ministry. To this task the following chapter addresses itself.
24. Cf. Alberto Valentini, La Rivelazione di Gesu dodicenne al Templo (Lc 2, 41-52),
Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 261-304; Antionio Rodriguez Carmona, Jess
Comeinze su Vida de Adulto (Lc 2, 41-52), Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 179-189;
NJBC: 43:35-36; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 434-448; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 53-58; Evans,
Luke, pp. 221-227; Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp. 271-499; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke,
I, pp. 434-462; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 259-275.
Chapter 13: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Luke
349
Chapter 13
Positive Dramatic Linkages in Luke
This chapter examines the way in which Luke adapts to his own narrative
purposes the positive dramatic linkages which he finds in Mark. In both
gospels, Jesus relates positively to John the Baptizer, to the Father, and to
the divine Breath.
This chapter divides into three parts. Part one examines Jesus relationship to John. Part two focuses on His relationship to the Father. Part
three meditates His relationship to the divine Breath. In examining each
relationship, I shall compare and contrast Luke with Mark and with
Matthew.
(I)
Luke dates the beginning of Johns preaching more precisely than any
other evangelist: namely, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius
Caesar.1 (Lk 3:1-3) Moreover, like Mark and in contrast to Matthew, Luke
describes the baptism John preaches as one of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Matthew, as we have seen, prefers to reserve the forgiveness
of sins to the paschal mystery. (Lk 3:3) In introducing Johns ministry,
Luke also alludes to his infancy gospel by designating John as the son of
Zechariah. (Lk 3:2)
John the Baptizer and Jesus
Like the other synoptics, Luke identifies John with the voice in the wilderness described in second Isaiah; but Luke cites the text of Isaiah more
extensively than the other two evangelists as a way of developing the theme
of universal salvation in Christ so prominent in his gospel:
The voice of one crying in the wilderness: prepare the way of the Lord,
make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain
and hill shall be brought low, and the crooked shall be made straight, and
the rough ways smooth; and all flesh shall see the salvation of God. (Lk
3:4-6; Is 40:3-5)
The text from Isaiah describes a second exodus. Its citation portrays the
salvation foreshadowed in the preaching of John as a new liberation. The
reference to all flesh asserts its universality.
Luke omits Marks description of Johns garments and diet. Both Mark
and Matthew describe John in ways which suggest both his asceticism
1. Cf. August Strobel, Pldoyer fr Lukas: Zur Stimmigkeit des chronistischen Rahmens
von Lk 3.1, New Testament Studies, 41(1995), pp. 466-469.
350
and his mission as a second Elijah. Luke has indicated in his gospel preface that he likes a well-ordered narrative. (Lk 1:1-4) Quite possibly, then,
Luke may have omitted these descriptive details because he anticipated
that his Gentile Christians would probably miss Marks allusions or because he makes both theological points more clearly elsewhere in his narrative. Like Matthew and Mark, however, Luke finds it significant that
John preached in the desert, from which Israel expected Gods final saving action to emerge.2
Like Matthew, Luke shows a concern to preserve more of Johns teaching than Mark, who records only the Baptizers prophecy of the coming
of a mightier one who would baptize with a sanctifying Breath. Drawing,
possibly, on Q, Luke records substantially the same sayings of John as
Matthew, but Lukes John, in contrast to Matthews, addresses them to
the crowds in general rather than to the Pharisees and Sadducees. In the
process Luke downplays the conflict between John, on the one hand, and
the Pharisees and the high priests, on the other, a conflict which Matthew enhances.
Of the three synoptics, Luke gives the completest account of the
Baptizers preaching. Lukes John develops three interrelated themes: repentance in the face of an immanent eschatological judgment, the ethical
transformation which repentance demands, and predictions about the
coming of the messiah.
In the eschatological section of Johns discourse, Luke has the Baptizer
call the multitudes who come to him a brood of vipers. Matthew, as we
have seen, applies the same epithet to the Pharisees and Sadducees. On
the lips of Lukes John, the image probably connotes the corrupting and
dangerous power of unrepented sin.
Lukes John warns the crowds that racial descent from Abraham offers
no guarantee of salvation: only the works born of repentance have the
power to save. Like Matthews John, Lukes also warns of an immanent
divine judgment: Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every
tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
(Lk 3:7-9; Mt 3:7-10)
Moreover, in Luke as in Matthew, John warns that God can raise up
children of Abraham from inert stones. In both gospels, the warning foreshadows the incorporation of the Gentiles into the kingdom; but Johns
words accord especially well with Lukes stress on a universalist soteriology.
Luke, moreover, shows more concern than either Matthew or Mark to
preserve a sample of the Baptizers moral teaching. Luke does so in a
dialogue between the Baptizer and the repentant multitudes who flock to
University Press, 1968), pp. 42-45; Robert J. Muller, Elijah, John, and Jesus in the
Gospel of Luke, New Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 611-622.
351
hear him. In contrast to Matthews stony-hearted Pharisees and Sadducees,

Lukes crowds respond positively to Johns warning about immanent judgment. They ask the Baptizer what repentance demands of them in practice. (Lk 3:7)
John responds: He who has two coats, let him share with him who has
none; and let him who has food, do likewise. (Lk 3:11) To the tax collectors, John says: Collect no more than is appointed you. (Lk 3:13) To
the soldiers, presumably Jewish men in the service of Herod Antipas,
who collaborated with the occupying Romans in policing Palestine,
John responds: Rob no one by violence or by false accusation, and be
content with your wages. (Lk 3:14) Luke, in other words, situates John
in the tradition of the great Old Testament prophets who demanded as
the condition for authentic worship of Yahweh the creation of a just social order.
As we shall see, Lukes Jesus places the sharing of the physical supports
of life with the needy at the heart of the moral demands of entry into the
kingdom. John demands moral transformation as the condition for avoiding immanent judgment; but he does not recommend political subversion. He does not forbid the tax collectors to collect Roman taxes; he
only forbids extortion. He does not tell the soldiers to quit the army, only
not to use a position of power as a basis for exploitation, bribery, and
injustice. He requires of all an active compassion for the poor.3 Lukes
account of Johns preaching suggests, then, that Jesus may have derived
His messianic reversal of values in His own teaching in part from listening to John.
Luke follows his sample of Johannine moral teaching with an example
of the Baptizers messianic message. Asked by the crowds if he is the messiah, John equivalently denies it. He responds with his prediction of the
coming of one mightier than himself who will baptize, not just with water but with a sanctifying Breath and with fire. The mightier one, not
John, will have messianic authority. (Lk 3:16) Luke, then, asserts more
clearly than either Matthew or Mark that John looked upon the coming
mightier one as the messiah, even though, as we have seen, in Matthews
gospel, when John sends to Jesus to ask Him if He is the one who is to
come, the question suggests implicitly that John did in fact equate the
two figures.
Luke, moreover, underscores the fact that the baptism which the disciples will confer on others at Pentecost fulfills Johns prophecy of the
Breath baptizer. Both at the end of his gospel and at the beginning of
Acts, Luke portrays the risen Christ telling the disciples to go to Jerusalem where He will send them the promise of my Father. (Lk 24:49;
Acts 1:4) The phrase promise of my Father alludes to Johns prophecy,
3. Cf. NJBC, 43:45-46.
352
which the arrival of the Pentecostal Breath will fulfill. On Pentecost the
Holy Breath will come from the ascended Christ in order to create by an
outpouring of charisms the Church into which people can then be baptized. (Acts 2:1-41)
As in Matthew, Lukes John points to Jesus as the messianic instrument
of divine judgment.
His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor, and to
gather the wheat into his granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire. (Lk 3:17; Mt 3:12)
Here as in Matthews account, fire symbolizes the holiness of God which

transforms and purifies believers but consumes the unrepentant. In Luke,
however, this Johannine prophecy has connotations absent from Matthews
text. In using the winnowing fork, the farmer relied on the wind to separate out the grain from the chaff. The same images of wind and fire will
dominate Lukes account of Pentecost. On Pentecost day, while a great
wind blows, the tongues like fire will descend on the disciples in the
upper room. The fiery tongues foreshadow the purification and judgment which the proclamation of the risen Christ will effect. Moreover, as
we shall see, like the message of the angel to the shepherds, the fiery
tongues also symbolize in their own way a choice between Jesus and imperial Rome. (Acts 2:1-5)
Luke closes his account of Johns preaching by underscoring the continuity between the Baptizer and Jesus. The evangelist actually describes
Johns preaching as an anticipatory proclamation of the gospel. He asserts
that John evangelized the people (euaggelizeto ton laon). Luke also records
the themes which unite the preaching of both men: conversion, repentance of sin, immanent judgment, and moral reform in accord with fundamental demands of covenant religion. As we shall see later, Luke also
recognizes significant discontinuity between Jesus and John.4
Luke alone records that John publicly denounced Herod Antipas not
simply for having adulterously married his brothers wife but also for all
the other wicked deeds which Herod had committed. (Lk 3:19-20) In
other words, of the three synoptic evangelists, Luke only portrays John as
having engaged in a wide ranging critique of the evils and injustices of
Antipass regime. Luke, moreover, makes this sweeping moral and political critique the reason for Herods placing John under arrest. In Luke, the
wider scope of Johns verbal assault on Antipas also endows Jesus endorsement of John with broader political significance than concern with
4. Cf. Robert L. Webb, The Activity of John the Baptists Expected Figure at the
Threshing Floor (Matthew 3:12=Luke 3:17), Journal for the Study of the New
Testament, 43(1991) pp. 103-111; NJBC, 43:47.
353
family values. (Lk 3:19-20) Of the three synoptic evangelists, Lukes

account of the relationship between the Baptizer and Herod best approximates that of Josephus.5 (Cf. Josephus, Antiquities, 116-119) Only Luke
among the synoptics will portray Herod as conspiring with Rome in Jesus
death. For Luke, client kings like Herod form an integral part of the
oppressive political and economic power structures which his Gentile
Christians should regard as anti-Christ. Moreover, condemnation of political and economic oppression accords well with Lukes concern to warn
his Gentile converts against the corrupting influences of Greco-Roman
mores.6 (Lk 4:6)
Luke modifies Marks account of Jesus baptism in several ways. As we
have seen, the first Christians found the fact that Jesus had submitted to
the baptism of another religious leader embarrassing. Luke reflects that
embarrassment by refusing to describe the baptism itself. Instead, He
depicts Jesus praying on the banks of the Jordan after John has finished
baptizing. (Lk 3:21; Mk 1:9; Mt 3:13-6)
Luke throughout his narrative lays greater emphasis on Jesus prayerfulness than the other evangelists. In fact, Jesus prayer in Luke prefaces
any event of special significance. Accordingly, only Lukes Jesus prays at
the moment of the Breaths descent. (Lk 3:21; Mk 1:10; Mt 3:16) Jesus
prayer also assimilates the Breaths descent upon Him to Her descent on
the disciples on Pentecost. On Pentecost, after the disciples gather in the
upper room, presumably to continue their constant prayer for the Fathers
promise, the Holy Breath descends on them in tongues like fire.7
(Acts 2:1)
Like the other synoptics, Luke has the Holy Breath descend on Jesus
under the sign of a dove. Like Matthew, Luke distinguishes Jesus relationship to the Breath from the disciples relationship to Her. She descends on Jesus under the sign of the dove in order to begin His revelation as Gods pet, as the beloved of God and beginning of a new Israel.
(Lk 3:22; Ps 74:19) She descends on the disciples under the sign of fire:
i.e., in purification and in judgment.
Because Luke separates temporally the descent of the dove from Johns
baptizing, Luke attenuates somewhat the rich baptismal symbolism in
Marks account of Jesus baptism. Mark, as we have seen, uses the image
of the Breath over the waters and of the dove over the waters in order to
evoke ideas of a new creation and of a new covenant. Moreover, unlike
Mark, Luke has the dove descend on Jesus in bodily form. (Lk 3:22) The
5. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 56-62.
6. Cf. NJBC, 43:48; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 449-478; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 63-68;
Evans, Luke, pp. 229-244.
7. Cf. James D.G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit (London: SCM Press, 1970);, pp.
23-54; Ledger Feldkaemper, S.V.D., Der betende Jesus als Heilsmittler nach Lukas
(Bonn: Styler Verlag, 1978), pp. 40-50; George, op. cit., pp. 87-108.
354
physicality of the dove further mutes its symbolic character. As we shall

see, Luke also naturalizes the symbolic darkness which in Mark settles
on Israel as Jesus hangs on the cross. Luke calls the darkness an eclipse.8
(Lk 23:43)
Luke, like Mark and in contrast to Matthew, portrays the theophany
which Jesus experiences during His messianic commissioning as a personal experience of Jesus Himself. As Jesus prays, the heavens open, an
apocalyptic sign of the last age of salvation, and the Holy Breath descends.
Only after She descends does Jesus hear the Fathers voice personally.
Luke follows Mark in having the Father combine a verse from the messianic Psalm 2 and the first line of the first of the servant songs. The
Father says to Jesus: You are my beloved Son, with you I am well pleased.
(Lk 3:22) The Father, therefore, commissions Jesus as messiah, beloved
Son, and suffering servant. As in the other synoptics, the fact that the
Breath descends on Jesus before He hears the Fathers voice suggests that
He hears the Father speak through Her empowering enlightenment.9
In recording the controversy over fasting, Luke, in contrast to Mark
and Matthew, notes that the disciples of John not only fasted frequently
but also that they frequently prayed. (Lk 5:33) Later, Luke indicates that
the Baptizer gave his disciples instructions in how to pray. (Lk 11:1) These
additional details accord well with the evangelists narrative stress on the
importance of prayer.
Matthew has the disciples of John accost Jesus personally for not requiring his disciples to fast; but Luke follows Mark by having others raise
the question to Jesus. Mark leaves the questioner anonymous. Luke links
this controversy to another controversy with some Pharisees over table
fellowship with sinners. In Luke, it would appear that Pharisees question
Jesus about why His disciples do not fast. (Lk 5:30, 33)
Jesus gives substantially the same reply as in the other synoptics. He
says that wedding guests cannot fast in the presence of the bridegroom.
He thus assimilates Himself to the divine bridegroom of Israel, faithful in
His love for His chosen people despite their sinfulness. (Lk 5:34) Jesus
then assures the Pharisees that His disciples will fast when the bridegroom is taken from them, i.e, after Jesus death. Luke, then, follows
Mark by portraying fasting in the apostolic Church as an expression of
eschatological longing for Jesus return. Moreover, like Mark, Luke asserts that even though Jesus and His disciples did not undertake the optional fasts which the disciples of John and the Pharisees did, nevertheless, the Christian practice of fasting has sanction in Jesus attitudes.
8. Cf. Leander E. Keck, The Spirit and the Dove, New Testament Studies, 17(1970-1971),
pp. 41-67; NJBC: 43:49; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 479-487; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 68-72;
9. Cf. NJBC, 43:49; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 479-487; Bock, op. cit., I, pp.
331-347; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 117-119.
355
As in Mark, Lukes Jesus justifies a lack of asceticism on the part of His

disciples with the parables about the patch and the wine skins. Both
parables describe the novelty of what is happening in Jesus presence and
ministry. (Lk 5:36-9; Mk 2:20-2; Mt 9:16-7) Jesus questioners focus too
narrowly on traditional forms of piety. As a result, they cannot recognize
the entirely new initiative of divine grace which Jesus embodies. In all
this Luke follows Mark but focuses Jesus response on the Pharisees. Later,
as we shall see, Luke equates the leaven of the Pharisees with hypocrisy.
(Lk 12:1)
Luke also appends to the parable of the wine skins a saying of Jesus
unique to his gospel: And no one after drinking old wine desires new;
for he says, The old is good. (Lk 5:39) This proverb portrays Jesus as
offering new wine which the religiously conservative will probably find
unpalatable. The new wine would also have had eucharistic connotations
for Lukes readers; and it would probably have connoted the wine served
at the final messianic banquet.
The proverb makes another point as well. It cautions against a narrow
preoccupation with novelty which overlooks the value of older traditions.
The old is good. Lukes Jesus warns His Gentile disciples against
deracinating the kingdom from its foundations in the Old Testament.
The warning also undergirds Lukes polemic against the many Jews who
failed to recognize in the Christian community the fulfillment of Old
Testament prophecies.10
Luke, like Matthew, derives possibly from Q the tradition that the Baptizer, from his prison cell, sent disciples to ask Jesus if He is the one who
is to come. In Luke, however, the incident occurs after Jesus raises the
dead son of the widow of Nain. (Lk 7:11-7) Matthew makes no mention
of this miracle. Moreover, Luke links the two events by having Johns
disciples tell him about this astonishing resuscitation of the dead as well
as about the other things that Jesus is doing. (Lk 7:18) Moreover, Luke,
like Matthew, indicates that the question came right after Jesus had healed
and exorcised a large number of people. Luke has already made it clear
that John equates the Breath- baptizer with the messiah. In effect, Lukes
John asks Jesus: Are you the more powerful, messianic Breath-baptizer I
foretold? Jesus replies in Lukes narrative as He does in Matthews. Jesus
points to His miracles and proclamation of the gospel as signs that in the
kingdom which He is proclaiming and embodying the messianic age has
already arrived. Luke, however, suggests somewhat more explicitly that
resurrection above all characterizes the messianic age.
10. Cf. NJBC, 43:80; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 549-603; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
96-100; Evans, Luke, pp. 309-312; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 513-522; Ernst, op. cit., pp.
154-156.
356
As in Matthew, Lukes Jesus asserts that, because He has chosen to focus His ministry especially on the poor and disenfranchised, He has chosen a different kind of messianic identity from popular expectation. Jesus
differs too from the stern judgmental figure whom John had predicted.
As in Matthew, Lukes Jesus concludes His response with a beatitude:
And blessed is He who takes no offense at Me. (Lk 7:18-23; Mt 11:2-6)
Jesus is urging John, as he urged the Pharisees, not to let messianic preconceptions blind them to the unexpected reality which He, Jesus, embodies and proclaims.11
As in Matthews account, after the departure of Johns disciples, Lukes
Jesus eulogizes John as a courageous man, as an ascetic, and as more than
just a prophet. He has been sent by God to prepare the way for Jesus; and
his faithful accomplishment of that role even at the risk of his life qualifies him as the greatest among those born of women. Still, great as he is,
the least in the kingdom of heaven ranks before John. John prepares a
reality which surpasses anything he himself anticipates. (Lk 7:24-8) John,
then, bridges the first age of salvation in which God revealed Himself to
Israel, and the second age, the time of Jesus. In what concerns the second
age, however, the Baptizer plays a strictly subordinate role to Jesus, even
to the point of ranking behind Jesus disciples, since the Baptizer himself
failed to embrace the kingdom.12
Like Matthew, Luke then records the parable of the children in the
market place; but Lukes version probably better approximates the way in
which Jesus originally told it. In Lukes version of the parable, the fickle
children in the market place, who reject and slander John for his asceticism and Jesus for His lack of it, contrast with the children of wisdom.
(Lk 7:31-5; cf. Mt 11:16-9)
Luke, moreover, goes out of his way to identify the children of wisdom.
He notes that after Jesus encomium of John, the people, including the
tax collectors, justified God because they accepted Johns baptism of
repentance. The Pharisees and lawyers did not justify God because they
refused to repent at Johns preaching. The repentant crowds exemplify
the children of wisdom; the unrepentant lawyers and Pharisees, the children in the market place.13
Luke modifies significantly Marks account of Herods perception of
Jesus. In Mark, Herod superstitiously believes that Jesus is in fact the
murdered John returned to life. (Mk 6:16) Lukes Herod shows more
shrewdness. Luke notes that while some popularly regarded Jesus as John
11. Cf. NJBC, 43:43:96; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 662-676; Bock, op. cit., I, pp.
663- 666; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 188-191.
13. Cf. Wink, John the Baptist in the Gospel Tradition, pp. 54-55; NJBC, 43:97-98;
Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 662-682; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 121-125; Evans, Luke,
pp. 349- 359; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 666-686; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 191-195.
357
raised from the dead and others regarded him as Elijah or one of the
prophets, Herod himself recognized realistically that John still lay in his
grave. Still, the tyrant entertained considerable curiosity about Jesus, even
to the point of wanting to see Him with his own eyes. (Lk 9:7-9; cf. Lk
9:19) Herods curiosity will find fulfillment later during Jesus passion,
when Pilate sends Jesus to Herod for judgment. (Lk 23:6-12) Luke alone
among the evangelists records the encounter.
Herods remark about having beheaded John constitutes Lukes sole
comment on that event. He omits from his gospel any description of the
beheading itself. As we shall see, the omission heightens the direct conflict between Lukes Herod and Lukes Jesus.14
Matthew inserts in Jesus encomium to John the Baptizer Jesus teaching about the kingdom of heaven suffering violence. Luke places the same
teaching in Jesus journey discourse, as He goes up to Jerusalem for the
last time. Moreover, Luke modifies this saying in a way which better accords with his sense of salvation history. Matthews Jesus says: From the
days of John the Baptizer until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered
violence, and the violent take it by force. (Mt 11:12) Lukes Jesus says,
The law and the prophets were until John; since then the good news of the
kingdom of God is preached, and every one enters it violently. (Lk 16:16) In
Matthew the violence done to the kingdom probably refers to the violence
Herod is doing to John; but Luke insists that entry into the kingdom itself
happens violently. In Luke the violence probably symbolizes the trauma of
repentance and the sacrifices demanded by life in the kingdom.15
Moreover, in comparing Himself to John, Lukes Jesus distinguishes
between the time of the Law and prophets and the time of the kingdom;
but the evangelist immediately links the two periods by citing a pronouncement of Jesus which Matthew puts in the sermon on the mount.
Lukes Jesus says: But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than
for one dot of the Law to become void. (Lk 16:17) Matthews Jesus says:
For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a
dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Mt 5:18)
Clearly, for Luke, Jesus proclamation of the kingdom does not abolish
the moral demands of the Torah. Recall Jesus earlier pronouncement
that the old is good. Heaven and earth appear in both versions of this
pronouncement as images of the Law and prophets; but heaven and earth
symbolize something different in the Lukan and Matthean versions. In
Luke, they function as images of enduring stability, while Matthew portrays them as eventually perishing with this world.
14. Cf. NJBC, 43:112; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 756-760, 191-195; Johnson,
Gospel, pp. pp. 144-150; Evans, Luke, pp. 397-399; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 820-824;
Ernst, op. cit., pp. 223-224.
358
Even so, the two versions of this saying make fundamentally the same
point: Jesus did not view his proclamation of the kingdom as an abrogation of the Torah. Matthew typically develops this insight by alluding to
the theme of fulfillment. Luke makes no such allusion; but clearly the
evangelist desires his Gentile Christians to acknowledge the continuity
which links the new covenant to the old.16
Luke makes a final allusion to the Baptizer in Jesus final Jerusalem
ministry. Following Mark, Luke records how the chief priests challenged
Jesus to name the source of the authority with which He acted. Jesus
replies by asking by what authority John baptized. When they say they
do not know the origin of Johns authority, Jesus refuses to name the
origin of His authority. (Lk 20:1-8; Mk 11:23-33) The story in Luke
makes basically the same points as it does in the other synoptics. It indicates that Jesus recognized the prophetic character of Johns ministry and
claimed to act with a similar prophetic authority. The story also shows
Jesus endorsing Johns ministry to the end of His own career; and it also
challenges both the chief priests and the reader to acknowledge the prophetic authority of both Jesus and John.17
Like the other synoptic evangelists, Luke uses Jesus relationship to John
in order to describe fundamental realistic and moral conditions for assimilation to Jesus in the power of the divine Breath. Lukes Jesus differs
from John both in what He embodies and in what He accomplishes. In addition, Jesus, not John, baptizes with a sanctifying Breath and with fire.
Among the synoptic evangelists, however, Luke in some ways sharpens
the contrast between Jesus and John, even though he recognizes real continuity between the two. Lukes infancy narrative insists again and again
on Jesus superiority to John. Moreover, Lukes Jesus, as the Breath-baptizer,
stands at salvation historys pivotal center. While Jesus endorsed John, the
Baptizer apparently never endorsed Jesus and failed to enter the kingdom.
This section has considered the first of the positive dramatic linkages
in Luke. The following section examines the second: namely, Jesus relationship to the Father.
(II)
In Luke, as in the other synoptics, the term God (ho Theos) designates
the Father. Hence, I shall consider here the texts in which either term
occurs.18 Moreover, one discovers references to the Father scattered
16. Cf. NJBC, 43:150; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, 1114-1119; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 249257; Evans, Luke, pp. 605-610.
17. Cf. NJBC, 43:167-168; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1269-1276; Johnson, Gospel,
pp. 303-309; Evans, op. cit., pp. 691-695.
18. Cf. Navone, op.cit., pp. 51-55; John T. Squires, The Plan of God in Luke-Acts
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Robert L. Brawley, Centering on
359
throughout Lukes gospel: in the infancy narrative, in Lukes account of

Jesus Galilean ministry, in the journey discourse, in the passion narrative, and in Jesus resurrection appearances. I shall consider each cluster
of texts in turn.
The Father in the Infancy Narrative
In his infancy gospel, Luke uses the phrase before God several times.
The phrase also surfaces in the appearance of Jesus to the disciples on the
way to Emmaus. Elizabeth and Zechariah live righteous before God,
walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. Zechariah serves as priest before God. (Lk 1:6, 8) Moreover, the
angel Gabriel promises that John the Baptizer will be great before the
Lord because he will turn many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their
God. (Lk 1:15-6) The disciples on the way to Emmaus describe Jesus as
a prophet mighty in deed and word before God. (Lk 24:19) In Luke,
the phrase before God connotes obedient submission to the divine will.
Matthew uses the term God only once in his infancy narrative: namely,
in explaining the prophecy of Immanuel; but in Lukes infancy gospel,
God recurs frequently. In responding to Zechariahs request for a sign
that the angels message about John will prove true, Gabriel replies that
he stands in the presence of God. (Lk 1:19) Gabriel is sent from God to
announce to Mary that she will conceive the messiah in the power of
Gods Breath; and after greeting Mary, Gabriel assures her that she has
found favor with God. (Lk 1:26, 30) The God who sends the angelic
messenger holds the initiative in accomplishing all the events which the
angel foretells.
Jesus greatness stems from the fact that He is Son of the Most High.
He receives from Gods hands the throne of David which He will occupy
in perpetuity. (Lk 1:33) The Holy Breath who effects Jesus conception
acts in the power of the Most High, a Semitic euphemism for God. (Lk
1:34) Hence, Jesus miraculous conception through the creative power of
the Breath manifests that He is Gods Son. (Lk 1:34) Moreover, the omnipotence of God guarantees that the angels message to Mary will come
to pass. (Lk 1:37)
In the Magnificat, Mary acknowledges that God my Savior deserves
all the credit for her becoming mother of His Son. (Lk 1:46-7) Zechariah
too blesses God at the birth of John (Lk 1:64, 67) and foresees that as
prophet of the Most High John will prepare the way for the coming of
the Lord in obedience to a divine initiative. In the Benedictus Zechariah
also foretells that the ministry of Jesus will manifest Gods mercy. (Lk
God: Method and Message in Luke-Acts (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press,
1990).
360
1:78) As we shall see, Luke tells Jesus story in a way which stresses the
divine forgiveness which He both announces and embodies.
At Jesus birth, the angelic hosts praise God for sending the messiah
into the world as its savior and Lord. (Lk 2:13) The shepherds praise God
for the revelation they have received. (Lk 2:20) When Mary and Joseph
present Jesus to the Lord in obedience to the demands of the Law,
Simeon addresses his Nunc Dimittis to God. (Lk 2:22-4, 26, 27-8) Anna
praises God for the coming of the messiah. (Lk 2:38) As the child Jesus grows,
the favor of God rests upon Him. (Lk 2:40. 52) In Jerusalem, the boy Jesus
recognizes in the temple His Fathers house. (Lk 2:49; cf. 6:4, 19:45)
In sum then, in Lukes infancy narrative, God the Father appears as the
aboriginal source of the divine salvation which Jesus brings. As the author of salvation, the Father also receives reverential obedience and thankful
praise for His saving action in Christ.19 Let us turn next to the Father
texts in Lukes preface to Jesus public ministry.
In Luke, the prophetic word of God inspires John to proclaim the universal salvation which God will accomplish in Jesus. (Lk 3:2, 6) Luke
stresses the universality of the salvation which is dawning by tracing Jesus
genealogy, not to Abraham, as Matthew does, but to Adam, the son of
God. (Lk 3:38) Lukes genealogy employs an ascending Greek order, in
contrast to Matthews descending Hebraic order. Adam, the son of God,
therefore ends Lukes list. The first Adam, foreshadows the coming of the
last. Neither has a human father. Jesus, the new Adam, in virtue of His
divine Sonship transcends the first Adam in dignity and stands not only
at the head of a new Israel, but at the head of a new humanity recreated in
Him. Lukes universalism suits well His predominantly Gentile audience.
Lukes genealogy has more than seventy names. Ancient numerology
regarded seven as a sacred number. Seven times eleven names stretch between Joseph, Jesus legal father, and God. Luke thus associates the name
of God with the doubly perfect number 77. Jesus begins the twelfth and
final set of seven names and so functions historically in the genealogy as
the culmination of what God has done both for His creation and for His
chosen people. David in the genealogy enjoys the number 42 (6 x 7). As
the new David, Lukes Jesus brings salvation history, which began with
the story of Adam, to its supreme and central saving moment.
Lukes genealogy contrasts, then, with Matthews at several points: 1)
Matthew follows a descending order by tracing Jesus ancestry from
Abraham to Jesus. Luke follows an ascending Greco-Roman order by
beginning with Jesus and tracing His origins back to the first human and
19. Cf. NJBC, 43:12-36; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp 303-448; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 31-60;
361
ultimately to God. 2) Matthew uses rabbinic gametria to structure his

genealogy symbolically. Luke uses ancient Greek numerology. 3) Matthews
gametria calls special attention to Jesus Davidic messianism. Luke situates Jesus messianic mission within the history of humanity and portrays
Jesus as the mediator of a universal salvation. Lukes numerology also
portrays Jesus as the culmination of Gods saving action within the whole
of history. 4) Matthews genealogy prefaces his gospel and links Jesus to
major figures in Hebrew history. Lukes genealogy comes between Jesus
baptism and temptation in order to underscore the universal saving significance of both of these events. 5) Matthews genealogy cites Jewish woman
whose role in salvation history foreshadowed Marys. Lukes does not.20
In Jesus messianic commissioning, as we have seen, the voice of the
Father proclaims Jesus His beloved Son and commissions Him messiah
in the image of the suffering servant. (Lk 3:22); and in Lukes temptation
narrative as in Matthews, Satan addresses Jesus with the title Son of
God. (Lk 3:3, 9) In citing the Torah in response to Satans desert temptations Lukes Jesus, like Matthews, twice invokes the name of God. (Lk
3:8, 12) For Luke as for Matthew, then, Jesus temptations engage His
relationship to His Father in a profound way. Moreover, since, in both
gospels, Jesus in His temptations embodies the new Israel in its desert
sojourn, His responses to Satan mirror the way in which the members of
the new Israel ought also to relate to the Father.
Satan tests Jesus with the same temptations as in Matthews temptation
narrative, but Luke reverses the order of the second and third temptation. Satan first tempts Jesus to self-reliance by abandoning His fast. As
in Matthew, Satan is tempting Him to replace trust in the Father with
trust in His own charismatic prowess. (Lk 4:3-4)
Matthews Jesus replies to the temptation by citing the same text from
Deuteronomy at somewhat greater length: One shall not live by bread
alone but by every word which proceeds from the mouth of God. (Mt
4:4) Lukes Jesus replies to Satan: One shall not live by bread alone. (Lk
4:3-4; cf Dt 8:3) The terseness with which Lukes Jesus replies to Satan
rules out any inclination to greed or avarice at the same time that it ex20. Cf. Gert J. Steyn, The Occurrence of Kainam in Lukes Genealogy: Evidence of
Septuagint Influence? Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 65(1989), pp. 409-411;
Richard Bauckham, More on Kainam, the Son of Arpachshad in Lukes
Genealogy,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 67(1991), pp. 95-103; Gert J.
Steyn, A Short Reply,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 67(1991), pp. 103-104;
Brown, Birth of the Messiah, pp. 64-94; NJBC, 43:50-51; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, I,
pp. 488-505; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 68-72; Evans, Luke, pp. 250-254; Bock, op. cit., I,
pp. 348-362; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 120-122; William S. Kurz, Luke 3:23-32: Biblical
Genealogies in Luke-Acts: New Perspectives from the Society of Biblical Literature
Seminar, edited by Charles H. Talbot (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1984), pp.
169-187.
362
presses trust in God. As we shall see, throughout his gospel Luke will
insist even more strongly than Matthew on the importance of sharing
ones bread with others. The evangelist repeatedly warns the followers of
Jesus to repent of greed. Luke also stresses even more than Matthew or
Mark the eschatological hope which such sharing expresses: it keeps ones
heart anchored in ones true heavenly home.
Lukes Satan next shows Jesus all the kingdoms of this world and says
to Him: To you will I give all this authority and their glory; for it has
been delivered to me, and I give them to whom I will. If you, then, will
worship me, it shall all be yours. (Lk 4:5-7) Lukes Satan asserts more
strongly than Matthews that the kingdoms of this world really do belong
to him and lie under his evil domination. Satans assertion reflects Lukes
concern that his Gentile Christians recognize in the Roman empire and
in all such morally corrupt and oppressive political and economic institutions the embodiment of Anti-Christ. (Cf. Mt 4:9) Satans assertion does
not, however, change the meaning of the temptation as one finds it in
Matthew. In both temptations, Satan is in effect urging Jesus to espouse
a secular messianism and to found the kingdom on law and coercive
violence. Lukes Jesus, like Matthews, rejects such a vision of the kingdom as idolatry and devil worship. He insists that one must found the
kingdom only on authentic worship of the Father. (Lk 4:4-8; cf. 19:45-8;
Mt 4:7-10; cf. Dt 6:13)
As we saw, Matthews opposition to a nascent clericalism at Antioch
led him to regard as the supreme temptation of the Christian community
replacing with power politics Jesus vision of an egalitarian community of
mutual service. Matthew therefore makes lust for power Jesus last and
culminating temptation. Luke places Matthews second temptation last
and in so doing gives it the greatest prominence. The devil takes Jesus to
the pinnacle of the temple and urges Him to tempt God by throwing
Himself down in the expectation that the Father will send angels to rescue Him. (Lk 4:9-12) One tempts God by setting the conditions under which
one is willing to relate to Him. Jesus rejects the temptation outright, saying:
You shall not tempt the Lord your God. (Lk 4:9-12; cf. Dt 6:16)
I shall consider later the reason why Luke reorders the desert temptations as he does. Here it suffices to reflect on what the temptations say
about Jesus relationship to the Father. Like Matthews Jesus, Lukes relates to the Father in an attitude of unconditioned trust. He also founds
the kingdom, not on coercive violence and law, but only on authentic
worship of the Father. Luke, however, portrays testing God, setting conditions on trusting the Father, as Jesus culminating temptation and therefore as the culminating temptation of the new Israel which He begins.21
363
Lukes preface to Jesus public ministry makes, then, three basic

affirmations about the Father. 1) The Father initiates the salvation accomplished in Jesus. 2) That salvation has a universal scope. 3) The acceptance of that salvation demands both the renunciation of the institutionalized violence of worldly kingdoms and unconditioned trust in God.
During his account of Jesus public ministry, Luke portrays Jesus as
speaking with divine authority. He proclaims to the crowds the word of
God. (Lk 5:1, 8:11) Moreover, like Mark and Matthew, Luke also endows Jesus with Gods own authority to forgive sins.22 (Lk 5:17-26; cf.
Mk 2:1-12; Mt 9:1-8)
As we have seen, during His ministry Lukes Jesus prays to the Father
more frequently than in the other synoptics. Apart from the agony in the
garden, both Matthew and Mark describe Jesus praying on only two other
occasions. (Mt 14:23, 19:13, 26:36-44; Mk 1:35, 6:46, 14:32-9) The
frequency of Jesus prayer in Luke expresses the evangelists concern to
hold up Jesus as the model for frequent Christian prayer. Jesus prayer in
Luke manifests His saving relationship to the Father. Besides modeling
prayer for the disciples, Lukes Jesus also intercedes for them. (Cf. Lk
22:32) Moreover, as we have also seen, Jesus prayer in Luke tags the
event which follows it as one of special significance.23
Lukes disciples ask Jesus to teach them how to pray while Jesus Himself is rapt in prayer. The request dramatizes the true disciples desire to
imitate Jesus prayer. Jesus response presents the Father prayer as the prototypical Christian prayer. In Matthew, the Our Father occurs in the ser22. As in the other two synoptics, the crowds on seeing the miracle experience amazement,
glorify God. In Luke and Mark, however, they also acknowledge the strangeness of
what they have just seen. NJBC, 43:78-79; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 577-586; Johnson,
Gospel, pp. 91-96; Evans, Luke, pp. 296-304; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 478-488; Ernst, op.
cit., pp. 148-151.
23. Cf. Feldkmper, op. cit., pp. 333-338; Oscar Gerald Harris, Prayer in Luke-Acts: A
Study in the Theology of Luke (Doctoral Dissertation: Vanderbilt University, 1966). As
we have seen, Lukes Jesus is praying when He experiences His messianic commissioning. (Lk 3:21) Similarly, when Jesus calls the Twelve, Luke says that the night before
He prayed to God all night. After Jesus cures the leper Jesus withdraws to the
wilderness, not to avoid the crowds, as he does in Mark, but in order to pray. (Lk 6:12;
Mk 1:40-5) Jesus prays in the presence of the disciples before He asks them who they
believe Him to be. (Lk 9:18) The other two synoptics say that Jesus ascended the
mount of the transfiguration to be alone with the disciples; Luke says He ascended the
mountain with the disciples in order to pray. Moreover, the transfiguration occurs
while Jesus is at prayer. (Lk 9:28-9) Jesus prayer motivates the disciples to ask Him
to teach them how to pray. (Lk 11:1) Like the other synoptics, Luke portrays Jesus
praying to the Father in Gethsemane. In Luke, moreover, Jesus prays in the presence
of all His disciples. (Lk 22:41, 45) Luke, however, adds the detail that Jesus in the
garden prayed all the more earnestly because of the anguish He felt. (Lk 22:44)
364
mon on the mount. Lukes Jesus functions as the model of Christian

prayer, as the praying messianic savior, and after His glorification as heavenly intercessor.
Luke records a terser version of the Father prayer than Matthew. (Mt
6:9-16) The Didache preserves the longest version of the prayer. (Did.
8:2). Lukes leaner version probably best approximates the prayer which
Jesus formulated. Lukes prayer reads as follows:
Father, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come. Give us each day our
daily bread; and forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone who
is indebted to us; and lead us not into temptation. (Lk 11:1-4)
Instead of Matthews Our Father in heaven, Lukes prayer begins more

simply with Abba. As we saw in the preceding section, heaven in Matthew symbolizes the awesome throne of God. Lukes simpler form of
address evokes more a sense of intimacy than of awe. The fact, however,
that the disciples call God Abba makes them members of His family. In
Luke as in the other synoptics, Jesus, by drawing His disciples into His
Abba experience, incorporates them into the family of God; and membership in that family has as its condition obedience to Gods will. In
both gospels, the first petitionhallowed be your nameteaches the
disciples to approach the Father with reverence.24 (Lk 8:19-21; Mk 3:31-5;
Mt 12:46-50; cf. Lk 11:27-8)
The second petition begs for the final and definitive establishment of
Gods reign. The petition implies that the kingdoms realization results from
the Fathers action in the world and that its final realization lies in the future.
The next two petitions allude to the moral conditions for membership
in the kingdom: trust in God to provide for ones physical needs, personal repentance, and mutual forgiveness. In Luke as in Matthew trust in
Gods providence frees one to share ones bread and the other physical
supports of life with others. As in Matthew, the term daily (epiousion)
which qualifies bread could mean tomorrows, daily, needful, or
future and probably connotes all four meanings. For the post-resurrection Christian, needful bread would have taken on eucharistic connotations. Moreover, like Matthews Jesus, Lukes makes it clear that mutual
forgiveness functions as the presupposition of all Christian prayer.
The final petition asks for deliverance from the power of sin and from
any inclination to commit it. Lukes version does not pray for deliverance
from the Evil One.25
24. Matthew makes this point explicit in the Our Father by adding the petition: Your
will be done on earth as in heaven. Luke does not. Cf. NJBC, 43:104; Fitzmyer, Gospel
25. Cf. NJBC, 43:128; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 869-909; Evans, Luke, pp. pp. 475-487;
Johnson, Gospel, pp. 176-189; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 268-275; David Crump, Jesus the
365
During Jesus ministry, Luke attributes Jesus mighty works to the

Fathers action in Him. When, for example, Jesus raises the son of the
widow of Nain, the crowds not only recognize Jesus as a prophet but they
also acknowledge the miracle as a visitation from God. (Lk 7:16) After
Jesus heals the epileptic demoniac boy, the witnesses express astonishment at the majesty of God which the exorcism has revealed. Matthew
and Mark portray the same crowds as mere curiosity seekers. (Lk 9:43)
When on a sabbath Jesus heals a woman ill for eighteen years, she too
praises God. (Lk 13:13) Finally, when Jesus enter Jerusalem in triumph,
the disciples praise God for all the mighty works they had seen. (Lk
19:37) The repeated enthusiastic responses of the crowds to Gods action
in Jesus enhance Lukes portrait of Jesus as the joyful prophet of good
news. Moreover, Lukes Jesus expects thankful praise of God in response
to His healings. When He heals ten lepers, and only a Samaritan responds by praising God and thanking Jesus, Jesus rebukes the silence of
the other nine because they have failed to recognize in His person the
healing power of God. (Lk 17:11-14)
In Luke as in Mark, the Gerasene demoniac recognizes that Jesus is
the Son of the Most High God. (Lk 8:28) Matthew contents himself
with the title Son of God. Moreover, after Jesus delivers the demoniac,26 Lukes Jesus, like Marks, sends the man home to testify to what
God has done for him. The delivered demoniac testifies in fact to how
much Jesus did for him. In both Mark and Luke, the mans testimony to
Jesus foreshadows the evangelization of the Gentiles.27 (Lk 8:39)
Lukes Jesus teaches His disciples about the Father. After Jesus testifies
to John, Luke says that those who received Johns baptism justified God,
while the Pharisees and lawyers did not because in rejecting Johns baptism they rejected Gods purpose for them. (Lk 7:29-30) We find no
parallel statement either in Matthew or Mark. Justifying God means publicly attesting to His saving action in Johns ministry. The repentant also justify God by acknowledging the justice of Gods judgment upon human
sinfulness and by accepting the justification which repentance mediates.28
Intercessor (Tbingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1992); Stanley E. Porter, Mt 6:13 and Luke
11:4: Lead us not into temptation, Expository Times, 101(1990), pp. 359-362;
Joachim Jeremias, Die Botshaft Jesu vom Vater (Stuttgart: Calver Verlag, 1968); Abba:
Studien zur neutestametlische Theologie und Zeitgeschichte (Gttingen: Vanderhoeck
and Ruprecht, 1966); The Lords Prayer, translated by John Reumann (Philadelphia,
PA: Fortress, 1964); Nicholas Ayo, C.S.C., The Lords Prayer (Notre Dame, IN:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1992).
26. Luke, like Mark, speaks of only one demoniac instead of the pair one encounters in
Matthew.
27. Cf. NJBC, 43:106; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, 732-740; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 135-140;
28. Cf. NJBC, 43:98; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 670-676; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 121-126;
366
As we have seen, when Matthews Peter confesses Jesus as messiah, he

also acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God. Matthews Jesus responds that only the Father could have revealed this to Peter, since only
the Father, the source of saving enlightenment, could have empowered
Peter to grasp Jesus divine sonship. (Mt 16:13) In Lukes account of
Peters confession, the evangelist has Peter acknowledge that Jesus is the
Christ of God. (Lk 9:20) Mark, as we have seen, has Peter confess only
that Jesus is the Christ. (Mk 8:29) In adding the phrase of God,
Lukes Peter names the divine origin of Jesus messianic commissioning.
The confession of Lukes Peter stands theologically somewhere between
Marks account and Matthews.29
During Jesus Galilean ministry, then, Luke makes the following assertions about Jesus relationship to the Father: 1) Jesus possesses the Fathers
unique divine authority to forgive sins. 2) Jesus teaches His disciples how
to pray to the Father by word and example. 3) Jesus miracles manifest
that the Father acts through Him. 4) Jesus draws His disciples into His
Abba experience and through the obedience of faith transforms them
into Gods family. Luke, however, collects most of Jesus teachings about
the Father in the journey discourse. To those teachings I turn in the paragraphs which follow.
The Father in the Journey Discourse
The first reference to the Father during the journey discourse occurs when
the seventy-two disciples joyfully recount the success of their mission of
evangelization, exorcism, and healing. Luke describes Jesus response in
the following terms.
In that same hour He rejoiced in the Holy Breath and said, I thank you,
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from
the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yes, Father, for
such was your gracious will. All things have been delivered to me by My
Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, or who the Father is
except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him. (Lk
10:21-2)
Like Matthew, Luke presumably derives this saying of Jesus from Q.

(Mt 11:25-7) Matthew, however, records this pronouncement in a very
different context. Matthew inserts it in Jesus testimony to John. (Mt
11:25-7) Lukes Jesus praises the Father for the evangelizing disciples
29. Cf. Brown, Peter in the New Testament, pp. 64-69, 111-112; M. Corbin, S.J., Le
Christ de Dieu: Mditation sur Luc 9:18-27, Nouvelle Revue Thologique, 99(1977),
pp. 641-680; NJBC, 43:114; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, 770-782; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
228-230.
367
faith. Moreover, when read in context, Lukes Jesus also thanks the Father
for their efficacious proclamation of the kingdom, which foreshadows
the Pentecostal Churchs proclamation of the risen Christ.
In both gospels Jesus speaks as divine wisdom incarnate and claims
privileged knowledge of the Father. Luke, however, suggests more explicitly than Matthew that the Holy Breath inspires Jesus Abba awareness
just as She had inspired His messianic commissioning. In Luke, Jesus
rejoices in the divine Breath before proclaiming His unique knowledge
of and cognitive access to the Father. (Lk 3:21-2)
In both gospels, the things which God has revealed to the disciples
include Jesus and His mission in proclaiming the kingdom. In Luke the
disciples share explicitly in that mission. In both gospels, they recognize
in Jesus unique relationship to the Father the revelation of a relationship
in which they themselves may also participate.
Jesus alone has the power to reveal the Father because the Father has
given Him authority over all creation. That authority includes the ability
to reveal the Father to whomever He chooses. Jesus possession of universal sway suggests a post-resurrection perspective in both Matthew and
Luke. It also implies Jesus divinity; for only God exercises dominion
over all things.30
Lukes handling of the great commandment differs from both Marks
and Matthews. Luke locates this pronouncement story in Jesus journey
discourse. Its placement in Luke identifies obedience to the great commandment as an fundamental expression of discipleship.
In Mark, a scribe asks Jesus which commandment counts as the greatest; and Jesus cites the two great commandments. The scribe then approves Jesus answer, and Jesus tells him he is not far from the kingdom.
Jesus second response suggests that one should read the great commandment not only in the light of Torah but also in the light of Jesus proclamation of the kingdom. (Mk 12:28-34)
Matthew makes a similar theological point to Marks by having Jesus
assure his questioner that these two commandments fulfill the Law and
the prophets. In Matthew, of course, Jesus in turn fulfills both. For Matthew, then, one must interpret the great commandments in the light of
the Torah read through the filter of Jesus proclamation of the kingdom.
(Mt 22:34-40)
Luke, however, has a lawyer ask Jesus what he must do to have eternal
life. When Jesus asks him for his reading of the law, the lawyer replies:
You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your
30. Cf. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., Abba and Jesus Relation to God in A cause de lvangile
(Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1985), pp. 13-38; Gospel, II, 864-876; NJBC, 43:125;
Johnson, Gospel, pp. 166-171; Evans, Luke, pp. 456-463; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 256-259.
368
soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself. Jesus then approves the lawyers response.31 (Lk 10:25-9)
Luke orchestrates the scene in this way because he wants to interpret
second of the great commandments in the light of the parable of the
good Samaritan. In Lukes account of the exchange, the lawyer feels embarrassed for having asked a question whose answer he already knew. He
therefore justifies having raised the issue by asking Jesus to clarify the
meaning of the term neighbor. (Lk 10:29) In effect, the lawyer is asking, Whom should I consider a fellow Israelite? He seems to assume
that not every Jew would fit the category.
Jesus replies with the story of the good Samaritan, a parable unique to
Luke. Robbers waylay a man on the desert road from Jerusalem to Jerico,
rob, strip, and beat him. They leave him half dead. A priest and a levite
both pass by and refuse to touch an apparent corpse lest they incur defilement. A Samaritan, however, takes pity on the man, pours wine and oil
into his wounds to disinfect and heal them, takes him to an inn, and pays
for the mans care and lodging with the promise to make good any further expense the innkeeper might incur on the mans account. This promise
expresses the Samaritans concern lest the robbed man become liable to
enslavement for his inability to pay his debts. (Lk 10:30-5)
Jesus then reverses the lawyers question and asks him who acted like a
neighbor toward the robbed man. The lawyer cannot bring himself
even to use the term Samaritan and replies that the one who showed
mercy acted as neighbor. Jesus then replies, Go and do likewise. (Lk
10:36-7) In effect, then, Jesus tells the lawyer: treat anyone in need as
your neighbor, even an enemy and a heretic, for Palestinian Jews regarded
the Samaritans as both.
Luke, then, in his own way, makes the same theological point about
the great commandments as the other two synoptics: namely, that one
must interpret them in the light of Jesus proclamation of good news.
Luke, however, makes this point in his own distinctive way. Luke focuses
on the second commandment and universalizes it to include even enemies and heretics, like Samaritans. Through the parable, Lukes Jesus
makes universal love of neighbor the practical test of love of God. The
parable also insists that any authentic love of neighbor liberates those it
benefits and does not enslave them. Finally, in response to the lawyers
original question, Lukes Jesus proclaims that anyone, even a despised
Samaritan, who acts with the compassion which both the Law and the
gospel require belongs to the true Israel.32
31. Cf. S.G. Wilson, Luke and the Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983),
pp. 28-29.
32. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Law in the New Testament: Fresh Light on the Parable
of the Good Samaritan, New Testament Studies, 11(1964-1965), pp. 22-37; J.M.
Furness, Fresh Light on Luke 10:25-37, Expository Times, 80(1968-1968), p. 182;
369
In Mark and Matthew, Jesus, in the controversy over Beelzebul claims

to cast out demons by the power of the Breath of God. (Mk 3:23-30; Mt
12:28) In Luke, Jesus claims to do so by the finger of God. (Lk 11:20)
Luke is referring to Ex 8:15, where Pharaohs magicians recognize that
Moses performs the signs he does by the finger of God.
Through the reference the evangelist makes three points. First, Jesus
assimilates His power to exorcise to the same liberating, divine power
which brought about the exodus. Second, Luke rebukes the unbelief of
Jesus adversaries by suggesting that Gentile sorcerers had more insight
than those who accused Jesus of exorcising through the power of Beelzebul.
Third, the allusion to the exodus points to Jesus as the promised prophet
like Moses.33 (Dt 18:18-20)
In the first section of his journey discourse, Jesus instructs his disciples
about how to relate to Father, Son, and Breath in times of persecution.
I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that
have no more that they can do. But I will warn you whom to fear: fear
Him who, after he has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I tell you,
fear Him. Are not two sparrows sold for two pennies? And not one of
them is forgotten before God. Why even the hairs of your head are numbered. Fear not; you are of more value than many sparrows. (Lk 12:4-7)
Luke cites a terser version of a similar saying in Matthew. (Mt 10:26-30)

Both evangelists, however, portray Jesus teaching substantially the same
thing. The disciples should let the fear of Gods ultimate condemnation
take away any fear they may have for their persecutors and potential executioners.
In both gospels, Jesus lightens this stern admonition by an immediate
assurance of the Fathers meticulous care for each of His children. His
assurance has a touch of ironic peasant humor. Jesus promises the disciples that God keeps count of the number of hairs on their balding heads
and values them more than a flock of birds.
In times of persecution, the disciples should testify courageously to the
Son:
And I tell you, every one who acknowledges Me before others, the Son of
man also will acknowledge before the angels of God; but anyone who denies me before others will be denied before the angels of God. (Lk 12:8-9)
Dietfried Gewalt, Der baumhertziger Samaritner, Evangelische Theologie, 38(1978),

pp. 403-417; NJBC, 43:126; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 876-890; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
171-176; Evans, Luke, pp. 463-471; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 259-265.
33. Cf. NJBC, 43:129; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 916-923; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 180-184;
Evans, Luke, pp. 488-493; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 276-280.
370
This saying finds a parallel in the other two synoptics. (Mt 10:32; Mk
8:38) Fearless testimony to Jesus under persecution will ensure that He
will testify on the disciples behalf. The angels of God make up the heavenly court. In testifying before the angels therefore, Jesus testifies to the
Father.34
In the journey discourse, Jesus also tells the parable of the rich fool as a
way of manifesting Gods attitude toward extreme wealth. Only Luke
records this parable; and it reflects his concern lest Christians settle into
this world too comfortably.
In the parable, the rich fool can think of nothing to do with his abundant wealth other than to heap it all up in one place. He tears down his
old barns to build larger ones which will store all his possessions. He then
says to his soul: Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; take
your ease, eat, drink, and be merry.
Luke portrays the rich man as completely self-preoccupied and
self-isolated in his wealth. He speaks only to himself, cares only about his
own possessions, his own future, his own personal pleasures. He has not
even made provision for disposing of his fortune when he dies. God,
however, replies to this selfish complacency with a rebuke: Fool! This
night your soul is required of you; and the things you have prepared,
whose will they be? (Lk 12:13-21)
Gods rebuke in the parable expresses bitter irony. The rich mans folly
consists in this: while still alive, he could have shared his wealth with
others and did not. Once he dies, all his labor to gather his wealth in one
place will come to naught, as others divide his possessions among them.
The rich mans folly also recalls Ps 14:1: The fool says in his heart
there is no God. His folly consists in his failure to foresee that he would
one day have to answer to God for his selfishness. The parable also implicitly equates greed with unbelief
The parable ends with the observation: So is he who lays up treasure
for himself, and is not rich toward God. (Lk 12:21) Selfish concern with
amassing personal wealth leaves one poor in the eyes of God. By reverse
logic, those whom God regards as rich share their possessions with others. Both the parable and this final observation exemplify the messianic
reversal of values.35
34. Cf. Von Rudolf Pesch, ber die Autoritt Jesu: Eine Rckfrage anhand des
Bekenner- und Verleugnungspruchs Lk 12. 8f par. in Die Kirche des Anfangs, edited
by R. Schnackenburg et al. (Leipzig: St. Benno Verlag, 1977), pp. 25-55; I. Howard
Marshall, Uncomfortable Words VI. Fear Him who can destroy both soul and body
in hell (Mt 10, 28 RSV), Expository Times, 81(1969-1970), pp. 276-280; John M.
McDermott, S.J., Luke XII, 8-9: Stone of Scandal, Revue Biblique, 84(1977), pp.
523-537; NJBC, 43:133; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 955-961; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
35. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 176-180; J. Duncan M. Derrett, The Rich Fool: A Parable
of Jesus Concerning Inheritance, Heythrop Journal, 10(1977), pp. 127-151; Paul
371
Luke follows the parable of the rich fool with the parable of the lilies of
the field, which Matthew includes in the sermon on the mount as an
expression of one of the fundamental demands of discipleship. (Lk
12:22-34; Mt 6:25-34) Luke again preserves a leaner version of the parable, but it says substantially the same things as the parable in Matthew.
Lukes Jesus urges his disciples to put aside all anxiety about their lives
and the physical supports of life: food, drink, clothing. They should recognize that life is more important than food and the body than clothing.
(Lk 12:22-3)
Matthews version of the parable of the lilies of the field cites the example of the birds of the air who look to God to feed them. Lukes Jesus
refers to ravens, which in Jewish law counted among the unclean animals. (Lk 12:24; Lev 11:15; Deut 14:14) In other words, in Luke not
only does the Fathers providence include every sparrow, but it even encompasses the unclean animals and birds as well. By shifting from birds
to ravens, Lukes Jesus asserts that the Fathers care reaches out universally
to all and abolishes traditional distinctions between clean and unclean,
between those who belong and outcasts.36
In Luke as in Matthew, the example of Gods care for things as ephemeral as birds and wild flowers rebukes the lack of trust which humans put
in His providential care of them, who have much more value in His eyes.
(Lk 12:24-8; Mt 6:26-30)
In both gospels, anxiety about the future motivates this lack of faith;
and Jesus urges his disciples to put such anxiety from their minds. The
same anxiety motivated the rich fools amassing of wealth. Matthews Jesus
repudiates such anxious concerns for the physical supports of life as typical of unbelieving Gentiles; Lukes Jesus attributes these vicious attitudes
to the nations of the world: in other words, to unconverted Gentiles
who espouse the values of this world: wealth, self-indulgence, and power.
(Lk 12:30; Mt 6:32) Instead, the disciples of Jesus must recognize the
Fathers care and concern for each of His children. They then should seek
the kingdom of heaven first and trust the Father to take care of them. (Lk
12:30-1; Mt 6:32-3)
Matthews Jesus concludes the parable of the lilies of the field with a
realistic proverb: Let tomorrow worry about itself; every day brings troubles
enough. (Mt 6:34) Luke, however, follows the parable with another sayJouon, La parabole du riche insens, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 29(1939), pp.
486-489; John Reid, The Poor Rich Fool, Luke XII, 21, Expository Times,
13(1901-1902), pp. 567-568; NJBC, 43:134; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 967-970;
36. Cf. Richard Dillon, Ravens, Lilies, and the Kingdom of God (Matthew 6:25-33/
Luke 12:22-31, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 53(1991), pp. 605-627; J.F. Healey,
Models of Behavior: Matt 6:26(// Luke 12:24) and Prov 6:6-8, Journal of Biblical
Literature, 108(1989, pp. 497-498.
372
ing of Jesus which Matthew had recorded earlier in the sermon on the
mount. Moreover, Luke prefaces this saying differently from Matthew.
Lukes Jesus says:
Fear not, little flock, for it is your Fathers pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses
which do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens which does not fail,
where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. For where your treasure
is there will your heart be. (Lk 12:32-4; cf. Mt 6:19-21)
Luke omits Matthews realistic proverb, which one could take as qualifying the parable of the lilies of the field by conceding that life has its
anxieties. Instead, Luke insists on what it means to seek the kingdom of
God before all else. Typically, he understands the kingdom in eschatological
terms. He contrasts the kingdom which the disciples will one day receive
with their present condition of vulnerability as the little flock of God.
The disciples must never doubt that in the end the Father will hand over
to them the kingdom He has promised.
One seeks the promised kingdom in this life by selling ones possessions, giving them to the poor. Luke regards such conduct not as a counsel for a religious elite but as a condition for close discipleship. Here as
elsewhere in his gospel, Luke again insists that the free sharing of ones
possessions with others keeps ones heart anchored with God in the life to
come rather than on the kingdoms of the world and their values. This
eschatological interpretation of the practice of sharing ones possessions
with others typifies Luke. The gift of the kingdom recalls Dan 7:13-14,
27, which describes a bestowal of the kingdom upon the saints of the
Most High. The Act of the Apostles will describe the Breath-baptized disciples taking responsibility for the kingdom and exercising judgmental
authority on Gods behalf.37
Luke further underscores the eschatological character of the kingdom
by telling the parable of the servants who await their masters return from
a wedding feast. Not only will the master reward them if he finds them
watching and ready for his return, but he will also defend them from
anything which could harm them. (Lk 12:35-8)
Luke seems to feel concern that the delay of the second coming has
caused some Christians to settle in too comfortably into this world by
looking to their own needs while neglecting those less advantaged. Only
by persevering in active concern for the poor can Christians hope to live
prepared to welcome Jesus when He returns. The selfish and complacent,
37. Cf. Paul S. Minear, Commands of Christ (New York, NY: Abingdon, 1972), pp.
373
like the rich fool, will find themselves suddenly startled by the Son of
Mans arrival as eschatological judge.38 (Lk 12:40)
Later in the journey discourse, Lukes Jesus makes a similar point. Luke
notes that the Pharisees were lovers of money. Jesus rebukes them for
thinking that they can reconcile greed and genuine faith in God. Those
who do live in self-righteous self-deception: You are those who justify
yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts; for what is exalted
among men is an abomination in the sight of God. (Lk 16:14-5) The
Pharisees compound the sin of greed with self-righteous self-justification
and religious pretense. In the process, they simply show that they do not
really know God, who reads hearts and abominates both greed and
self-righteousness. Since Luke equates Pharisaism with hypocrisy (Lk
12:1), in condemning pious greed the evangelist denounces the hypocrisy of covetous Christians. In overturning traditional human judgments,
the kingdom effects the messianic reversal of values.
The incident follows a strong condemnation by Jesus of all desire for
wealth. Jesus has just told the parable of the unjust steward. Called to
account for having swindled his master, the steward, knowing that he is
out of employment, makes sure that someone will befriend him in his
need by further swindling the master. Before abandoning his post, he
forgives a large portion his masters debts. (Lk 16:1-9) Jesus ends the
parable with the following observations:
And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous mammon, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal habitations. The one who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and
one who is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much. If then you
have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will entrust you
with true riches? And if you have not been faithful in what was anothers,
who will give you that which is your own? No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted
to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. (Lk
16:10-13)
In the sermon on the mount, Matthew cites a similar pronouncement

about the impossibility of serving God and mammon (Mt 6:24); but
Luke re-enforces the point of this teaching by prefacing it with other
sayings of Jesus absent from Matthew, including the parable of the unjust
steward. Those who cannot use wealth in a way which pleases God prove
themselves unworthy of the greater gift of eternal life. (Lk 16:9) Riches
have insignificant value by comparison with life in the eternal mansions.
The rich, moreover, in their selfish greed appropriate what actually be38. Cf. NJBC, 43:136; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 981-993; Evans, Luke, pp. 532-539;
Johnson, Gospel, pp. 203-307; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 302-307.
374
longs to others: namely, to the poor and needy. Their mismanagement of

wealth proves them unworthy of the greater gift of eternal life. As we
have seen in other contexts, rhetorical stress on active concern for the
poor as an expression of eschatological longing typifies Lukes portrait of
Jesus.39
Lukes rhetorical stress on divine forgiveness also leads him to write a
gospel of great pardons; and in the journey discourse he insists on the fact
that God rejoices in the repentance of every sinner.40 Luke makes the
point in two parables which Jesus tells in response to a criticism from the
Pharisees that he receives sinners and eats with them. Prior to the confrontation, Luke describes the tax collectors and sinners crowding around
Jesus. (Lk 15:1-3)
Luke typically doubles parables with the first involving a man and the
second a woman. This stylistic device expresses the evangelists concern
to shatter sexual stereotypes by including women in the kingdom, even
though women enjoy little prominence in the evangelists account of
Christian origins in Acts. In the first parable, a shepherd with a hundred
sheep loses one in the wilderness, a place of danger.41 The lost sheep
symbolizes the sinner as abandoned and hopeless in a hostile world.42 The
shepherd leaves the ninety-nine sheep and searches until he finds it.
Contrast Matthews phrase if he finds it. (Mt 18:13) When the shepherd finds the lost sheep, only in Luke does he lift it tenderly to his shoulders. (Cf. Is 40:11, 49:22, 50:4, 56:12; Hos 11:3) On restoring the sheep
to the fold, the shepherd rejoices more than in the possession of the other
ninety-nine.43 (Lk 15:4-7)
In the second parable, a woman sweeps her house diligently until she
finds a lost drachma and rejoices on finding it more than in the possession of nine other coins like it. Comparing God to a woman would have
39. Cf. Richard H. Hiers, Friends By Unrighteous Mammon: The Eschatological
Proletariate (Luke 16:9), Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 38(1970), pp.
30-36; Geoffrey Paul, The Unjust Steward and the Interpretation of Luke 16.9,
Theology, 61(1958), pp. 189- 193; Hans-Joachim Degenhardt, Lukas Evangelist der
Armen (Stuttgart: Katolisches Bibelwerk Verlag, 1965), pp. 120-131; NJBC, 43:149;
Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1104-1114; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 243-249; Evans, Luke, pp.
594-605; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 350-353.
40. Cf. J. Cantinat, C.M., Les paraboles de la misericorde, Nouvelle Revue Thologique,
77(1955), pp. 246-264.
41. Cf. F. Bussby, Did a Shepherd Leave Sheep Upon the Mountains or in the Desert?
A Note on Matt 18.12 and Luke 15.4, Anglican Theological Review, 45(1963), pp.
93-94.
42. Cf. Wilhelm Schmidt, Der Gute Hirte: Biblische Besinnung ber Lukas 15:1-7,
Evangelische Theologie, 24(1964), pp. 173-177.
43. Cf. Robert J. Karris, Women and Discipleship in Luke, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
45(1992), pp. 59-78; NJBC, 43:146; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1071-1082; Johnson,
Gospel, pp. 234-242; Evans, Luke, pp. 584-587; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 336-339.
375
shocked and challenged Palestinian Jewish misogynism. Moreover, the

woman in the parable faces an even greater loss than the shepherd: one
drachma had much more value than one sheep. She searches diligently,
lighting a lamp and sweeping the floor, until she finds the coin. (Lk
15:8-10)
Both parables make the same point: there is more rejoicing in heaven
and before the angels of God over one repentant sinner than over
ninety-nine who do not need repentance. Moreover, God not only welcomes repentant sinners; He actively searches for those lost in sin until
He finds them. Jesus willingness to welcome tax collectors and sinners
expresses Gods active concern to reconcile backsliders and sinners, because the reconciliation of sinners causes God and the heavenly court
enormous joy. (Lk 15:3-10)
In Matthew, the parable of the shepherd targets Church leaders especially and urges them to reach out actively to sinners and backsliders as
an expression of Gods will to forgive. Luke shifts the primary focus of
the parable to the great joy and satisfaction which the Father finds in
forgiving repentant sinners.44
That God takes great joy in forgiving also finds expression in the parable of the two sons, which immediately follows. Often called the parable
of the prodigal son, the story really concerns both sons. The first squanders his inheritance on loose living and experiences abasing poverty. Dire
need forces him to consort with Gentiles and to accept degrading employment from them as a keeper of pigs. The pigs for all their unclean
flesh fare better than the young man. His hunger makes him want to feed
on the unclean animals swill. Utterly degraded, the younger son repents.
In a rehearsed soliloquy, the young man decides to return to his fathers
house thinking that he can earn the fathers forgiveness by working as his
servant.
The father, who has been looking for his sons return with maternal
anxiety, welcomes him back with extravagant affection and forgiveness.
The father further violates middle eastern male decorum by actually running to the younger son when from afar he espies the returning youth.
More important still, the father interrupts the repentant son before he
can complete his prepared apology and offer to work for the father as a
servant. Instead, the elated father with prodigal and gratuitous love welcomes the young man as his true son, clothes him sumptuously, and throws
a banquet to celebrate his return.
When the second son refuses self-righteously to join the feast, the father goes out to him in an attempt to persuade him to show the same
44. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Fresh Light on the Lost Sheep and the Lost Coin, New
Testament Studies, 26(1979-1980), pp. 36-60; Dennis Buzby, S.C.J., La brbis
perdu, Revue Biblique, 39(1930), pp. 47-61.
376
joyful forgiveness to the boy as the father had. The second, older son
commits the same error as the first. He thinks that by faithful service and
obedience over the years, he has earned the fathers love and fails to recognize that the fathers love comes to him as pure gift. Through the experience of sin, repentance, and gratuitous forgiveness, the younger son has
learned to accept the fathers love as free gift and not as something he can
earn. By the end of the parable, one does not know whether or not the
second son will ever achieve the same insight and join in the festivities.
(Lk 15:11-32)
The parable of the two sons addresses the self-righteous Pharisees who
had disapproved of Jesuss hobnobbing with tax-collectors and sinners.
Lukes Jesus responds that repentant sinners know in a way in which the
self-righteous do not that the Fathers forgiving love comes to them as
pure, gratuitous, and joyful gift. Self-righteousness, by contrast, excludes
one from the (messianic) banquet which the Father is throwing by trapping one in the illusion that one needs to earn Gods love.45
Later in the journey discourse, Jesus rebukes such Pharisaical
self-righteousness in the parable of the tax collector and the Pharisee.
The parable describes how sinners ought to relate to God.
First century Jews who collected taxes (or tolls) incurred defilement. In
the parable a Pharisee and a tax-collector both go to the temple to pray.
The Pharisee stands as he prays, assuming the normal prayer posture in
Judaism and in early Christianity. He prays in a soliloquy which boasts
to God of all his virtuous acts and thanks God that he differs from the
sinful tax-collector. The Pharisees prayer focuses on himself and on his
virtuous behavior, rather than on God. With eyes lowered in shame and
humility, the tax collector beats his breast and prays for Gods mercy on
his sinfulness. Unlike the Pharisees prayer, the tax-collector focuses on
God and on Gods merciful willingness to forgive the repentant.
The tax collector goes home justified in the eyes of God; while the
Pharisee, who ironically thanked God for not being like the tax-collector,
does not go home justified. The Pharisee correctly deemed himself different from the tax-collector but misunderstood in his religious smugness
45. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 151-162; Otfried Hofius, Alttestamentlische Motive im
Gleichnis vom verlorenen Sohn, New Testament Studies, 24(1971-1978), pp. 240-248;
Jack T. Sanders, Tradition and Redaction in Luke XV. 11-32, New Testament Studies,
15(1968-1969), pp. 433- 438; Philip Sellew, Internal Monologue as a Narrative
Device in the Parables of Luke, Journal of Biblical Literature, 111(1992), pp 239-253;
M.J.J. Menken, The Position of splagchnizesthai and splagchna in the Gospel of
Luke, Novum Testamentum, 30(1988), pp. 107-114; Ernesto Borghi, Lc 15, 11-32.
Linee esegetiche globali, Rivista Biblica, 34(1996), pp. 279-308; J. Albert Harrill,
The Indentured Labor of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:5), Journal of Biblical Literature,
115(1996),pp. 714-717; NJBC, 43:147; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1982- 1094;
377
the reason for the difference. Humble repentance yields justification in

Gods eyes; self-righteous boasting to God does not.46 (Lk 18:9-14)
Toward the end of the journey discourse, Lukes Jesus teaches at length
about prayer to the Father. He tells the parable of the unjust judge in
order to dramatize the fact that God will hear the prayers of those He has
chosen. The parable occurs only in Luke.
A widow keeps pestering an unjust judge who habitually hands down
corrupt judgments. He has no concern for God or pity for the poor. The
widow, however, keeps demanding insistently that the judge do her justice. Widows would not normally have acted with the self-assertion of
this one. Moreover, this widow eschews the common means of dealing
with judicial injustice: namely, bribery. Instead, she demands her just
rights. In the end, she wears the judge down with her relentless persistence. The word which the judge in the parable uses to describe the
womans activity (hypopiaze me) suggests ironically that he feels pummeled like a boxer by the weak womans tenacity. (Lk 18:1-8)
Luke concludes the parable with the following words:
And the Lord said: Hear what the unrighteous judge says. And will not
God vindicate his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long
over them? I tell you, he will vindicate them speedily. Nevertheless, when
the Son of man comes, will He find faith on earth? (Lk 18:6-8)
Jesus here speaks allegorically as the Lord and as the eschatological

Son of man. In that capacity he contrasts the action of God with that
of the unjust judge. The judge shilly-shallies; God responds promptly to
the prayers of those He has chosen. The unjust judge hands down corrupt verdicts and does justice reluctantly; God vindicates His elect who
trust in Him. The fact of divine election ought therefore to inspire confident prayer for the rectification of injustice and oppression. Jesus final
rhetorical question suggests that unless the elect persevere in prayerful
resistance to injustice the Son of man will not find faith on earth when
He returns.47
46. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 187-193; F. Gerald Dowling, The Ambiguity of The
Pharisee and the Toll-Collector (Luke 18:9-14) in the Greco Roman World of Late
Antiquity, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 54(1992), pp. 80-99; NJBC, 43:155; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, II, pp. 1175-1182; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 268-274; Evans, Luke, pp. 634-640;
47. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 180-185; Herman Ljungvik, Zur Erklrung einer Lukas-Stelle
(Luk. XVIII, 7), New Testament Studies, 10(1963-1964), pp. 289-294; Albert
Wifstrand, Lukas XVIII.7, New Testament Studies, 11(1964-1965), pp. 72-74; J.
Duncan M. Derrett, Law in the New Testament: The Parable of the Unjust Judge,
New Testament Studies, 18(1971-1972), pp. 178-191; Heinrich von Zimmermann,
Das Gleichnis vom Richter und Witwe (Lk 18, 1-8) in Die Kirche des Anfangs, edited
by R. Schnackenburg (Leipzig: St. Benno Verlag, 1977), pp. 79-95; Domingo
378
In another parable about perseverance in prayer, a friend seeks a favor

from another friend in the middle of the night. The friend seeking the
boon finds himself with an empty larder and surprised by an unexpected
guest. The surprised host seeks the bread he needs from a friend who, in
the middle of the night, of course lies abed. The parable focuses on the
persistence of the friend in need. If he just keeps knocking, the sleeping
friend will eventually relent and begrudgingly grant his request. (Lk 11:5-8)
Unlike the unjust judge, the sleeping man in the parable relates in friendship to the man banging on the door. Inconvenience rather than vice
motivates his reluctance to respond to the friends importunity. In both
parables, however, human reluctance to respond to prayer contrasts with
Gods willingness to do so.48
Luke reproduces in the journey discourse Marks account of the rich
man who cannot follow Jesus because of his attachment to his wealth.
Luke transforms the man into a ruler (archon); but in other respects he
reproduces Marks story with minor editing. The mans status as a ruler
suggests that attachment to power offers as much an obstacle to following Jesus as attachment to wealth. Luke rewrites the story in a manner
which suggests Gods power to save even the rich.49 (Lk 18:18-9)
As in Mark, when the man asks Jesus what he must do to gain eternal
life, Jesus replies that he should keep the commandments and names
several. Lukes Jesus does not add to Marks list the second of the great
commandments, as Matthews does. When the man says he has kept the
commandments from his youth, Jesus invites him to sell all he has, give it
to the poor, and come follow Him.50 (Lk 18:22; Mt 19:21; Mk 10:21)
The ruler becomes sad because he finds it difficult to part with his
riches and relinquish his power. At his sadness Jesus warns the disciples
Muos-Leon , Jess y la apocaliptica pesimista (a proposito de Lc 18:8b / Mt 24:12),
Estudios Biblicos, 46(1988), pp. 457-495; NJBC, 43:156; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II,
48. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp.185-187; Jacques Dupont, La prire et son efficacit dans
lvangile de Luc, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 69(1981), pp. 45-56; A.D. Martin,
The Parable Concerning Hospitality, Expository Times, 37(1925-1926), pp. 411-414;
Herbert Pegg, The Scorpion and the Egg (Luke xi.12), Expository Times,
38(1926-1927), pp. 468-469; Borge Hjerl-Hansen, Le rapprochement poisson-serpent
dans la predication de Jsus (Mt VII, 10 et Luc XI, 11),Revue Biblique, 55(1948), pp.
195-198; NJBC, 43:129; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 909-913; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 276-180;
49. Luke does not have the ruler prostrate himself before Jesus in an exaggerated gesture
of homage, as Mark does. The man does, however, indulge in exaggerated courtesy by
calling Jesus Good Teacher. As in Mark, Jesus replies dryly and self-deprecatingly:
Why do you call me good, no one is good but God alone.
50. Luke does not say, as Mark does, that Jesus looked on him with love. Nor does Luke
preface the invitation, as Mt does, with the phrase: If you would be perfect. By
adding the phrase, Matthew, as we have seen, depicts imitation of the universality of
divine love.
379
that a camel can pass more easily through the eye of a needle than a rich
man enter the kingdom of God. Luke, however, in contrast to Mark does
not say that the man departed. Instead, Luke leaves it an open question
whether or not the man finally decides to follow Jesus. By leaving the
rulers response ambiguous, Luke foreshadows dramatically the point he
next makes: namely, that God can save even the rich.51 (Lk 18:23-25)
As in the other synoptics, Lukes Jesus also promises Peter that those
who have left all to follow Him will receive much more in return and will
inherit eternal life. Moreover, Luke, like Mark and in contrast to Matthew insists that some of the manifold rewards of discipleship will come
in this life as well as in the life to come. Luke, however, speaks only
vaguely about the much more (pollaplasiona) which the disciples will
receive in this world, while Mark names the benefits: houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands. Luke, moreover,
omits Marks promise that along with the rewards of discipleship will
come persecutions. (Lk 18:28-30; Mk 10:28-31) Luke, in other words,
fails to portray the Church as a second family, as Mark does. Nor does
Luke follow Mark in stressing the inevitability of persecutions.52
During the journey discourse, then, Luke makes the following important affirmations about relating to the Father. 1) Jesus reveals the Father
in a unique and normative way which transforms Him into the personal
paradigm of any human filial relationship to the deity. 2) One who relates to the Father in Jesus image must love Him with an all-consuming
love and must practice a universal, reconciling, liberating charity toward
all people. 3) In times of persecution, the disciples should relate to the
Father with a reverential fear greater than any fear inspired by their persecutors. On the last day, Jesus will testify to the Father on behalf of those
who testify to Jesus in times of persecution. 4) Trust in the Fathers providential care must free the disciples from all covetousness and greed; and
that same trust must inspire in them generous liberality toward all people,
including social outcasts. 5) That same trust should inspire the disciples
to leave their future in the Fathers hands. 6) The Father together with all
the court of heaven rejoices over the repentance of every sinner. 7) The
Father yearns for sinners with a forgiveness which they can never earn. 8)
The Father hears and answers prayers, especially persistent ones. 9) God
has the power to save even the rich. 10) The Father rewards generous
51. Cf. Degenhardt, op. cit., pp. 136-153; Ernest Best, Uncomfortable Words VII: The
Camel and the Needles Eye (Mk 10.25), Expository Times, 82(1970-1971), pp.
83-89; J.W. Whenham, Why Do You Ask Me About Good? A Study of the Relation
Between Text and Source Criticism, New Testament Studies, 28(1982), pp. 116-125;
Walther Zimmerli, Die Frage des Reichen nach dem ewigen Leben, Evangelische
Theologie, 19(1959), pp. 90-97.
52. Cf. NJBC, 43:157; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1195-1201; Evans, op. cit., pp.
648- 655; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 379-383.
380
service in this life and in the next. In the paragraphs which follow, I shall
consider next Lukan texts about the Father taken from Jesus Jerusalem
ministry, passion, and resurrection.
The Father in the Jerusalem Ministry
The dispute over tribute to Caesar occurs in Luke, as in the other synoptics,
during Jesus Jerusalem ministry. As in Mark and Matthew, those who
ask Jesus about paying tribute to Caesar first flatter him hypocritically by
telling Him that He speaks and teaches rightly, fears no one, and teaches
truly the way of God. Mark identifies Jesus adversaries as Pharisees and
Herodians; Matthew calls them Pharisees. Luke, however, portrays them
as spies sent by the temple priests and scribes. (Lk 20:20; Mk 12:13; Mt
22:15) Their mission as spies underscores the hypocrisy of their flattery
of Jesus. Moreover, as we shall see, in Luke the temple priests and Jesus
constantly battle one another for proprietorship of the temple.
As in the other synoptics, Jesus sees through their guile and makes
them show him a Roman coin with Caesars image on it. When they
identify the image, Jesus tells them, as He does in the other synoptics, to
render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar but to God what belongs to
Him. (Lk 20:20-6; Mk 12:13-7; Mt 22:15-22)
Jesus makes no direct pronouncement on the justice or injustice of
Roman taxes, but tells His adversaries to give to Caesar whatever Caesar
has to right to demand of them. Jesus rhetorical emphasis falls, of course,
on His second injunction: namely, render to God what belongs to Him.
As in Mark and Matthew, one can see in Jesus reply an allusion to Gen
1:26-7, which states that God created men and women in His image.
The coin bearing Caesars image belongs to him, while humans, who
bear Gods image, belong to God. Those who render to God what belongs to God therefore reverence His image in others.53
Luke reproduces Marks account of Jesus encounter with the Sadducees
during His Jerusalem ministry. They pose the case of the seven brothers
who married the same wife and ask Jesus whose wife she will be in the
resurrection. (Lk 20:27-32) As in Mark, Jesus rebukes the Sadducees for
confusing resurrection and resuscitation; and He endorses the Pharisaical
belief that the risen body has a heavenly, angelic character.
Lukes Jesus, however, goes beyond Marks when He interprets the meaning of this transformed existence. He says that the risen enjoy immortality, stand on an equal plane with the angels, and enjoy divine sonship, in
virtue of the fact that they are sons of the resurrection. In other words,
for Luke resurrection brings to perfection a humans filial relationship
53. Cf. Herbert Lowe, Render Unto Caesar: Religious and Political Liberty in Palestine
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940); NJBC, 43:170; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II,
pp. 1289- 1298; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 310-319; Evans, Luke, pp. 703-710; Ernst, op.
cit., pp. 410-412.
381
with God which the obedience of faith in this life begins. In also translates one into an angelic mode of existence, different from embodied
human existence. (Lk 20:34-7)
As in the other synoptics Jesus cites Ex 3:6 and argues that the God of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is a God of the living, not of the dead. Hence,
the patriarchs live in God. Luke, however, adds to Marks response, the
phrase: for all live to him. Luke, who writes for a predominantly Gentile audience, makes it clear that Jesus, besides joining the Pharisees in
defending the resurrection of the body, also upholds personal survival
after death.54 (Lk 20:37-40)
Mark locates the dispute among the Twelve about which of them ranks
greatest at the end of the way section of his gospel. (Mk 10:41-5) Luke,
however, places it at the last supper itself, right after Jesus has instituted
the eucharist and has announced His immanent betrayal and death. (Lk
22:14-24) The relocation of the incident puts the disciples in an even
worse light: at the very moment when Jesus faces His ultimate ordeal of
suffering and gives Himself to them eucharistically, they remain ambitious, self-serving, and self-preoccupied.
In addition, after Jesus calls the Twelve to leadership in service, Luke
inserts a slightly modified version of a saying of Jesus which Matthew
places after the story of the rich young man. Then Matthews Jesus promises the disciples a reward for having renounced all to follow Him. At the
last supper Lukes Jesus says:
You are they who have continued with me in my trials; and I assign to you,
as my Father has assigned to me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at
my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of
Israel. (Lk 22:28-30)
Lukes version of this saying of Jesus differs from Matthews in several

notable respects. First, Luke explains why Jesus gives the Twelve special
authority in the Church: they have accompanied Him throughout His
ministry and sufferings. In Acts that same experience will provide the
criterion for choosing someone to replace Judas. (Acts 1:21) Second, Lukes
Jesus names the source of His right to confer judicial authority on the
Twelve: the Father has given the kingdom of God into His hands, so that
He might confer authority within it on those whom He chooses. Moreover, Jesus bequeaths (diatithemai) the kingdom to the disciples. The
verb comes from the same root as diatheke (covenant) and connotes
54. Cf. D.M. Cohn-Sherbok, Jesus Defense of the Resurrection of the Dead, Journal
for the Study of the New Testament, 11(1981), pp. 64-73; F. Dreyfus, O.P., Largument
de Jsus en faveur de la resurrection des morts (Marc XII, 26-27), Revue Biblique,
66(1959), pp. 213-224; NJBC, 43:171; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1298-1308; Johnson,
382
that the transfer of the kingdom will result from the sealing of the covenant which the eucharistic words of Jesus have just prophesied. In other
words, in Lukes ecclesiology apostolic judicial authority functions in a
eucharistic context.55 (Lk 22:20)
Finally, Lukes Jesus, like Matthews, promises that the Twelve will exercise judicial authority in the new Israel; but Luke adds that they will also
share in the messianic banquet with Jesus. Coming after the institution
of the eucharist with its allusion to the eucharist as a covenant, this phrase
points to eucharistic worship as a foretaste of the messianic banquet.
In Matthew Jesus promise especially empowers the Twelve to pass judgment on Israel at the parousia. In Luke, apostolic judgment has the same
ambivalence as eating and drinking at my table in the kingdom. In
Luke one must understand both judgment and table fellowship in the
context of a realized eschatology. In Acts both the proclamation of the
risen Christ and the exercise of disciplinary authority in the Church have
a judgmental character which anticipates the final and full arrival of the
kingdom in the parousia.56 (Cf. Acts 2:1-41; 5:1-11, 8:18-24, 15:1-29)
Luke attenuates even more than Matthew the sense of struggle with which
Mark depicts Jesus prayer in Gethsemane. Lukes Jesus does not fling
Himself to the ground as Marks does. Instead, He kneels down to pray,
just as His disciples will kneel to pray in Acts. (Lk 22:41; Acts 20:22,
36-37) The Father does not respond to Jesus garden prayer in Mark until
Jesus has died, apparently forsaken even by God as He hangs on the cross.
In Luke, the Father responds to Jesus prayer in the garden immediately.
When Lukes Jesus asks the Father to take away the cup of suffering, the
Father responds by sending Him an angel to strengthen Him. (Lk 22:43)
As we have seen, during Jesus desert temptations in Mark, angels support Him as He struggles with Satan. (Mk 1:12-13) The temptation account in Matthew ends with angels ministering to Jesus after He has
vanquished Satan. (Mt 4:10-11) In Lukes narrative of Jesus desert encounter with Satan, the tempter withdraws until a more opportune time
presents itself. (Lk 4:13) No ministering angels appear in Lukes tempta55. Cf. Robert Tannehill, A Study in the Theology of Luke-Acts, Anglican Theological
Review, 143(1961), pp. 195-203.
56. Cf. Jacques Dupont, Le logion sur les douze trnes (Mt 19,28, Lc 22, 28-30),
Biblica, 45(1964), pp. 355-392; Augustin George, S.M., La royaut de Jsus selon
lvangile de Luc, Sciences Ecclesiastiques, 14(1962), pp. 55-69; Jacques Guillet, Une
formule Johannique dans lvangile de Luc? Recherches de Science Religieuse, 69(1981),
pp. 113-122; Juergen Roloff, Anfnge der soteriologische Deutung des Todes Jesu
(Mk x,45 und Lk xxii, 27), New Testament Studies, 19(1972-1973), pp. 38-64; NJBC,
43:181; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1411-1419; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 350-356; Evans, Luke,
pp. 798-801; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 453-457.
383
tion narrative. Instead, the third evangelist introduces a strengthening

angel at the moment when Satan returns to the attack, namely, in
Gethsemane at the beginning of Jesus passion. The hour of renewed Satanic onslaught has arrived; and the Father sends a strengthening angel in
response to Jesus prayer so that Jesus can vanquish Satan this second
time by enduring faithfully the ordeal which awaits Him.
The Fathers immediate response to His prayer heartens Lukes Jesus to
pray more earnestly. In His struggle (agonia), Jesus pours with sweat,
which streams from Him in torrents, like blood. (Lk 22:44) Luke is
probably not thinking of a bloody sweat but of profuse perspiration, which
indicates the intensity of Jesus struggle. The Greek word for struggle
(agonia) connotes the agonistic contests of the athletes in the Roman
arenas. As a consequence of the Fathers immediate response to His prayer,
Lukes Jesus faces His eschatological test with a divine empowerment communicated to Him by the ministering angel. The struggle loses nothing
of its intensity and reality; but Lukes Jesus enters into His ordeal like an
athlete straining for victory.57
Luke also modifies Marks account of Jesus trial before the Sanhedrin.
In Luke, the trial occurs during the morning and not at night, as it does
in the other synoptics. Mark and Matthew both portray Jesus as silent in
the face of accusation, until the high priest questions Him; but Lukes
Jesus dialogues actively with the Sanhedrin.
The dialogue differs somewhat from the final dialogue between Jesus
and the high priest in the other two synoptics. (Lk 22:66-71; Mk 14:55-65;
Mt 26:59-68) In Lukes dialogue, when the Sanhedrin asks Jesus if He is
the Messiah, Jesus replies: If I tell you, you will not believe; and if I ask
you, you will not answer. But from now on the Son of Man will be seated
at the right hand of the power of God. (Lk 22:67-8) Marks Jesus claims
messianic authority outright when questioned by the high priest (Mk
14:62), while Matthews replies more non-committally. Lukes Jesus recognizes that His accusers have already prejudged Him and points to the
uselessness of their pretending justice or fairness in His trial.
While Marks Jesus warns His enemies that He will one day return to
judge them as the eschatological Son of Man, Lukes Jesus speaks of His
present and future enthronement at the right hand of God (apo tou nyn).
His response provokes a further question: Are you the Son of God? to
57. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 180-190; Thorlief Forman, Der
Gebetkampf Jesu, New Testament Studies, 10(1963-1964), pp. 261-273; R.S. Barfour,
Gethsemane in the Tradition of the Passion, New Testament Studies, 16(1969-1970),
pp. 231-251; Jerome Neyrey, The Absence of Jesus EmotionsThe Lukan Redaction of Lk 22, 39-46, Biblica, 61(1980), pp. 153-171; NJBC, 43:184; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, II, 1436-1446; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 350-356; Evans, Luke, pp. 808-813;
384
which Jesus replies: You say that I am. The Sanhedrin then pronounces
Jesus guilty. (Lk 22:69-71; cf. Mk 14:55-65 and Mt 26:59-68)
In contrast to Mark, Luke does not make Jesus assault on the temple
one of the central issues in His trial. Initially, a single issue preoccupies
the chief priests in Luke: namely, Jesus messianic claims. In Luke, therefore the chief priests and Pilate pass the same judgment on Jesus: both
condemn Him as a messianic usurper. Indeed, by always locating Jesus
teaching in the temple, Luke transforms His final Jerusalem ministry into
a struggle between the messiah and the chief priests for control of Gods
house.
Lukes account of the trial makes no mention of blasphemy; but it does
assert that the Sanhedrin condemned Jesus because they viewed Him as
claiming divine Sonship. Jesus claim to enthronement at the right hand
of God places Him in a divine, heavenly realm, on a par with God and
transforms the title Son of God into much more than a messianic title.
It connotes as well divine dignity and prerogative.58
In some versions of Lukes gospel, the crucified Christ prays to the Father a
prayer of forgiveness: Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.
(Lk 23:34a) Jesus seems to pray for anyone responsible for His death.
Moreover, the prayer occurs in a scene of extreme brutality where not
only the chief priests but the Roman soldiers mock Jesus. The priests call
on Jesus to save Himself and prove He is the Christ of God. The soldiers offer Him vinegar to drink and speak in similar terms. Their violent
contempt for a dying man contrasts starkly with the forgiveness which
Jesus begs from His Father.
Lukes Jesus also pardons one of the evildoers crucified with Him. In
the other synoptics, those crucified with Jesus both join in reviling Him.
(Mk 15:32; Mt 27:44) In Luke, one of the malefactors does in fact mockingly challenge Jesus to save both Himself and the two crucified with
Him. The other rebukes the first saying: Do you not fear God, since you
are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly; for
we are receiving the due reward of deeds; but this man has done nothing
wrong. The repentant evildoer then begs Jesus to remember him when
He comes into His kingdom. In response to this compassionate act of
faith, Jesus replies: Truly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in
Paradise. (Lk 23:39-43)
58. Cf. Paul W. Walaskey, The Trial and Death of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke, Journal
of Biblical Literature, 94 (1915), pp. 81-93; Joseph Plevnik, Son of Man Seated at the
Right Hand of God: Luke 22,69, Biblica, 72(1991), pp. 331-347; John Paul Heil,
Reader Response and the Irony of Jesus before the Sanhedrin in Luke 22:66-71,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 51(1989), pp. 271-284; Frank J. Matera, Luke 22, 66-71:
Jesus before the Presbyterion,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 65(1989), pp.
385
The second malefactor proclaims Jesus innocence even as the two of

them die on the cross. In response, the crucified Son of God not only
offers forgiveness to the evildoer even at deaths door but also promises
personal intimacy in the future: you will be with Me. Jesus includes the
repentant malefactor among those who share in the destiny of all Christian believers, a destiny which goes beyond this life and includes the life
to come. That the repentant evildoer will enjoy the blessings of the kingdom today accords well with Lukes earlier assertion of universal human immortality.
Mark and Matthew cite Ps 22:1, the prayer of the innocent poor man,
as Jesus last words; and they portray Jesus dying with a loud cry of inarticulate dereliction. (Mk 15:33-7; Mt 27:45-50) Luke, however, portrays
Jesus dying with a prayer of trust upon His lips. Luke has the dying Jesus
cry out with a loud voice: Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.
(Lk 23:46)
The prayer removes any ambiguity about the meaning of Jesus final
words in Mark: My God, My God, why have your forsaken Me? Luke
apparently did not trust his Gentile audience to recognize these words as
the prayer of the innocent poor man of the psalms who dies trusting in
divine vindication. Instead, the evangelist makes it quite clear that Jesus
did indeed die trusting in the Father to receive His soul and welcome
Him into the divine presence. While Lukes reformulation of Jesus last
words contrasts on first reading with Marks and Matthews passion account, in the end all three synoptic evangelists make the same assertion
about Jesus death: namely, that He died trusting in the Father to vindicate Him and His cause.59
God in the Resurrection
After Jesus rises from the dead and before He ascends into heaven, He
opens the disciples minds to understand that the scriptures had foretold
His death and resurrection. Jesus then instructs the disciples in the following way: You are witnesses to these things. And behold, I send the
promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed
with power from on high. (Lk 24:48-9)
The phrase the promise of my Father refers, as we have seen, to the
fulfillment of John the Baptizers prophecy about the coming of the
mightier one who would baptize with a sanctifying Breath and fire.
Breath-baptism has as its purpose to empower the disciples to proclaim
universal repentance and the forgiveness of sins accomplished in Jesus
59. Cf. Xavier Lon-Dufour, S.J., Le dernier cri de Jsus, tudes, 348(1978), pp.
667-682; NJBC, 43:190-192; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1507-1511; Johnson, Gospel,
pp. 375-385; Evans, Luke, pp. 864-874; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 483-491; George, op. cit.,
185-212.
386
ministry and especially in the paschal mystery. Although Jesus baptizes

with the Holy Breath, the Father once again in Luke functions as the
ultimate source of both Son and Breath.60 (Lk 24:53)
Luke endorses the broad lines of Marks portrait of Jesus relationship to
the Father. Like Mark, Luke portrays that relationship as one of perfect
obedience, unconditioned trust, and absolute love. In all three synoptics,
these attitude characterize the way in which Jesus disciples relate to the
Father. Like Matthew, Luke echoes Mark in portraying the kingdom as
the family of God and regards obedience to the divine will as the condition for membership in that family.
One also finds, however, some typically Lukan stresses in the evangelists
understanding of the disciples relationship to the Father. Typically, in
characterizing the Christians relationship to the Father, Luke stresses the universality of Christian love, the importance of prayer, Gods joy in forgiving
the repentant, and the eschatological dimensions of Christian sharing.
Luke agrees with the other synoptics that one must interpret the great
commandment in the light of Jesus proclamation of the kingdom. Luke,
however, does so by using the parable of the good Samaritan in order to
elucidate the meaning of the second of the two great commandments:
you shall love your neighbor as yourself. In the process, Luke universalizes the scope of the great commandment to include any needy person,
even outcasts, enemies, and heretics.
Luke stresses more than the other synoptics the fact that Jesus prayed
constantly to the Father and holds Jesus up more explicitly than the other
synoptics as the model for Christian prayer. Moreover, Luke reproduces a
briefer version of the Our Father than Matthew,
Luke transforms the final cry with which Jesus dies in Mark and Matthew into a prayer of trust and total self-donation into the Fathers hands.
Luke thus clarifies for his Gentile Christians the meaning of Marks citation of Ps 22:1. Since Luke clearly portrays Jesus as the model of Christian prayer, Jesus final prayer transforms His death into the model Christian death. Jesus dies forgiving His enemies and trusting unconditionally
in the Father.
Mark sought to shore up faith and commitment among Roman Christians in the wake of imperial persecution. Matthew sought to strengthen
the resolve of the church in Antioch as it confronted the synagogue across
the street. Luke especially inculcated those religious attitudes which con60. Cf. Benjamin J. Hubbard, The Commissioning Stories in Luke-Acts: A Study of
Their Antecedents, Semeia, 8(1977), pp. 103-123; NJBC, 43:197; Fitzmyer, Gospel,
II, 1578-1585; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 400-406; Evans, Luke, pp. 916-928; Ernst, op.
cit., pp. 513-515.
387
tradicted the corrupt mores of a Satanic Roman empire: prayer, not

self-reliance; forgiveness, not vengeance; eschatological hope, not
this-worldly security; compassionate care for the poor, not greed and class
distinctions; universal love, not the violent pursuit of self-interest.
This section has reflected on Jesus relationship to the Father. How,
then, does Lukes Jesus relate to the Holy Breath? To this question the
following section turns.
(III)
Luke stresses Jesus relationship to the Holy Breath more than any other
synoptic evangelist.61 For example, as we saw in considering his infancy
narrative, Luke suggests that an outpouring of Gods Breath accompanied the birth of Jesus. Mary conceives Jesus in the divine Breaths power,
an event which transforms her into the tabernacle of God. Elizabeth,
Zachary, and Simeon all experience the divine Breaths enlightenment.
Anna the prophetess foreshadows the Pentecostal Church. (Lk 1:15, 35,
41, 67; 2:25-7, 36-8) This mini-Pentecost foreshadows the multiple
Pentecosts in Acts.
Jesus and the Divine Breath
As we saw above, in Luke as in the other synoptics, John foretells the
coming of the mightier one who will baptize with a sanctifying Breath
and with fire. Luke, then, like Matthew differentiates Jesus relationship
to the Breath from Her relation to His disciples. She comes to Jesus under the sign of the dove in order to reveal Him as beloved Son of God and
as the beginning of a new Israel. She comes to the disciples under the sign
of fire, that is, in purification and judgment. (Lk 3:16, 22) In Acts, Luke
will develop the purification and judgment which the fire of
Breath-baptism effects more extensively than Matthew.
Moreover, Lukes Jesus during His journey discourse longs to cast the
fire of sanctification and of judgment upon the earth, and He links this
saving, judgmental action to His impending passion. His own suffering
and death will complete His own baptismal commissioning and mediate
the coming of the sanctifying Breath of purification and of judgment.62
(Lk 12:49-50)
As we also saw, Luke describes Jesus messianic commissioning in the
power of the Breath in a way which anticipates Her coming on Pentecost.
Luke does so by having Her descend on Jesus after John has finished
baptizing and while Jesus Himself is at prayer. She comes to the disciples
61. Cf. Robert P. Menzies, The Development of Early Christian Pneumatology with Special
Reference to Luke-Acts (Worchester: Billings & Sons Ltd., 1991); Navone, op.cit.,
151-169.
62. Cf. Cesar-Augusto Franco Martinez, Lc 12,50: Angustia de Jess antes de su
muerte?, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 423-441.
388
on Pentecost after they gather in persistent prayer for Her coming. (Acts
2:1-2) As we have already seen, Lukes separation of Her descent from
Jesus baptism mutes the connotations of the image of the dove which one
finds in Marks account of Jesus baptism. Moreover, as we have also seen,
Luke makes the descent of the Breath more public than either of the other
two synoptics by having her settle on Jesus in bodily form.63 (Lk 3:22)
Like Matthew, Luke does not have the Breath drive Jesus into the desert
to confront Satan, as Mark does. She leads (geto) rather than drives. As
in the other two synoptics, however, the Holy Breath presides over the
entire temptation narrative. As in Matthew, therefore, She inspires Jesus
response to Satans temptations. (Lk 4:1)
Luke begins his account of Jesus public ministry very differently from
either Matthew or Mark. Moreover, he does so in a way which calls dramatic attention to the fact that Jesus conducts His ministry in the power
of the divine Breath.64
After His desert temptations Jesus returns to Galilee in the power of
the Breath (en te dynamei tou pneumatos). She inspires His proclamation
of the good news in the synagogues of Galilee. Because of His
Breath-inspired preaching Jesus reputation grows, and all speak in His
praise. (Lk 4:14-5) From the outset of His ministry, Lukes Jesus speaks
and acts as the Breath-filled messenger of good news. As we shall see,
Luke also desires the reader to recognize in Jesus the prophet like Moses
whose coming the book of Deuteronomy had foretold. (Deut 18:18-20)
Luke makes the same point at the beginning of his account of Jesus
rejection at Nazareth, which in Luke opens Jesus public ministry. In
Nazareth Jesus attends the sabbath service in the synagogue. He rises to
read the scriptures and to comment on them. He opens the scroll at a
messianic prophecy in the book of Isaiah:
The Breath of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach
good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord. (Lk 4:18-9)65
63. Cf. A. Feuillet, Le symbolisme de la colombe dans les recits vangeliques du
baptme, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 46(1958), pp. 524-544; Leander E. Keck,
The Spirit and the Dove, New Testament Studies, 17(1970-1971), pp. 41-67; NJBC,
43:49; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 479-487; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 331-347; Ernst, Luke, pp.
117-119; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 68-72.
64. Cf. Navone, op.cit., pp. 132-150, 185-187.
65. Luke rewrites Isaiahs prophecy. The original prophecy reads:
The Breath of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to
bring good tidings to the afflicted; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to captives, and the opening of the prison to those
who are bound. (Is 61:1-2)
389
Luke identifies the afflicted ones to whom Jesus ministers as the poor.
Debtors would have numbered among those whom Jesus seeks to release
from prison; and Lukes text may well have had them particularly in mind.
As we have seen in reflecting on the parable of the good Samaritan, Luke
regards the gospel as a liberating message. Moreover, the release (aphesis)
of debtors connotes the jubilee year when all debts were canceled and
slaves released. The acceptable year which Jesus proclaims also alludes
to the jubilee year, a season which Jesus will extend beyond the limits of
only twelve months. (Cf Ex 23:10-3; Lev 25:1-19)
Jesus informs his fellow townspeople: Today this scripture has been
fulfilled in your hearing. (Lk 4:21) Jesus claim in the other synoptics to
exorcise in the power of Gods Breath makes an analogous point (Mk
4:29; Mt 12:28); but by portraying Jesus at the very start of His ministry
as publicly claiming the Breaths illumination, Luke gives this prophetic
dimension of Jesus ministry more dramatic emphasis. The word today
introduces another important Lukan theme. It refers not so much to historical time as to the present moment of eschatological opportunity and
fulfillment which Jesus ministry inaugurates.
Moreover, Luke attributes this remarkable proclamation to the anointing of the divine Breath. The reference to anointing alludes to Jesus
messianic commissioning on the banks of the Jordan. Luke, however,
seems also to have a prophetic anointing in mind, since the passage lacks
any clear Davidic references. The fact that Jesus in verses 25-7 will compare Himself with the prophets Elijah and Elisha also favors a prophetic
interpretation of Jesus anointing.66
As we saw above, Luke stresses in a way in which Matthew does not
that the divine Breath inspired Jesus Abba awareness. (Lk 10:17-20)
Luke also makes it clearer than the other two synoptics that Jesus disciples should desire the gift of the Holy Breath above any other blessing
which the Father can give. Lukes Jesus says:
And I tell you, Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find;
knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and
one who seeks finds, and to one who knocks it will be opened. What
father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a
serpent; or, if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, who
66. Cf. Finkel Asher, Jesus Sermon at Nazareth in Abraham Unser Vater, edited by Otto
Betz et al. (Kln: Brill, 1963), pp. 106-115; Jeffrey S. Seker, First to the Gentiles:
A Literary Analysis of Luke 4:16-30, Journal of Biblical Literature, 111(1992),
pp.73-90; D.A.S. Ravens, Luke 9.7-62 and the Prophetic Role of Jesus, New
Testament Studies, 36(1990), pp. 119-129; Vittorio Fusco, Luke-Acts and the Future
of Israel, Novum Testamentum, 38(1996), pp.1-7; NJBC, 43:57-62; Fitzmyer, Gospel,
I, pp. 525-540; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 77-82; Evans, Luke, pp. 265-276; Bock, op. cit.,
I, pp. 394-421; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 129-135.
390
are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more
will the heavenly Father give the Holy Breath to those who ask Him? (Lk
11:9-13)
Matthews Jesus says: ....how much more will your Father who is in
heaven give good things to those who ask Him. (Mt 7:11) By changing
the phrase good things into the Holy Breath Luke points to the gift of
the Pentecostal Breath as the Fathers supreme gift to His children. Moreover, he turns the moral of the parable into a kind of prophecy which
anticipates the Breaths arrival on Pentecost. She will come to the disciples as they pray persistently to receive what the Father has promised.67 (Acts 1: 4; 2:1)
As we saw above in reflecting on Jesus relationship to the Father, Jesus,
during His journey discourse, instructs His disciples about how to relate
to Father, Son, and Breath in times of persecution. They should show a
reverential fear of the Father which exceeds the fear they may have of
their persecutors. They should bear fearless witness to Jesus, the Son, so
that He may testify in turn about them to the Father. In this context
Luke introduces Jesus saying about blaspheming the Holy Breath:
And every one who speaks a word against the Son of man will be forgiven;
but one who blasphemes against the Holy Breath will not be forgiven.
And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the
authorities, do not be anxious how or what you are to answer or what you
are to say; for the Holy Breath will teach you in that very hour what you
ought to say. (Lk 12:10-12)
As we saw in both Mark and Matthew, one blasphemes the Breath by

attributing Jesus Breath-inspired exorcisms to Beelzebul. (Mt 12:32; Mk
3:28-29) Luke, by contrast, transforms the sin of Breath-blasphemy into
the apostasy of the Breath-baptized disciple. Luke, like Mark and Matthew, assures the disciples that, when they testify to Jesus under persecution, the Breath will inspire their testimony; so that they need not plan in
advance what they will say.68
Lukes Jesus gives, then, both negative and positive advice about how
the disciples should relate to the Breath in times of persecution. Nega67. Cf. Jacques Dupont, La prire et son efficacit dans lvangile de saint Luc,
Recherches de Science Religieuse, 69(1981), pp. 45-56; NJBC, 43:129; Fitzmyer, Gospel,
II, pp. 913-916; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 176-180; Evans, Luke, pp. 475-487; Ernst, op.
cit., pp. 268-275.
68. Luke follows Mark in attributing the inspiration to the Holy Breath, while
Matthew, who stresses somewhat more than the other two synoptic evangelists that the
Father sends the Breath, has Jesus promise that the Breath of your Father will inspire
the beleaguered disciples. (cf. Mk 13:11; Mt 10:19-20)
391
tively, they should avoid blaspheming Her by denying the faith; positively, they should look to Her to inspire their faithful testimony to Jesus.69
Of all the evangelists, only Luke attempts to describe the actual experience of Breath-baptism which fulfills John the Baptizers prophecy of the
coming of a mightier one. (Lk 3:16) Luke does so initially in his Pentecost account. As we shall see, however, the Baptizers prophecy does not
find fulfillment in the text of Acts until after Peters Pentecost sermon.
Lukes Jesus anticipates Pentecost in a section of the journey discourse
which deals with the need for eschatological readiness. Jesus says:
I came to cast fire upon the earth; and I would that it were already kindled!
I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how I am constrained until it is
accomplished! (Lk 12:49-50)
Jesus then recalls the prophecy of Simeon by warning that He and His
message will sow deep divisions among those who hear it. They will even
pit the members of the same family against one another. (Lk 12:51-53)
The eschatological fire of which Jesus speaks anticipates the fiery tongues
of Pentecost, when the divine Breath will settle on the disciples in purification and in judgment. Their proclamation of the risen Christ which
the fiery tongues anticipate and empower will effect judgment by forcing
a choice for or against the risen Christ. Jesus reference to baptism recalls
His own messianic commissioning and the Baptists prophecy of the coming Breath-baptizer. Pentecost will fulfill that prophecy and extend the time
of eschatological testing which the paschal mystery begins.70 (Lk 22:40)
When the day of Pentecost itself arrives, the community, which includes the reconstituted twelve apostles,71 Mary, Jesus brothers, and about
69. Cf. I. Howard Marshall, Hard SayingsVII, Theology, 67(1964), pp. 65-69; Owen
E. Evans, The Unforgivable Sin, Expository Times, 68(1956-1957), pp. 240-244;
Gottfried Fitzer, Die Snde wider den Heiligen Geist, Theologische Zeitschrift,
13(1957), pp. 161-182; James G. Williams, A Note on the Unforgivable Sin
Logion, New Testament Studies, 12(1965-1966), pp. 75-76; NJBC, 43:133; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, II, pp. 913-916; Evans, Luke, pp. 510-519; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 290-294; Rudolf
Pesch, ber die Authoritt Jesu: Eine Rckfrage anhand des Bekenner- und
Verleugnungsspruchs Lk 12, 8f, in Die Kirche des Anfangs, edited by R. Schnackenburg
et al. (Leipzig: St. Benno Verlag, 1977), pp. 25-55.
70. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Christs Second Baptism (Luke 12:50, Mk 10:38-40),
Expository Times, 100(1989), pp. 294-295.
71. Luke prefaces his account of Pentecost by recording the reconstitution of the Twelve
in the period between Jesus ascension into heaven and Pentecost. At one of their
gatherings, Peter urges the community to elect a replacement for Judas. He proposes
that the community choose someone who has been with us the whole time that the
Lord Jesus was traveling round with us....from the time when John was baptizing until
the day when He was taken up from us. He explains that only someone who has
witnessed Jesus entire ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension can serve as a fit
replacement for Judas. (Acts 1:12-22) The community nominates two candidates,
392
one hundred and twenty disciples, gathers again, presumably as a prolongation of their continuous prayer.72 (Acts 2:1, 1:14)
The arrival of the Breath recalls not only the Baptizers prophecy of the
mightier one but also the images of fire and wind with which John portrayed the judgmental character of Breath-baptism. In Lukes account of
Johns preaching, John, as we have seen, compares Breath-baptism to winnowing, which employs both wind and fire as its instruments. The winnower throws the wheat into the air. The heavier grain falls to earth while
the wind blows away the chaff, which the winnower then burns. John
warns that those who resist Breath-baptism will burn with a fire which
will never go out. (Lk 3:17) Now on Pentecost, the Breath finally arrives
under the same judgmental sign of wind and of fire. The images also
recall Is 66:15-22, which closes an apocalyptic poem describing the regathering of Israel.
The fiery flames which settle on the disciples may also derive from
Roman political iconography. Pliny tells us that, shortly after Julius Caesars
assassination, a comet appeared in the skies and remained for seven days.
(Pliny, Natural History, 2.93-94) Coin portraits of Caesar with a star above
his head began to appear as a symbol of his apotheosis. The emperor
Augustus subsequently appropriated the Julian star with a flaming tail as
a symbol of his own divinity. Coins minted under Augustus show the
emperors head surmounted by a flame and a star. In the Aenead, tongues
of flame and a falling comet point to Anchises, Aeneass son, as the ancestor of
the Roman race. (Virgil, Aenead, 2.634-729); and book eight of the Aenead
describes Augustus triumphing over Antony and Cleopatra with the Julian
star and double flame surmounting his brow. (Ibid., 6.680-681)
In his infancy narrative, Luke proclaimed Jesus rather than Augustus
the divine imperator. (Lk 2:10-13) At the beginning of Acts, the evangelist confronts the reader with an analogous choice: those who follow the
risen Jesus must choose between the flaming tongues of Pentecost, which
foreshadow the judgmental proclamation of the risen Christ, and the
imperial supercephalic flame.73
Joseph and Matthias; but they decide to leave the final choice to God by having the
two candidates draw lots. The lot falls to Matthias. (Acts 1:23-6)
In establishing the criteria for the replacement of Judas, Luke does not intend to
question the authenticity either of Pauls apostolic status or of his witness to the risen
Christ. Rather he concerns himself here with the reconstitution of the Twelve as a
group of leaders who link the apostolic witness to the ministry of Jesus Himself. As the
story of Acts unfolds, Paul, like Peter and, especially, like Stephen before him, will, as
we shall see, render a witness analogous to Jesus own by being drawn through his
testimony to the risen Christ into Jesus passion.
72. Cf. Curt Niccum, A Note on Acts 1:14, Novum Testamentum, 36(1994), pp.
196-199.
73. Cf. Richard Oates, Numismatic Windows into the Social World of Early Christianity: A Methodological Inquiry, Journal of Biblical Literature, 101(1982), pp. 195-223.
393
The group of disciples gathered in the upper room hears the sound of a
powerful wind which fills the house, the sound of God breathing. Tongues
like fire (glossai hosei pyros) settle on the heads of each of the disciples.
The appearance of the tongues designates the entire assembly of the disciples, including the Twelve, as the recipients of the Breath. The Breaths
arrival under the image of tongues foreshadows their proclamation of the
risen Christ in the power of the Breath. The fiery character of the tongues
symbolizes divine holiness and portends the purifying, sanctifying, judgmental character of that proclamation. The disciples infilling with the
Breath manifests itself in their eruption into glossolalic speech, after which
they rush out into the streets.
Pilgrims to Jerusalem express astonishment because each one hears the
disciples speaking in his or her own native language. Nowhere else in
Acts does Luke describe tongues as the miraculous speaking of a foreign
language. One is, then, probably dealing with Lukes midrashic reading
of the Breaths arrival.
The glossolalia which reveals the Breaths arrival foreshadows the
miracle of Pentecost, when those gathered for the feast hear the apostles
proclaim the risen Christ each in his or her own language. The miracle
manifests that the proclamation of Christ will cross over national boundaries and embrace peoples of all nations. Here, however, in the Pentecost
of the Jews, it portends more immediately the regathering of Israel from
the four corners of the earth. That gathering prepares the ingathering of
the Samaritans and of the Gentiles. Luke notes that Jews from every nation
under heaven had gathered in Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost.
In first Corinthians Paul describes the experience of tongues as unintelligible speech. (1 Co 14:8-9) Had those who heard the disciples speaking in tongues actually heard them in their own native voice, they would
have experienced nothing surprising; nor would they have had reason to
suppose the apostles drunk as they do in Lukes narrative. Unintelligible
glossolalic speech might, however, have very well motivated the bystanders charge of drunkenness. (Acts 2:13)
I deem it at least plausible that Lukes description of Pentecost as the
miraculous speaking of foreign languages also alludes by way of reverse
imagery to the story of Babel. At Babel God confounded human tongues
as a strategy for scattering a sinful humanity across the face of the earth.
(Gen 11:1-9) Now on Pentecost God confounds human tongues anew as
a reverse sign of the gathering of Israel from all the nations of the earth.
Moreover, God regathers Israel so that she may serve as the divine instrument for the salvation of the Samaritans and the Gentiles. (Acts 2:1-13)
In other words, the miracle of tongues foreshadows the universal salvation which Breath-baptism will accomplish.74
74. Cf. George T. Montague, Baptism in the Spirit and Speaking in Tongues, Theology
Digest, 21(1973), pp. 342-360; Jacques Dupont, Nouvelles tudes sur les Actes des
394
Does the initial arrival of the Holy Breath under the sign of wind and
tongues like fire fulfill the Baptizers prophecy of the coming of a
Breath-baptizer? At no point does Luke describe the initial arrival of the
Breath as a baptism. Indeed, the term baptism does not appear in Lukes
Pentecost narrative until the end of Peters Pentecost sermon. When the
crowds, touched by Peters words ask what they must do in response,
Peter tells them:
You must repent and everyone of you must be baptized in the name of
Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of
the Holy Breath. The promise which was made is for you and your children, and for all those who are far away, for all those whom the Lord our
God will call to Himself. (Acts 2:38-9)
The promise to which Peter alludes has a double meaning. In the first
instance, it refers to Gods promise to Abraham that in His offspring all
nations would be blessed (Acts 3:25; Gen 12:3). In the second instance,
the promise also alludes to the promise of the Father to which the risen
Christ refers in Acts 1:4. As we have seen, the promise of the Father
means the fulfillment of Johns prophecy of the Breath-baptizer. Peter,
however, refers to a single promise because he sees both promises fulfilled
in the Pentecost event. By becoming Breath-baptizer the risen Christ will
in fact fulfill the promise made to Abraham by incorporating the Gentiles into the new Israel.
Christian baptism, then, in Lukes Pentecost account finally fulfills the
Baptizers prophecy. The arrival of the Breath under the sign of wind and
tongues like fire creates the community of faith into which others can
subsequently enter through baptism. In other words, the initial charismatic arrival of the Breath creates the conditions under which the Baptizers
prophecy will find its subsequent fulfillment; but the actual fulfillment
occurs in the experience of ritual baptism. Later, in Lukes account of the
Pentecost of the Gentiles, when the God-fearing Gentile Cornelius and
his household burst into glossolalic speech, Peter interprets the event not
as a sign that they have already been baptized but that they ought to be.
(Acts 10:44-48)
Like Paul, Luke envisages a complex relationship between the baptized
and the divine Breath. She sanctifies them, and She also empowers them
charismatically. Like Paul, moreover, Luke deems sanctification the more
fundamental of the two relationships. (Cf. 1 Cor 13)
Aptres (Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1984), pp. 193-209; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., The
Ascension of Christ and Pentecost, Theological Studies, 45(1984), pp. 409-440;
A.J.M. Wedderburn, Traditions and Redaction in Acts 2:1-13, Journal for the Study
of the New Testament, 55(1994), pp. 27- 54; NJBC, 43:22-28.
Chapter 15: Ambiguous Dramatic Linkages in Luke
395
Lukes summary account of the life of the Jerusalem community dramatizes the primacy of sanctification among the effects of Breath-baptism.
The community of the baptized listens in faith to the teaching of the
apostles, remains faithful to one another as members of the same family,
cultivates shared prayer and eucharistic worship. In addition, the newly
baptized submit spontaneously to the moral demands of discipleship by
sharing all their possessions in common and by seeing to it that the needs
of no member of the community go unmet. The community practices
Christian hospitality gladly and generously. Even if one concedes the idealized character of this portrait in Acts, it describes the moral ideals to
which the first Christians felt bound in virtue of their baptism in the
Breath; and in the process it holds up to Lukes Gentile community an
ideal to emulate.
The Jewish-Christian character of the community appears in the fact
that in addition to gathering for eucharistic worship, the new Christians
also engage in temple worship. The miracles and signs worked by the
apostles make a deep and wide impression, and many other converts join
the community.75 (Acts 2:42-47)
Among the synoptic evangelists, only Luke actually describes the arrival
of the Breath on Pentecost. She comes in tongues like fire which portend
the judgmental proclamation of the risen Christ. She creates the Christian community through Her charismatic gifts. In Lukes Pentecost narrative, however, ritual baptism fulfills the Baptizers prophecy about
Breath-baptism. Ritual baptism has as its most immediate consequence
the moral conformity of the Christian community to the demands of life
75. Cf. NJBC, 44: 20-28; Bruce, Acts, pp. 49-75; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 13-24; Friedrich
Wilhelm Horn, Glaube und Handeln in der Theologie des Lukas (Gttingen: Vanderhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1983); Maria Ancia Co, The Major Summaries in Acts: Acts 2, 42-47;
4,32-35; 5:12-16: Linguistic and Literary Relationships,Ephemerides Theologicae
Lovaniensis, 68(1992), pp. 49-85; Alan C. Mitchell, The Social Function of Friendship in Acts 2:44-47 and 4:32-37, Journal of Biblical Literature, 111(1992), pp.
255-272; Dietrich Werener, Grenzberschreitung als Lebensprinzip von Kirche
oder: Missionarische Ekklesiogenesis als Werk des Heiligen Geistes, Zeitschrift fr
Mission, 16(1990), pp. 194-210; J.C. ONeill, The Connection between Batpism
and the Gift of the Spirit in Acts, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 63(1996),
pp. 87-103; John Gillman, Possessions and the Life of Faith: A Reading of Luke-Acts
(Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical Press/Michael Glazier, 1991); Kilian McDonnell
and George Montague, Christian Initiation and Baptism in the Holy Spirit: Evidence
from the First Eight Centuries (Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical Press, 1991); Luke
Timothy Johnson, The Acts of the Apostles (Collegeville, MI: The Liturgical Press,
1992), pp. 41-63; Ernst Hnchen, The Acts of the Apostles, translated by Basil Blackwell
(Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1971), pp. 166-196.
396
in the kingdom. The charisms enhance and confirm the apostles preaching and attract new converts into the Jerusalem community.
As in the other synoptic gospels, the Pentecostal Breath comes to the
disciples in order to conform them corporately and personally to Jesus.
As we shall see, in Acts Luke actually describes in some detail how the
proclamation of Jesus transforms Peter, Paul, and Stephen into other
Christs.
Luke gives this familiar theme his own development in other ways as
well. Luke describes Jesus baptism in a manner which foreshadows the
Breath-baptism of the disciples on Pentecost. Luke also stresses more than
the other synoptics the importance of praying for the divine Breath as the
Fathers best gift to those who believe. The same Breath which inspires
Jesus Abba awareness, conforms the Christian community to Him through
both the obedience of faith and charismatic witness. That witness prolongs Jesus public ministry of proclamation, exorcism, and healing.
Finally, Luke, who writes for a predominantly Gentile church, stresses
the universal salvation which Breath-baptism accomplishes. The first Pentecost of the Jews prepares the Pentecosts of the Samaritans and of the
Gentiles. In addition, the tongues like fire which settle on the disciples
heads on Pentecost have prophetic and judgmental meaning. By inspiring the prophetic communitys witness to the risen Jesus, they force a
choice between the reign of God which Jesus and His Church proclaim
and the supercephalic, flaming tongues of an idolatrous Roman empire.
Judgment follows and responds to choice.
This chapter has considered how Luke transforms the positive dramatic
linkages which he finds in Marks gospel. As in the other synoptics, these
positive linkages define the realistic and moral conditions for growth in
Christological knowing. The following chapter considers how Luke modifies and develops Marks negative linkages.
Chapter 14: Negative Dramatic Linkages in Luke
397
Chapter 14
Negative Dramatic Linkages in Luke
Luke develops the same set of negative dramatic linkages as the other two
synoptics. Lukes Jesus relates negatively to Satan and his demons, to the
scribes and Pharisees, to Herod, to the chief priests, and to Pilate.
This chapter divides, then, into five parts. Part one examines Jesus
confrontation with Satan. Part two describes Jesus conflict with the scribes
and Pharisees. Part three analyzes Lukes distinctive depiction of Jesus
relationship to Herod. Part four focuses on Jesus confrontation with the
chief priests. Part five ponders His relationship to Pilate and to the Roman empire whom Pilate represents.
(I)
Luke identifies Jesus tempter in the desert as the devil (tou diabolou).
While Luke does not name the devil as Satan in his temptation narrative,
he elsewhere identifies the two. (Lk 10:18, 11:18, 13:16, 22:3, 31) As in
Matthew then, Lukes Jesus confronts explicitly, not just one who puts
Him to the test, but the chief devil, the prince of darkness himself.
Jesus and Satan
Lukes Satan, moreover, insists more than Matthews that the kingdoms
of this world belong to him to give to whomever he desires. (Lk 4:6) The
boast designates oppressive secular institutions like the Roman empire as
Satanic realities and as anti-Christ. This uniquely Lukan narrative detail
gives one more indication that the evangelist expected his Gentile Christians to define themselves religiously in moral opposition to a demonic
empire and to everything which it incarnated. Matthew, as we have seen,
apparently expected his Petrine Christians to define themselves primarily
over against the synagogue across the street.1
As in Matthew, the devil in tempting Jesus reveals His strategy for opposing the work of the kingdom. The devil seeks to persuade both Jesus
and the members of the new Israel He founds to replace trust in God
with sinful self-reliance, to test God by setting conditions on ones willingness to obey Him, and to replace Gods kingdom with one founded of
coercive violence and law. (Lk 4:3-12)
Luke, however, reverses the order of the last two temptations as we find
them in Matthew. In Luke, Jesus temptations culminate in the temptation to test God. As we have seen, physical movement plays an important
1. Cf. Susan R. Garrett, The Demise of the Devil: Magic and the Demonic in Lukes Writings
(Minneapolis, MI: Fortress, 1989).
398
role in Lukes gospel and in Acts. Luke portrays Jesus ministry as the
movement of the gospel from Galilee to Jerusalem. In placing the temptation atop the temple last, Luke makes the movement of his temptation
narrative parallel the movement of his infancy narrative and of his gospel
as a whole.2
A deeper reason, however, motivates Lukes ordering of the temptations. Luke regards testing God as the supreme temptation confronting
any Christian. As we shall see in considering the teachings of Lukes Jesus,
unconditioned trust in God comes to practical expression in an unconditioned willingness to share ones physical possessions with others. Anyone who sets conditions on the willingness to share ones possessions with
others tests God.
Luke makes this point dramatically in Acts when he tells the story of
Ananias and Sapphira. The story alludes explicitly to Jesus final temptation in the desert and illustrates its relevance to the disciples.
In contrast to the generous Barnabas, who sells his property and gives
all the money it brings to the apostles for distribution to the needy, Ananias
and Sapphira sell their property but turn in only some of the proceeds for
distribution to the poor. They pretend to give all but keep something for
themselves. In other words, the husband and wife set conditions on their
willingness to share with the needy at the same time that they hypocritically play the part of devout, committed Christians. They incarnate therefore the kind of Christian religious hypocrisy which Luke denounces as
Pharisaical. (Lk 12:1)
When Ananias confronts Peter, the apostle says to him:
Ananias, how can Satan have so possessed you that you should lie to the
Holy Breath and keep back part of the money from the land? While you
still owned the land, wasnt it yours to keep, and after you sold it wasnt the
money yours to do with as you liked? What put this scheme into your
mind? It is not to men that you have lied but to God. (Acts 5:3-5)
The unfortunate Ananias instantly drops dead. The same fate awaits his
wife. When Sapphira confronts Peter he says:
So you and your husband have agreed to put the Breath to the test! What
made you do it? You hear those footsteps? They have just been to bury
your husband; they will carry you out too. (Acts 5:8-9)
Sapphira too drops dead.
2. Cf. NJBC: 43:52-54; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 506-520; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 73-77;
399
Here several points need noting. First, Satan is tempting Ananias and
Sapphira to test God, just as he once tempted Jesus. They, however, have
yielded to the temptation. Jesus refused to test God; but they have put
the Holy Breath to the test. They have done so, first, by setting conditions on their willingness to share their possessions with others and then
by hypocritically pretending that they were giving everything to the poor.
Luke, as we have seen, has the Breath come to the disciples under the
sign of fire because She comes to them in purification and judgment. He
tells the story of Ananias and Sapphira as a tale about the way the Breath
judges the sin of testing God. The unfortunate couple suffers instant
retribution.3
When one reads Jesus final temptation in the light of the story of
Ananias and Sapphira, it becomes clear that, for Luke, testing Godi.e.,
setting conditions on ones willingness to trust in Gods providential care
leads one to set conditions on ones willingness to share ones goods with
others, especially with the needy. One tests God by hypocritically pretending to love God unconditionally in the poor while holding back ones
goods from the needy.
Luke therefore made testing God Jesus final and culminating temptation because he wanted to make it clear that this temptation constitutes
the supreme temptation of most Christians.4 In other words, while
Matthews anti-clericalism led him to view replacing the kingdom of God
with power politics as the culminating Christian temptation, Luke feared
that, with the delay of the second coming, his Gentile community was
settling too comfortably into this world. In the process, Lukes community was in his eyes beginning to set conditions both on its trust in Gods
providential care and on its willingness to reach out actively to the poor.
Luke denounces such conditioned faith as rank Christian hypocrisy.5
Mark describes angels ministering to Jesus in His temptations. They
seem to support Him in His confrontation with Satan. (Mk 1:12-13)
Matthew describes angels surrounding Jesus after He has routed the
tempter. (Mt 4:11) Luke omits all mention of angels and ends his temptation narrative by saying: And when the devil had ended every temptation, he departed from Him until an opportune time. (Lk 4:13) Luke
equates the opportune time with Jesus passion. He therefore portrays
Jesus passion as His supreme moment of testing; and, as we have seen,
the evangelist describes angelic succor for Jesus in Gethsemane. In other
words, Luke postpones the angelic support which Mark describe in his
temptation narrative until Satans second assault on Jesus during the latters
3. Cf. NJBC: 43:37; Bruce, Acts, pp. 102-108; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 37-38.
4. Cf. Navone, op.cit., pp. 103-117, 170-181.
5. Cf. NJBC, 43:52-54, 44:37; Johnson, op. cit., pp. 82-93; Hnchen, op. cit., pp.
236-241.
400
passion. During Lukes account of the passion, Satan will sift Peter and
cause him to deny Jesus. (Lk 22:31) Satan will also use Judas as his instrument for destroying Jesus. Moreover, as we shall see, both the chief
priests and Pilate will incarnate the powers of darkness. (Lk 22:3) A ministering angel will succor Lukes Jesus as He prays in Gethsemane prior to
His arrest.
Like Matthew, Luke mutes the theme of demonic conflict which he
finds in Marks version of Jesus desert temptations; but Luke does so for
different reasons. Matthew does so in order to assert the sovereign authority of Jesus, Immanuel, over Satan and his minions. After Jesus temptations Luke postpones Jesus confrontation with Satan until His passion
so that the evangelist can portray Jesus as the joyful prophet of good
news. Luke, then, describes two major conflicts between Jesus and Satan:
one at the beginning of Jesus ministry in the desert; the other, in Jesus
passion. In the first conflict, Satan confronts Jesus personally; in the second he acts through human instruments, through the Satanic institutions of the Roman empire and its clients.6
Luke inserts Marks account of Jesus exorcism at Capernaum after the
story of His rejection at Nazareth. As a result, Luke tells the story of Jesus
in a way which suggests that His move from Nazareth to Capernaum
resulted in part from the hostility of the Nazarenes. In Mark the exorcism
parallels Jesus confrontation with Satan in the desert. Matthew omits
the incident altogether.
Mark describes how the demon, on leaving the screaming demoniac,
convulsed his body. (Mk 1:25) Luke omits these violent descriptive details. Instead, Luke observes: And when the demon had thrown him
down in the midst, he came out of him, having done him no harm. (Lk
4:35) Luke alludes to the violence in Mark by having the demon knock
the man down; but then he immediately assures the reader that no harm
came from the fall.
In both Luke and Mark, however, the story pits the pneumatic authority present in the Breath-filled Jesus against the power of Satan. As in
Mark, Jesus power over demons reveals that He has effectively broken
the devils power over humans.
In Luke as in Mark, after the sabbath ends, the people of Capernaum
bring their sick and possessed to Jesus to heal. As in Mark, the demons
identify Jesus as the Son of God, but he silences them and drives them
6. Cf. Jacques Dupont, Die Versuchung in der Wste (Stuttgart: Katolisches Bibelwerk,
1969), pp. 42-69; Heinz Kruse, S.J., Das Reich Satans, Biblica 58(1977) pp. 29-61;
Wilhelm Wilkens, Die Versuchungsgeschichte Luk. 4, 1-13 und die Komposition
des Evangeliums, Theologische Zeitschrift, 30(1974), pp. 267-272; Niels Hydahl, Die
Versuchung auf die Zinne des Temples, Studia Theologica, 15(1961), pp. 113-127.
401
out. (Lk 4:40-1; cf. 8-26-34) The messianic secret does not, however,
play as prominent a role in Luke as in Mark.7
Luke includes in his gospel Mark allegorical interpretation of the parable of the sower. In so doing, he also endorses Marks portrayal of the
devil as the enemy of faith in Jesus. (Lk 8:12)
Luke introduces only minor editorial changes into Marks story of the
Gerasene demoniac. As in Mark, the exorcism follows Jesus calming of
the storm, a cosmic miracle which manifests His divine authority over
the forces of chaos. (Lk 8:22-5) Luke, like Mark, notes that the demon
endowed the demoniac with dangerous, preternatural strength but edits
out Marks comment that the demon caused the man to mutilate himself.
(Lk 8:29, Mk 5:3-5) As in Mark, the story dramatizes Jesus power over
the demonic realm despite its power and numbers. When Jesus drives
Legion into the swine, they rush headlong into the sea over which Jesus
has just exercised divine authority. (Lk 8:30-3, Mk 5:9-13)
The event has the same symbolism as in Mark. In calming the storm,
Jesus, has already mastered the forces of chaos symbolized by the sea.
Now He conquers Satan and His minions by hurling them into the same
sea which with divine authority He mastered through a mere word. Satans
minions include the Roman legions and the empire which they serve.
Their destruction in the Sea of Galilee recalls the destruction of Pharaoh
and his army in the Red Sea. In Mark, Rome serves especially as a symbol
of persecution and oppression. In Luke, Rome symbolizes more the moral
corruption from which his Gentile Christians must distance themselves.
As in Mark, those whom Lukes Jesus delivers from the power of Satan
He transforms into His witnesses. When the Gerasenes beg Jesus to leave
their country and He complies, the delivered demoniac begs permission
to go along with the other disciples. Jesus, however, sends him to his own
people to testify to what God has done for him. As in Mark, his proclamation of Jesus foreshadows the risen Christs proclamation to the Gentiles.8 (Lk 8:34-9; Mk 5:14-20)
As in the other synoptics, Jesus, in sending the Twelve out to evangelize, also communicates to them the power of heal and to exorcise. (Luke
9:1-2; Mk 6:7; Mt 10:1) By involving the Twelve in the work of evangelization, Jesus draws them into His own onslaught on the kingdom of
7. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Getting on Top of a Demon (Luke 4:39), Evangelical
Quarterly, 65(1993), pp. 99-109; Charles H. Talbert, The Lukan Presentation of
Jesus Ministry in Galilee, Luke 4:31-9:50, Review and Expositor, 64(1967), pp.
485-497; NJBC, 43:53-66; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 525-540; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
540-554; Evans, Luke, pp. 277-283; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 394-421.
8. Cf. John. F. Craghan, C.SS.R., The Gerasene Demoniac, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
30(1968), pp. 522-536; NJBC, 43:106-107; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 541-547;
Johnson, Gospel, pp. 135-140; Evans, Luke, pp. 382-387; Bock, op. cit., I, pp.
428-435; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 136- 138.
402
Satan. Later, Jesus will extend the same mission to all disciples by commissioning the seventy-two. Their commissioning will extend symbolically the work of evangelization to the Church as a whole. In Acts, Luke
narrates that proclamation. (Lk 10:1-16)
After the transfiguration, Luke records a severely edited version of Marks
account of the exorcism of the demoniac, epileptic boy. Like Matthew,
Luke in the process of editing Mark eliminates all the symbolic and allusive details from Marks original text. Luke thus transforms Marks highly
symbolic account of the deliverance into a straightforward exorcism which
reveals primarily the divine majesty manifest in Jesus power to deliver
and to heal.9 (Lk 9:37-43)
When, during the journey discourse, the seventy-two disciples return
from their missionary work reporting that even the demons are subject
to us in your name, Jesus announces:
I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the
enemy; and nothing shall hurt you. Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this
that the spirits are subject to you; but rejoice that your names are written
in heaven. (Lk 10:17-20)
Only Luke among the synoptic evangelists records the mission and
return of the seventy-two disciples, who foreshadow the missionary activity of the Pentecostal Church. Jesus response to the disciples report of
apostolic success makes it clear that the proclamation of the kingdom
with healing and exorcism casts Satan out of heaven. Satans fall symbolizes his loss of power; but it also suggests that the court of a forgiving
Father has no place in it for the scheming angelic prosecuting attorney of
the book of Job. (Job 1:6-12, 2:1-7)
As we have seen, the mission of the seventy-two extends the earlier
mission of the Twelve to the entire Church. Hence, the entire Christian
Churchs prophetic witness to Jesus routs Satan and casts him out of the
heavenly court.10
9. Cf. NJBC, 43:117; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 805-818; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 157-161;
10. Cf. Pierre Grelot, Etude Critique de Luc 10, 19, Recherches de Science Religieuse,
69(1980), pp. 87-100; Friedrich Spitta, Der Satan als Blitz, Zeitschrift fr die
Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 179(1988), pp. 160-163; Julian V. Hills, Luke
10.18Who Saw Satan Fall, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 46(1992),
pp. 25-40; David Crump, Jesus the Victorious Scribal Intercessor in Lukes Gospel,
Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 38(1992), pp. 51-65; Samuel Vollenweider,
Ich sah den Satan wie einen Blitz von Himmel fallen (Lk 10:18), Zeitschrift fr die
Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 79(1988), pp. 187-203; NJBC: 43:124; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, I, pp.858-864; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 166-171; Evans, Luke, pp. 543-556.
403
Jesus second response to the disciples report of success warns them

against charismania, against coveting charismatic prowess and power over
the demonic realm for its own sake. Such powers in themselves do not
guarantee salvation. The disciples authority to tread on serpents and scorpions assures them of protection against physical harm; but that too does
not save. Only having ones name recorded in heaven does. That record
insures ones entry into the heavenly realm.11
Luke modifies Marks account of the controversy over Beelzebul in several ways. First, Luke contextualizes the controversy differently. Mark has
scribes from Jerusalem make the accusation. (Mk 3:22) In Luke the controversy occurs right after the exorcism of a deaf and dumb demoniac.
The man, once delivered, hears and speaks. Luke then mentions that
some witnesses of the exorcism made the charge that Jesus has delivered
the man by invoking the power of Beelzebul. (Lk 11:14-5, 12:10) Matthew records a similar exorcism but attributes the blasphemy to the Pharisees. (Mt 9:32-33) In both Matthew and Luke, the exorcism has the same
symbolic connotations: those whom Jesus delivers from the power of Satan He also empowers us to hear and proclaim the good news. Such faith
contrasts with the unbelief of Jesus adversaries.
Second, Lukes Jesus replies to the slander in much the same way as He
does in the other synoptics. (Lk 11:17-19; Mk 3:24-7; Mt 12:25-8) As
noted above, however, Lukes Jesus, in contrast to Marks and Matthews,
claims to exorcise not by the power of Gods Breath but by finger of
God. Both texts claim divine power for Jesus exorcisms; but in Luke,
the allusion to Ex 8:15 further develops the evangelists portrait of Jesus
as the prophet like Moses. As we also saw, in Exodus the Pharaohs magicians recognize that Moses does miracles through the finger of God.
The phrase suggests that Jesus adversaries have less insight than these
pagan magicians. The link with exodus also implicitly portrays the deliverance from Satan which Jesus effects as divine liberation.
Third, like Matthews Jesus, Lukes ends with the stern warning: Whoever is not with Me is against Me and whoever does not gather with me
scatters. (Lk 11:23; Mt 12:30) Unless Jesus adversaries renounce their
unbelief and recognize the arrival of Gods reign in Jesus exorcisms, they
will find themselves routed with Satan and His minions. While Matthew
directs Jesus warning to the Pharisees, Luke targets the unbelieving crowds.
In other words, Luke universalizes the warning.
Finally, Luke differs from the other synoptics in his handling of this
incident by making no reference whatever to blasphemy against the Holy
11. Jesus warning resembles themes enunciated in 1 Co 13. There Paul insists that
without faith, hope, and love charismatic prowess counts for nothing. It also recalls
Matthews insistence that the obedience of faith saves while the mere possession of
charismatic gifts does not. (Mt 7:21-3) (Cf. NJBC, 43:125; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke,
II, pp. 864-876; Evans, op. cit., pp. 453-456; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 250-256.
404
Breath. As we saw above, Luke equates Breath-blasphemy with the apostasy of the baptized Christian.12
During the journey discourse, Luke on another occasion equates deliverance from Satan with liberation. Jesus cures a woman whose infirmity
has deprived her of the ability to stand up straight, He defends His right
to cure her on the sabbath by saying to the ruler of the synagogue who
protests against sabbath healing:
You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the sabbath untie his ox or his ass
from the manger and lead it away to water it? And ought not this woman,
a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen years, be loosed
from this bond on the sabbath day? (Lk 13:15-6)
In describing the woman as having lived in bondage to Satan for eighteen years Jesus assimilates her infirmity to the afflictions which Satan
visited on Job to test His faith in God. (Job 2:8-10) Some exegetes have
read the womans condition as demon possession, since the evangelist
attributes her infirmity to a spirit (pneuma). Luke, however, is probably
personifying the illness rather than attributing it to demon possession as
such. In healing the woman, however, Jesus liberates her from the severe
testing to which Satan has subjected her.
Lukes Jesus also rebukes the sexism of His antagonists who value chattel more than a Jewish woman who enjoys personal human dignity. Implicitly, then, Luke also rebukes the sexism of Graeco-Roman society.
The womans faith and praise also mark her as a model of belief and
contrast her with Jesus unbelieving adversaries. No other evangelist records
this incident.13
In Luke as in the other synoptics, Satan personifies all those forces which
oppose Jesus and the kingdom. On the whole Luke endorses Marks por12. Cf. Robert J. Scirock, Whose Exorcists are They? The Referents of hoi hyioi hymon
at Matthew 12:27/Luke 12:27, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 46(1992),
pp. 41- 51; B. Couroyer, O.P., Le droit de Dieu, Revue Biblique, 63(1956), pp.
481-495; A. George, Note sur quelques traits lucaniens de lexpression Par le droit
de Dieu (Luc XI, 20), Sciences Ecclesiastiques, 18(19660), pp. 461-466; NJBC,
43:130; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 916-923; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 180-184; Evans, Luke, pp.
488-493; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 276-280.
13. Cf. Robert F. OToole, S.J., Some Exegetical Reflections on Luke 13, 10-17,
Biblica, 73(1992), pp. 84-107; Joel B. Green, Jesus and a Daughter of Abraham
(Luke 13:10-17): Test Case for a Lucan Perspective on Jesus Miracles, Catholic
Biblical Quarterly, 51(1989), pp. 643-654; John Wilkinson, The Case of the Bent
Woman in Luke 13:10-17, Evangelical Quarterly, 49(1977), pp. 195-205; NJBC,
43:139; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1009-1014; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 210-215; Evans,
Luke, pp. 549-553; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 314-316.
405
trait of Satan. Characteristically, however, Luke stresses hypocrisy and

greed as two related Satanic temptations against which believers should
especially arm themselves. The evangelists emphasis suggests that both
posed a problem in the community for which he wrote. The problem
stems from the false values of Greco-Roman society, which Luke depicts
as a Satanic source of testing God.
Luke alone among the synoptic evangelists portrays the proclamation
of the kingdom in power, through works of exorcism, as having the effect
of casting Satan out of heaven. The image dramatizes Satans overthrow;
but it also suggests that the heavenly court of a merciful, forgiving Father
has no use for a conniving angelic prosecuting attorney. All of this accords well with Lukes stress on divine forgiveness.
Like Matthew, Luke mutes Marks theme of demonic conflict but does
so for a different reason. Matthew finds it unsuitable that God-with-us
should struggle with demons. Luke desires to portray Jesus as the promised second Moses, as a Breath-filled prophet of good news whose coming evokes joy, gratitude, and praise.
This section has considered the first of Lukes negative dramatic linkages. The section which follows examines the second: namely, Jesus relationship with the scribes and Pharisees.
(II)
All three synoptics portray Jesus in an adversarial relationship to the scribes
and Pharisees. In Mark, from the very beginning of Jesus ministry, they
conspire with the Herodians to destroy Him. (Mk 3:1-6) Luke, more
than Matthew, seems to find this portrait of the relationship between the
Pharisees and the Herodians as overdrawn or perhaps as irrelevant to his
community. Like Matthew (Mt 12:9-14), Luke edits out Marks reference to the conspiracy.
Moreover, Luke more than either Mark or Matthew refuses to stereotype the Pharisees in their relationship to Jesus. Luke, for example, puts
some Pharisees in friendly relationship with Jesus and in an adversarial
relationship with Herod. During the journey discourse, concerned Pharisees warn Jesus that Herod desires His death. Moreover, elsewhere in his
gospel, Luke suggests that Jesus evoked a variety of responses from the
Pharisees, not just hostility. Nevertheless, conflict between Jesus and the
Pharisees does escalate as Lukes narrative unfolds.14 (Lk 13:31-33)
14. Cf. David B. Gowler, Host, Guest, Enemy, and Friend: Portraits of the Pharisees in Luke
and Acts (New York, NY: Peter Lang, 1991); Joseph B. Tyson, The Death of Jesus in
Luke-Acts (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1986), pp. 64-72.
406
Jesus and the Pharisees

Luke reproduces with minor editorial changes the five conflict stories
which open Mark. Luke even expands slightly Marks account of the controversy over the healing of the paralytic.15 None of Lukes changes, however, modify the central point of the healing story: namely, that Jesus
claimed the power to forgive sins, a power which only God possesses.
Lukes Jesus also validates His claim by the miraculous cure of the paralytic. (Lk 5:17-26; Mk 2:1-12; Mt 9:1-8)
As in the other synoptics, after Jesus calls Matthew the tax collector,
He comes under attack by Pharisees for eating with tax collectors and
sinners.16 In relating the encounter, Luke again makes fundamentally the
same point as the other synoptic evangelists. Jesus justifies His socializing
with tax collectors and sinners by His mission from the Father to summon sinners to repentance. Just as doctors risk contact with disease to
cure illness, so too Jesus risks contact with sin to reclaim the sinner. (Lk
5:27-32; Mk 2:14-7; Mt 9:10-13)
In the controversy over fasting, Mark says that some of Jesus listeners
asked Him why His disciples did not fast like the scribes and Pharisees.
(Mk 2:18) Matthew attributes the question to the disciples of John. (Mt
9:14-7) Luke attributes it to the Pharisees and portrays the question as a
prolongation of the debate over table fellowship with sinners. Jesus replies substantially as He does in the other synoptics.17 (Lk 5:33-9)
As we have seen, however, Lukes Jesus appends the following proverb
to His response: And no one after drinking old wine desires new; for he
15. Luke makes the following principal changes in Marks text. He does not, as Mark does,
identify the site of the miracle as Capernaum. (Lk 5:17; Mk 2:1) Instead of identifying
Jesus adversaries simply as scribes, as Mark does (Mk 2:6), Luke speaks of Pharisees
from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem itself. (Lk 5:17) Luke
stresses that Jesus healed the paralytic in the power of the Lord. (Lk 5:17) Luke also
describes in greater detail than Mark the difficulty the friends of the paralytic had in
getting the man to Jesus. (Lk 5:18) He states that the roof through which they lowered
the man consisted of tiles; Mark leaves its composition vague. (Lk 5:19, Mk 2:4) In
Mark Jesus calls the man child (teknon), while Luke has Jesus call him man
(anthrpe). (Lk 5:20; Mk 2:4) Luke adds the term alone to the question of the
scribes and Pharisees: Who can forgive sins but God? (Lk 5:21; Mk 2:7) Luke stresses
in a way Mark does not the instantaneous character of the cure. (Lk 5:25) Finally, Luke
intensifies the reaction both of the cured paralytic and of those who witness the
miracle. (Lk 5:26; Mk 2:12)
16. Mark calls Jesus attackers scribes who also belong to the party of the Pharisees. (Mk
2:16) Matthew calls them simply Pharisees. (Mt 9:11) Luke tries to clarify what Mark
says by calling them the Pharisees and their scribes. (Lk 5:30)
17. Jesus compares Himself to the divine bridegroom and says that the joy His presence
brings the disciples prevents their doing penance. He predicts that they will fast after
His death, a reply that points to fasting in the apostolic Church as the expression of
eschatological longing. Finally, Jesus uses the parables of the patch and the wineskins
to point to the novelty of what He and His ministry embody.
407
says The old is good. (Lk 5:39) The proverb dramatizes the contrast
between traditional forms of piety and the new and joyful message of the
kingdom. One too habituated to traditional forms of piety will find Jesus
new vision unpalatable. At the same time, the proverb sanctions the good,
the validity of ancient Jewish traditions. The newness which Lukes Jesus
brings endorses and builds upon a more ancient revelation. This endorsement of Old Testament revelation develops Lukes polemic against those
Jews who failed to recognize in Jesus the promised prophet like Moses.18
Like Matthew, Luke edits out a number of details from Marks account
of the controversy with some Pharisees over picking grain on the sabbath
but without changing the storys point, namely, that as Son of Man Jesus
exercises Lordship over the sabbath.19 (Lk 6:1-5; Mk 2:23-8; Mt 12:1-8)
As in Mark, a second conflict over sabbath violations closes this cycle
of conflict stories. It too involves scribes and Pharisees. Despite minor
editorial variations the story makes the same fundamental point. Jesus
defends His right to heal the man with the withered hand on the sabbath
by appealing to the traditional Jewish belief that doing good deeds does
not violate the sabbath rest. (Lk 6:6-11; Mk 3:1-6; Mt 12:9-14) Later,
the cure of the man with dropsy makes a similar point. (Lk 14:1-6)
Luke, then, endorses Marks overall account of the issues which divided
Jesus and the Pharisees: Jesus authority to forgive sins, His table fellowship with sinners, His lack of austerity, and His violation of the sabbath
rest. We find here, however, one special Lukan emphasis: the Pharisees
rigid traditionalism, despite its ancient validity, prevents them from accepting the novelty of Jesus message.20
Only Luke tells the story of the woman who was a sinner. While Jesus
reclines at table with Simon the Pharisee, a woman (a known sinner but
not necessarily a harlot) crashes the stag party, washes Jesus feet with her
tears, and anoints them with ointment.
18. Cf. A.H. Mead, Old and New Wine: St. Luke 5:39, Expository Times, 99(1988), pp.
234-235.
19. Luke, like Matthew, makes no mention of Abiathar the high priest and omits the
maxim: The sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the sabbath. Luke
replaces Marks remark that the disciples were making their way through the fields with
the detail that they not only plucked the heads of grain but rubbed them with their
hands to detach the grain and eat it. Unlike Matthew, Luke makes no mention of the
temple or the fact that Jesus holds greater dignity than the temple. In Lukes
streamlined version of the story, it makes a single, clear theological point: Jesus justifies
actions which the Pharisees regarded as violations of the sabbath by appealing to the
precedent of David doing legally unlawful things which human need justified. In
addition, Jesus claims Lordship over the sabbath. Like Marks readers, Lukes would
have seen in that claim to Lordship an allusion to the Lordship Jesus enjoys in virtue
of His resurrection. Cf. Jean Bernardi, Des chiffres et des lettres: le Texte de Luc 6.1,
Revue Biblique, 101(1994), pp. 62- 66.
408
Lukes story bears only superficial resemblance to the story recorded in

both Mark and Matthew of the woman who anointed Jesus on His head
prior to His passion. (Mk 14:3-9; Mt 26:6-13) While both stories mention an anointing, in Marks and Matthews tale, the woman gives Jesus a
messianic anointing on the head. In Luke, she anoints his feet. In Mark
and Matthew, she anoints Jesus body for burial. In Luke she anoints
Jesus feet in love and gratitude for having been forgiven. In the end, the
two stories describe different events and make very different points.
It would appear that Simon has invited Jesus to dine with him more
out of curiosity than friendship; for Simon discourteously omits offering
to Jesus the opportunity to wash His feet on arrival. The woman makes
up for Simons rudeness.
Simon instantly and silently dismisses Jesus prophetic pretensions on
the basis of the fact that a prophet would have known the womans sinfulness and would not have incurred the defilement of allowing her to
touch Him. Simon also seems outraged at the womans loosing her hair
in public, a shocking gesture for a Jewish woman of the time to perform.
(Lk 7:36-39)
Jesus, however, immediately proves His prophetic insight to the skeptical Simon. He reads Simons thoughts and rebukes him with a parable.
Jesus tells of a creditor who forgives two debts, one trivial, the other the
equivalent of five hundred days wages and asks Simon which debtor would
have shown greater gratitude. When Simon replies that the one who owed
more would, Jesus approves his answer and adds:
Do you see this woman? I entered your house, but you gave me no water
to wash my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them
with her hair. You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed
my feet with ointment. Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are
forgiven, for she loved much; but one who is forgiven little, loves little.
(Lk 7:44-47)
By His response to Simon, Jesus proves that He does indeed have prophetic insight into the womans religious condition. The womans gestures of love and gratitude prove to Him that she has heard His proclamation of divine forgiveness, has believed it, and has repented of her sins.
Jesus also reveals that He knows and rebukes Simons secret, censorious
thoughts. Simon, not Jesus, has misjudged the woman. As a result of her
faith and repentance she no longer counts as a sinner in Gods eyes. Her
gestures of homage toward Jesus flow from the love and gratitude she
feels for having claimed the divine forgiveness which He has announced
and embodies.
Jesus then turns to the woman and says, Your sins are forgiven. This
further scandalizes those at table who ask, Who is this who even forgives
409
sins. Jesus, however, does not take back His words. Instead, He commends the saving faith which has motivated the womans repentance and
acceptance of the divine forgiveness which He proclaims.21 (Lk 7:48-50)
The Pharisees in the Journey Discourse
In the course of the journey discourse, Lukes Jesus rebukes the Pharisees
for their cupidity. The rebuke occurs at yet another banquet hosted by a
Pharisee. When the host shows astonishment that Jesus omitted the ceremonial washing of hands prior to eating, Jesus first rebukes his unspoken censure. Then Jesus says:
Now you Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but
inside you are full of extortion and wickedness. You fools! Did not he who
made the outside make the inside also? But give for alms those things
which are within (ta enonta); and behold everything is clean for you. (Lk
11:39-41)
Matthew includes among his woes an analogous saying of Jesus.

Matthews Jesus accuses the Pharisees of extortion and rapacity. He also
summons the Pharisees to cleanness of heart. (Mt 23:25-6) Lukes Jesus
condemns their greed and wickedness, and He reminds them that the
one who made the outside of the cup also made the inside. Lukes Jesus
uses the metaphor of a potter to allude to the fact that God, who creates
all things creates the human heart as well. On Jesus lips this saying would
have challenged the Pharisees to a genuine interiorization of religious
ideals instead of squabbling over ritual externals.22
Then in a typical Lukan twist, Jesus exhorts the Pharisees to replace
extortion and wickedness with active concern for the poor. Jesus phrase
21. Cf. John J. Kilgallen, A Proposal for Interpreting Luke 7,36-50, Biblica, 72(1991),
pp. 303-330; Forgiveness of Sins (Luke 7:36-50), Novum Testamentum, 40(1998),
pp. 105-116; D.A.S. Ravens, The Setting of Lukes Account of the Anointing, New
Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 282-292; Otfried Hofius, Fusswaschung als Erweis
der Liebe: Sprachliche und sachliche Anmerkungen, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 181(1990), pp.171-177; Ulrich Wilckens, Vergebung fr die
Snderin (Lk 7,36-50) in Orientierung an Jesus, edited by Paul Hoffmann et al.
(Freiburg: Herder, 1973), pp. 394-424; Hans Drexler, Die grosse Snderin, Lukas
7:36-50, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 59(1968), pp. 159-173;
Paul Jouon, La pcheresse de Galilee et la parabole des deux debiteurs (Luc 7, 36-50),
Recherches de Science Religieuse, 29(1939), pp. 615-619; John R. Donahue, S.J., The
Penitent Woman and the Pharisee: Luke 7:36-50, American Ecclesiastical Review,
142(1960), pp. 414-421; R. Holst, The One Anointing Jesus: Another Application
of Form Critical Method, Journal of Biblical Literature, 95(1976), pp. 435-446;
NJBC, 43:99-100; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 683-692; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 127-130;
22. Cf. Jacob Neusner, First Cleanse the Inside: The Halakhic Background of a
Controversy Saying, New Testament Studies, 22(1975-1976), pp. 486-495.
410
those things which are within (ta enonta) has received a variety of interpretations. It probably refers to the contents of cup and dish, i.e. food
and drink. In that case, Jesus is simply exhorting the Pharisees to share
the physical supports of life with the poor. Others, however, think that
Jesus is exhorting the Pharisees to give alms from the heart: i.e., to replace
extortion and wickedness with heartfelt concern for the poor. In either
case, Jesus is clearly calling for repentance of greed and wickedness and
for active concern for the needy. Moreover, He does so with the assurance
that such conduct will make the Pharisees inwardly as well as outwardly
clean. For Jesus purity of heart counts for much more than mere ritual
purity.23
The issue of Pharisaical greed surfaces again later in the journey discourse. There Luke notes that the Pharisees loved wealth. They therefore
scoff at Jesus when He teaches that one cannot serve God and money.
(Lk 16:13-4) Apparently the Pharisees covet wealth for the good esteem
its possession will bring them. Jesus, however, rebukes their vanity and
cupidity:
You are those who justify yourselves before others, but God knows your
hearts; for what is exalted among humans is an abomination in the sight of
God. (Lk 16:15)
The hypocrisy of the Pharisees sets them against Jesus; and their
self-righteous refusal to repent transforms them into an abomination in
Gods eyes. They fallaciously regard wealth as the reward and sign of virtue
while pretending to a virtue they do not possess. In rebuking Pharisaical cupidity, Luke, who writes for a predominantly Gentile audience, also targets
Christians who imagine that they can reconcile faith and the amassing of
wealth. The other synoptic evangelists fail to record this incident.24
During the journey discourse Jesus, as we have just seen, rebukes Pharisaical greed at a banquet. At the same banquet, Jesus then utters three
woes against the Pharisees:
But woe to you Pharisees! for you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and
neglect justice and the love of God; these you ought to have done, without
neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! for you love the best seat in
the synagogues and salutations in the market places. Woe to you! for you
are like graves which are not seen, and men walk over without knowing it.
(Lk 11:42-44; cf. Mt 23:5-7, 23-6)
23. Cf. NJBC, 43:132; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 941-953; Evans, op. cit., pp. 500510; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 285-290.
24. Cf. NJBC, 43:50; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1111-1114; Evans, Luke, pp. 604-605;
411
Both Luke and Matthew may derive the woes from Q, but Luke offers
a terser version of them than Matthew. Luke omits the epithet hypocrites, which Matthew repeats over and over. For Luke as for Matthew,
however, religious hypocrisy remains the issue.
Lukes Jesus accuses the Pharisees of replacing concern for the true intent of the Lawjustice and the love of Godwith concern for external
and relatively superficial things like tithing. As in Matthew, Jesus does
not condemn the practice of tithing as such. Instead, he calls attention to
the fundamental intent of the Law: to promote love of God and just
dealings with ones neighbor.
Lukes Jesus next rebukes love of public honors and adulation. Jesus is
not only objecting to the vanity which such love expresses, but to its
hypocrisy as well: the Pharisees desire honor and praise but neglect justice and the love of God. Craving for public honor hides their inner corruption. The final rebuke also points to the Pharisees as a source of impurity in others, since under the Law those who came in contact with graves
incur legal defilement.
This diatribe against the Pharisees provokes a protest from one of the
lawyers, or scribes, also present at the dinner. Jesus responds by including
them in his Jeremiad. Matthew, of course, directs all the woes impartially
against the scribes and Pharisees. Luke divides them between the lawyers
and the Phraisees. Symmetry with the three authentic Lukan beatitudes
may motivate the division. (Lk 6:20-3)
Jesus denounces the lawyers 1) for using the Law to oppress people
rather than to liberate them; 2) for pretending devotion to the memory
of the prophets while cultivating the same murderous attitude toward
them as their ancestors; and 3) for failing to grasp the true wisdom present
in Torah and thereby preventing others from doing so as well:
Woe to you lawyers also! for you load people with burdens hard to bear,
and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers.
Woe to you! for you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers
killed. So you are witnesses and consent to the deeds of your fathers; for
they killed them and you build their tombs. Therefore, the wisdom of
God said: I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they
will kill and persecute, that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the
foundation of the world, may be required of this generation, from the
blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar
and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you it shall be required of this generation.
Woe to you lawyers! for you have taken away the key of knowledge; you
did not enter yourselves, and you hindered those who were entering. (Lk
11:45-54; cf. Mt 23:4, 13, 29-36)
Luke attributes the promise of retribution for murdering the prophets

to the Wisdom of God, while Matthew puts it on Jesus own lips. The
412
wisdom text which Luke cites, however, never appears in the Old Testament. Like Matthew, Luke leaves vague the promised retribution for shedding prophetic blood; but the evangelist probably saw this prophecy fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem. Not surprisingly, the Pharisees and
lawyers whom Jesus has attacked react with hostility.25 (Cf. Lk 11:53-54,
13:31-35, 19:41-44)
In all three synoptics leaven symbolizes an evil influence which can
gradually permeate the conscience.26 Marks Jesus warns against the leaven
of the Pharisees and of Herod, and makes it clear that the attitudes which
they embody contradict eucharistic faith. (Mk 8:15) Matthews Jesus warns
against the leaven of the Pharisees and Saducees and identifies the leaven
with their teaching. (Mt 16:16) Lukes Jesus warns against the leaven of
the Pharisees only, and identifies it with hypocrisy. (Lk 12:1) The warning provides an important key to Lukes narrative portrait of the Pharisees. They function in His gospel primarily as symbols for Christian religious hypocrisy.
Lukes Jesus also promises that everything, even secret sins, will finally
come to light. The promise has eschatological overtones and probably
refers to the last judgment. (Lk 12:2-3) It also dramatizes the futility of
religious pretense before an all-knowing God.27
During the journey discourse Luke develops further the theme of Pharisaical hypocrisy. Some scribes and Pharisees complain that Jesus receives
sinners and eats with them. Jesus responds with three parables: the parable of the lost sheep, the parable of the lost coin, and the parable of the
two sons.
As we have seen, the first two parables make the same point: God and
His angels rejoice more over the repentance of a single sinner than over
ninety-nine righteous people who do not need repentance. The joy comes
from finding what one has lost. Through repentance, therefore, God re25. Cf. Robert J. Miller, The Rejection of the Prophets in Q, Journal of Biblical
Literature, 107(1988), pp. 225-240; Hans Klein, Gerichtsankndigung und
Liebesforderung: Lk 6.24-26 und 27 innerhalb der Botschaft des Frhen Christentums,
New Testament Studies, 42(1996), pp, 421-433; J. Duncan M. Derrett, You Build
the Tombs of the Prophets (Lk 11:47-51; Mt 23:29-31) in Studia Evangelica, edited
by F.L. Cross (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1968), pp. 187-193; O.J.F. Seitz, The
Commission of Prophets and Apostles: A Re-examination of Matthew 23:34 with
Luke 11:49, Ibid., pp. 236-283; Huges Vincent, Le tombeau des prophetes, Revue
Biblique, 10(1901), pp. 72-88.
26. Cf. Leslie Mitten, New Wine in Old Wine Skins: IV, Leaven, Expository Times,
84(1972-1973), pp. 339-343.
27. Cf. David P. Mssner, The Leaven of the Pharisees and This Generation: Israels
Rejection of Jesus According to Luke, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
413
claims the sinner as His own. Lukes God actively pursues the unrepentant. (Lk 15:1-10)
Both parables also target Pharisaical hypocrisy among Lukes Gentile
Christians. Here Christian hypocrisy takes the form of judgmentalism
and the refusal to forgive.
The two parables about the lost sheep and coins defend Jesus table
fellowship with sinners. The parable of the two sons challenges the
self-righteous legalism of the scribes and Pharisees. As, we have seen, when
the parable of the two sons ends, one does not know if the self-righteous
elder son will join the feast or not. The younger prodigal has learned
from his sin and repentance that he cannot earn the fathers love; the
self-righteous older son has learned no such lesson. His self-righteousness
keeps him from sharing in the banquet. (Lk 15:11-32)
The elder son symbolizes the scribes and Pharisees. They think that
they can earn Gods love by their meticulous observance of the Law; but
in the end their self-righteousness threatens to exclude them from the
messianic banquet.
In another encounter with the Pharisees unique to Luke, they ask Jesus
when the kingdom of God will come. Jesus replies:
The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will
they say, Lo, here it is! or There! for behold, the kingdom of God is
within You (entos hymn). (Lk 17:21)
Exegetes debate the meaning of the phrase entos hymn. Greek grammatical usage, however, suggests that one ought to translate it as within
you. If one reads the text in this sense, Jesus is challenging the Pharisees
to recognize that the kingdom which Jesus proclaims consists not in some
striking public, even miraculous, event but in transformation of heart.
Some exegetes prefer to render the phrase as either in your midst or
within your grasp.28
28. Cf. Tom Holman, The Alternatives of the Kingdom: Encountering the Semantic
Restrictions of Luke 17. 20-21 (entos hymn), Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 87(1996), pp. 204-229; Harald Reisenfeld, Le rgne de Dieu parmi
vous ou en vous? Revue Biblique, 98(1991), pp. 190-198; Burton Scott Easton, Luke
17:20-21, An Exegetical Study, American Journal of Theology, 76(1912), pp. 275-283;
Andre Feuillet, La venue du rgne de Dieu et du fils de lhomme dapres Luc, XVII,
20 a XVIII, 8, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 35(1948), pp. 544-548; La double
venue du rgne de Dieu et du fils de lhomme en Luc XVII, 20-XVIII,8: Recherches
sur leschtologie des Synoptiques, Revue Thomiste, 81(1981), pp. 6-15; J. Gwinn
Griffiths, entos hymn (Luke XVII, 21), Expository Times, 63(1951-1952), pp.
30-31; Richard H. Hiers, Why Will They Not Say, Lo, Here! or There! Journal
of the American Academy of Religion, 53(1967), pp. 379-384; NJBC, 43:154; Fitzmyer,
414
Jesus directs the parable of the Pharisee and the tax-collector against
religious self-righteousness. Unique to Luke, the parable, as we have seen,
deals in deep irony. The Pharisee thanks God that he does not resemble
the publican, but the Pharisee does not realize that in Gods eyes the
self-abasement of the publican makes the latter more acceptable to God
than the boastful, self-righteous Pharisee. In the course of the parable
Luke presents the Pharisee as an example of hypocritical, self-justifying
prayer; but Jesus final warning about the need for all to humble oneself
suggests that the evangelist intends the parable to apply to Christian prayer
as well.29 (Lk 18:9-14)
The Pharisees in the Entry into Jerusalem
When Jesus enters Jerusalem at the end of His pilgrimage to Jerusalem,
He does so seated on a colt. On that occasion, Luke has the disciples,
rather than the crowds, cry out: Blessed be the King who comes in the
name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest! (Lk 19:38)
In Mark the crowds make a similar shout: Hosanna! Blessed is he who
comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the kingdom of our father
David that is coming! Hosanna in the highest! (Mk 11:9) Luke, by placing a similar cry on the lips of the disciples, transforms the entry from
Jesus triumphant welcome by the inhabitants of the holy city into the
joyful culmination both of the journey discourse and of the pilgrimage to
Jerusalem.
Luke also modifies Mark in other ways. He omits any reference to the
kingdom of David but has the crowds call Jesus king. Moreover, in a
Biblical inclusion, Luke has the praise of the disciples echo the praise of
the angels at Jesus birth. (Lk 2:14) Since, as we have seen, the angels
song hails Jesus imperial dominion, Lukes omission of any reference to
Jesus Davidic authority probably points to His universal dominion over
the nations.
Some Pharisees who are accompanying Jesus urge him to rebuke His
disciples for saying such things. Jesus replies I tell you, if these were
silent, the very stones would cry out. In an obscure reference to Hab
2:11, Jesus seems to be saying that if His disciples kept silence, the very
stones, which in the text of Habakkuk personify witnesses for Gods rectification of injustice, would proclaim Jesus as the one who has come to
effect that vindication.30
After replying to the Pharisees, Jesus weeps over Jerusalem and prophesies that the city will experience a final devastation in which her enemies
29. Cf. NJBC, 43:156; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1182-1190; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
30. Cf. A. George, La Royaut de Jsus selon lvangile de Luc, Sciences Ecclesiastiques,
14(1962), pp. 57-69; NJBC, 43:163; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1241-1253;
Evans, op. cit., pp. 676-682; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 396-400.
415
will leave not one stone on another because the city failed to recognize its
hour of visitation. The image of stones ties Jesus lament to His reply to
the Pharisees. In their own way the stones of the devastated city will
testify to its failure to acknowledge Jesus as Gods agent for vindicating
the oppressed.
This final confrontation marks the last appearance of Pharisees in Lukes
account. In Matthews gospel, as we have seen, they play a much more
prominent role in Jesus Jerusalem ministry than in Mark. Luke does
portray the scribes as participants in Jesus Jerusalem ministry. Since,
however, the scribes in question probably belong to the Sanhedrin, I shall
consider their activities later when I reflect on Jesus relationship to the
high priests. The disappearance of the Pharisees from Lukes account of
Jesus Jerusalem ministry transforms it into a prolonged struggle between
Jesus and the chief priests for proprietorship of the temple where Lukes
Jesus habitually teaches.
Matthew involves the Pharisees actively in Jesus death because he perceives them as perpetuating in his own day the same unbelief and hostility to the gospel as the chief priests exhibited at the time of Jesus. Luke
eliminates even the minor role which the Pharisees play in Marks account of Jesus final days. In part, Luke desires to present His Gentile
Christians with a clean option between Jesus, on the one hand, and the
Satanic institutions which conspire to kill Him: namely, the client priests,
the client Jewish aristocracy, and the Roman empire itself. These institutions constitute the kingdoms of this world which Satan owns and rules.
(Lk 4:6) They function as Satans instruments when the prince of darkness renews His assault upon Jesus at the more opportune time of His
passion.31 (Lk 4:13)
Like the other two synoptic evangelists, Luke uses the Pharisees to warn
the disciples against attitudes incompatible with their commitment to
Christ. The warnings could conceivably target the Pharisaical leaders of
the Jewish community; but Lukes gospel gives fewer signs than Matthews
of serious confrontation with the synagogue. Writing as he does for a
predominantly Gentile community, Lukes diatribes against Pharisaism
probably target more sinful Christian attitudes.
31. Cf. David L. Tiede, Prophecy and History in Luke-Acts (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress,
1980), pp. 65-96; Bo Reicke, Synoptic Prophecies on the Destruction of Jerusalem
in Studies in New Testament and Early Christian Literature, edited by D.E. Aune
(Leiden: Brill, 1972), pp. 121-134; Jacques Dupont, Il ne sera pas laiss pierre sur
pierre (Marc 13,2; Luc 19, 44), Biblica 52(1971), pp. 301-320; NJBC, 43:164;
Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1253-1260; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 295-302; Evans, Luke, pp.
682-685; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 400-402.
416
Luke stresses more than either of the other two synoptics the avarice
and cupidity of the Pharisees because the evangelists diatribes against the
Pharisees envisage especially hypocritical and covetous tendencies in his
own community. As the story of Ananias and Sapphira shows, Luke regarded the Christian whose pretended piety masks cupidity as a rank
hypocrite.
The theme of forgiveness, as we have seen, also plays a major role in
Lukes narrative Christology. It also colors the evangelists handling of the
Pharisees. Luke alone uses the two parables of the prodigal son and of the
tax-collector and the Pharisee to dramatize the fact that self-righteous
judgmentalism has no place among those who live in the kingdom. This
uniquely Lukan material traces the roots of the Pharisees hypocrisy to an
unrepentant refusal to recognize both ones own need for forgiveness and
Gods gratuitous desire to forgive. Here too Luke probably censures Christian self-righteousness.
Of the three synoptic evangelists, Luke minimizes Pharisaical opposition to Jesus in His final Jerusalem ministry. In the woes, Luke attributes
violence of heart more to the lawyers than to the Pharisees; and in Lukes
account of Jesus Jerusalem ministry, scribes do indeed seek to engineer
His death. In Luke, then, the Pharisees typify especially self-righteousness,
hypocrisy, and greedattitudes which Luke deplored among his Gentile
Christians.
This section has examined Lukes use of Jesus conflict with the scribes
and Pharisees. The following section reflects on his unique handling of
the relationship between Jesus and Herod.
(III)
Luke dates the Baptizers ministry during the reign of Herod as tetrarch
in Galilee. (Lk 3:1) Luke, however, handles the figure of Herod Antipas
differently from either of the other synoptics. As we have seen, Luke alone
of the three synoptic evangelists insists that John publicly denounced
Herod not only for his adulterous relationship with his brothers wife but
for a host of other crimes. (Lk 3:19) Luke has Herod allude to the fact
that he beheaded John the Baptizer; but, alone among the synoptics, Luke
fails to narrate the event. (Lk 9:7) Luke alone mentions that among the
women disciples who traveled with Jesus one, Joanna, belonged to Herods
household. (Lk 8:3)
Jesus and Herod
While Matthew and Mark both portray Herod as believing superstitiously
that Jesus is John the Baptizer risen from the dead (Mk 6:14; Mt 14:1-2),
Luke does not. Instead, he portrays Herod as perplexed at the different
interpretations of Jesus identity which he hears. Luke alone insists that
Herod had a great desire to see Jesus. (Lk 9:9) Moreover, in Luke, Herods
417
question: John I beheaded, but who is this about whom I hear such
reports? finds its answer in the confession of Peter (Lk 9:18-21) and in
the Fathers testimony to Jesus in the transfiguration. (Lk 9:28-36)
While Mark mentions that the Herodians conspired with the Pharisees
to assassinate Jesus (Mk 3:6), Luke alone indicates that Herod himself
wished Jesus dead. (Lk 13:31) Herods desire to kill Jesus explains initially the tyrants curiosity to see Him.
Only in Lukes gospel does Jesus comment directly on Herod. Warned
by some friendly Pharisees that Herod seeks His life, Jesus replies:
Go and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today
and tomorrow, and the third day I finish my course. Nevertheless, I must
go on my way today and tomorrow and the day following; for it cannot be
that a prophet should perish away from Jerusalem. (Lk 13:32-3)
Jesus rhetorical command suggests that, while He recognizes Herods

power, His death fulfills a providential plan which guarantees that He
will die only in Jerusalem. In calling Herod a fox, Jesus proclaims him
cunning, not wise. The healing and deliverance which Jesus works contrasts starkly with Herods murderous oppression. The third day probably connotes here both a time of fulfillment and the day of resurrection.
The incident dramatizes the deadly serious conflict between Jesus and
Herod; and it places Herod among the kings of this world whom Satan
rules. Finally, the story foreshadows the role which Herod will play in
Jesus crucifixion. So too does the lament over Jerusalem which immediately follows.32
In Lukes text, Jesus tender lament over Jerusalem follows His reply to
Herod. The lament re-enforces His assertion that no one can harm Him
until He sets foot in Jerusalem. Jesus says:
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are
sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a
hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Behold, your
house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say Blessed
is He who comes in the name of the Lord! (Lk 13:34)
As we have seen, Matthew cites substantially the same lament but puts it
to very different theological use. In Matthew, it provides the transition
from the woes against the scribes and Pharisees to the main body of the
eschatological discourse. In Luke, the lament prophesies Jesus triumphal
32. Cf. M. Rese, bige berlegungen zu Lukas XIII, 31-33 in Jsus aux origine de la
Christologie, edited by Jacques Dupont (Leuven: University Press, 1989), pp. 201-225;
L.H. Bunn, Herod Antipas and That Fox, Expository Times, 43(1931-1932), pp.
380-381; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1027-1033; Evans, op. cit., pp. 559-562.
418
entry. Since in Matthew, Jesus has already entered Jerusalem when He

utters the lament, it predicts the second coming. Accordingly, Matthew
has Jesus say you will not see me again.
In both gospels, however, the lament contrasts what might have been
with what will be. Had Jerusalem accepted the tender offer of love Jesus
made it, the city could have escaped the devastation which His rejection
will inevitably bring down upon it. By linking the lament to Jesus rebuke to Herod with its sense of historical inevitability, Luke underscores
the inexorable character of the double tragedy which lies in the future:
the death of Jesus and the destruction of the Holy City. By locating the
lament after an attempt by Herod on Jesus life, Luke pits Jesus against
Herod Antipas more explicitly than any other evangelist. As we shall soon
see, Luke portrays Herod as one of the Satanic powers arraigned against
Jesus. Luke will make a similar point in the condemned Jesus encounter
with the women of Jerusalem who lament His death.33 (Lk 23:26-33)
Finally, of the four evangelists, only Luke mentions that Herod played
a role in Jesus trial. Some have questioned the historicity of this event
but have failed to offer compelling reasons for denying that it could have
happened.
In Lukes passion narrative, when Pilate, in the course of interrogating
Jesus, hears that he comes from Galilee, he hands Jesus over to Herod for
judgment. Jesus trial at the hands of the Roman authorities finds a parallel in Pauls trial by the Romans at the end of Acts. In both trials, the
Roman judge hands the accused over to a Jewish ruler who equivalently
declares the accused not guilty. Pilate hands Jesus over to Herod Antipas.
In Acts, the governor Felix refers Pauls case to King Herod Agrippa, who
also finds Paul innocent of any crime against Rome. (Cf. Lk 23:6-7; Acts
25:13-26)
In his account of Jesus encounter with Herod, Luke reminds the reader
that Herod has been wanting to see Jesus. While before Luke indicated
that Herod wanted to do so for murderous reasons, he here suggests another motive. Out of idle curiosity, Herod demands that Jesus work a
miracle. Jesus, however, does nothing of the sort and refuses even to answer either Herods verbose questioning or the accusations of the chief
priests and scribes.
As in the other synoptics, Jesus silence recalls implicitly the silent suffering of the servant of God in second Isaiah. (Is 53;7) In Luke, however,
33. Cf. Joseph B. Tyson, Jesus and Herod Antipas, Journal of Biblical Literature,
Gospel, pp. 215- 222; Evans, Luke, pp. 563-566; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 321-323.
419
Jesus silence also serves another narrative purpose. It re-enforces the impression given by Jesus former use of the epithet that fox that He does
not hold Herod in very high regard.
Herod for his part responds to Jesus silence and intransigence with
contempt. He mocks Jesus by throwing an elegant garment around Him
and sending Him back to Pilate. Some see in the whiteness of the robe a
symbol of Jesus innocence. Others see in the garment a mockery of the
garment worn by candidates for office. In the latter interpretation, Herod
ironically clothes Jesus in a way which prepares the crowds choice between Him and Barabbas. (Lk 23:8-11)
Luke ends his account of Jesus encounter with Herod on an ironic and
prophetic note. The entire incident brings about the reconciliation of
Herod and Pilate, who had formerly regarded one another with enmity.
Did the enmity result from Pilates slaying the Galilean pilgrims? Or did
Pilates refusal to respond to the petition of the Herodian princes in the
matter of the shields set him and Antipas at odds? We have no way of
answering such questions.
In Lukes story line, however, Pilate and Herod, despite all the power
they wield, seem to lack the ability to free someone whom they both now
seem to regard as politically harmless. Moreover, ironically, Jesus, who
will soon die their victim, brings about their reconciliation, but not their
conversion. (Lk 23:12) The reconciliation only creates friendship among
villains and draws Herod into the conspiracy against Jesus. (Acts 3:27-8)
In Acts, Luke will describe Herods part in Jesus trial as the collusion of
secular princes with Israel against Gods anointed. These combined Satanic forces put Jesus to His final test.34 (Acts 4:25-31) By failing to release Jesus and by returning Him to Roman jurisdiction, Herod becomes
in the evangelists eyes co-responsible with Pilate and the chief priests for
Jesus death.
34. Cf. Brown, Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 756-757, 760-778; Ernst Bammel, The Trial
of Jesus (Napierville, IL: Allenson, 1970), pp. 84-90; Erwin Buck, The Function of
the Pericope Jesus Before Herod in the Passion Narrative of Luke, in Wort in der Zeit,
edited by Winfrid Harbeck and Michael Bachmann (Leiden: Brill, 1980), pp.
165-178; Josef Blinzler, Der Process Jesu (Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet Verlag, 1969),
pp. 284-300; Michael Corbin, Jesus devant Herode: Lecture de Luc 23,6-12,
Christus, 25(1978), pp. 190-197; Martin Dibelius, Herodes und Pilatus, Zeitschrift
fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 16(1975), pp. 113-126; NJBC: 43:187;
839-859.
420

While Mark and Matthew concentrate on Herods relationship to John
the Baptizer, Luke seeks instead to establish a direct relationship between
Herod and Jesus. Lukes omission of Marks story of the death of John the
Baptizer serves this end. Lukes Herod alludes to the Baptizers death but
expresses far more interest in Jesus. By including Herod in Jesus trial
before Pilate, Luke makes him co-responsible with Pilate for Jesus death.
In Lukes portrait of Herod, the Jewish tyrant embodies with Pilate the
secular powers which futilely conspire against the Lord and His anointed.
As we have also seen, Luke also goes out of his way to insist that the
kingdoms of this world belong to Satan and that he gives power to anyone he chooses. (Lk 4:6)
In other words, in portraying the Jewish king to Gentile Christians,
Luke desires his readers to regard Herod as an integral part of the oppressive, imperial Roman power system which the reign of God subverts and
replaces. Both Herod and Rome function as Satans instruments in his
final assault on Jesus. (Lk 4:13) In Luke, moreover, as we shall see, both
Peters confession and the Fathers testimony to Jesus answer Herods question about Jesus identity. Jesus confronts Herod as messiah and as Son of
God. In Luke, therefore, Peters confession and the Fathers testimony
challenge the disciples to choose between oppressive imperial power, on
the one hand, and Jesus, the messianic Son of God, on the other.
I have considered three of the negative dramatic relationships which
structure Lukes gospel. The section which follows examines the fourth:
namely, Jesus relationship to the chief priests.
(IV)
Luke dates the ministry of the Baptizer during the pontificates of Annas
and Caiphas. (Lk 3;2) We hear nothing more of the chief priests until
Jesus first prediction of His passion. After Peter names Jesus the Christ
of God, Jesus predicts that the Son of Man must suffer many things,
and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed,
and on the third day be raised. (Lk 9:20-22) Luke edits out of Mark any
explicit mention of the chief priests in both the second and third predictions of the passion, although Luke clearly attributes Jesus death to a
conspiracy among the chief priests, Herod, and Pilate.35 (Acts 4:24-27)
Jesus and the Chief Priests
Luke also edits Marks account of the cleansing of the temple. He omits
any mention of Jesus overturning the tables and seats of the merchants
and money changers. Luke records only that Jesus drove the money chang35. Cf. F. Neirynck and T.A. Fredricksen, Note on Luke 22: A Response to M.D.
Goulder,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 65(1989), pp. 390-394.
421
ers from the temple saying: It is written My house shall be a house of

prayer; but you have made it a den of robbers. (Lk 19:45-8) As in Mark,
Jesus words allude to Is 56:7 and to Jer 7:11. Luke, like Mark, implicitly
portrays Jesus as a second Jeremiah, consumed with zeal for the temple.
Unlike Mark, however, Luke does not refer to the temple as a house of
prayer for all the nations, no doubt in part because the non-existence of
the temple at the time the evangelist wrote made such a sentiment seem
superfluous. It also seems unlikely that Luke would have seen Christian
Gentile worship culminating in Jewish temple ritual. The omission of
the phrase for all nations also places rhetorical emphasis on the term
prayer and highlights the incompatibility between authentic worship
of God and greed.36
Like Mark, Luke notes after the cleansing of the temple that the chief
priests and scribes wanted to destroy Jesus but feared to act because of
His popularity with the crowds. (Lk 19:45-8, 22:1-2) Unlike, Matthew,
Luke makes no attempt to nuance Marks account of the reason why the
chief priests sought Jesus death.37
Luke, like Mark and Matthew, records that the chief priests, scribes,
and elders challenged Jesus to name the authority which sanctioned His
actions. As in the other synoptics, Lukes Jesus responds by challenging
the priests to acknowledge that both He and John speak with prophetic
authority. Luke, however, adds the colorful narrative detail that Jesus
adversaries feared that if they denied that John baptized with divine sanction, the crowds would stone them on the spot.38 (Lk 20:1-8)
As in the other synoptics, after Jesus tells the parable of the wicked
tenants who mistreated their masters servants and eventually killed his
son, the scribes (read members of the Sanhedrin) and chief priests recognize that Jesus intends the parable to apply to them. Moreover, but for
their fear of the crowds, they would have arrested Jesus then and there.
Luke follows Marks version of the story and has Jesus himself draw the
allegorical moral of the parable instead of eliciting it from His adversaries, as Matthews Jesus does. The moral remains the same: that the owner
of the vineyard (God) will take His vineyard (the kingdom) from the
36. Cf. Charles Kingly Barrett, The House of Prayer and the Den of Thieves in Jesus
und Paulus, edited by E. Earl Ellis and Erich Graesser (Gttingen: Vanderhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1975), pp. 13-20; F.M. Baum, O.P., Lexpulsion des vendeurs du temple,
Revue Biblique, 38(1929), pp. 178-200; Neill Q. Hamilton, Temple Cleansing and
Temple Bank, Journal of Biblical Literature, 83(1964), pp. 365-372; Etienne Trocm,
Lexpulsion des marchands du Temple, New Testament Studies, 15(1968-1969), pp.
3-22; Siegfried Mendner, Die Templereinigung, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 47(1956), pp. 93-112; NJBC, 43:165; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp.
1260-1268; Evans, op. cit., pp. 686-689; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 402-404.
37. Cf. NJBC: 43:167; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp 1271-1276; Evans, Luke, pp. 691-695.
38. Cf. NJBC, 43:167-168; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, 1271-1276; Evans, op. cit., pp.
691- 695; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 404-406.
422
rebellious tenants (the chief priests and scribes) and give it to others (those
who believe in Jesus, including the Gentiles). (Lk 20:9-19; Mk 12:1-12;
Mt 21:33-46)
In Lukes version of this story, however, the Jerusalem crowds cry out,
God forbid! This repudiation of Jesus prophecy by the crowds marks
the turning point in their relationship to Him. In response, Lukes Jesus,
like Marks, cites Ps 118:22: The very stone which the builders rejected
has become the head of the corner. Then, however, Lukes Jesus adds a
saying found in neither Mark nor Matthew: Every one who falls on that
stone will be broken to pieces; but when it falls on any one it will crush him.
One cannot trip over a cornerstone imbedded in a wall, nor can it fall
on anyone unless the wall collapses. Luke, however, has chosen to develop the image of stone with a proverb which probably alludes to Is
8:14-5. There Isaiah states that the Lord of hosts will become a stone of
offense, a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to
the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Many will stumble thereon; they will fall
and be broken to bits. Jesus teaching about the stone probably also
alludes to the prophecy of Simeon in Lukes infancy gospel that Jesus
would cause many in Israel to stumble and fall.39 (Lk 2:34)
Luke has the chief priests, scribes and elders send spies to question
Jesus about paying taxes to Caesar. Matthew, as we have seen, has Pharisees raise the issue with Jesus, while Mark has a conspiracy of Pharisees
and Herodians do so. The absence of Herodians in both Matthew and
Luke depoliticizes the incident somewhat and transforms it into an
in-house, religious debate among Jews. In this context, Luke underscores
the hypocrisy of Jesus questioners. Lukes staging of the incident reflects
his concern to portray Jesus final Jerusalem ministry as a struggle between Jesus and the chief priests. (Lk 20:20-6; Mk 12:13-7; Mt 22:15-22)
In other respects, Lukes version of the story repeats Marks and makes
the same point: those who can recognize Caesars image on his coins should
give Caesar his due; but they should show greater concern to give to God
what God justly claims from them. As in the other synoptics, Jesus is
probably also calling His adversaries to recognize Gods image where they
find it: namely, in other persons, especially in the poor and needy.40
The Sadducees who question Jesus about resurrection belonged to the
temple priesthood. Luke expands slightly Marks version of Jesus reply;
39. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, The Stone That the Builders Rejected in Studia
Evangelica, edited by F.L. Cross, (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1968), pp. 180-186;
NJBC: 43:170; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1289-1298; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 303-307;
40. Cf. Richard J. Cassidy, Jesus, Politics, and Society: A Study of Lukes Gospel (Maryknoll,
NY: Orbis, 1978), pp. 55-61; Charles Homer Giblin, S.J., The Things of God in
the Question Concerning Tribute to Caesar (Lk 20:25; Mk 12:17; Mt 22:21),
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 33(1971), pp. 510-511; NJBC: 43:170; Fitzmyer, Gospel,
II, pp 1289-1297; Evans, Luke, pp. 703-709.
423
and Lukes Jesus asserts more clearly than Marks the immortality of those
who die in God. He adds that those who die destined for resurrection
cannot marry or give in marriage because they cannot die any more. In
Luke personal immortality as well as the transformation of the human
body into an angelic, heavenly one makes marriage superfluous in heaven.
The insistence on personal immortality reflects the Gentile character of
Lukes audience. Gentiles tended to think of life after death as personal
immortality, while Jews looked forward to bodily resurrection.41 (Lk
20:27-40; Mk 12:18-27; Mt 22:23-33)
The confrontation with the chief priests ends with Jesus questioning
them about why David calls the messiah Lord in Ps 110:1. Luke insists
perhaps even more than the other two synoptics that Jesus has Davidic
descent. As in the other synoptics, however, Lukes Jesus is distancing
Himself from any understanding of the messiah as another warrior king
like David. Moreover, the saying implicitly points to Jesus resurrection,
when He will stand revealed as Lord and therefore as incomparably superior to David.42 (Lk 20:41-4; Mk 12:35-6; Mt 22:41-6)
Lukes Jesus, like Marks, warns His disciples not to imitate the scribes,
who like to receive public marks of honor. Nor should the disciples pretend piety while at the same time they devour the homes of widows, as
the scribes do. (Lk 20:45-7; Mk 12:38-40) Following Mark, Luke also
contrasts the greed and hypocrisy of these scribes with the widow who
gives all she has, two copper coins, to the temple tax. (Lk 21:1-4) As in
Mark, the taxing of poor widows also illustrates the fact that the chief
priests and Sanhedrin have transformed the temple from a house of prayer
to a robbers den. Jesus, then, points to the widow for all her generosity
more as conspiring in her own exploitation than as a strict model for
emulation.43 (Lk 20:45; Mk 11:17)
41. All three synoptics, however, make the same basic points in reproducing this story:
1) The Sadducees denied the resurrection because they confused it with resuscitation,
while Jesus, with the Pharisees, regarded resurrection as the transformation of an
earthly body into a heavenly one. 2) Those who die continue to live in God while they
await final resurrection because God is the God of the living. Luke alone has scribes
approve of Jesus response. In Matthew, the crowds respond to Jesus reply with
astonishment. Cf. Nils A. Dahl, The Story of Abraham in Luke-Acts in Studies in
Luke-Acts, pp. 139-158; Jean le Moyne, O.S.B., Le sadducens (Paris: Librairie Le
Coffre, 1972), pp. 123-127, 129-135; D.M. Cohn-Sherbok, Jesus Defence of the
Resurrection of the Dead, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 11(1981), pp.
64-73; E. Earl Ellis, Jesus, the Sadducees, and Qumran, New Testament Studies,
10(1963-1964), pp. 274-279; NJBC: 43:171; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1298-1308;
42. Cf. Bruce Chilton, Jesus ben David: Reflections on the Davidssohnsfrage, Journal for
the Study of the New Testament, 14(1982), pp. 88-112; NJBC: 43:172; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, II, 1308-1316; Evans, Luke, pp. 720-723; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 416-418.
43. Cf. Degenhardt, op. cit., pp. 93-97; Addison G. Wright, The Widows Mite: Praise
or Lament?A Matter of Context, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 44(1982), pp.
424
As Passover approaches, the chief priests plot to have Jesus killed; but
they fear the people. Luke explains to his Gentile audience that Passover
celebrates the feast of Unleavened Bread. To the delight of the chief priests,
Judas offers to betray Jesus. The priests engage to pay the traitor for his
treachery. We find in Luke no mention of the amount paid or of the
eventual purchase of a Potters Field with it.
In describing Judass treachery, Luke deviates from the other synoptic
evangelists in one significant detail. He portrays the incident as Satans
return after his defeat in the desert to put Jesus to the test once again.44
(Lk 22:1-5; Mk 14:10-11; Mt 26:1-2)
Both Marks and Matthews account of Jesus arrest leave the impression that possibly only one temple official accompanied the mob sent by
the chief priests to arrest Jesus: namely, the servant of the high priest
who loses his ear in the garden. (Mk 14:43-52; Mt 26:47-56) Luke, however, has a group of chief priests and elders personally accompany the
arresting mob. Their presence in the garden heightens the sense of conflict between Jesus and the priestly aristocracy. Luke moreover has Jesus
direct his reproach specifically to them. Luke also modifies the reproach
slightly. Jesus says to the chief priests: Have you come out as against a
robber with swords and clubs? When I was with you daily in the temple,
you did not lay hands on me. But this is your hour and the power of
darkness. As we shall see in greater detail in considering Jesus relationship to the crowds, only in Luke does Jesus conduct virtually all of His
Jerusalem ministry in the temple. Not only does Luke depict Jesus and
the chief priests locked in mortal combat; but the evangelist also names
the object of their struggle: namely, control and possession of Gods house.
The temple priests win the combat and thus doom the temple to destruction. (Lk 22:52-3)
Lukes Jesus rebukes the cowardice and hypocrisy of the chief priests
for not arresting Him openly. Then, like the Johannine Jesus, Lukes Jesus
alludes to their act as the victory of the powers of darkness. (Cf Jn 13:30,
19:11) The struggle between light and darkness does not play the central
role in Luke which it does in John. Here Luke transforms the fact that
Jesuss arrest took place under the cover of darkness as a metaphor for the
evil in the hearts of the high priests, who in Lukan theology at this point
256-265; R.S. Sugirtharajah, The Widows Mite Revalued, Expository Times,
103(1991), pp. 42-43; NJBC: 43:173; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1316-1322; Johnson,
44. Cf. Fernando Morell-Baladron, El Relato de la Pasion segun San Lucas, Estudios
Biblicos, 54(1996), pp. 79-114; Kenneth Hein, Judas Iscariot: Key to the Last Supper
Narratives, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 17(1970-1971), pp. 227-232; NJBC: 43:177;
Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1373-1375; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 331-336; Evans, Luke, pp.
771-776; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 440-442.
425
function, together with Judas, as the instruments of the prince of darkness.45 (Lk 22:47-54; Mk 14:43-52; Mt 26:47-56)
After the arresting mob has Jesus in custody, they mock and beat him.
They blindfold Him and challenge Him mockingly to say who struck
Him. They subject Him to prolonged reviling. (Lk 22:63-65) Luke adapts
this incident from Marks account of Jesus night trial. (Mk 14:65) Luke,
however, makes no mention at all of a night trial. Instead, he speaks only
of the insult and physical abuse which Jesus suffered at the hands of those
who arrested Him. Luke interprets the mockery and abuse as an act of
blasphemy against the person of Jesus. Moreover, the third time the Lukan
Jesus prophesies His passion, He portrays the cursing and reviling which
He will endure as arrogance against God (hybrizein). The blasphemy which
Jesus endures at the hands of His captors fulfills that prophecy. Since one
blasphemes against God, the evangelists is implicitly endowing Jesus with
divine dignity.46
In his account of Jesus morning trial, Luke omits any mention of witnesses. Luke, as we have seen, also gives no indication that Jesus prophecy of the destruction of the temple played a part in His trial, although it
will in Stephens trial in Acts. He does not, as Mark and Matthew do,
depict Jesus as the suffering servant, silent in the face of false accusation.
As we have already seen in another context, Luke makes Jesus messianic
identity and claim to divine Sonship the basis for the Sanhedrins verdict
of condemnation. In Luke, however, the Sanhedrin does not explicitly
condemn Jesus for uttering blasphemy as it does in Mark. (Lk 22:67-68)
Luke found the testimony of the false witnesses and the charge of blasphemy in Marks account of Jesus trial; but Luke transposed these details
to the trial of Stephen, the protomartyr, before the Sanhedrin in Acts.
Luke may have intended this editorial transposition to assimilate Christian martyrdom to the fate of the crucified Christ. If so, Luke would have
presupposed that his readers had read Marks account of Jesus trial. Otherwise, they could not have recognized that an editorial transposition of
events had occurred. Since, however, Luke used Marks gospel as a source,
the Lukan community probably had some familiarity with the Markan
text.47 (Cf. Acts 6:11-14)
Moreover, Lukes Jesus does not promise the Sanhedrin that they will
see the Son of Man doing anything, as He does in both Mark and
45. In contrast to both Mark and Matthew, Luke makes no mention that this event and
the passion of Jesus as a whole fulfills the Scriptures. (Mk 14:48-9; Mt 26:55-6) Cf.
NJBC: 43:185; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp 1446-1452; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 350-355;
46. Cf. NJBC, 43:185; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1446-1452; Evans, op. cit., pp.
813- 830; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 464-467.
426
Matthew. Instead, Lukes Jesus proclaims: From the present, there the
Son of Man will be sitting at the right of the power of God. In other
words, Jesus trial by the Sanhedrin begins His exaltation to the right
hand of God. As in John, the passion of Jesus begins His divine enthronement; and that entronement reverses human judgments on Jesus.48
The Sanhedrin hands Jesus over to Pilate. They accuse Him before
Pilate of political crimes: deceiving the people by forbidding tribute to
Caesar and claiming to be the messianic king. (Lk 23:1) Luke thus underscores the priests deceit, malice, and hypocrisy. In Luke, the priests
know very well that Jesus does not forbid paying taxes to Caesar, since, as
we have seen, in Lukes account of the Jerusalem ministry, emissaries of
the chief priests put the question about tribute to Caesar to Jesus. The
priests, then, know well that He answered: Render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. Later, the chief priests accompany Jesus in His trial
before Herod and there press their accusations vehemently. They fail,
however, to secure a negative judgment from Herod beyond a judgment
of contempt for Jesus and the decision to resubmit Jesus to the tender
mercies of Roman justice.49 (Lk 23:8-12)
Luke handles the choice between Jesus and Barabbas (son of the father) somewhat differently from the other two synoptics. When Lukes
Jesus returns from Herod, Pilate summons the chief priests, the elders,
and the people and tells them that since neither he nor Herod found any
fault with Jesus, he, Pilate, will simply scourge Jesus and release Him. At
this suggestion the chief priests call for the release instead of Barabbas.
Luke mentions no custom of releasing a prisoner at the time of Passover. Like Mark, Luke mentions that Barabbas stood charged with insurrection and murder. Matthew describes Barabbas as notorious, without
naming his crimes.
Lukes Pilate remonstrates a second time with the chief priests and
people; but they demand Jesus execution, drowning out Pilates third
protest that Jesus had committed no crime worthy of death. And their
voices prevailed. (Lk 23:13-25) Luke does not say that the chief priests
incited the crowds to call for Jesus blood but has them call spontaneously with the chief priests for the judgment of crucifixion.50 (Cf. Mk
15:6-15; Mt 27:15-26)
On Calvary, the religious leaders of the people, i.e., members of the
priestly caste and the Sanhedrin, mock Jesus as He hangs on the cross:
48. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 495-506; NJBC: 43:186; Fitzmyer, Gospel,
II, 1452-1471; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 356-363; Evans, Luke, pp. 830-839; Ernst, op.
cit., pp. 471-473.
49. Cf. Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1471-1477; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 474-476; Gerard
S. Sloyan, Jesus on Trial (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1973), pp.89-109.
50. Cf. NJBC: 43:187; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1483-1493; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 363-375;
427
He saved others; let Him save Himself, if He is the Christ of God, His
Chosen One! Luke, however, contrasts the attitude of the religious leaders with the response of the crowds on Calvary. As we shall see, in Luke,
the crowds on Calvary repent. Among the chief priests one finds no hint
of repentance.51 (Lk 23:35-6, 48)
In all three synoptics, the high priestly caste functions as negative models
for all Christians and especially for Christian leaders. By underscoring
their malice and their unbelief, Luke if anything stresses even more than
the other two synoptics the gulf which lies between them and Jesus. Luke
portrays the temple priests as hypocritical, lying, conniving, cowardly,
ruthless, unrepentant, and murderous. He dramatizes their deceit by having them confront Jesus on the issue of paying taxes to Caesar; for, later
they accuse Him of forbidding the payment of the imperial taxes, even
though they know He did nothing of the sort. At His arrest Jesus reminds
the priests that he had taught daily in the temple. Only Luke portrays
Jesus Jerusalem ministry as a stake-out between the messiah and the chief
priests for control of the temple. The chief priests win the contest and
doom the city and its temple to destruction.
Only Luke insists that a conspiracy of the chief priests and the people
of Jerusalem, on the one hand, and of both Herod and Pilate on the
other, engineered Jesus death. In all the gospels, the paschal mystery functions as the time of decision for the disciples. In Luke one must choose
between Jesus, the messianic Son of God, and a phalanx of adversaries
who all incarnate Satan and his kingdoms. Satan has returned in human
form to put once again the Son of God to the test. In the end, therefore,
the disciples must opt between Jesus and the Satanic Roman empire with
its client vassals.
Only one negative dramatic linkage in Luke needs examination: namely,
Jesus relationship to Pilate. To that task I turn in the section which follows.
(V)
At the beginning of his gospel, Luke notes that John the Baptizer began
preaching in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when
Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea. (Lk 3:1)
51. In the conversation between Jesus and the disciples on the way to Emmaus, Luke
underscores the fact that the chief priests and rulers delivered Jesus up and had Him
condemned. (Lk 24:13-27) Cf. Mark Allen Powell, The Religious Leaders in Luke:
A Literary-Critical Study, Journal of Biblical Literature, 109(1990), pp. 93-110;
428
Jesus and Pilate

Luke alone of the synoptic evangelists alludes to the atrocities committed
by Pilate during his reign. Some people recount to Jesus the story of
Galileans butchered by Pilate in the forecourt of the temple of the priests
where all sacrificial animals met their deaths. (Lk 13:1) Pilates aggression
against Antipass subjects could conceivably have contributed to the breach
between the two men which Lukes Pilate tries to smooth over by sending
Jesus to Antipas for judgment.52 (Lk 23:6-12)
The people who inform Jesus apparently expect Him to denounce Pilates
violence. The non-violent Jesus, however, uses the occasion to call all of
His hearers, not just Pilate, to repentance. Instead of demanding vengeance against the violence and oppression of Roman rule, Jesus assures
His audience that sudden death, like that suffered by the Galileans, provides no proof that they had sinned any more than anyone else. All have
sinned, all must deal with the contingencies of life and of death. All must
repent. (Lk 13:1-4)
In order to re-enforce His point, Jesus cites an accident, the collapse of
a tower at the pool of Siloam in Jerusalem which killed eighteen people.
Then He draws the same conclusion as He had concerning the deaths of
the Galileans. These victims of a terrible accident had not deserved to die
any more than any other inhabitant of Jerusalem. Jesus, then repeats a second
time: No, but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. (Lk 13:5)
The theme of judgment in this section of the journey discourse suggests that perishing involves more than just physical death. It means
ultimate repudiation by God. The universal repentance for which Jesus
calls includes the renunciation of violence; but Jesus refuses to target just
the violent injustices of Pilate. Instead, He universalizes the summons to
repentance to include all His contemporaries as well as all sinfulness,
including the sins of violence and injustice. Nevertheless, by calling special attention to the Roman governors atrocities, the story does challenge
Lukes Gentile Christians to distance themselves morally from the evils
incarnate in Roman oppression.53
A parable about a fig tree follows Jesus response to Pilates atrocities. It
underscores the theme of judgment. This parable could conceivably have
provided the basis for the cursing of the fig tree in Mark. (Mk 11:12-4,
20-5; Mt 21:18-22) The owner of a fig tree has waited three years and
received no fruit from the tree. He tells his vine dresser to cut it down;
52. Cf. Josef Blinzler, Die Niedermetzlung von Galilrn durch Pilatus, Novum
Testamentum, 2(1957), pp. 24-49; Gnther Schwarz, Eine Emendation, Lukas
13:1-5, Novum Testamentum, 11(1969), pp. 121-126.
53. Cf. Robert Shirock, The Growth of the Kingdom in the Light of Israels Rejection of Jesus:
Structure and Theology in Luke 13:1-35,Novum Testamentum, 35(1933), pp. 15-29.
429
but the vine dresser asks for one more year of grace. If the tree still remains barren, then he will cut it down. (Lk 13:6-9)
The parable makes two points simultaneously. A compassionate God
will postpone judgment in the hope that the unrepentant will change
their hearts and begin to bear fruit. Nevertheless, God cannot wait indefinitely; and, when the time of judgment comes, the spiritually barren
will find themselves cut down and rejected.
The parable underscores the universal call to repentance which Jesus
pronounced in response to the news of Pilates crimes; and it contains a
special warning to Jesus contemporaries that time is running out.54
In all three synoptics, Jesus explicitly warns His disciples never to imitate the oppressive ways of pagan kings. Luke, however, locates the warning at the last supper immediately after the institution of the eucharist.
The relocation endows Jesus words with greater solemnity and transforms them into a fundamental moral condition for eucharistic faith.
Moreover, by including a warning against aping the publicly celebrated
benefactions of the rich which only perpetuated unjust class structures,
Lukes Jesus also indites aristocratic pagan mores which foster hypocrisy
among Gentile Christians.55 (Lk 22:24-27; cf. Mk 10:42-44; Mt 20:25-27)
Luke alone indicates that already during Jesus Jerusalem ministry the
chief priests had determined to hand Him over to Pilate. To this end they
send spies to trap Jesus into denying tribute to Caesar. Luke consistently
attributes Jesus death to a conspiracy involving the chief priests and imperial Rome.(Lk 20:20)
When the chief priests and the Sanhedrin finally do hand Jesus over to
Pilate for trial, Pilate asks Jesus directly, as he does in Mark, Are you the
King of the Jews. Jesus replies as He does in Mark, with a diffident You
have said so. In Marks account of the passion, Pilate makes no comment upon Jesus reply. In Luke, however, he says: I find no crime in this
man. Throughout his passion narrative, Luke insists that Roman law
dealt unjustly with an innocent Jesus. The fact that Pilate recognizes Jesus
innocence and yet condemns Him to death by torture dramatizes the
arbitrariness of Roman justice.(Lk 23:4)
As we have seen, Luke names the charges the high priests bring against
Jesus: deceiving the nation, forbidding paying taxes to Caesar, and claiming to be Christ the King. When they let slip that Jesus has been active in
54. Cf. Hyacinthus M. Faccio, O.F.M., De ficu sterili (Lc 13:6-9), Verbum Domini,
29(1951), pp. 233-238; Jean Georges Kahn, La parabole du figurier strile et les
arbres rcalcetrants de la Gnese, Novum Testamentum, 13(1971), pp. 38-45; NJBC:
43:138-139; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1003-1009; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 210-215; Evans,
55. Cf. Friedrick W. Danker, Benefactor: Epigraphic Study of a Graeco-Roman and New
Testament Semantic Field (St. Louis, MO: Clayton House,1982); NJBC: 43:181;
Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1411-1419; Evans, Luke, pp. 779-808.
430
Galilee, Pilate asks if He comes from Galilee. When Pilate finds that
Jesus is Galilean, Pilate tries unsuccessfully to pass the buck to Herod and
sends Jesus to Herod for judgment. As we have seen, this gesture brings
about an ironic reconciliation between the two despots.56 (Lk 23:5-12)
When Jesus returns from Herod mockingly clad in a sumptuous robe,
Pilate interprets Herods act as a confirmation of Pilates own judgment
that Jesus poses no threat to the state and has done nothing deserving of
death. Lukes Pilate paradoxically concludes this declaration of innocence
by saying: I will therefore scourge Him and release Him. (Lk 23:16)
Luke never describes Jesus scourging and crowning with thorns. Instead
the evangelist only records Pilates offer to have Jesus scourged.
Why does Pilate first declare Jesus innocent and then propose to scourge
Him? As Jesus trial before Pilate moves to a quick resolution in Luke,
Pilate retreats before the vehement attacks of the chief priests and members of the Sanhedrin. It fits the tone of Lukes narrative that Pilate offers
to scourge Jesus as a sop to the chief priests and elders malevolence. By
omitting Marks account of Jesus scourging and mockery by the Roman
soldiers, Luke also focuses Jesus trial before Pilate single-mindedly on
the crucifixion, which, as we have seen, Luke portrays as the supreme
expression of divine forgiveness.
Outraged at the suggestion that Pilate might release Jesus, the chief
priests and the crowds call for the release of Barabbas instead of Jesus.57
Pilate makes two more attempts to get Jesus off with a scourging but
succeeds only in provoking the priests and elders to greater hostility. Finally, the governor yields to the demands of Jesus enemies. He releases
Barabbas and condemns Jesus to die on the cross. (Lk 23:18-25)
The chief priests success in bending the governor to their will fulfills
the words of Jesus in the garden at His arrest: This is your hour and the
power of darkness. (Lk 22:53) The chief priests and the blood-thirsty
crowds have become the instruments of Satan and the powers of evil.
Pilates capitulation joins him to their ranks and dramatizes Satans boast
in Jesus desert temptations that the kingdoms of this world do indeed
belong to him. Far from excusing Pilates action, Luke dramatizes his
willingness for reasons of political expediency to condemn an innocent
man to death. This act of violence and injustice accords well in Lukes
eyes with Pilates other atrocities.58 (Lk 4:6)
56. Cf. Martin Dibelius, Herodes und Pilatus, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 16(1915), pp. 113-126.
57. Luke in contrast to the other synoptics makes no mention of an annual custom of
releasing prisoners at Passover. (Mk 15:6; Mt 27:15)
58. Cf. Gottfried Rau, Das Volk in der lukanischen Passionsgeschichte: Eine Konjectur
zu Lk 23.13, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 56(1965), pp. 41-51;
NJBC: 43:187-188; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1471-1493; Evans, Luke, pp. 837-859;
431
Luke describes the unscourged Jesus led out to execution. As in the

other synoptics, the soldiers force Simon of Cyrene to carry the cross
behind Jesus. (Lk 23:26, Mk 15:21; Mt 27:32) As in the other synoptics,
Simons action, even though coerced, transforms him into an ironic type
of a faithful disciple.59 (Lk 23:26; 9:23, 14:27)
Luke then adds an incident which neither Mark nor Matthew record.
Jesus encounters on the way to Calvary women of Jerusalem who bewail
His death. The women symbolize those people who support Jesus and
who grieve for His martyrdom. Jesus, however, warns the weeping women
that their grief will not protect the Holy City from the destruction and
judgment which His death makes inevitable. Jesus turns to the women
and admonishes them:
Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and
for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say:
Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts
that never gave suck! Then they will begin to say to the mountains, Fall
on us; and to the hills, Cover us. For if they do this when the wood is
green, what will happen when it is dry? (Lk 23:28-32)
What Jesus is about to suffer will pale by comparison with the tragedy
and torment soon to descend on the Holy City. His death makes the
destruction of Jerusalem inevitable. Better never to have seen the light of
day than to face the coming retribution. The citys inhabitants will find
death by cataclysm preferable to the terrible ordeal soon to overwhelm
them. The women should, then, weep, not for Jesus, but for themselves
and for their descendants; for the consequences of Jesus unjust execution
will extend beyond His and the womens own generation and will visit
grief upon future generations as well.
Jesus discourse to the women ends with the enigmatic pronouncement: For if they do this when the wood is green, what will happen
when it is dry? (Lk 23:32) The pronouncement probably means: If the
chief priests and elders with the connivance of the Romans treat me so in
a time of grace and favor, how much worse will those who reject me
suffer at the Romans hands when the time of judgment comes.
Luke wrote his gospel after the destruction of Jerusalem. He therefore
looks back to that tragedy as ample fulfillment of Jesus prophecy that
only repentant acceptance of Gods reign could ward off the destruction
59. Like Matthew, Luke fails to mention (Mark does) that Simon has two sons: Alexander
and Rufus. (Cf. Mk 15:21) Possibly known to the Markan community, the two sons
had apparently no significance for the Lukan church.
432
of the Holy City and of its temple. Josephuss account of the fall of the
Holy City documents the truth of Jesus grim prophecy.60
As we have seen in reflecting on Jesus relation to the Father, Luke
transforms Jesus crucifixion and death into the supreme expression of
divine forgiveness and of Jesus personal trust in the Father. (Lk 23:33-43)
In Mark and Matthew, the darkness which reigned over the land while
Jesus hung on the cross functions as a cosmic symbol of judgment. Luke
explains the darkness as an eclipse of the sun. Although astronomically
impossible, the notion of an eclipse restricted to Palestine probably made
the apocalyptic darkness which Mark describes more credible to Lukes
Gentile Christians; but the explanation attenuates somewhat the darknesss
symbolism.
Luke also has the rending of the temple veil precede rather than follow
Jesus death. By associating the rending of the veil with the darkness,
Luke underscores the judgmental character of Gods abandonment of
His former sanctuary. The rending, however, signifies much the same
thing as in the other synoptics: the passing of the old religious order and
the inevitable destruction of the temple itself.61 (Lk 23:44-9)
As in the other synoptics, after Jesus dies, the centurion testifies to
Him; but each evangelist gives a different explanation for the testimony.
In Mark, Jesus death with a loud cry seems to provoke the centurions
testimony. (Mk 15:39) In Matthew, the earthquake which accompanies
Jesus death, the opening of the tombs, and the resurrection of those who
were in them at the moment of Jesus death motivates the centurions
words. (Mt 27:51-4) Other things move Lukes centurion: the forgiveness of the dying Jesus, the testimony of the crucified, repentant malefactor, and the faith in the Father which Jesus professes with His dying breath.
Stirred by all these events, Lukes centurion praises God and confirms the
repentant criminals judgment by saying: Certainly, this man was innocent. Ironically, the centurions testimony echoes Pilates initial verdict
concerning Jesus; and it reminds the reader of the capacity of a Satanic
kingdom like the Roman empire to murder the innocent.62 (Lk 23:47)
60. Cf. Jerome H. Neyrey, Jesus Addresses the Women of Jerusalem (Lk 23. 27-31)
A Prophetic Judgment Oracle, New Testament Studies, 29(1983), pp. 74-86; NJBC,
43:189; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1493-1499; Evans, op. cit., pp. 859-864;
61. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, pp. 1103-1118; Maria Rufino-Grandez, Las
tinieblas en la muerte de Jess: Historia de la exegesis de Lc 23:44-45a (Mt 27:45; Mc
15:33), Estudios Biblicos, 47(1989), pp. 177-223; Joel B. Green, The Demise of the
Temple as Culture Center in Luke-Acts: An Exploration of the Rending of the Temple
Veil (Luke 23:44-49), Revue Biblique, 101(1994), pp. 495-515.
62. Cf. NJBC, 43:192-193; Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1507-1523; Evans, op. cit.,
pp. 864-879; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 483-491; J. Smit, The Making of Luke 23:26-56: An
Analysis of the Composition Technique in Lukes Crucifixion Narrative, Revue
Biblique, 104(1997), pp. 378- 404..
433
As in the other synoptic gospels, Joseph of Aramathea secures the body

of Jesus from Pilate and buries it in a rock-hewn tomb. Luke follows
Mark in not portraying Joseph as a disciple of Jesus. Luke describes Joseph as good and just: in other words, as made of the same stuff as the
parents of John the Baptizer. (Lk 1:5-7) Like Matthew, Luke describes
Jesus tomb as hitherto unused, but the evangelist does not say that it
belonged to Joseph. Luke also asserts that Joseph disapproved of the Sanhedrins
condemnation of Jesus. (Lk 23:50-6, Mk 15: 42-7, Mt 27:57-61)
As in the other gospels, the women who will discover the empty tomb
watch as Joseph inters Jesus in haste. In Luke, however, they play a slightly
more active role. With the sabbath hard upon them, the women hurriedly prepare the spices which they plan to use in supplying the burial
preparations which Joseph has had no time to perform.63
Like the other synoptic evangelists, Luke portrays Pilate and all other
oppressive secular rulers as negative role models for Christian leaders.
Luke who insists even more than the other synoptics on the importance
of non-violent resistance to personal and institutional violence goes out
of his way to stress Pilates violent abuse of power. Luke even makes the
repudiation of the self-serving mores of pagan aristocrats a condition for
eucharistic faith. In Lukes passion narrative, moreover, the priests victory over Pilate joins him to them as an instrument of the powers of
darkness. Finally, because in Luke Jesus death exemplifies the supreme
expression of divine forgiveness, it functions as the Christian non-violent
alternative to secular violence and oppression. In all these ways, Luke
dramatizes the fact that his Gentile Christians must choose between Jesus
and the Satanic powers of this world.
I have considered all the negative dramatic linkages in Luke. In what
follows, I shall examine the way in which Luke modifies Marks ambiguous linkages. As in dealing with the other two synoptic gospels, I shall
first reflect on Jesus relationship to the crowds, then on His relationship
to His own disciples.
63. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, II, pp. 1226-1234; NJBC, 43:194; Fitzmyer,
Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1523-1531; Evans, op. cit., pp. 879-884; Ernst, op. cit., pp.
491-497.
434
Chapter 15
Ambiguous Dramatic Linkages in Luke
This chapter examines Jesus relationship to the crowds and to His disciples. As in the other synoptics, Jesus relates positively to both groups;
but they relate ambiguously to Him. As in both Mark and Matthew, for
both constituencies, the passion marks the moment of decision for or
against Jesus.
This chapter divides into two parts. Part one ponders how Luke handles
Jesus relationship to the crowds. Part two describes how Jesus and the
disciples interact.
(I)
In Matthew, John addresses the Pharisees and Sadducees as a brood of
vipers. Lukes John addresses similar comments to the crowds. John says:
You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Bear fruits which befit repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves,
We have Abraham as our father; for I tell you, God is able from these
stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the
root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut
down and thrown into the fire. (Lk 3:7-9)
In Matthew, as we have seen, the phrase brood of vipers, besides

connoting repulsiveness and danger, has a very specific meaning: the enemies of Jesus speak from the rottenness of their hearts poisonous, slanderous words about Him which seek to undermine faith in Him and in
His message. Because in Luke John applies the epithet to the crowds
rather than the scribes and Pharisees, the phrase has no so such specific
connotations. In Luke, the phrase simply asserts that as long as the crowds
trust in racial pride, rather than in repentance, to save them, they, despite
all their ethnic self-preening, remain repulsive in the eyes of God and
dangerous to others.
In Matthew, the Pharisees and Sadducees ignore Johns warning of immanent judgment. In Luke the crowds repent and seek more specifics
from John about the way they should amend their conduct. (Lk 3:10-4;
Mt 3:7-12) Moreover, in Luke, their repentance foreshadows their repentance of Jesus death on Calvary.1 (Lk 23:48)
1. For Lukes vagaries in his use of the term crowds (ochloi), see Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, p.
467. See also: Harold Sahlin, Die Frchte der Umkehr, Studia Theologica, 1(1948),
pp. 54-68; Jens-W. Tger, Der Mensch und sein Heil: Studien zum Bild des Meschen und
zur Sicht der Berkehrung bei Lukas (Gutersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1982); NJBC: 43:38-46;
435
Jesus and the Crowds

As we have seen, Luke begins Jesus ministry with His proclamation of a
season of jubilee to the Nazarenes. The people of Nazareth initially react
as Jesus other auditors had: they speak approvingly of Him and wonder
at the graciousness of His speech. In this respect, Lukes account of Jesus
encounter with His fellow townspeople differs from Marks and from
Matthews, who present Jesus auditors as hostile from the beginning.
(Mt 13:53-58) Even in Luke, however, the townspeople begin quickly to
show skepticism. Familiarity has bred contempt; and they challenge Jesus,
whom they know familiarly as Josephs son, for putting on airs. (Lk
4:22)
Jesus replies to their skepticism in the following manner:
Doubtless you will quote me this proverb, Physician heal thyself; what
we have heard you did at Capernaum, do here also in your own country.
And He said, Truly, I say to you, no prophet is acceptable in His own
country. But in truth, I tell you, there were many widows in Israel in the
days of Elijah, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months,
when there came a great famine over all the land; and Elijah was sent to
none of them but only to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman
who was a widow. And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of the
prophet Elisha; and none of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the
Syrian. (Lk 4:24-7)
Jesus recognizes the skepticism of the Nazarenes as lack of faith. They

cannot bring themselves to believe that He can perform in their midst
the miracles He did elsewhere. Lukes Jesus, however, in contrast to Marks
and Matthews, immediately makes a doctrinal point. The Nazarenes have
a deeper reason for rejecting him than the familiarity which breeds contempt. At the basis of their unbelief lies an unwillingness to recognize
that God freely and graciously chose Israel to function as the instrument
of a universal salvation which includes the Gentiles. The miracles performed for the widow of Zarephath and for Naaman the Syrian foreshadow the reconciliation and cleansing of the Gentiles which Luke will
describe in Acts. Jesus has come to proclaim just such a universal season
of jubilee.
The Nazarenes respond to Jesus prophetic challenge with a murderous
rage which echoes Israels past opposition to prophetic preaching at the
same time that it foreshadows Jesus own rejection in Jerusalem. The
Nazarenes rise up against Jesus and seek to assassinate Him by throwing
Him from the brow of the hill on which the city of Nazareth lies. Jesus
however passes through their midst and departs. (Lk 4:28-30)
Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 463-478; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 302-316; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
63-68; Evans, Luke, pp. 229- 244; Ernst, op. cit., pp. pp. 108-112.
436
Jesus unexplained deliverance foreshadows His paschal victory. By the

same token, Lukes narrative has transformed the Nazarenes into a symbol of all of those Jews who will reject Jesus message of universal salvation. Later in Acts, Luke will dramatize this same doctrinal point several
times. It could conceivably have functioned as a bone of contention between the Lukan community and the local synagogue.2
As we have seen, Mark begins his account of Jesus public ministry
with the story of the initial spread of the gospel from the disciples to the
people of Capernaum and from them to the rest of Galilee. Luke, as we
also saw, places these incidents after Jesus has begun His public ministry
and so transforms them into a typical day in the life of the messiah.
As in Mark, when Jesus seeks solitude for prayer, the crowds come
seeking Him out. Jesus resists their attempt to keep Him in Capernaum
with the words: I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to
the other cities also; for I was sent for this purpose. (Lk 4:42-3; Mk
1:35-9)
In recounting this incident Luke interpolates Marks text in two ways.
In Mark we find no mention of the kingdom. Luke, on the other hand in
his initial general description of Jesus early ministry had made no mention of Jesus central message: namely, the eschatological approach of Gods
reign. Now as Jesus departs from Capernaum, Luke makes up in part for
this earlier omission and indicates that the kingdom lies at the heart of
Jesus preaching.
Moreover, while Mark has Jesus preaching throughout Galilee, Luke
portrays Him departing now to preach in the synagogues of Judea. (Lk
4:44; Mk 1:39) Luke later distinguishes Judea from Galilee. It seem therefore unlikely that Luke would use the name Judea to designate Palestine in general. Although Luke confines most of Jesus early ministry to
Galilee, the evangelist now has Jesus make an early foray into Judea apparently because he wants to portray Jesus even in his Galilean ministry
as having an impact beyond Galilee. (Cf. Lk 5:17, 6:17, 7:17) As we shall
2. Cf. John G. Kilgallen, Provocation in Luke 4, 23-24, Biblica, 7(1989), pp. 511-516;
Dirk Monshouwer, The Reading of the Prophet in the Synagogue at Nazareth,
Biblica, 72(1991), pp. 90-99; Robert C. Tannehill, The Mission of Jesus According
to Luke IV.16-30 in Jesus in Nazareth, edited by Walther Eltester (Berlin: Waelter de
Bruyter & Co., 1972), pp. 51-75; Walther Eltester, Israel in lukanischen Werk und
die Nazarethperikope, op. cit., pp. 76- 147; Asher Finkel, Jesus Sermon at Nazareth
(Luke 4, 16-30) in Abraham Unser Vater, edited by O. Betz et al. (Kln: E.J. Brill,
1963), pp. 106-115; David Hill, The Rejection of Jesus at Nazareth (Luke IV
16-30), Novum Testamentum, 13(1971), pp. 161-180; Hugh Anderson, Broadening Horizons: The Rejection of Jesus at Nazareth in Light of Recent Critical Trends,
Interpretation, 18(1964), pp. 257-275; Larrimore Crockett, Luke 4.25-27 and
Jewish-Gentile Relations in Luke-Acts, Journal of Biblical Literature, 88(1969), pp.
177-183; NJBC: 43:57- 62; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 525-540; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 77-82;
437
see in volume three, the fourth gospel has Jesus preach in Jerusalem several times during His public ministry.3
As in the other synoptics, the crowds in Luke serve as the anonymous
backdrop to Jesus ministry. Among the synoptics, however, Luke especially conveys a sense of the joy and astonishment which Jesus presence
inspired.4 The repeated response of the crowds in Luke develops the
evangelists portrait of Jesus as the joyful prophet of good news.
Like the other synoptics, Luke indicates that Jesus miraculous powers
provided an important key to His popularity. (Lk 6:19; Mk 6:56; Mt
14:36) Moreover, following Mark, Luke indicates that the crowds, despite their enthusiasm, failed to grasp the real truth about Jesus and about
His mission. (Lk 9:18-22)
Luke records only one multiplication of the loaves and fishes. Since the
second multiplication of the loaves in both Mark and Matthew foreshadows the eucharist of the Gentiles, Luke, who intends to describe in Acts
the conversion of the Gentiles may have judged such foreshadowing superfluous.5 (Mk 8:1-10; Mt 15:32-9)
Like the other synoptic evangelists, Luke assimilates the one miracle of
multiplication to the eucharist. Before Jesus has the Twelve distribute the
3. Cf. Michael Wolter, Reich Gottes bei Lukas, New Testament Studies, 41(1995), pp.
541-563; NJBC: 43:67; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp.554-558; Evans, Luke, pp. 283-286.
4. Before the call of the disciples in Luke, the milling crowds force Jesus to commandeer
Peters boat as a pulpit for instructing them. (Lk 5:1-3) As Jesus reputation grows,
great multitudes of people gather to hear Him. (Lk 5:15) The density of the crowds
around Jesus force the friends of the paralytic to lower him through the roof into Jesus
presence. (Lk 5:19) Luke describes the guests at Levis feast as a large company of tax
collectors and others. (Lk 5:29) Crowds gather to hear the sermon on the plain, the
equivalent in Luke of Matthews sermon on the mount. (Lk 6:17) Luke, however,
directs the sermon itself to the disciples rather than to the crowds. (Lk 6:20) Crowds
accompany the widow of Nain and witness Jesus raising of her dead son. (Lk 7:11-2)
The crowds pressing around Jesus keep His relatives from approaching Him. (Lk 8:19)
Crowds await Jesus return from the country of the Gerasenes and press about Jesus
when the woman with a flux of blood touches Him. (Lk 8:40, 42, 45) Crowds greet
Jesus when He descends from the mountain of the transfiguration and express
astonishment at His exorcism of the epileptic demoniac boy. (Lk 9:37, 43) The crowds
react with amazement when Jesus exorcises a dumb man and cures him. (Lk 11:14)
Luke at times insists on the size of the crowds as a way of dramatizing Jesus popularity.
At one point the evangelist notes that so many thousands of the multitude had
gathered together that they trod upon one another. (Lk 12:1) In one of Jesus sabbath
cures the synagogue official rebukes the people for coming to Jesus for healing on the
sabbath; but the people rejoice in Jesus sabbath healings anyway. (Lk 13:14, 17) In
the cure of the blind man the noise of the crowds accompanying Jesus alerts him to
Jesus presence. (Lk 18:36) Finally, the crowds surrounding Jesus force the short-legged
Zacchaeus to climb a tree in order to see Jesus. (Lk 19:3)
5. Both Mark and Matthew situate this miracle in a lonely place, Luke locates the
lonely place near the city of Bethsaida. The crowds learn of Jesus arrival and swarm
to hear Him. He continues instructing them in the way of the kingdom and cures the
sick. (Lk 9:10-12; Mk 6:35; Mt 14:15)
438
five loaves and two fish, He performs the eucharistic gestures of taking,
blessing, breaking, and giving. (Lk 9:16; Mk 6:41; Mt 14:19)
Luke, however, adds his own narrative touches to Marks story. He notes,
for example, that the day began to wear away when Jesus performed the
miracle. (Lk 9:12-7) The same expression occurs toward the end of the
encounter between the risen Christ and the disciples on the way to
Emmaus. As evening draws near and the day wears away, they invite Jesus
to stay with them. He does and again breaks bread in a way which recalls
the eucharist; and the disciples recognize Him in the breaking of the
bread. (Lk 24:28-35) Luke thus brackets the event of the eucharist itself
with a symbolic foreshadowing prior to the passion as well as a symbolic
recall after the resurrection. Luke thus underscores the fact that the
eucharist not only recalls the last supper and the passion which it interprets but also celebrates the resurrection.6
On occasion, Luke explicitly directs some of Jesus teachings toward
the crowds. Lukes Jesus, for example, addresses his encomium of John
the Baptizer to the crowds. (Lk 7:24) Jesus warns against self-exaltation.
(Lk 14:7-10) As in Marks parabolic discourse, Lukes Jesus addresses the
first parable of the astonishing harvest to the crowds; but the other parables
all concern the disciples directly. (Lk 8:4-8) The parable of the astonishing harvest serves the same apologetic purpose in Luke as in the other
synoptics: it warns the unbelieving crowds that, despite initial setbacks,
the kingdom will bear astonishing fruit. I shall reflect on the rest of the
parabolic discourse in describing the Lukan Jesus relationship to His
disciples and in analyzing the scope of His teachings.
Mark leads Luke, as he leads Matthew, to misinterpret the parables as
attempts on Jesus part to conceal His message from the unbelieving
crowds. Moreover, Luke, like Mark, contrasts the unbelieving, uncomprehending crowds with the disciples who have access to the secrets of
the kingdom. (Lk 8:9-10; Mk 4:10-12; Mt 13:10-7) As we shall see when
we consider Jesus relationship to His disciples, Luke has reservations about
Marks stress on the esoteric character of the Christian message.7
6. Luke also edits Marks version of this miracle. He omits some descriptive details and
adds others. On the one hand, he shortens the dialogue between Jesus and His
disciples; on the other he names the disciples specifically as the Twelve. (Lk 9:12-6; Mk
6:35-40; cf. Mt 14:15-9) Luke probably names the Twelve because of the twelve
baskets of leftovers to which Mark alludes at the end of his account of the miracle.
Lukes account implicitly portrays each of the Twelve returning with a hamper full of
fragments. (Lk 9:17; Mk 6:43) Cf. NJBC: 43:113; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 761-769;
825-836; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 224-227; F. Neirynck, The Matthew-Luke Agreements
in Mt 14,13-14/Lk 9,10-11 (Par. Mk 6, 30-34),Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis,
60(1984), pp. 25-44.
7. Cf. Edward F. Siegman, C.SS.P., Teaching in Parables, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
23(1961), pp. 161-181.
439
The Crowds in the Journey Discourse

Sometimes Lukes Jesus speaks to individuals in the crowds. After the
controversy over Beelzebul, a woman in the crowd cries out: Blessed is
the womb which bore you, and the breasts which you sucked! Jesus
replies: Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it.
(Lk 11:28) No other evangelist mentions this incident.
The womans outburst recalls the Magnificat: From now on all generations will call me blessed. (Lk 1:48) Jesus, however, responds to the
womans praise with typical self-effacement. He draws attention away
from Himself and to the heart of His message: He has come to call people
to the obedience of faith. That means more to Him than any relationship
based only in physical descent. Jesus reply also recalls His words to His
own relatives when they attempt to speak with Him: My mother and
my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.8 (Lk 8:19-21)
When a man in the crowds asks Jesus to tell his brother to share his
inheritance with him, Jesus replies that no one has appointed him to
judge such matters. (Lk 12:13-4) The man has failed to understand the
purpose of Jesus own mission. Jesus comes not to settle legal questions of
inheritance but instead to summon people to renounce all forms of covetousness. The story ends with the pronouncement: Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a mans life does not consist in abundance of
his possessions. (Lk 12:15) Jesus reply to the man also hearkens back to
His first temptation in the desert and to His response there to the devil:
One does not live by bread alone. (Lk 4:4) One must look to God, not
to wealth, as the ultimate source of ones life. The parable of the rich fool
follows, which further develops this last point. (Lk 12:16-21) I have reflected on the meaning of the parable in another context.9
Marks Jesus, as we have seen, rejects the hypocritical challenge posed
to Him by some Pharisees to work some great sign which authenticates
His ministry. Lukes Jesus rebukes the crowds, not the Pharisees, for flocking to Him in search of a sign. Lukes Jesus, like Matthews, refuses to
work a sign and promises instead the sign of Jonah. Lukes Jesus, however, interprets the sign of Jonah, not as the resurrection, but as the
conversion of the Gentiles. Luke observes:
When the crowds were increasing, He began to say, This generation is an
evil generation; it seeks a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the
sign of Jonah. For as Jonah became a sign to the people of Nineveh, so will
8. Cf. Raymond E. Brown et al., Mary in the New Testament (New York, NY: Paulist,
1978), pp. 170-172; NJBC, 43:130; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 926-929; Evans, Luke,
pp. 495- 500; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 280-281.
9. Cf. Engelbert Neuhsler, Anspruch und Antwort Gottes (Dsseldorf: Patmos Verlag,
1962), pp. 170-185; NJBC: 43:134; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 967-970; Johnson,
440
the Son of man be to this generation. The Queen of the South will arise at
the judgment with the men of this generation and condemn them; for she
came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and
behold, something greater than Solomon is here. The men of Nineveh will
arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah
is here. (Lk 11:29-32)
The faith of the Gentile Ninevites and of the Gentile Queen of Sheba
rebukes the unbelief of Jesus own generation. Their unbelief foreshadows with reverse symbolism the conversion of the Gentiles which Luke
will describe in Acts. The Lukan sign of Jonah also recalls Jesus proclamation of a universal salvation at Nazareth. The crowds unbelief parallels that of the Nazarenes.10
The parable of the lamp which follows reflects further on the crowds
unbelief. In the parabolic discourse, as we shall soon see, Jesus has already
applied the same parable to the disciples. During the journey discourse,
however, Jesus puts the parable of the lamp this way:
No one after lighting a lamp puts it in a cellar or under a bushel, but on a
stand, that those who enter may see the light. Your eye is the lamp of your
body; when your eye is sound your whole body is full of light; but when it
is not sound, your body is full of darkness. Therefore, be careful lest the
light in you be darkness. If then your whole body is full of light, having no
part dark, it will be wholly bright, as when a lamp with its rays gives you
light. (Lk 11:33-36)
In Lukes parabolic discourse, the lamp symbolizes the faith of the disciples which draws others into the Church. Here Jesus Himself functions
as the light. He warns the crowds that their own blindness to the fact that
they confront a greater than Solomon or Jonah leaves them in darkness.
The problem lies not with the light itself but with the darkening of the
crowds vision. Their lack of faith keeps them from seeing the light and
excludes them from the household of the faith. The illumination of the
entire body-person through healthy vision resembles a house completely
lit up by a lamp. (Cf. Lk 8:19-21)
Only repentance from unbeliefTherefore be careful lest the light in
you be darknesswill allow the crowds to acknowledge the light of Jesus.
The clear-sightedness, or simplicity (haplous), of vision to which Jesus
10. Cf. Richard Alan Edwards, The Sign of Jonah in the Theology of the Evangelists and Q
(Napierville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1971), pp. 89-95; John Howton, The Sign of
Jonah, Scottish Journal of Theology, 15(1962), pp. 288-304; NJBC: 43:131; Fitzmyer,
441
calls the crowds connotes sincerity and the absence of hypocritical pretense.11
In the presence of an enormous multitude of people, Jesus warns His
disciples against the Pharisaical leaven of hypocrisy. (Lk 12:1) Clearly,
Lukes warning applies to both groups, to believers and to unbelievers
alike. Later in the journey discourse, Jesus calls the crowds themselves
hypocrites. Jesus warns:
When you see a cloud rising in the west, you say at once, A shower is
coming; and so it happens. And when you see the south wind blowing,
you say, There will be scorching heat; and it happens. You hypocrites!
You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and sky; but why
do you not know how to interpret the present time? (Lk 12:54-6)
The hypocrisy of the crowds consists in the fact that they flock to Jesus
but finally do not believe in Him. Their blindness to the signs of the
times keeps them from interpreting correctly the significance of Jesus
and of His ministry. Some interpreters also see in this teaching a reference to the fact that Palestinian Jews had embarked on a collision course
with the Roman empire, even though rebellion against Roman rule in
fact intensified in the decades which followed Jesus ministry and death.
If Jesus does refer to contemporary political unrest, He is warning the
crowds that only repentance and submission to Gods reign can save them
from national disaster.12 Jesus continues:
And why do you not judge for yourselves what is right? As you go with
your accuser before the magistrate, make an effort to settle with him on
the way, lest he drag you to the judge, and the judge hand you over to the
officer, and the officer put you in prison. I tell you, you will never get out
until you have paid the very last penny. (Lk 12:57-9)
11. Cf. Marc Philonenko, La parabole sur la lampe (Luc 11:33-36) et les horoscopes
qumraniens, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 79(1988), pp. 145-151;
Gottfried Nebe, Das estai in Lk 11,36eine neuer Deutungsforschlag, Zeitschrift
fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 83(1992), pp. 108-114; Ferdinand Hahn,
Die Worte vom Licht: Lk 11:33-36 in Orientierung an Jesus, edited by Paul
Hoffmann et al. (Freiburg: Herder, 1973), pp. 107-138; P. Benoit, Le logion sur loeil
lampe du corps, Revue Biblique, 60(1953), pp. 603-605; NJBC: 43:131; Fitzmyer,
12. Cf. H.G. Wood, Interpreting this Time, New Testament Studies, 2(1956), pp.
262-266; Gnther Klein, Die Prfung der Zeit (Lukas 12:54-56), Zeitschrift fr
Theologie und Kirche, 61(1964), pp. 373-390; NJBC: 43:137; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp.
998-1003; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 207-210; Evans, Luke, pp. 542-544; Ernst, op. cit., pp.
309-311.
442
The question And why do you not judge for yourselves what is right?
probably links this second teaching to the preceding one. In effect, Jesus
warns the crowds that unless they acknowledge their hypocrisy and repent of their failure to respond to Him and to His message, they run the
risk of facing a severe judgment.
The Crowds in Jesus Jerusalem Ministry
In Lukes account of Jesus triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the disciples
of Jesus, rather than the crowds, greet Him with rejoicing. In the other
synoptics, as we have seen, the Jerusalem populace greets Jesus. (Lk 19:37;
Mk 11:8-9; Mt 21:1-11) Nevertheless, as in the other synoptics, Jesus
initial popularity with the crowds in Jerusalem affords Him temporary
protection from the malice of the chief priests. (Lk 22:6)
The crowds also function as a backdrop in Jesus Jerusalem ministry.
While Jesus is instructing the people, the temple priests confront Him
concerning the authority which justifies His words and actions. (Lk 20:1-8)
Lukes Jesus addresses the parable of the wicked tenants to the shocked
crowds. In it He warns them against the wickedness of their religious
leaders. (Lk 20:9-19) Finally, Jesus warns all the people to guard against
the religious hypocrisy and avarice of the scribes. (Lk 20:45-7)
In Mark and Matthew, Jesus delivers the eschatological discourse on
the Mount of Olives in private conference with His disciples. Lukes Jesus
delivers the discourse publicly in the temple itself whose destruction He
is predicting. During Lukes account of the Jerusalem ministry, Jesus, as
we have seen, delivers virtually all His teachings in the temple precincts.13
(Lk 21:5; Mk 13:3; Mt 24:3) Lukes Jesus, then, in contrast to Marks
and Matthews directs the bulk of the eschatological discourse to the
crowds, even though sections of it target the disciples in particular.
When the crowds admire the temple with its massive stones and offerings, Jesus responds:
As for these things which you see, the days will come when there shall not be
left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down. (Lk 21:6)
This prompts Jesus audience to ask Him when this will happen and the
signs which will accompany it.14
13. The discourse which follows divides into five parts. It follows the general plan of the
eschatological discourse in Mark, but does so with greater terseness of style. In the first
part of the discourse, Jesus warns against listening to false messiahs who claim to bring
the end time. In the second He warns that His disciples must suffer much persecution
before the end time comes. In the third part, Jesus describes the destruction of
Jerusalem. The fourth section of the discourse describes the final judgment. The
discourse ends with the parable of the fig tree and an exhortation to readiness.
14. Cf. Nickolaus Walter, Tempelzerstrung und synoptische Apokalypse, Zeitschrift
fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 57(1966), pp. 38-49; A. Feuillet, Le discours
de Jsus sur la ruine du temple, Revue Biblique, 55(1948), pp. 481-495.
443
Despite minor changes, Lukes message remains much the same as in

corresponding passages in Mark and Matthew: namely, before the end
time, history will bristle with tribulations.15 In the first part of the discourse, Jesus warns the crowds that false messiahs will announce the last
day but that people should ignore them. As in the other synoptics, catastrophes give no certain sign that the end has arrived. (Lk 21:8-10; cf. Mk
13:3-8; Mt 24:3-7)
Mark, as we have seen, refers to the abomination of desolation as the
sign of the approaching doom of the holy city. Luke, writing after the city
has fallen, has Jesus say that the encampment of the avenging armies
around the city will signal the its immanent destruction. (Lk 21:20; Mk
13:14; Mt 24:15) Lukes Jesus, like Marks, advises His disciples to flee a
doomed Jerusalem. (Lk 21:20-4)
Unlike Mark, however, Luke describes the fate of the city with grim
accuracy:
For great distress shall be upon the earth and wrath upon this people; they
will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led captive among all nations;
and Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the
Gentiles are fulfilled. (Lk 21:23-4)
Luke omits Marks promise that God would shorten the time of siege and
suffering for the sake of the elect. Instead, Luke speaks in terms of unrelenting retribution. The times of the Gentiles, the period allotted to them for
effecting the utter destruction of Jerusalem, must play themselves out.
Luke records Jesus prophecy of an event which has already transpired
as a way of shoring up his communitys faith in the second coming. If
Jesus proved right about the destruction of Jerusalem, He will also prove
right about final judgment.16
As in Mark, the Son of man arrives announced by signs and disasters in
heaven and on earth. Luke, however, embellishes Marks text. Lukes Jesus
says:
And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and upon the earth
distress of nations in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and waves, men
fainting with fear and foreboding of what is coming on the world; for the
15. Luke adds pestilences and great portents in the sky to the earthquakes and famines and
wars which will precede the second coming.
16. Cf. Felix Fleckiger, Luk 21, 20-24 und die Zerstrung Jerusalems, Theologische
Zeitschrift, 28(1972), pp. 385-390; Georg Braumann, Die lukanische Interpretation
der Zerstrung Jerusalems, Novum Testamentum, 6(1963), pp. 120-127; A. Feuillet,
Le discours de Jsus sur la ruine du temple, Revue Biblique, 52(1949), pp. 61-82;
Arthur Wainwright, Luke and the Restoration of the Kingdom of Israel, Expository
Times, 89(1977-1978), pp. 76- 79; James A. Gardiner, Studies in Texts: Luke 21.28,
Theology, 59 (1956), pp. 460-462.
444
powers of the heavens will be shaken. (Lk 21:25-6; cf. Mk 13:24-5; Mt

24:29)
The roaring waters could refer Ps 46:4. The roaring flood connotes the
unleashing of the forces of chaos. Matthews Jesus, as we have seen, predicts that the Son of mans arrival will cause grief to many. Lukes, however, sees His approach as terrifying for sinners but not for the elect:
And then they will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and
great glory. Now when these things begin to take place, look up and raise
your heads, because your redemption is at hand. (Lk 21:27-8)
Luke omits Marks reference to the Son of man sending out angels to
gather the elect from the four corners of the earth. Instead, he replaces
this encouraging descriptive detail with an exhortation to rejoice, since
Jesus comes to redeem those who have lived faithful to Him.
The parable of the fig tree closes the eschatological discourse. The parable refers to the cosmic signs Jesus has described in vv. 11 and 25. People
recognize the approach of summer by the appearance of leaves on the fig
tree. So too when these cosmic signs appear, people should recognize that
the full and final establishment of the kingdom of God approaches. (Lk
21:29-31)
The discourse ends with the prediction:
Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all has taken place.
Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. (Lk 21:32-3)
This prediction reflects the one made in Lk 2:27, Mk 9:1, and Mt

16:28. Exegetes argue over the meaning of the phrase this generation.
They identify it with Jesus own contemporaries, the whole of humanity,
the Jewish people, and the generation alive at the time of the parousia.
Jesus, however, is probably referring to the original question about the
destruction of the temple which prompted the discourse. In that case,
Jesus would be saying that His own generation would live to see the destruction of Jerusalem, even though the time of the second coming remains shrouded in obscurity.
By directing most of the eschatological discourse to the crowds, Luke
universalizes the need of eschatological readiness. All people, not just the
disciples, must live in active preparedness for the final judgment.17
17. Cf. Feuillet, loc. cit., pp. 82-92; Ruthild Geiger, Die Lukansichen Endzeitreden: Studies
Zur Eschatologie des Lukas Evangeliums (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1973), pp. 149-268;
Josef Zmijewski, Die Eschatologiereden des Lukas-Evangeliums (Bonn: Peter Hanstein
Verlag, 1972), pp. 43-325; NJBC: 43:174-176; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1323-1256;
445
The Crowds in the Passion

Having called for Jesus blood during His trial, the Lukan crowds, as we
have seen, repent on Calvary. Motivated apparently by the forgiveness
and faith with which Jesus dies, the people return from the place of execution beating their breasts. (Lk 23:48) Their compunction recalls their
repentance at Johns preaching (Lk 3:10) and foreshadows the large number of conversions which will follow Peters Pentecost sermon.18 (Acts 2:41)
Luke, as we have seen, stresses the forgiveness of God more than the
other synoptic evangelists. The repentance of the Judean crowds at the
conclusion of Lukes passion account suggests that the mercy and forgiveness of God have the power to overcome even the most obstinate
unbelief. It also foreshadows the conversion of the Jerusalem crowds after
Peters Pentecost sermon.
Luke on occasion portrays the crowds somewhat more negatively than
the other synoptic evangelists. Luke has Jesus rebuke the crowds rather
than the scribes and Pharisees for seeking a sign. Lukes Jesus promises
the sign of Jonah to the crowds but interprets it differently. By the sign of
Jonah Luke means the conversion of the Gentiles whose faith in Jesus
will stand in judgment over the unbelief of the Palestinian crowds. Other
rebukes to the crowds follow in Luke as Jesus moves toward His passion.
Lukes Jesus challenges the hypocrisy of the crowds: they can read the
signs of changing weather but can neither read the signs of the times
correctly nor respond to Jesus with appropriate faith. In other words,
Luke occasionally uses the crowds to underscore the unbelief with which
Jesus fellow countrymen responded on the whole to His mission. One
senses here a Lukan commentary on Jewish indifference to the gospel
during the evangelists own day.
Luke departs even more significantly from Mark and Matthew by having Jesus deliver the eschatological discourse to the crowds in the temple,
not to His disciples in private. The shift in audience results in part from
the fact that Lukes Jesus in His messianic struggle with the chief priests
for the temple prefers it as a classroom. Nevertheless, in redirecting the
discourse to the crowds, Luke makes clearer its universal import. Universal salvation means universal judgment and requires universal readiness.
As a Pauline Christian speaking to Gentile Christians, Luke once again
underscores the universality of salvation in Christ.
18. Cf. Gottfried Rau, Das Volk in der lukanischen Passionsgeschichte: Eine Konjectur
zu Lk 23, 13, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 56(1956), pp. 41-51;
NJBC: 43:193; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1513-1528; Evans, Luke, pp. 875-879; Ernst,
op. cit., pp. 488- 491.
446
Only one final set of Lukan dramatic linkages needs consideration:

namely, Jesus relationship to His disciples. As in the other synoptics, this
linkage more than any other defines the plot of Lukes gospel. As we
shall see, Luke handles that relationship in an original and distinctive
way.
(II)
As we have seen, in Mark the call of the disciples parallels Jesus own
messianic commissioning. Luke, however, places the call of the disciples
later in Jesus ministry, after His presumed return from an excursion into
Judea. The displacement destroys the Markan parallelism.19 (Lk 4:44)
In Mark Jesus exorcises the demoniac at Capernaum in the presence of
the disciples and the exorcism parallels Jesus desert temptations. (Mk
1:21-8) Luke destroys this parallelism as well and locates the call of the
disciples after the exorcism. Hence, Lukes Jesus seems to perform this
initial deliverance alone. (Lk 4:31-7) Nevertheless, Luke follows Mark by
having Jesus retire to Simons house after the exorcism. There Jesus cures
Simons mother-in-law. (Lk 4:38-9) As Luke tells Jesus story, Simon knows
Jesus before Jesus calls him. Luke also expands Marks brief account of
the call of the disciples and focuses the story on the call of Simon. (Lk
5:1-3) Lukes special concern with Simon Peter foreshadows the prominent role which the apostle will play in the first part of Acts.
The call of Simon in Luke has several parallels to the encounter between the risen Jesus and His disciples in Jn 21:1-11. 1) In both gospels,
the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing. Jesus directs them
to cast their nets again. The disciples pull in an extraordinary catch of
fish. 2) Simon reacts to the catch. 3) Simon calls Jesus Lord. 4) The
other fishermen take in the haul but say nothing. 5) The story culminates
in the following of Jesus. 6) The huge haul of fish symbolizes a successful
missionary endeavor. 7) Both stories use the name Simon Peter. (Lk 5:1-11)
The two stories, however, also exhibit real dissimilarities. 1) In John
the disciples at first do not recognize the risen Christ as Jesus. In Luke
Jesus has yet to rise from the dead. 2) In John, Simon Peter and the
Beloved Disciple share the same boat. In Luke they do not. 3) In John,
Peter leaves the hauling of fish to the other disciples, but not in Luke. In
John, the net does not tear; in Luke it begins to break. 4) In John, but not
in Luke, the disciples catch the fish near shore and drag them in. 5) In
John, Peter rushes through the water to the risen Lord whom he has
denied, while in Luke Peter asks Jesus to depart from him because of his
sinfulness.
19. Cf. George, op. cit., pp. 351-427.
447
Contemporary exegetes tend to agree that Luke and John have probably put a story about an extraordinary catch of fish to different narrative
uses. In Luke the story stands in counterpoint to Jesus rejection at
Nazareth. (Lk 4:16-30) Instead of rejection, Jesus here encounters disciples whose generosity leads them to abandon all they possessgoods
and familyin order to join Jesus in proclaiming the kingdom. In the
process Jesus transforms them from fishermen to fishers of men.
Simons fearful plea that Jesus depart from him because of his sinfulness and Jesus call to Simon to follow Him despite the fishermans sinfulness both foreshadow Peters denial of Jesus and Jesus forgiveness of that
denial after Peter repents. (Lk 5:8-11, 22:31-4, 54-62) Jesus call also
makes it clear that he has no hesitation about gratuitously choosing sinners to follow Him and to proclaim the gospel. In his account of Pauls
apostolic vocation, Luke will make the same point.20 (Acts 9:1-19)
As in the other synoptics, Jesus table fellowship with sinners begins to
draw the disciples into conflict with Jesus adversaries. In Acts, the proclamation of the risen Christ will draw the disciples into His passion. (Lk 5:27-32)
The call of the Twelve in Luke follows the five conflict stories which
the evangelist adapts from Mark.21 As we have seen, Lukes Jesus always
prays before major events in His ministry. Luke alone of the synoptic
evangelists says that Jesus choice of the Twelve followed an entire night
of prayer on a mountaintop, the traditional Biblical place to encounter
God.22 (Lk 6:12-6; Mk 3:13-9; Mt 10:1-4)
20. Cf. Antonio Pitta, Ichthya ed opsarion in Gv 21,1-14, Biblica, 71(1990), pp.
348-363; Christian-B. Amphoux, C.N.R.S., Les premires ditions de Luc: Le texte
de Luc 5,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 67(1991), pp. 312-327; Gnther
Klein, Die Berufung des Petrus, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft,
58(1967), pp. 1- 44; Jean Delorme, Luc v.1-2: Analyse structurale et histoire de la
redaction, New Testament Studies, 18(1971-1972), pp. 331-350; R. Pesch, La
rdaction lucanienne du logion des pcheurs dhommes (Lc v. 10c), in Lvangile de
Luc-The Gospel of Luke, re-edited by F. Neirynck (Leuven: University Press, 1989), pp.
135-154; NJBC: 43:68-72; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 559-576; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 87-91;
Evans, Luke, pp. 286-293; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 448- 463; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 142-146.
21. In Luke as in the other synoptics, Jesus vindicates His divine authority to forgive sins
by healing a paralytic. (Lk 5:17-26) He justifies His hobnobbing with sinners by
appealing to His mission from the Father. He can risk contagion with sin in order to
heal it in the same way that physicians risk contagion with physical illness in order to
heal it. (Lk 5:27-32)
Luke records the dispute over fasting as an extension of the dispute with the Pharisees
over table fellowship with sinners. (Lk 5:33-9; Mk 2:18-22; Mt 9:14-7) As we have
seen, Luke reproduces the substance of Marks account of this conflict. Luke also
reproduces with minor editing the dispute over picking grain on the sabbath. (Lk
6:1-5; Mk 2:23-8; Mt 12:1-8) Cf. NJBC: 43:78-82; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp.577-612;
Johnson, Gospel, pp. 91-105; Evans, Luke, pp. 296-317.
22. Cf. NJBC: 43:84; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp.612-621; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 100-105;
448
The call of the Twelve in Luke serves as a prelude to the sermon on the
plain, Lukes equivalent of Matthews sermon on the mount. In Luke as
in Matthew, the sermon follows an initial outpouring of miracles and
exorcisms which manifest the healing and liberating character of Jesus
message. (Lk 6:17-9)
Matthew locates Jesus inaugural discourse on a mountain top because
he desires to portray Jesus as Immanuel, as God-with-us. Like God who
proclaimed the first covenant from Mount Sinai, Matthews Jesus proclaims the kingdom initially from a symbolic mountain top. Luke, however, portrays Jesus the joyful prophet of the kingdom, as the prophet
like Moses whom the book of Deuteronomy had foretold. (Deut
18:15-18; cf. Acts 7:24-41, 51-53) Moses brought the Law down from
the mountain top and proclaimed it to the people at its base. Accordingly, Lukes Jesus, after an night of prayer atop a mountain first chooses
the Twelve there and then descends to the plain to proclaim the beginning of a new Israel. The choice of the Twelve from a mountain top
enhances its authority and solemnity.
Luke presents a much shorter version of Jesus inaugural discourse than
Matthew does because Luke includes most of Jesus teachings in the journey discourse. In both gospels, Jesus addresses His discourse to both the
disciples and the crowds; but, in both gospels, His message applies especially to the disciples. Luke employs the same literary device as Mark to
indicate this point and says that Jesus raised His eyes on His disciples
before He began to speak. The stare indicates that His words envisage the
disciples in a special way. (Lk 6:20, 7:1; Mt 5:1) In other words, the
sermon on the plain did not exclude the crowds as an audience; but it
deals primarily with the demands of discipleship.23
Lukes Jesus begins the sermon on the plain by eyeing His disciples and
saying: Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. (Lk
6:20) Matthews Jesus blessed the poor in spirit and spoke of them in
the third person. (Mt 5:3-12) By adding in spirit Matthew insisted on
the importance not only of poverty but of a personally appropriated detachment from any desire for wealth. Lukes more direct form of address
identifies the disciples with the poor. Lukes Jesus equivalently says If
you would follow me and enter Gods kingdom, share the lot of the poor.
Lukes version of the beatitudes preserves the same realized eschatology
as Matthews. The first beatitude promises a present share in the kingdom; the other two beatitudes promise future blessings:
Blessed are you who hunger now, for you shall be satisfied. Blessed are you
who weep now, for you shall laugh. (Lk 6:21-2; cf. Mt 5:4, 6)
23. Cf. Indrich Manek, On the Mount-On the Plain (Mt v 1Lk vi 17), Novum
Testamentum, 9(1967), pp. 124-131; H.-W. Bartsch, Feldrede und Bergpredigt,
Theologische Zeitschrift, 16(1960), pp. 5-18.
449
Luke records a terser and probably more authentic version of the beatitudes. Matthews Jesus blesses those who hunger and thirst for righteousness. (Mt 5:6) Lukes Jesus promises food to the starving. Matthews
Jesus promises comfort to the grieving; Lukes promises them that they
will rejoice. (Mt 5:4) Moreover, Lukes Jesus explicitly contrasts the situation of the hungry and grieving now with what will be. The beatitudes
give no indication when food and joy will become the lot of those now
needy; but the contrast between now and then probably points to the
end time as the final and full arrival of the kingdom. Luke, then, portrays
the disciples of Jesus in this life as poor, hungry, grieving outcasts but
blessed and beloved of God in their poverty, hunger, and grief. In other
words, in his version of the beatitudes, Luke stresses even more than
Matthew the sacrifices which membership in the kingdom demands.
Lukes fourth beatitude, like Matthews ninth, probably envisages primarily the situation of the post resurrection Church. It promises:
Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and
revile you, and cast out your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man!
Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold your reward is great in
heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets. (Lk 6:22; cf. Mt 5:11)
The fourth beatitude makes it clear that the complete fulfillment of the
blessings promised in the first three will indeed come in heaven. The
identification of Christians enemies with the persecutors of the prophets
could allude to conflicts between the Lukan Church and the synagogue,
although Lukes gospel gives no evidence of the kind of embittered confrontation with the synagogue which Matthews does.
Three woes follow which reverse each of the blessings promised in the
beatitudes:
But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation. Woe
to you who are full now, for you shall hunger. Woe to you who laugh now,
for you shall mourn and weep. Woe to you, when all people speak well of
you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets. (Lk 6:24-6)
As we have seen, the woes in Matthew target the hypocrisy of the scribes
and Pharisees. (Mt 23:13-32) While they correspond in general to the
beatitudes, they do not reverse one by one the blessings promised in the
beatitudes in the way in which Lukes woes do. Riches, abundance of
food, and joy in this life (now) not only offer no assurance of ultimate
membership in the kingdom but even exclude one from sharing in its
blessing.
Nor does the approval of others make one secure. Far from it, their
approval means rather that one has strayed from the path of Gods truth.
450
In other words, while Matthew portrays the beatitudes and the woes as
the blessings and curses of the new covenant, Luke uses them to insist
that the proclamation of the kingdom effects a radical messianic reversal
of values.
Lukes woes and beatitudes also give eloquent testimony to the radical
character of Jesus social program. Social status, wealth, happiness, far
from symbolizing divine approval, exclude one from the blessings of Gods
kingdom which belongs to the poor, the hungry, the grieving, the persecuted.24
Luke follows the beatitudes of Jesus with reflections on the moral conditions for membership in the kingdom. Luke lists as the first condition
a universal love which includes even ones enemies. Love of enemies takes
practical shape, moreover, in nonviolent resistance to evil and oppression:
But I say to you that hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate
you, bless those who persecute you, pray for those who abuse you. To the
one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from him who
takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt. Give to everyone
who begs from you; and of him who takes away your goods do not ask
them again. As you wish that people would do to you, do so to them. And
if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners
love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to
you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you
lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you?
Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He is kind to
the ungrateful and the selfish. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.
(Lk 6:27-36; cf. Mt 5:38-48)
The disciples must, like Jesus, walk in the path of non-violent resistance to evil. As in Matthew, in turning the other cheek and giving away
ones shirt, one counters oppression by seizing the moral initiative and
forcing ones oppressors to confront the people whom they abuse in a
new light. Non-violent protest against oppression seeks to convert the
oppressor.
Matthew, as we have seen, presents Jesus counsels about how to resist
oppression non-violently as a dimension of Jesus new morality. Matthew
follows these counsels with an exhortation to love ones enemies. By bracketing the counsels on non-violent resistance between two exhortations to
love of enemies, Lukes Jesus makes it even clearer that non-violent resis24. Cf. Raymond S. Brown, S.S., New Testament Studies (Milwaukee, WI: Bruce, 1965),
pp. 265-271.
451
tance to oppression exemplifies love of enemies. The disciples must counter

enmity with love, hatred with good deeds, curses with blessing, stinginess
with generosity, and abuse with prayer for the abuser.
The disciples must abide by the golden rule. They must treat others
just as they would want others to treat them. Such conduct presupposes
the selfless ability to view situations empathetically. Universal love must
replace exclusive love of ones own. Jesus teachings here demand exactly
the opposite of what Essene piety did: the Essenes blessed their own members but cursed their enemies and those who defected from their ranks.
(1QS 2:2-17)
Moreover, Lukes Jesus typically insists on the eschatological significance of care for the needy: one must share ones goods with others without any expectation of return in this life. Ones reward will come, as the
beatitudes promise, in heaven. (Lk 6:23)
Love of enemies conforms one to Jesus because it makes one a child of
the Father. Matthews Jesus counsels You, therefore, must be perfect as
your heavenly Father is perfect. (Mt 5:48) Lukes Jesus says: Be merciful, even as you Father is merciful. While Matthew portrays divine, universal love as the perfection of loving, Luke portrays it as the expression
of a divine mercy and compassion toward sinners.
The disciples must refrain from passing judgment on one another and
must forgive one another if they expect to experience divine forgiveness.
(Lk 6:37; cf. Mt 7:1-5) They must give generously to those in need in the
confident expectation that the degree of their generosity will determine
the extent of their reward. Lukes God will not allow anyone to outdo
Him in generosity.25 (Lk 6:37-42)
The disciples will find themselves in positions of leadership and will
have to instruct others. Leading others, however, presupposes repentant
self-confrontation. Repentant confrontation with ones own blindness and
limitations must, always precede any attempt at correcting others. One
must remove the log in ones own eye before I can see to take the speck
out of anothers eye. (Lk 6:41-2) Otherwise like one blind person leading
another, both will fall into a pit. (Lk 6:39) By the same token, the disciples can instruct others truly only if they allow the teachings of Jesus,
which they hand on, to conform them to Him. (Lk 6:40)
Like Matthews Jesus, Lukes insists that only practical living of the
gospel proves goodness of heart:
For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit;
for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from
25. Cf. J. Duncan M. Derrett, Christ and Reproof (Matthew 7.1-5;Luke 6.37-42), New
Testament Studies, 34(1988), pp. 271-281; W.C. van Unik, Die Motivierung der
Feindesliebe in Lukas VI 32-35, Novum Testamentum, 8(1966), pp. 284-300.
452
thorns, nor grapes from a bramble bush. The good person out of the treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person of his evil treasure
produces evil; for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. (Lk
6:43-5; cf. Mt 12:33-7)
Lukes Jesus likens the human heart, the deepest center of a person, to
a storehouse where one hides ones most prized treasure. The image suggests that ones deepest attitudes constitute the most valuable part of the
self, the part most worth sharing with others. Moreover, words and deeds
express the contents of ones heart. Good treasure comes from a good
heart; evil treasure, from an evil heart. One knows the heart, therefore,
through the deeds and words which flow from it, just as one knows trees
by their fruit. Those who hear the good news need, therefore, both to
interiorize it and to embody it.
The sermon on the plain closes with a warning similar to the one which
closes Matthews sermon on the mount:
Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and not do what I tell you? Every one
who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you who
he is like: he is like a man building a house, who dug deep, and laid the
foundations upon rock; and when a flood arose the stream broke against
that house and could not shake it because it had been well built. But he
who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the
ground without a foundation; against which the stream broke, and immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great. (Lk 6:46-9; Mt 7:24-7)
In both gospels, the parable makes fundamentally the same point. In

times of trial and testing, only one thing will assure ones deliverance
from evil and ruin: not just hearing the gospel but living it. The lived
word provides the only solid foundation for a life of discipleship.26
The disciples witness Jesus raise the son of the widow of Nain to life.
The miracle, unique to Luke, alludes to Elijahs raising of the son of the
widow at Zarepath. (1 Kgs 17:10-24) The miracle reveals Jesus as a great
prophet like Elijah and Jesus ministry as a divine visitation. Jesus in fact
shows even greater power over death than Elijah: Jesus raises the boy by a
mere word, while Elijah had to prostrate himself over the dead boy three
times and engage in prolonged prayer.
The miracle also teaches other lessons to the disciples: Jesus has special
compassion for the widow in her grief and need. She embodies the third
beatitude. Moreover, in turning her sorrow to joy, Jesus reveals that He
possesses sovereign authority over death itself.27 (Lk 7:11-7)
26. Cf. NJBC: 43:85-92; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 625-646; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 105-116;
27. Cf. Barnabas Lindars, S.S.F., Elijah, Elisha, and the Gospel Miracles in Miracles,
edited by C.F.D. Moule (London: A.R. Mowbray & Co. Ltd., 1965), pp. 63-79;
453
Luke records that many women disciples traveled around with Jesus.
The evangelist names three: Mary of Magdala, from whom Jesus had
driven seven devils, and two other woman, one named Joanna and the
other Suzanna. As the wife of Chuza, Herods steward, Suzanna would
have commanded considerable financial means. Indeed, the fact that all
these women supported Jesus financially puts them in the upper financial bracket of society.
While women commonly supported a rabbi financially, for them to
travel around with him would have caused considerable scandal. Luke,
then, notes this aspect of Jesus ministry as a way of dramatizing three
points. First, unlike other rabbis, Jesus had women disciples who even
traveled about with Him like male disciples. Second, Jesus apparently did
not care about the raised eyebrows which His actions caused. Third, discipleship requires the rich to share their wealth with others. While Luke
portrays Jesus relationship to women as shattering gender stereotypes,
private women take a back seat to public men in the Acts of the Apostles.28
(Lk 8:1- 3)
Luke observes that the large gathering of people from town after town
heard Jesus parabolic discourse. (Lk 8:4) In Mark the parabolic discourse
takes place on a lake. Luke makes no mention of a lake, possibly as a way
of avoiding the awkward switch in location which occurs in Marks discourse. In Mark, as we have seen, Jesus discourse shifts implausibly back
and forth from the boat in which it begins to a private chat between Jesus
and the disciples. Moreover, Luke has already used Mk 4:1-2 as the setting for the call of Simon. Apparently, then, the evangelist felt disinclined
to employ the same pericope as a setting for the parabolic discourse. To do so
may have offended Lukes sense of an orderly (Lk 1:3) narrative. (Lk 5: 1-3)
While Matthew expands Marks parabolic discourse, Luke edits it
slightly. As in Mark, the discourse begins with the parable of the astonishing harvest followed by Marks allegorized rendering of the parable.
(Lk 8:4-15) Luke, however, eliminates Marks parable about the seed which
grows without help from the farmer and yet yields a harvest. (Mk 4:26-9)
Luke also displaces the parable of the mustard seed to his journey discourse. (Mk 4:30-2; Lk 13:18-9) The rest of parabolic discourse in Luke
consists of the parable of the lamp and two proverbs. (Lk 8:16-18)
In Marks sermon on the lake, the lamp shining on a lamp stand signifies that everything hidden or secret will eventually come to light. (Mk
4:21-3) The universal character of the disclosure in Mark suggests the
NJBC: 43:95; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 655-661; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 116-121; Evans,
Luke, pp. 345-349; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 646-655; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 185-188.
28. Cf. Turid Karlsen Seim, The Double Message: Patterns of Gender in Luke-Acts
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), NJBC: 43:701; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 695-698;
710-715; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 201-203.
454
final judgment when all hidden deeds will lay open to the light and when
the kingdom will come to final and full disclosure
In Luke, however, the lamp seeks to light people into the house. (Lk
8:16-7) Lukes lamp symbolizes the light of faith which attracts others
into the Christian community. The faith of the disciples should, then,
seek to draw the unbelieving crowds, the outsiders, into the household of
faith. In the journey discourse. Lukes disciples will share in the responsibilities of evangelization. (Lk 10:1-12)
Lukes modification of the parable of the lamp also gives different meaning to the proverb which follows it: For nothing is hid which shall not
be made manifest, nor anything secret which shall not be known and
come to light. (Lk 8:16-7) In Luke, instead of connoting the ultimate
disclosure of a secret wisdom, this proverb suggests that those who have
access to the secrets of the kingdom ought to share them with those who
do not know them.29
Luke also abbreviates and rewrites the final proverb of this short discourse. In Luke it reads as follows: Take heed then how you hear; for to
the one who has will more be given, and from the one who has not, even
what he things he has will be taken away. (Lk 8:18) Luke changes Marks
what you hear (Mk 4:24) to how you hear. The phrase how you
hear seems to allude to the allegorical interpretation of the parable of the
astonishing harvest which in Luke as in Mark describes different ways of
responding to the word of God: 1) initial faith, followed by unbelief, 2) a
faith which has shallow root and so withers in time of temptation, 3) a
faith choked by the cares, riches, and pleasures of life, and 4) faith
received in a good and honest heart which bears astonishing fruit. (Lk
8:11-5) Those who respond generously to the word will receive more and
more abundant gifts; those who respond in a niggardly way risk losing
what little faith they have.30
Luke, like Matthew, edits from Marks text the embarrassing fact that
Jesus relatives thought Him mad and came to take custody of Him (Lk
8:19; Mt 12:46; Mk 3:20-1, 31) After the parabolic discourse, Luke simply notes that His mother and brethren came looking for Him but
could not reach Him because of the crowds. Luke does not indicate why
they came looking for Jesus, while Matthew says that they wanted to
speak with Him.
Luke, however, uses the story to make the same fundamental point
about the life of discipleship as the other two synoptics. Those who fol29. Cf. Jacques Dupont, Au service de lvangile (Namur: Editions J. Duculot, 1968), pp.
43- 59; Gerhard Schneider, Das Bildwort von der Lampe: Zur Traditionsgeschichte
eines Jesus-Wortes, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 60(1970), pp.
183-209.
30. Cf. NJBC, 43:103; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 699-721; Evans, Luke, pp. 368-376; Bock,
op. cit., I, pp. 727-747; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 205-209.
455
low Jesus and obey His teachings belong to the household of God. They
become Jesus own family because, by imitating Him, they enter into the
same obediential relationship with the Father as He.31 (Lk 8:19-21; Mk
3:31-5; Mt 12:46-50)
Although Luke omits Marks account of Jesus walking on the water,
Luke does recount with minor editing Jesus calming of the storm. Luke
portrays the disciples as terrified by Jesus display of divine power. They
ask, Who then is this, that He commands the wind and water, and they
obey Him? (Lk 8:22-5; Mk 4:35-41; Mt 8:23-7)
Luke uses this cosmological miracle in exactly the same way which
Mark and Matthew do. The story underscores the question which Jesus
puts to His disciples: Who do you say that I am? (Lk 9:20) As in the
other synoptics, the calming of the storm in Luke functions as a theophany:
it reveals the divinity of Jesus by endowing Him with a power which only
God possesses. (Ps 65:7)
As in the other synoptics, the story also sets the stage for the exorcism
of the Gerasene demoniac. When the demons enter the swine which then
plunge into the sea, their deaths reveal Jesus sovereign authority over the
forces of chaos: over Satan, over his minions, and over the principalities
and powers of this world, symbolized by the demon named Legion. In
contrast to Matthew, then, Luke endorses Marks identification of the
Roman legions with Satanic powers.32 (Lk 8:26-34)
The disciples witness the cure of the woman with a flux of blood who
touches Jesus while the crowds jostle Him. (Lk 8:42-4; Mk 5:24-31) As
in Mark, Peter, James, and John witness the raising of the daughter of
Jairus. (Lk 8:40-2, 49-56) In Luke as in Mark, the number twelve links
the women symbolically. The daughter of Jairus has lived twelve years,
the older woman has suffered from the flux of blood for twelve years. The
number twelve also transforms both women into symbols of the old and
new Israel. The old Israel had twelve tribes; the new one has twelve apostles.
As in Mark, Jesus delivers the older woman from the impurity and
condemnation of the Law. He establishes the new covenant by giving His
disciples a share in His resurrection. Moreover, Luke, following Mark,
links resurrection faith to the eucharist by having Jesus command that
someone give the young girl something to eat. As in Mark, Jesus will give
the same command to His disciples in the multiplication of the loaves
and fishes, a miracle which, as we have seen, symbolizes the eucharist.
31. Cf. Brown, Mary in the New Testament, pp. 167-170; NJBC: 43:104; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, I, pp. 722-725; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 130-135; Evans, Luke, pp. 377-378;
Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 748-753; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 209-210.
32. Cf. NJBC: 43:105-106; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 726-741; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
211-216.
456
(Lk 8:55, 9:13; Mk 5:43, 6:37) Matthew, as we have seen, edits this text
more radically than Luke and eliminates most of Marks symbolism.33
Luke records a slightly edited version of the mission of the Twelve, but
he preserves all the essential points which Mark makes. Jesus involves the
Twelve actively in His own ministry, gives them authority to proclaim
the word, and empowers them to heal and exorcise. The urgency of their
message forces them to travel light: without staff, bed, bread, or money.
The poverty with which they proclaim the word will force them to trust
the providence of God and the hospitality of those to whom they preach.
Wherever they find resistance to the word, they should withdraw and
shake the towns dust from their feet as a sign that they have nothing in
common with unbelief. As in Mark, the gesture expresses the judgmental
character of their preaching and ministry, a theme which Luke will develop in
greater narrative detail in Acts. (Lk 9:1-6; Mk 6:7-13; cf. Acts 13:50)
In all the synoptics, the mission of the Twelve foreshadows the mission
of the apostolic Church and prescribes the attitudes which should accompany the apostolic proclamation of the good news. In Luke, however, the sending of the Twelve also foreshadows the acts of the apostles
which the evangelist will describe in his second volume.
Luke, in contrast to Mark makes no mention of the fact that the Twelve
anointed with oil. Nor does Luke say that the Twelve preached a message
of repentance, a theme otherwise dear to his heart. (Cf. Mk 6:12) Luke
simply says that the disciples preached and healed everywhere. Their ministry foreshadows their activities in the Acts of the Apostles. Their ministry also imitates the Lukan Jesus joyful message of good news.34 (Lk 9:6)
The return of the Twelve introduces the miracle of the loaves and fishes.
(Lk 9:10-1) The Twelve disciples distribute the miraculous food to the
crowds, an act which alludes to their future role as eucharistic presiders.
They return from distributing the food, each with a basket full of fragments. The full baskets suggest messianic abundance.35 (Lk 9:12-17; cf.
Mk 6:35-44; Mt 14:15-21)
In Luke, the confession of Peter follows immediately upon the miracle
of the loaves. Luke omits all the intervening material in Mark: the cures
at Gennesaret, Jesus disputes with the Pharisees over their legalistic attitudes, the exorcism of the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman, the
healing of a deaf man outside of Galilee, the second miracle of the loaves,
33. Cf. Rudolf Pesch, Jairus (Mk 5,22, Lk 8, 41), Biblische Zeitschrift, 14(1970), pp.
252- 256; H. van der Loos, The Miracles of Jesus (Leiden: Brill, 1965), pp. 509-519,
567-573; NJBC: 43:43; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, 785-808; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 140-144;
34. Cf. NJBC: 43:110; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 751-755; Evans, Luke, pp. 393-396; Bock,
op. cit., I, pp. 809-819; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 220-222.
35. Cf. NJBC: 43:113; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp. 761-769; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 144-150;
457
the story of Jesus walking on the water and invoking the divine name, the
Pharisees demand for a sign of heaven, and the progressive cure of a
blind man. (Mk 6:45-8:26) Luke, as we have seen, relocates Jesus polemic against seeking signs as well as the warning against the leaven of the
Pharisees in the journey discourse.36 (Lk 11:29-32, 12:1)
In Luke, the great omission puts Peters confession in close narrative
proximity to Herods question: John I beheaded; but who is this about
whom I hear such things? (Lk 9:9) In Luke, Peters confession begins to
answer Herods question. Accordingly, Luke omits the account of the
confrontation between Jesus and Peter after the latters confession. Lukes
Jesus never calls Peter Satan. Nor does Luke turn Peters confession into a
Church founding story as Matthew does. Instead, Luke makes it clear
that those who profess faith in Jesus as messiah stand with Him and in
opposition to the Herods of this world. (Cf. Mk 8:31-3; Mt 16:22-3)
Lukes infancy gospel has already identified Jesus as the Davidic messiah; hence, Peters confession does not tell readers anything they do not
already know. Luke, however, situates Peters confession during one of
Jesus prayer times. In fact, Luke finds it more important to locate Jesus
question and Peters response in the context of prayer than to name the
place where the incident occurred, namely, Caesarea Philippi. In Luke,
then, prayer inspires Jesus question: Who do the people say that I am?
and Who do you say that I am? These narrative details underscore the
solemnity of what Jesus is asking and of Peters response. (Lk 9:18-20;
cf.Mk 8:27-30; Mt 16:13-15)
As in the other synoptics, the disciples respond that people regard Jesus
as John the Baptizer returned from the grave or as Elijah or as one of the
Old Testament prophets. When Jesus counters with the question: But
who do you say that I am? Lukes Peter responds: The Christ of God.
(Lk 9:19-20) Marks Peter says simply: You are the Christ. (Mk 8:30)
As we have seen, Lukes Peter does not at this point confess Jesus divine
sonship as Matthews does. (Mt 16:16-17) Instead, Lukes Peter contents
himself with designating the Father as the source of Jesus messianic commissioning. Peters response in Luke stands somewhere in between the
corresponding response in Mark and Matthew.
As in the other synoptics, Jesus charges the disciples to tell this to no
one and immediately begins to qualify Peters confession with the first
prediction of the passion. Like Mark and Matthew, Luke identifies the
messiah with the suffering servant of second Isaiah.37 (Lk 9:22; Mk 8:30-1;
Mt 16:20-1)
36. Cf. Michael Pettin, Lukes Great Omission and His View of the Law, New
37. Cf. Brown, Peter in the New Testament, pp. 64-69, 111-112; NJBC, 43:114; Fitzmyer,
Gospel of Luke, I, pp. 770-776; Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 838-843.
458
Following Mark, Luke underscores the point he has made in narrating

Peters confession by having Jesus immediately insist that discipleship draws
one into His passion. Lukes Jesus says:
If any one would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross
daily and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. For what does it profit a man if he
gains the world and loses or forfeits himself: For whoever is ashamed of me
and of my words, of him will the Son of man be ashamed when He comes
in His glory and the glory of the Father and the holy angels. But I tell you
truly, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see
the kingdom of God. (Lk 9:23-7)
Luke modifies this saying as he finds it in Mark. Luke inserts the word
daily (kath hemeran). By the insertion, Luke makes it clear that the way
of the cross and the day to day living of the gospel coincide. The disciples
cross may include martyrdom, but it also includes suffering the ordinary
tribulations of life in atoning love.
As we have already seen, if authentic, this saying of Jesus need not
imply that He foresaw His own crucifixion with any certitude. He could,
however, have used the image of the condemned criminal, reviled and
pelted by the crowds as a startling image of discipleship. On Jesus lips,
then, the first saying would have challenged the disciples to endure any
rejection, indignity, and suffering which discipleship entails.
As in Mark, this first saying of Jesus forms a kind of topic sentence
which the three following pronouncements develop. The word for (gar)
which introduces the subsequent sayings subordinates them to the first,
whose central insight they expand. The first pronouncement describes a
fundamental condition for daily carrying ones cross. It inculcates strict
self-denial: in order to save ones life one must live ready to sacrifice it for
the sake of Jesus and of the gospel which He proclaimed and embodied.
The second pronouncement teaches that, compared with saving oneself,
even great wealth and power pale to insignificance. Indeed, the life of
discipleship demands the renunciation of both wealth and power. Finally, the third pronouncement asserts that Christian self-denial expresses
itself in the willingness to bear fearless testimony to Jesus, no matter what
the consequences. To deny Him makes one liable to condemnation at the
final judgment. The three pronouncements, then, extend to ordinary disciples the same point which Luke dramatizes in Peters confession, namely:
that ordinary discipleship sets one in opposition to the principalities and
powers of this world and causes one to share in Jesus sufferings.
Following Mark, Luke has Jesus predict next that some of his audience
will see the arrival of the kingdom during their lifetimes. Marks Jesus
predicts that the kingdom will arrive with power (en dynamei). (Mk
459
9:1) Luke omits this phrase possibly as a way of indicating that he regards
the resurrection as the fulfillment of this saying. If so, then Luke is contrasting the way the kingdom begins to arrive in the resurrection with its final
and full establishment when the Son of Man returns to judge the world.38
Like Mark, Luke uses the first prediction of the passion and the teachings of Jesus about the way of the cross in order to qualify Peters confession of Jesus as the messiah of God. As in the other synoptics, however,
the story of the transfiguration qualifies the qualification by manifesting
Jesus divine Sonship and by foreshadowing the resurrection. (Lk 9:28-36)
Luke reproduces Marks account of the transfiguration with some editorial changes.39 Mark makes no mention of prayer prior to the transfiguration. Luke does. In Luke, as we have seen, Jesus prayer precedes any
event of importance. Luke has the disciples fall asleep on the mountain
and awaken to the vision of Jesus transformed. Mark makes no mention
of sleep. Lukes allusion probably links this event to Jesus prayer in the
garden prior to His arrest. There again the disciples will fall asleep while
Jesus prays. (Lk 22:45-6)
Luke also mentions that Jesus face underwent alteration in the transfiguration and that Moses and Elijah appeared with Him in glory. Mark
speaks only of the transformation of He clothes. Luke describes Jesus
garments as dazzling white but omits Marks homely comparison to
clothes whitened by a fuller. In Luke, the alteration of Jesus face probably alludes to the transformation of Moses face, which glowed with
reflected divine glory after he spoke with God face to face. (Ex 34:34-35)
The allusion assimilates Jesus implicitly to the prophet like Moses; but
the alteration of Jesus face seems to express an inner personal quality,
Jesus own glory.
As in Mark, Moses and Elijah appear to Jesus. In Luke, the two Old
Testament figures, like Jesus, participate in heavenly glory. Moreover, only
Luke actually names what Jesus discusses with Moses and Elijah: namely,
His departure (ten exodon autou), which He was to accomplish at Jerusalem. Scholars debate whether the term departure (exodon) refers to
Jesus death, resurrection, or ascension. It probably includes all three.
However one takes it, the term certainly points to the paschal mystery as
a new exodus, a new and universal liberation of humanity from bondage
38. Cf. M. Corbin, S.J., Le Christ de Dieu: Mditation thologique sur Luc 9, 18-27,
Nouvelle Revue Thologique, 99(1977), pp. 641-680; B. Willaert, La connexion entre
la premire prdiction de la passion et la confession de Pierre chez les synoptiques,
Ephemerides Theologiae Lovaniensis, 32(1958), pp. 24-45; NJBC: 43:114; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, I, pp. 777-790; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 150-157; Evans, Luke, pp. 403-412;
Bock, op. cit., I, pp. 844-861; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 228-232.
39. Luke dates the transfiguration eight days after the confession of Peter and the
instructions on the way of the cross. Mark puts it six days later. The change in number
has no apparent significance.
460
to Satan. The allusion again implicitly assimilates Jesus to the prophet

like Moses, but with a difference. The resurrection, ascension, and Pentecost will effect an exodus superior to liberation from physical bondage.
Mark makes no mention of any such departure. That Lukes Jesus discusses the paschal mystery with the two who symbolize the Law and the
prophets suggests that the paschal mystery fulfills both. As we shall see, Luke
will insist on this point in his resurrection narratives.40 (Lk 24:27, 45-46)
In Luke the Father calls Jesus My Son, the chosen one. In Mark the
phrase the chosen one does not appear. Luke inserts it as a way of insisting on Jesus divine election as messianic Son of God. As in the other two
synoptics, the Fathers testimony also recalls His words to Jesus in His
messianic commissioning after His baptism by John. On that occasion,
the Fathers commission began Jesus revelation as messianic Son of God
in the image of the suffering servant. As in the other synoptics, the Fathers
witness in the transfiguration begins to draw the disciples into Jesus own
messianic commissioning. In Luke, however, the words of the Father also
answer Herods question about Jesus identity and further qualify Peters
confession of Jesus. Messiah and suffering servant, Jesus also confronts
the disciples as the Son of God and therefore as the object of a unique
divine election. Only God speaks with more authority than the Law and
the prophets. In Luke, the Father proclaims this truth, not just to the
disciples, but to client kings like Herod Antipas.
In Mark as Jesus and the disciples descend the mount of transfiguration, they discuss John the Baptizer. Luke omits the conversation. Luke
merely notes at the end of his account of the transfiguration that the
disciples kept the incident secret. (Lk 9:28-36; Mk 9:2-8)
Despite these Lukan modifications, the transfiguration has the same
generic import as in the other two synoptics. Jesus takes the three disciples to a mountain top, the Biblical place for encountering God. Jesus
transformation there manifests His divine glory and anticipates His resurrection. Moses symbolizes the Law and Elijah, the prophets, which
Peter mistakenly puts on a par with Jesus own teaching by suggesting
that they erect a tent for each of the interlocutors. The Father then testifies to Jesus and designates Him as His Son, as the chosen one of God, to
whom the disciples must listen. The Fathers testimony endows Jesus
teaching with a divine authority which surpasses both Moses and Elijah,
both the Law and the prophets.41
40. Cf. Susan R. Garrett, Exodus and Bondage: Luke 9:31 and Acts 12:1-24, Catholic
Biblical Quarterly, 52(1990), pp. 656-680.
41. Cf. Jindrich Manek, The New Exodus in the Books of Luke, Novum Testamentum,
2(1957), pp. 8-23; A. Feuillet, Les perspectives propres chaque evangeliste dans les
recit de la transfiguration, Biblica, 39(1958), pp. 281-301; Johannes M. Nuetzel, Die
Verklrungserzlung im Markusevangelium: Eine redactionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung
(Wurzburg: Echter Verlag, 1973), pp. 289-299; NJBC: 43:115-116; Fitzmyer, Gospel,
461
Like Mark, Luke places the cure of the epileptic demoniac boy after the
transfiguration; but like Matthew Luke severely edits Marks text. He
omits many of the descriptive details in Mark. In Luke the boys father
shows no signs of unbelief. In Mark he does. Mark portrays the crowds
who witness the exorcism as curiosity seekers. Luke describes them as
thunderstruck at the majesty of God which the exorcism has revealed.
Lukes Jesus does not call the demon deaf and dumb as Marks does; nor
does Luke assimilate the deliverance to resurrection, as does Mark. In
Mark the demon convulses the boy as it leaves him; but in Luke it convulses him as the boy comes into Jesus presence. The convulsion in Luke
expresses the demons reaction to confronting Jesus rather than the struggle
of deliverance. (Lk 9:37-43; Mk 9:14-27)
As Luke tells the story, Jesus majestic authority over the demons contrasts with the unbelief of the disciples whose lack of faith has prevented
them from casting the demon out. In Luke as in Mark, Jesus utters the
rebuke: O faithless and perverse generation, how long am I to be with
you and bear with you? (Lk 9:41) In Luke, the rebuke targets the disciples, while in Mark it refers to all of Jesus unbelieving contemporaries,
the scribes, the disciples, and the curious but unbelieving crowds.
Finally, Lukes Jesus counters the admiration of the crowds with the
second prediction of His impending death. Mark separates the second
prediction of the passion from the exorcism of the demoniac boy.42 (Lk
9:43-5; Mk 9:30-2)
The story of the demoniac boy dramatizes the disciples lack of faith.
Luke follows it with two incidents which also dramatize their ambition
and cliquishness. Jesus rebukes both attitudes. Lukes Jesus first discovers
the disciples arguing over which of them ranks greatest. Jesus recognizes
that the argument springs from ambition: Jesus perceived the thought
of their hearts. (Lk 9:46) As in Mark, whose version of this incident Luke
edits, Jesus draws a child to Himself before instructing the disciples.
Luke, moreover, combines into one the two sayings of Jesus which he
finds in Mark. Lukes Jesus says: Whoever receives this child in My name
receives Me, and whoever receives Me receives Him who sent Me; for the
one who is least among you is the one who is greatest. (Lk 9:48) Jesus
demands that the disciples replace their egotistical aspirations to personal
greatness with the recognition that in the new Israel, the least and most
vulnerable count as the greatest. The dignity of the little ones derives
from the fact that both Jesus and the Father identify most intimately
I, pp. 791-804; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 790-804; Evans, Luke, pp. 413-421; Bock, op.
cit., I, pp. 862- 876; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 233-236.
42. Cf. Van der Loos, op. cit., pp. 397-405; NJBC: 43:117; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, pp.
236-238.
462
with them. In the new Israel, therefore, true greatness expresses itself in
humility and personal self-effacement. Jesus gives personal example to
the disciples by identifying with the child in its smallness and vulnerability. (Lk 9:46-50; Mk 9:33-7) In contrast to Matthew, Luke does not use
this incident as an occasion to denounce giving scandal.43 (Mt 18:1-10)
Luke also edits slightly the next incident in Mark. The disciple John
tells Jesus that the disciples had told a man exorcising in Jesus name to
stop doing so because he does not follow with us. (Lk 9:49) Lukes
Jesus responds: Do not forbid him; for he that is not against you is for
you. (Lk 9:50) Luke, however, omits Jesus statement in Mark that no
one with faith enough to perform a work of power in Jesus name will
tend to speak evil of Jesus. (Mk 9:39) The fact, however, that Luke focuses the story of the epileptic demoniac boy on the unbelief of the disciples, gives their intolerance of the successful exorcist a special ironic
twist. They forbid someone with greater faith than they from doing what
their lack of faith prevented them from doing. As in Mark, Jesus rebuke
to the disciples intolerance and cliquishness challenges them to honor
the signs of faith wherever they find it, even outside the circle of disciples, even therefore outside the Christian community.44
After these rebukes to the disciples, Luke begins his great journey discourse. During Jesus Galilean ministry, then, Luke has already made the
following narrative affirmations about discipleship: 1) Jesus calls sinners
to follow Him and transforms them into apostles and evangelists. 2) Discipleship commits one to the messianic reversal of values which Jesus
proclaims. 3) Discipleship requires universal love, even of ones enemies.
It also requires non-violent resistance to evil. 4) The care for the poor
which expresses authentic discipleship anchors ones heart in heaven. 5)
Repentance corrects judgmentalism in those who follow Jesus. 6) Authentic faith requires living the gospel and insures membership in Gods
family. 7) In the family of God, women disciples stand on an equal footing with men. 8) The disciples living faith should draw others into the
Church. 9) Jesus frees His followers from the constraints of the old Law
by giving them a share in His risen life through eucharistic faith. 10)
Confession of Jesus draws one into conflict and associates one with Him
in His passion. The journey discourse develops and deepens many of
these themes.
43. Cf. Legasse, Jsus et lenfant, pp. 195-209; Robert Leaney, Jesus and the Symbol of
the Child (Luke ix. 46-48), Expository Times, 66(1954), pp. 91-92; Fitzmyer, Gospel
44. Cf. NJBC: 43:118; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, 819-822; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 157-161;
463
The Disciples in the Journey Discourse

The journey discourse encompasses nine chapters of Lukes gospel. Besides collecting most of the teachings of Jesus into this discourse, Luke
punctuates the journey with pronouncement stories.
Although in the journey discourse, Luke develops the way section of
Marks gospel, the evangelist endows this final journey with distinctive
narrative and symbolic significance. At the beginning of the discourse,
Luke points to Jesus ascension as its terminus. (Lk 9:51) Jesus journey,
then, encompasses not only traveling to Jerusalem but the whole of the
paschal mystery as it touches Him personally: His exodus. The discourse
also functions as an extended metaphor for discipleship as it describes the
pilgrimage of Jesus with His disciples into God.
Not all the sayings of Jesus in the discourse target the disciples explicitly. I
shall consider the thematic structure of the journey discourse in the following
chapter when I reflect on the teachings of Jesus in Luke. Here I focus only on
those teachings in the discourse which explicitly target the disciples.
Shortly before the journey discourse, Lukes Jesus predicts the passion
for a second time. As the disciples marvel at the things which Jesus is
doing, Jesus warns them: Let these words sink into your ears; for the
Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men. (Lk 9:43-5) Later
in the gospel, Luke recalls this warning. After the women discover the
empty tomb and hear the message of the two angels, they remember this
second prediction and recognize the supreme importance of the paschal
mystery. While terse, the second prediction of the passion in Luke has,
then, considerable importance for understanding the correct way to read
the journey discourse. The paschal mystery endows with ultimate significance everything which Jesus says, especially the journey discourse which
soon follows.
Luke begins the journey discourse with a lesson about non-violent resistance to hostility. Unfriendly Samaritans refuse to welcome Jesus and
the disciples into their village. Outraged James and John ask Jesus if He
wants them to destroy the village by calling down fire from heaven. The
two disciples are imagining themselves as prophets like Elijah who confounded pagan prophets by calling down fire from heaven in order to
consume his sacrifice to God. (1 Kgs 12:28) James and John, however,
want to outdo Elijah. They desire the fire to consume the hostile Samaritan town and transform it into another Sodom, although James and John
may also have been thinking of the two troops of soldiers whom Elijah
incinerated with fire from heaven.45 (2 Kgs, 1:1-18) Jesus rebukes the
fire-breathers and goes instead to another village.
45. Cf. Thomas L. Brodie, The Departure for Jerusalem (Luke 9, 51-56) as a Rhetorical
Imitation of Elijahs Departure for the Jordan (2 kgs 1,1-2,6), Biblica, 70(1989), pp.
96-109.
464
Clearly, the disciples have yet to comprehend Jesus teaching about love
of enemies, a teaching which Jesus now exemplifies for them. They also
need to learn that as the suffering servant, Jesus humbly walks the path of
nonviolent resistance to evil. Luke alone records this incident. (Lk 9:51-6)
Moreover, the evangelist follows it with further reflections on discipleship.46
Three sayings about the practical demands of discipleship follow. The
first two appear in Matthew, but Luke appends a third. (cf. Mt 8:18-22)
To a man who protests that he will follow Jesus wherever He goes, Jesus
replies: Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of
man has nowhere to lay His head. (Lk 9:57-8) Jesus seems to sense a
naive enthusiasm in the mans protest and warns him to count the costs
before throwing in His lot with the other disciples. Jesus can only offer
him a life of austerity and of poverty which make even animal existence
look good. Discipleship also commits one to a vagabond existence which
serves the proclamation of the kingdom.
Jesus then calls a disciple who begs permission to return home and
bury his father, a praiseworthy act of filial piety. Jesus shocking response
forbids him: Leave the dead to bury their dead; but as for you, go and
proclaim the reign of God. (Lk 9:59-60) Jesus words, which would have
deeply scandalized his contemporaries, make it clear that one can place
no conditions on a life of discipleship: it claims one totally and takes
precedence over all other obligations, even the most sacred. Discipleship,
moreover, includes one among the living. Non-disciples might as well be
dead. Discipleship also dedicates one to proclaiming the gospel.
Luke appends a final saying about discipleship unique to him among
the synoptics. A third potential disciple asks permission to say goodbye
to his family. Again Jesus forbids it. Jesus responds: No one who puts his
hand to the plough and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God. (Lk
9:61-2) The third potential disciple also puts a condition on following
Jesus. Like Elisha called by Elijah, the man asks permission to inform his
family of his departure. Elijah allows Elisha to do so; but Jesus will not.
Life in the kingdom demands single-hearted devotion which takes precedence over even the closest family ties and most solemn responsibilities.
Looking back alludes to Lots wife, whose disobedience to God caused
her to perish along with the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. (Gen
19:15-26) Authentic discipleship allows for no such vacillation.
These sayings of Jesus dramatize the sacrifices which discipleship demands. They also implicitly hearken back to Jesus third and final desert
temptation in Luke: His refusal to test God by setting conditions on His
obedience to His mission.47 (Lk 4:12-3)
46. Cf. NJBC: 43:120; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 823-832; Evans, Luke, pp. 436-438; Ernst,
op. cit., pp. 244-245.
47. Cf. Otto Glombitza, Die Christologische Aussage des Lukas in seiner Gesttung der
drei Nachfolgeworte Lukas IX 57-62, Novum Testamentum, 13(1971), pp. 14-23;
465
Matthew and Mark both describe Jesus commissioning of the Twelve

to preach, heal, and exorcise. (Mk 6:7-13; Mt 9:35-8) Luke alone describes the additional commissioning of the seventy-two disciples, whom
Jesus on His final journey sends ahead of Him in pairs to prepare His
way. In Luke the instructions to the seventy-two echo the instructions
which Matthews Jesus gives to the Twelve; but while Matthews Jesus
sends the Twelve only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, (Mt 10:5-6)
Lukes Jesus places no such restriction on either the Twelve or on the
seventy-two. Luke views evangelization as all-inclusive in its scope. The
mission of the seventy-two foreshadows, then, the Pentecostal Churchs
universal proclamation of the risen Christ.48 (Lk 10:3)
Luke prefaces the commissioning with a saying which also appears in
Matthew: The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest. (Lk
10:2; Mt 9:37) As in Matthew, this saying asserts that one does not take
up the work of evangelization on ones own initiative. One accepts it
rather as a vocation from God. The commissioning of the seventy-two
also makes it clear that the Twelve hold no corner on the vocation of
evangelization. It comes with discipleship.
Lukes Jesus will allude to both commissionings at the last supper. On
the threshold of the passion Jesus will bolster the disciples faith in the
Father by reminding them of the latters providential care of them in
their proclamation of the word. At the same time, Lukes Jesus warns the
disciples that the paschal mystery marks a radical shift in their relationship to God. Beginning with the passion, they will confront violence
head on.49 (Lk 22:35-38)
NJBC: 43:121; Fitzmyer, Gospel, I, 833-837; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 161-165; Evans,
48. As in the commissioning of the Twelve, Jesus instructions set basic guidelines for
evangelization in the Lukan community. The evangelizing disciples, like the Twelve,
must travel light and move fast. They must not waste time in idle chatter. Such
behavior betokens the urgency of their message. Traveling light also means traveling
in poverty and need: hence, the disciples should accept the hospitality of those they
evangelize, blessing in reward with the gift of peace those who receive them. They
should remain in one house and not move from one to another. They must heal the
sick and proclaim the approach of the kingdom. They can expect resistance: they go
like lambs in the midst of wolves. They should not, however, persist in the face of
opposition, but instead they should move on, shaking the dust from their feet in
testimony of the towns unbelief. (Lk 10:3-12)
49. Cf. A.E. Harvey, The Workman Is Worthy of His Hire: Fortunes of Proverb in the
Early Church, Novum Testamentum, 24(1982), pp. 209-221; Bruce Metzger, Seventy or Seventy- Two Disciples? New Testament Studies, 5(1958-1959), pp. 299-306;
Sidney Jellicoe, Luke and the Seventy(-Two), New Testament Studies, 6(1959-1960),
pp. 319-321; NJBC: 43:122; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 841-850; Evans, Luke, pp.
441-450.
466
Luke ends the commissioning of the seventy-two with an allusion to

the opposition which they encounter. Opposition to the gospel also motivates the woes which Jesus immediately calls down on Bethsaida,
Chorizin, and Capernaum for their unbelief. (Lk 10:13-15) Matthew
inserts Jesus lament over the lake towns in His eulogy of John the Baptizer. Since, however, the woes do not directly concern the seventy-two,
its insertion here makes them read almost like an aside, a burst of exasperation as Jesus contemplates the failure of His Galilean ministry.
Luke offers a somewhat shorter version of the lament than Matthew
does; but he preserves its gist. Stern judgment awaits the towns in which
Jesus chiefly ministered because of their persistent refusal to respond to
Him and to His message. The miracles performed in them will bring
down upon them divine condemnation.
Lukes Jesus, like Matthews, complains that, had He worked these signs
in Tyre and Sidon, they would have long since repented and believed.
The complaint, however, has slightly different connotations in Luke, since
the theme of universal salvation looms larger in his gospel than in
Matthews. In Luke, the putative conversion of Tyre and Sidon foreshadows Pauls successful Gentile mission in Acts. (Lk 10:13-15)
The commissioning of the seventy-two concludes with the assurance:
Whoever listens to you listens to Me; whoever rejects you rejects Me,
and whoever rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me. (Lk 10:16) The same
assurance ends the commissioning of the Twelve in Matthew. (Mt 10:16)
This pronouncement endows the preaching of the seventy-two with the
same prophetic authority as Jesus Himself and transforms them into prototypes of the prophetic Pentecostal Church. Jesus promises that the mission of the disciples, and therefore the mission of the post-resurrection
Church which it foreshadows, will prolong in space and time Jesus own
messianic commission from the Father.50
Luke makes the same point when he immediately recounts the joyful
return of the seventy-two and their elated report to Jesus, Lord, even the
demons are subject to us in your name! (Lk 10:17) The apostles in Acts
will repeatedly invoke the name of Jesus to heal and exorcise. Hence, the
report of the seventy-two like their commissioning also transforms them
into a prototype of the apostolic Church. As we saw in reflecting on
Jesus relationship to Satan, Jesus replies to the seventy-two that He saw
Satan fall like lightning from heaven. The ministry of proclamation deprives Satan of his power and casts the angelic prosecuting attorney from
the court of a forgiving Abba. So too will the apostolic proclamation of
the risen Jesus.
Jesus assurance to the seventy-two that he has given them authority
to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy
50. Cf. NJBC: 43:123; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 850-857; Evans, Luke, pp. 450-452.
467
(Lk 10:19) finds an echo in the pseudonymous conclusion of Marks gospel. (Mk 16:15-8) Jesus in effect promises to protect the evangelizing
disciples from physical evil as well as from the power of Satan.
Finally, Jesus, as we have seen, ends by warning the disciples against
self-inflated pride in their charismatic prowess. Only salvation brings ultimate joy, and the disciples should aspire to that instead of glorying in
their feats of exorcism.51 (Lk 10:18-20)
Having pondered some basic moral conditions for discipleship as well
as its missionary character, Lukes Jesus next reflects on its rewards. The
account of the return of the seventy-two ends with Jesus praise of the
Father for hiding these things from the wise and understanding and for
revealing them to children. Jesus, speaking with the voice of divine
Wisdom, asserts that He alone has the power to reveal the Father in virtue of the fact that the Father has delivered all things into His hands. In
sanctioning Jesus words and action, the Father, of course, also sanctions
His disclosure of the Father to the disciples. As we have seen, Luke insists
more explicitly than Matthew that Jesus knows the Father through the
enlightenment of the divine Breath. (Lk 10:21-2; Mt 11:25-7) Implicitly, therefore, the evangelist suggests that Jesus reveals the Father to the
disciples through the enlightenment of the Breath whom He will impart
to them on Pentecost. Knowledge of the Father in Jesus image during
this life and salvation in the next constitute, then, fundamental rewards
of discipleship. Moreover, one comes to know who Jesus is by sharing in His
mission and pneumatic inspiration. As we shall see, in Acts, the Breath of the
risen Christ will transform Stephen, Peter, and Paul into other Christs.
Finally, Lukes Jesus ends his instruction to the seventy-two with a
meditation on the privileges of discipleship:
Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets
and kings desired to see what you see and did not see it, and to hear what
you hear, and did not hear it. (Lk 10:23-4)
The blessing points to the disciples as privileged witnesses to Jesus and to

His ministry. Implicitly it also points to them as privileged witnesses to
the resurrection which brings the ministry of Jesus to its culmination.
The blessing reflects as well Lukes understanding of salvation history.
Jewish history up to John the Baptizer simply prepares for the coming of
Jesus. The whole of the Old Testament functions as a foreshadowing and
prophecy of His ministry and of the paschal mystery. By the same token,
Jesus and the paschal mystery endow ancient prophecies with their ultimate meaning.52
51. Cf. NJBC: 43:124; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 858-864; Evans, Luke, pp. 453-456.
52. Cf. Celestin Charlier, Laction de Jsus (Luc 10, 17-24 et Matth. 11, 25-30), Bible
et Vie Chrtienne, 17(1957), pp. 87-99; A. Feuillet, Jsus et la sagesse divine daprs
468
The pronouncement story about Martha and Mary further dramatizes

the fact that Jesus, in contrast to other rabbis, had women disciples.
Martha, fretted with the fact that Mary has left her alone to prepare dinner and deal with the housework, asks Jesus to order Mary to bear her
share of womans work. Jesus replies:
Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things; one
thing is needful. Mary has chosen the best portion, which shall not be
taken away from her. (Lk 10:38-42)
Martha values womans work more than the one thing which matters: namely, responding to Jesus and His message. Mary, in daring to
flout convention and relate to Jesus as a disciple, has chosen the best
portion. One suspects a pun in the phrase best portion. Mary has
opted for the most delectable dish or all: Gods word. Jesus therefore
sanctions Marys action and challenges Martha to move beyond the role
conventionally assigned to women by imitating Marys good example.
We find this story only in Luke.53
During the journey discourse, the disciples see Jesus praying and ask
Him to teach them to pray. He responds by teaching them the Father
prayer. (Lk 11:1-4) I have reflected already on the Father prayer in considering Jesus relationship to the Father and refer the reader to that discussion.
Two other teachings about prayer follow the Father prayer. The first
occurs only in Luke; the second surfaces with minor differences in
Matthews sermon on the mount.
The first saying counsels persistence in prayer. It takes the form of a
parable about a man importuned by a friend in the middle of the night.
(Lk 11:5-8) I have commented on this parable in greater detail above.
Here it suffices to recall that it demands of the disciples persevering prayer.
The pronouncement which follows it, as we have also seen, requires the
disciples to seek the gift of the divine Breath as the Fathers best gift. (Lk
11:9-13; Acts 2:1)
During the journey discourse, Jesus admonishes the disciples about
how to conduct themselves under persecution. He prefaces the admoniles vangiles synoptiques, Revue Biblique, 62(1955), pp. 161-196; NJBC: 43:125;
456-463; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 250-256.
53. Cf. Robert W. Wall, Martha and Mary (Luke 10.38-42) in the Context of a Christian
Deuteronomy, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 35(1989), pp. 19-35; Mary
Rose DAngelo, Women in Luke-Acts: A Redactional View, Journal of Biblical
Literature, 109(1990), pp. 441-461; J. Lionel North, oligon de estin chreis h henos
(Lyuke 10.42): Text, Subtext and Context, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
66(1997), pp. 3-13; NJBC: 43:127; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 891-895; Johnson,
469
tion, however, by warning them in the presence of enormous crowds

against the leaven of the Pharisees, which Luke equates with hypocrisy.
In a sense, Jesus here addresses the crowds as a foreshadowing of those
before whom the disciples will have to testify. I have also considered these
texts elsewhere.54
Luke includes in his journey discourse the parable about the lilies of
the field which Matthew locates in the sermon on the mount. In both
gospels, the parable targets the disciples and inculcates trust in the Fathers
providential care. In the journey discourse, the parable of the rich fool
follows it. It targets the crowds. I have already pondered both parables in
another context. Both call for the renunciation of avarice and wealth; but
the parable of the rich fool presupposes a lack of repentance, while the
parable of the lilies presupposes a converted hearer.55 (Lk 12:13-34)
Later in the journey discourse, Luke develops at some length the theme
of eschatological readiness. Here Lukes Jesus directs to the disciples warnings like those which the eschatological discourse will address to the
crowds. After rebuking some Pharisees who want to see the kingdom
arrive with extravagant signs and wonders, Jesus at the end of the journey
discourse, instructs the disciples on the need to live in readiness for the
second coming. (Lk 17:22-37) Luke here clusters several teachings which
Matthew locates at the end of Jesus eschatological discourse. (Cf. Mt
24:17-8, 26-7, 37-41)
Luke prefaces these eschatological warnings with the observation: The
days are coming when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of
man, and you will not see it. (Lk 17:22) The precise meaning of one of
the days of the Son of Man remains both debated and obscure, especially since in this passage Lukes Jesus alternates between singular and
plural in his use of the Greek word day (hmera). In verse 26 the evangelist refers to the days of the Son of man and in verse 30 to the day of
the Son of man. The day of the Son of man most probably refers to the
54. As we have seen, Lukes Jesus wants the disciples to relate differently to each of the
divine persons during persecution. Their reverential fear of the Father, who has power
to cast into hell after death, should outstrip any fear they have of their persecutors.
They must bear fearless witness to Jesus in the confidence that He will then testify on
their behalf on the last day. They should trust the Holy Breath to instruct them what
to say to their persecutors and should avoid apostasy, which Luke identifies with
Breath blasphemy. (Lk 12:1-12; cf. Mt 10:19-20, 26-33, 12:23; Mk 3:28-9, 4:21-23,
8:38, 13:11)
55. As we have seen, Luke makes minor editorial changes in the parable. He changes the
reference to birds of the air to ravens, as a way of stressing the universality of the
Fathers providential concern: the Father even looks after unclean beasts. The other
changes qualify as stylistic. The parable makes the same point in Luke as in Matthew:
because the Father knows your needs, let your trust that He will care for them even
more carefully than He cares for birds and flowers free you to set your heart first of all
on the kingdom and not on physical needs and their fulfillment. (Lk 12:22-31)
470
day of the last judgment. The phrase days of the Son of man could
suggest the messianic era which will follow. If so, one of the days of the
Son of man would seem to mean even one of the days of the messianic
era. In any case, verse 22 offers good evidence that hope for a quick
second coming was beginning to fade in the Lukan community. Hence,
the evangelist warns yet again: let not the delay of the second coming lull
you into complacency.56
Despite their longing for Jesus return, the disciples should refuse to
listen to false prophets who announce the arrival of a final judgment. (Lk
17:23) No predictions will precede the genuine arrival of the Son of man.
For as lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other,
so will the Son of man be in His day. (Lk 17:24) The real parousia will
arrive with brilliance and with an unannounced suddenness.
Lukes Jesus here inserts an allusion to His impending passion. He warns
that before the second coming the Son of Man must suffer grievously.
(Lk 17:25) We can also hear in this allusion a tacit reference to the sufferings which the disciples must face before the end arrives. (Cf Acts 9:4)
As in Matthews eschatological discourse, Lukes Jesus cites the example
of Lot and of Noah to dramatize the suddenness and unexpectedness of
the final judgment. The flood caught a sinful humanity completely unawares, as did the fire and brimstone which destroyed Sodom. (Lk
17:26-31)
Lukes Jesus warns:
On that day, let him who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house,
not come down to take them away; and likewise let him who is in the field
not turn back. Remember Lots wife. Whoever seeks to gain his life will
lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. I tell you, in that night
there will be two in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. There
will be two women grinding together; one will be taken and the other
left. (Lk 17:31-4)
In Marks eschatological discourse, the warnings to the man on the

housetop and to the man in the field apply to the people of Jerusalem at
the approach of the Roman army which will destroy the city. The warnings there stress the importance of instant flight if one hopes to avoid the
coming disaster. (Mk 13:14-6) Luke, who writes after the destruction of
Jerusalem, applies the same warnings to the second coming. As a consequence, on the lips of Lukes Jesus, the warning to the man on the roof
serves the opposite purpose from Jesus warning in Mark. In Mark it
56. Cf. Robert Leaney, The Days of the Son of Man, Expository Times, 67(1955), pp.
28-29; E. Ashby, The Days of the Son of Man, Expository Times, 67(1955), pp.
124-125; W. Powell, The Days of the Son of Man, Expository Times, 67(1955), p.
219; NJBC, 43:154.
471
warns Christians in Jerusalem to avoid the coming retribution; in Luke it

underscores the futility of any human attempt to avoid the final judgment. On the last day, personal possessions will offer no comfort. In
Mark the man in the field foolishly returns to retrieve his cloak. Luke,
however, transforms the mans turning around into an allusion to the
unbelief and disobedience of Lots wife. Take care, Lukes Jesus warns lest
at the second coming you incur a similar judgment.
Both Mark and Matthew record Jesus warning that those who seek to
save their lives will lose them and those who lose their lives will gain
them. The warning underscores the disciples need to follow Jesus, if necessary, even to the cross. (Mk 8:35; Mt 10:39) The same saying, when
read in context, enunciates the only way to avoid final judgment.
As in Matthews eschatological discourse, Jesus saying about those taken
and those left asserts that despite their superficial resemblance to one
another in human eyes, saints and sinners will suffer very different fates
on the day of judgment. Those taken probably alludes to Noah and Lot
who where delivered (taken) from judgment; those left designates those
who experience no such deliverance and must face condemnation. Luke
puts the man in bed, while Matthew locates him more decorously in the
field.57 (Lk 17:34-5; cf. Mt 24:37-41)
As the end of these warnings, the uncomprehending disciples in Luke
commit the same blunder as the Pharisees whom Jesus has just rebuked.
They ask specific information about the coming of the kingdom: And
they said to Him, Where, Lord? Jesus replies vaguely and with apparent frustration: Where the body is, there the eagles will be gathered.
(Lk 17:37) In Matthew the proverb alludes to the public, manifest character of the second coming. (Mt 24:28) On the lips of Lukes Jesus it
would seem to connote the inevitability of the second coming. Lukes
Jesus refuses, however, to give the disciples any specific information about
where He will appear and only assures them that the judgment will surely
come. At the beginning of Acts, the risen Christ will censure the disciples persistent concern with dating and locating the kingdoms arrival.58
(Acts 1: 6-8)
Lukes Jesus closes these eschatological reflections with the parable of
the unjust judge. Like Jesus earlier teachings on prayer, this parable counsels perseverance but puts it in an explicitly eschatological context. As we
have seen, the unjust judge of the parable has no fear of God and no
concern for the fate of other people; but he nevertheless renders a just
57. Cf. Xavier Lon-Dufour, Luc 17,33, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 69(1981), pp.
101-112; J. Schlosser, Les jours de No et de Lot: propos de Luc XVII, 26-30,
Revue Biblique, 80(1973), pp. 13-36; NJBC: 43:154; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp.
1163-1174; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 262-268; Evans, Luke, pp. 625-634.
58. Cf. NJBC: 43:154; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1163-1175; Evans, Luke, pp. 625-634; Ernst,
op. cit., pp. 367-372.
472
verdict in the case of a widow who keeps badgering him. The judge acts
justly but from pure self-interest. He has tired of the widows bold and
persistent petitions. (Lk 18:1-5)
Lukes Jesus then draws the following moral: Hear what the unjust
judge says. And will not God vindicate his elect, who cry to Him day and
night? Will He delay long over them? I tell you, He will vindicate speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes will He find faith on earth?
(Lk 18:6-8) This parable and the interpretation of its significance occur
only in Luke. Moreover, only in this passage does Luke refer to Christians as the elect of God. The evangelist is seeking to shore up flagging
faith in the second coming and exhorts the chosen ones not to number
among the faithless when God comes speedily to vindicate believers.
Jesus will find faith on earth when He returns only if the disciples keep
faith.59
In the journey discourse, two other parables develop the theme of
eschatological vigilance. The second parable applies especially to Church
leadership. The first of these parables describes a watchful master. The
master of a house, alerted to a prowling burglar in the neighborhood,
takes due precaution to insure that the burglar find no entry to his home.
Lukes Jesus warns after the parable: You also must be ready; for the Son
of man is coming at an unexpected hour. (Lk 12:39-40)
Peter then asks Jesus whether He is telling this parable for the Twelve or
for the crowds. (Lk 12:35-8) Jesus replies that it applies especially, though
not exclusively, to those who occupy positions of authority in the new
Israel. Jesus says:
Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom the master will set over
his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time? Blessed
is that servant whom his master when he comes will find so doing. Truly, I
say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. But if that servant says
to himself, My master is delayed in coming, and begins to beat the menservants and maidservants, and to eat and drink and get drunk, the master
of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an
hour he does not know, and will cut him in two and put him with the
unfaithful. And that servant who knew his masters will, but did not make
ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating. But he who
did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and
of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more. (Lk
12:42-8)
59. Cf. Geiger, op. cit., pp. 11-148; Zmijewski, op. cit., pp. 326-572; NJBC, 43:155;
Fitzmyer, Gospel of Luke, II, pp. 1175-1182; Evans, op. cit., pp. 634-640; Ernst, op.
cit., pp. 372-375.
473
Here several points need noting. Peters question creates the context for
interpreting the parable. The question applies the parable especially to
those in positions of authority in the apostolic Church. The phrase give
them their portion of food at the proper time could refer to the care of
the poor in the early Church, to communal meals, and even to the
eucharist. In effect, Jesus says that more will be demanded of those in
authority than of others if, knowing full well what God demands of them,
they choose instead to act in oppressive and self indulgent ways. Not only
can they not presume upon their position in the community to excuse
them; but they will suffer even harsher punishments because of their
weightier responsibilities.60
Luke returns to the theme of eschatological watchfulness in a second
parable, the parable of the wicked steward. Typically, the evangelist links
eschatological readiness to care for the poor. This parable occurs only in
Luke.
In the parable, a steward accused of mismanaging his masters goods
finds himself discharged. Before he leaves his post, however, he deliberately forgives all his masters debtors to the masters considerable financial
loss. Moreover, the steward does so as a way of insuring that those whose
debts he forgives will take care of him once he loses his position and pay.
The master surprisingly commends the steward for his shrewdness.
Lukes Jesus draws the moral: For the children of this world are more
shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the children of light.
And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous mammon, so that when it fails they will receive you into the eternal mansions. (Lk 16:1-9)
Luke immediately clarifies what Jesus means by befriending unrighteous mammon. Lukes Jesus says next:
One who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and one who is
dishonest in very little is dishonest also in much. If then you have not been
faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will entrust to you the true
riches? And if you have not been faithful in that which is anothers, who
will give you that which is your own? No servant can serve two masters; for
either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the
one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. (Lk
16:10-3)
Matthews Jesus also requires a radical choice between God and mammon. Matthew locates the challenge in the sermon on the mount. (Mt
6:24) Lukes Jesus asserts that compared with the true riches of eternal
salvation, mere material wealth has only trivial value. Greed for worldly
60. Cf. NJBC: 43:136; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 983-991; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 203-207;
474
possessions causes one to forfeit true wealth in the next life. Moreover, in
saying that material possessions belong to someone other than the one
who owns them, Lukes Jesus is asserting two things. First, God gives
physical possessions to humans to manage as stewards. They, therefore,
stand accountable to God for how they use them. Second, one who owns
more than one needs has equivalently stolen the surplus from the poor to
whom it rightfully belongs. Many of the fathers of the Church would
develop this Lukan insight in their preaching.61
Luke follows these teachings with the observation that the Pharisees
loved wealth; and Jesus condemns the self-righteous rich as abominations in the sight of God. History gives us no reason to regard Pharisees
as particularly covetous, although many may have regarded wealth as a
sign of divine blessing. Luke, however, here uses the Pharisees as symbols
of Christian religious hypocrisy. Lukes Jesus implicitly points to rich or
covetous Christians as nothing more than Pharisaical hypocrites and
adversaries of Jesus. (Lk 16:14-15)
The evangelist makes the same point more explicitly in the parable of
the rich man and Lazarus. The parable follows several sayings about the
abiding force of the Law and the prophets. (Lk 16:16-17) The parable
illustrates the same points as the sayings; but Luke gives this parable a
special eschatological twist by invoking Christian resurrection faith.
The parable tells about the reversal of fortunes in this life and in the
next. A rich man lives sumptuously, while, Lazarus, a beggar, scratches
out a marginal existence at the rich mans door. Starving, covered with
sores, the beggar hasnt even the strength to keep the street dogs from
licking the pustules on his body. Both men die. The beggar goes to
Abrahams bosom, while the rich man roasts in Hades. (Lk 16:14-31)
This parable stands out from all the other parables by assigning a name
to one of the characters. The beggar has the name of Lazarus. His name
61. Cf. Mary Ann Bevis, Ancient Slavery as an Interpretative Context for the New
Testament Servant Parables with Special Reference to the Unjust Steward (Luke
16:1-8), Journal of Biblical Literature, 111(1992), pp. 37-54; Douglas M. Parrott,
The Dishonest Steward (Luke 16:1-8a) and Lukes Special Parable Collection, New
Testament Studies, 37(1991), pp. 499- 515; William Loader, Jesus and the Rogue in
Luke 16, 1-8a: The Parable of the Unjust Steward, Revue Biblique, 96(1989), pp.
518-532; M.G. Steinhauser, Noah in his Generation: An Allusion in Luke 16:8b, eis
tn genean tn heauton, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 79(1988),
pp. 152-157; Charles Avila, Ownership: Early Christian Teaching (Maryknoll, NY:
Orbis, 1983); Richard H. Hiers, Friends By Unrighteous Mammon: The Eschatological
Proletariate (Luke 16:9), Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 38(1970), pp.
30-36; Geoffrey Paul, The Unjust Steward and the Interpretation of Luke 16.9,
Theology, 61(1958), pp. 189-193; A. Descamps, La composition litteraire de Luc
XVI, 9-13, Novum Testamentum, 1(1956), pp. 47-53; C.S. Mann, Unjust Steward
or Prudent Manager?, Expository Times, 102(1991), pp. 234-235; NJBC: 43:148-149;
594-604.
475
derives from the same root as the Semitic name Eliezar. Abraham had a
servant called Eliezar. (Gen 15:2) Moreover, in Jewish midrash, Eliezar
descends periodically to earth in order to report to Abraham about the
state of Israel, especially about its care of the poor and its hospitality to
strangers. Lazaruss return to the bosom of Abraham as well as the rich
mans suggestion that Abraham send Lazarus next to his brothers homes
both identify the Lazarus of the parable as Eliezar in disguise. In fact, the
surprising identification of Lazarus as Abrahams Eliezar gives the parable
much of its punch.62
So too does the fate of the rich man. Those who originally heard this
parable would not necessarily have cast the rich man in the role of a
villain. In first-century Palestine, riches often went as a sign of divine
blessing; poverty, as a sign of divine displeasure. In the literary flow of
Lukes narrative, Lazarus, who during life hungered for the scraps from
the rich mans table, reminds the reader of the prodigal son, who in the
depths of his degradation yearned to eat pig food. Another parabolic surprise comes, then, when the rich man finds himself after death plunged
into the torments of Hades, while Lazarus/Eliezar finds himself translated into heaven. (Lk 16:20-21, 15:16)
Lazarus had spent his entire life at the rich mans door; but the rich
man sees him for the first time when he raises his eyes from his own
torments in Hades and sees the former beggar ensconced in Abrahams
bosom. The rich mans wealth had blinded him to Lazaruss very existence in this life; and, in the next, his former blindness continues to separate the two, since a great gulf prevents Lazarus from relieving the rich
mans thirst, with even a drop of water.
The rich man begs Abraham to send Lazarus to warn his rich brothers
to avoid both his own mistakes and the place of torment in which he
finds himself. Abraham replies that the Law and prophets already instruct them to care for the poor and the marginal. On Jesus lips, then,
this parable would have ended here and would have struck a familiar
note: namely, that practical care of the poor and destitute lies at the heart
of Torah piety.
Luke, however, goes further. The evangelist applies the parable to his
Gentile Christians when the rich man objects that his brothers will listen
if warned by someone from the dead. (Lk 16:30) Abraham, however,
replies that even if someone rise from the dead, the rich mans brothers
will neither believe nor repent. The reference to resurrection which Luke
interpolates at the end of the parable transforms it from a story about the
perennial binding character of Torah morality into a reflection on the
eschatological dimensions of Christian care for the poor. Those who covet
wealth in this life not only blind themselves to the suffering of the poor
476
and the marginal; but, by claiming to believe in the resurrection while

neglecting the poor, hypocritical Christians confess with their lips a faith
which their lives belie.63
Immediately after Jesus proclamation of the perenniel value of the Law
(Lk, 16:16-17), Lukes Jesus denounces remarriage after divorce. Lukes
Jesus says: Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits
adultery; and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery. (Lk 16:18) Since the Law allows divorce because of uncleanness (Dt 24:1), Luke seems to show less concern about divorce and
more about remarriage after divorce. In contrast to both Matthew and
Mark, Luke fails to record the debate between Jesus and His adversaries
concerning the correct interpretation of the divorce text in Deuteronomy.64
During the journey discourse, Jesus warns the disciples sternly against
giving one another scandal. One finds analogous statements of Jesus in
both of the other synoptics. (Cf. Mk 9:42; Mt 18:6-7, 18:21-2) Lukes
version of this teaching takes the following form:
Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to the one by whom they
come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung round his neck
and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little
ones to sin. Take heed to yourselves. (Lk 17:1-3a)
Like Matthews Jesus, Lukes recognizes the inevitability of scandal but

refuses to condone it in any way. Mark and Matthew focus the teachings
against scandal explicitly on the Christian community by identifying the
little ones with those who believe in Me. (Mk 9:42; Mt 18:6-7) Luke
omits the phrase who believe in me and equates the little ones with
any needy person. The fact that Jesus regards death by drowning preferable to giving anyone scandal gives vivid expression to the horror in which
He holds the sin. The warning: Take heed to yourselves envisages anyone who ever feels tempted to corrupt another; but it probably also serves
as a transition to Jesus injunction on mutual admonition and forgiveness, which follows.
Jesus says:
63. Cf. Donahue, op. cit., pp. 168-174; C.H. Cave, Lazarus and the Lukan Deuteronomy,
New Testament Studies, 15(1968-1969), pp. 319-325; A. Feuillet, La parabole du
mauvais riche et du pauvre Lazare (Luc 16, 19-31), antithse de la parabole du
lintendant astusieux, Nouvelle Revue Thologique, 101(1979), pp. 212-223; Eckart
Reinmuth, Ps-Philo, Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum und die Auslegung der Parabel
Lk 16:19-31, Novum Testamentum, 31(1989), pp. 16-38; NJBC: 43:148; Fitzmyer,
64. Cf. John J. Kilgallen, S.J., The Purpose of Lukes Divorce Text, Biblica, 76(1995),
pp. 229-238; Larry Kreitzer, Luke 16:19-31 and 1 Enoch 22, Expository Times,
103(1992), pp. 139-142.
477
If your brother sins rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he
sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times and
says, I repent, you must forgive him. (Lk 17:3b-4)
This pronouncement enjoins the opposite of giving scandal. Far from

causing one another to sin, Christians should exercise a watchful vigilance over one another by calling one another to mutual repentance and
reconciliation. Jesus binds the disciples to forgive another no matter how
often an individual offends, provided that the offender also truly repents.
As in Matthews gospel, Lukes Jesus puts the responsibility for initiating
the reconciliation on the one offended. (Cf. Mt 18:15)
Lukes Jesus requires an expectant faith especially of the apostles and
Church leaders. When the apostles ask Jesus to increase their faith, the
Lord responds: If you had faith as a grain of mustard seed, you could
say to this sycamore tree, Be uprooted, and be planted in the sea, and it
would obey you. (Lk 17:5-6)
Matthew inserts an analogous saying of Jesus after the deliverance of
the epileptic demoniac boy. In Matthew the saying explains why the disciples failed in their attempt to exorcise the lad: they lacked sufficient
faith to do so. (Mt 17:20) Mark too cites an analogous version of this
saying but inserts it as a teaching about prayer after the withering of the
fig tree. (Mk 11:22-3)
Mark and Matthew talk about moving mountains; Luke about
self-transplanting trees which grow in the ocean. Both hyperbolic images
intend to suggest something impossible under ordinary circumstances.
Luke, who consistently paints a somewhat more positive portrait of the
disciples than either of the other two synoptics, describes the apostles
spontaneously longing to grow in faith.
In the same passage, however, Lukes Jesus recognizes an ambivalence
at the basis of the disciples request. His reply puts them on the spot. So
far they possess a faith smaller even than a mustard seed. Luke, however,
commends the apostles desire to increase in faith as an attitude proper in
a disciple and in a Church leader.
The parable of the unprofitable servant follows. It notes that a slave
who works all day does not expect his owner on his return home to show
the slave any special gratitude. Much less will the owner sit the slave at
table and wait upon him. Instead, the owner will expect the slave to wait
on all his own needs. Comparing discipleship to slavery would have
shocked Jesus listeners. The parable, however, commends, not the arrogance of the owner, but the humility of the slave. It concludes with the
moral: So also, when you have done all that is commanded you say, We
are unprofitable slaves; we have done what we ought to have done. (Lk
17:7-10)
478
The parable makes two fundamental points: 1) Through the obedience

of faith, one renders to God something which one already owes Him. 2)
Authentic Christian service excludes all boasting and self-aggrandizement.
The parable applies to all disciples; but, by inserting it immediately after
the apostles request to grow in faith, Luke is suggesting that Jesus words
apply in a special sense to Church leaders. One finds this teaching in
neither Mark nor Matthew.65
Luke records at the end of the journey discourse how Jesus welcomed
even infants (kai ta brephe). Luke adapts Marks account of this incident.
Mark speaks of children (paida); Luke insists that the children in question were mere babes in arms. As in Mark those who bring the babies to
Jesus (presumably the parents) want Jesus to touch them. Matthew, as we
have seen, has Jesus bless the children. In Luke, as in Mark, the purpose
of the touch remains somewhat ambiguous; but it suggests that the babies had some sickness and that the parents wanted Jesus to heal them.
(Lk 18:15; Mk 10:13; Mt 19:13)
In Luke as in the other synoptics, Jesus takes His disciples to task when
they rebuke the parents for presenting the babies. Lukes Jesus says:
Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the
kingdom of God. Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of
God like a child shall not enter it. (Lk 18:16-7; cf. Mk 10:13-6; Mt 19:14-5)
Luke does not describe what Jesus does after these words. Mark has
Jesus embrace the children and bless them (Mk 10:16); Matthew has
Jesus lay His hands on them in a solemn blessing. By omitting a description of Jesus actions, Luke focuses the incident on the pronouncement
itself. Jesus saying points even to babiesthe most innocent, the weakest, the most defenselessas ideal members of the kingdom. Since the
baptism of households in the apostolic Church probably included the
baptism of infants, it also seems entirely plausible that Luke, like the other
synoptic evangelists, records this incident as a way of justifying this practice,
although the original incident had nothing to do with infant baptism.66
65. Cf. Donahue, op.cit., pp. 172-174; Pierre Houzet, Les serviteurs de lvangile (Lc 17,
5- 10) sontils inutiles ou un contresense traditionelle? Revue Biblique, 99(1992), pp.
335-372; Paul S. Minear, A Note on Luke 17:7-10, Journal of Biblical Literature,
93(1974), pp. 82- 87; Josef Sudbrack, S.J., Armselige Knechte sind wir; unsere
Schuldigkeit was es was wir taten, Geist und Leben, 41(1968), pp. 308-312; NJBC:
43:152; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1136-1148; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 257-262; Evans,
Luke, pp. 617-622; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 359-364; J. Dupont, Le maitre et son serviteur
(Luc 17,7-10),Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 60(1984), pp. 233-251.
66. Cf. Stephen Fowl, Receiving the Kingdom of God as a Child: Children and Riches
in Luke 18.15ff., New Testament Studies, 39(1993), pp. 153-158; Wilhelm Michlis,
Lukas und die Anfnge der Kindertaufe in Apophoreta, edited by Walther Eltester
(Berlin: Alfred Tpelmann, 1964), pp. 187-193; Friedrick A. Schilling, What
479
The parable of the pounds closes the journey discourse. It resembles a

parable in Matthew. Lukes parable speaks of pounds, Matthews of talents; but the two parables exhibit other more significant contrasts. Luke
combines the parable of the pounds with another parable. The second
parable describes a nobleman who travels to a far country in order to
receive a kingdom. After his coronation he returns home. (Lk 19:12)
During his absence, the mans subjects rebel and refuse to submit to his
royal authority. (Lk 19:14) This part of the story ends with the punishment of the rebellious subjects, who are slain before the newly crowned
king. (Lk 19:27)
Before slaying the rebels, however, the king passes judgment on the
servants whom he has left behind to manage his property. Before departing the nobleman had given three servants different amounts of money
with which to trade until his return. (Lk 19:13) As in Matthews parable
of the talents, the servant with ten pounds has made ten pounds more. In
Matthew, he receives his masters commendation and enters into his joy.
In Luke, he receives from the king dominion over ten cities. A analogous
reward greets the servant with five pounds who made five more. (Lk
19:15-9) The fact that the successful servants share in the new kings
jurisdictional authority turns them into types of the saved Christian who
will share in Jesus eternal reign.
The servant with only one pound acts in the same way in Luke as in
Matthew: he hides the one pound and returns it unused to the king. As
explanation, he offers the fact that he feared to risk losing any money
because he knew of the kings severity in reaping what he had not sown.
In Luke, the king turns the excuse against the servant. He rebukes the
servants failure to use his one pound; and, over protest from the other
servants, the king orders the one pound given to the one who has ten. (Lk
19:20-5) The moral of this part of the parable follows: I tell you, that to
everyone who has will more be given; but from the one who has not, even
what he has will be taken away. (Lk 19:26; cf. Mt 25:29)
As Luke tells this parable, it makes three points: 1) the greater ones
generosity and willingness to use ones gifts for the sake of the kingdom,
the greater will be ones reward. 2) Those who fail to use their gifts for the
kingdom will face stern judgment. 3) Those who rebel against the kingdom will suffer divine retribution. Some see in the slaying of the rebels a
Lukan comment on Israels general refusal to accept the gospel.67
Means the Saying About Receiving the Kingdom of God as a Little Child? (Mk x.15,
Lk xviii. 17), Expository Times, 77(1965), pp. 56-58; NJBC: 43:156; Fitzmyer,
67. Cf. Wilhelm Resenkfft, Jesu Gleichnis von der Talenten Ergnzt durch die LukasFassung, New Testament Studies, 26(1979-1980), pp. 318-331; Jack T. Sanders,
The Parable of the Pounds and Lukan Anti-Semitism, Theological Studies, 42(1981),
480
The last words Jesus speaks to the disciples in the journey discourse
warn them of His coming passion and resurrection. This warning marks
Jesus third prophecy of the paschal mystery. (Lk 18:31-4; cf. Mk 10:32-4;
Mt 20:17-9)
In the course of the journey discourse, then, Luke makes the following
assertions about discipleship: 1) Discipleship demands commitment to
Jesus way of non-violence, and it requires the willingness to sacrifice all,
even the most sacred ties. 2) Discipleship commits one to proclaim the
good news and to confront in the process the same forces of unbelief as
Jesus did. 3) Missionary disciples enjoy Jesus protection from natural
harm and from the malice of their enemies; but they should rejoice, not
in charismatic prowess, but in the gift of salvation. 4) Discipleship brings
the reward of sharing in Jesus filial relationship with the Father through
assimilation to Him in His mission from the Father. As a consequence,
discipleship confers the privilege of actually experiencing the salvation
which the Old Testament foreshadowed and for which great leaders in
Israels history longed. 5) Among the community of disciples women
rank side by side with men. 6) Discipleship commits one to a life of
persevering prayer in Jesus image. Such prayer expresses eschatological
longing. 7) Discipleship requires fearless testimony to the gospel in times
of persecution, life long trust in the Fathers providential care, and practical readiness to face the final judgment. 8) Practical care of the poor
expresses in a special way ones eschatological longing and readiness to
face final judgment. Hence, those who profess faith in the resurrection
and neglect the poor indulge in gross religious hypocrisy. 9) Eschatological
readiness to face divine judgment requires actively using ones gifts to
advance the kingdom. 10) Disciples should avoid scandalizing others and
should actively seek reconciliation with those who offend them. 11) The
true disciple cultivates expectant faith as well as humble self-effacing service. 11) The smallest and weakest in the community model for the rest
how to accept the kingdom.
As in the other synoptics, Lukes disciples secure the a young horse or
colt on which Jesus rides into Jerusalem.68 In contrast to the other two
synoptic evangelists, who describe crowds streaming from the city to
welcome Jesus, Luke has the disciples accompanying Jesus, not the crowds,
spontaneously break into praise.
pp. 660-668; Paul Jouon, La parabole de mines (Luc 19, 13-27) et la parabole des
talentes (Matthieu 25,14-30), Recherches de Science Religieuse, 29(1939), pp. 489-494;
J. Duncan M. Derrett, Law and the New Testament: The Parable of the Talents and
Two Logia, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 56(1965), pp. 184-198;
68. Cf. Walter Bauer, The Colt of Palm Sunday (Der Palmesel), Journal of Biblical
Theology, 72(1953), pp. 220-229.
481
Lukes disciples shout: Blessed is the King who comes in the name of
the Lord! Peace in heaven and hosanna in the highest. (Lk 19:28-40; cf.
Mk 11:1-10; Mt 21:1-11) In Luke the words of the disciples echo the
chant of the angels at Jesus birth and fulfill Jesus own prophecy about
His last visit to Jerusalem. (Lk 2:14; 13:35) In Luke, the entry into Jerusalem follows immediately upon the parable of the pounds and proclaims
Jesus the king of the parable.69
In Luke the entry into Jerusalem brings Jesus long pilgrimage to Jerusalem to a dramatic climax. Luke endows the event with a strong sense of
historical inevitability. He records Jesus foreknowledge of events, as do
the other two synoptics. In addition, however, Jesus replies to the Pharisees, who urge Him to silence His disciples: I tell you, if these were
silent, the very stones would cry out. (Lk 19:39-40) As we have seen,
Jesus allusion to Hab 2:11 suggests what the stones would say: they would
cry out for the rectification of injustice, a rectification which Jesus has
come to effect.
The absence of the crowds from the triumphal entry in Luke changes
its context and modifies its significance. In Mark and Matthew, the people
of Jerusalem welcome Jesus as the messiah. In Luke Jesus enters the Holy
city as a solitary pilgrim accompanied by other pilgrims, His disciples.
Luke, moreover, implicitly contrasts the enthusiasm of the disciples with
the apparent hostility of the rest of the city: Lukes Jesus weeps over Jerusalem as He draws near the city and prophesies its destruction for its unbelief. Lukes Jesus has already prophesied His inevitable death in Jerusalem. Now He weeps prophetically over its consequences. His prophecy
describes in graphic detail Jerusalems actual destruction. The graphic character of the description makes it sound like a vaticinium ex eventu.70 (Lk
19:41-4)
In contrast to the other two synoptics, we find no other mention of the
disciples in the Jerusalem ministry, except for a reference to them in the
eschatological discourse. Having cheered the end of Jesus pilgrimage,
the disciples fade into the background as the chief priests and Jesus take
the center stage.71
As we have seen, in Luke, Jesus eschatological discourse addresses the
crowds, not just the disciples. One section of the discourse does, how69. Cf. Augustin George, La royaut de Jsus selon lvangile de Luc, Sciences
Ecclesiastiques, 14(1962), pp. 57-69.
70. Cf. Emanuel A. Marco, Videns civitatem flevit super eam, Verbum Domini,
10(1930), pp. 245-248; David L. Tiede, Prophecy and History in Luke-Acts (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1980), pp. 65-96; Walter Uhsadel, Predigt zum Gedchtnistage
der Zerstrung Jerusalems in Abraham Unser Vater, edited by Otto Betz et al. (Leiden:
Kroll, 1963), pp. 459-466.
71. Cf. NJBC: 43:163; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1241-1253; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
482
ever, target the disciples specifically. Following Mark, Lukes Jesus predicts that both Jews and Gentiles will persecute His followers. Times of
persecution will, however, offer the disciples the opportunity to function
as witnesses (apobesetai de hymin eis martyrion). The term witness, of
course, connotes martyrdom.
Lukes Jesus, however, omits Marks assurance that the Holy Breath will
inspire the witness of the disciples in times of persecution. Luke has already made that point in the journey discourse. (Lk 12:12) In the
eschatological discourse Jesus promises, I will give you a mouth of wisdom, which none of your adversaries will be able to withstand or contradict. (Lk 21:15) Luke, of course, understood the faith witness of the
disciples as Breath-inspired. Here, then, he implicitly points to the risen
Christ as the Breaths source and the Breaths inspirations as a word of
wisdom.
Even ones most intimate acquaintancesparents and brothers and
kinspeople and friendswill betray believers to their persecutors. (Lk
21:16) Universal hatred will greet Jesus followers. But not a hair of your
head will perish. By your endurance you will gain your lives. (Lk
21:18-19) Luke here introduces into the eschatological discourse sayings
of Jesus which Matthew locates in his missionary discourse. (Mt 10:16-23)
The pronouncements, however, make the same fundamental points in
both gospels. God will protect the disciples in the midst of persecution.
Fidelity under the test will yield salvation.72
As we have seen, Luke portrays the passion of Jesus as the return of Satan
and as a renewal of His desert temptations. A similar idea surfaces in
Matthew, where the taunting crowds on Calvary echo Satans desert temptations. (Mt 27:40, 4:3, 6) Luke portrays Judas, the chief priests, and
eventually Pilate as the agents of Satan. (Lk 22:3-6) In Luke, Judass plot
to hand Jesus over and Jesus arrest in the garden bracket the last supper.
The biblical inclusion suggests that Judas betrays everything which the
last supper embodies and proclaims.73
Luke reproduces Marks account of the preparation of the last supper
with minor variations. Luke has Jesus commission Peter and John specifically to make the preparations for the meal. As in Mark, Jesus again dis72. Cf. Albert Fuchs, Sprachilche Unterzuchungen zu Matthus und Lukas (Rome: Biblical
Institute, 1971), pp. 37-44, 171-191; J. Giblet, Le promesse de lEsprit et la mission
des aptres dans les vangiles, Irenikon, 30(1957), pp. 5-43; NJBC: 43:174-5;
Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1338-1347; Evans, Luke, pp. 739-745; Ernst, op. cit., pp.
425-427.
73. Cf. Herbert Priesker, Der Verrat des Judas und das Abendmahl, Zeitschrift fr die
Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 41(1942), pp. 151-155; Kenneth Hein, Judas Iscariot:
Key to Last Supper Narratives? New Testament Studies, 17(1970-1971), pp. 227-232.
483
plays a preternatural foreknowledge of events. Like Matthew, Luke follows Mark in portraying the last supper as a passover meal. (Lk 22:7-13)
Luke alone among the synoptics records Jesus intense desire to celebrate this final meal with the disciples. Lukes Jesus opens the meal with
the announcement: I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you
before I suffer; for I tell you I shall not eat it until it is fulfilled in the
kingdom of God. (Lk 22:14-23)
The other two synoptics record an analogous version of the second
part of this saying but place it after the institution narrative. Neither of
them mentions Jesus intense yearning for the meal. (Mk 14:25; Mt 26:29)
In Luke Jesus longing provides an explicit context for the institution of
the eucharist which follows immediately after Jesus announcement. In
Luke as in the other synoptics Jesus reference to the fulfillment of the
eucharist in the kingdom of God puts it in an explicit eschatological
context. The eucharist prefigures the kingdoms final and full arrival. By
locating Jesus proclamation of His immanent death at the beginning of
the last supper, Luke portrays the entire meal as Jesus final testament to
His disciples prior to His death.74
In Lukes account of the last supper, Jesus passes two cups, not one.
While some have suggested that this second cup may represent a liturgical development in the Lukan community, it could also refer to one of
the earlier cups in the Passover meal. If so, Jesus changes the Passover rite
by having all the disciples drink from the same cup. The first cup also
calls attention to the eschatological character of what is happening. As
Jesus passes it around, He says: Take this, and divide it among yourselves; for I tell you that from now on I shall not drink of the fruit of the
vine until the kingdom of God comes. (Lk 22:17-8) Later in Acts, Jesus
will again share meals with the disciples. His action there suggests, then,
that with the resurrection the kingdom has begun to arrive. (Acts 1:4)
The institution narrative follows. Jesus performs the eucharistic actions
of taking, blessing, breaking, and giving while saying: This is my body
which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of Me. (Lk 22:19) As
we have seen, Marks Jesus says, Take, this is My body. (Mk 14:22)
Matthews Jesus says: Take, eat; this is my body. (Mt 26:26) The phrase
for you in Luke underscores the fact that Jesus dies out of love for His
disciples. The gift of His death coincides with His gift of Himself in the
eucharist. Lukes Jesus also commanded that Christians remember Him
by repeating His eucharistic actions. The text in no way suggests sacra74. Cf. F.C. Burckett, St. Luke XXII, 15, 16: What is the General Meaning? Journal
of Theological Studies, 9(1908), pp. 569-571; Xavier Lon-Dufour, Das letzte Mahl
Jesu und die Testamentarische Tradition nach Lukas 22, Zeitschrift fr die Katolische
Theologie, 103(1981), pp. 33-55.
484
mental ordination; nor does Jesus designate who ought to lead the act of
recall.
After the supper, Lukes Jesus passes the cup of blessing saying: This
cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. (Lk
22:20) Marks Jesus says: This is my blood of the covenant which is
poured out for the many. The phrase the many assimilates Jesus to the
suffering servant. (Mk 14:22; cf. Is 54:11) Matthews Jesus says: Drink
of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out
for the forgiveness of sins. Lukes Jesus says He sheds His blood for His
disciples and by His death seals with them a new covenant.
In all three gospels, Jesus portrays the shedding of His blood as a covenant sacrifice. Matthew insists as well on its atoning character. Since,
however, the sacrifice of atonement renewed the covenant, all three evangelists probably allude to the rite of atonement. Among the synoptic evangelists, however, Luke alone refers to Jesus covenant self-sacrifice as new.
In doing so Luke alludes to Jeremiahs prophecy of the sealing of a new
covenant written on human hearts, not on stone. (Jer 31:31-4) In Acts,
as we have seen, the coming of the Breath will seal that covenant by
inspiring the disciples to live spontaneously the ethics of discipleship which
Jesus proclaimed. Her coming, therefore, seals the covenant.75 (Acts 2:41-7)
After the words of institution over the cup, Lukes Jesus then adds:
But behold the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. For
the Son of man goes as it has been determined; but woe to that man by
whom He is betrayed! (Lk 22:21)
In the other two synoptics, Jesus announces Judass treachery before the
institution of the eucharist and warns of the dire consequences of treachery. Luke has the disciples question Jesus about who will betray Him; but
Lukes Jesus does not name Judas as the traitor. In Mark and Matthew,
He does. (Mk 14:17-21; Mt 26:20-5)
In Acts, moreover, Luke informs the reader of the woe visited upon the
traitor. As we have seen, Matthew has the chief priests buy a potters field
with the blood money which they paid Judas for Jesus. In Acts, Luke says
that Judas bought the field. Matthew says that the despairing Judas hanged
himself; Luke says that he fell and spewed out his entrails. We do not
know exactly how Judas died; but he probably met his end shortly after
Jesus execution. The first Christians apparently regarded his quick demise as Gods judgment on his treachery. (Acts 1:18; Mt 27:5-10)
75. Cf. Navone, op.cit., pp. 11-37; Kobus Petzer, Style and Text in the Lucan Narrative
of the Institution of the Lords Supper (Luke 22.19b-20), New Testament Studies,
37(1991), pp. 113- 129; NJBC: 43:177-179; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1376-1406;
Johnson, Gospel, pp. 331-343; Evans, Luke, pp. 777-791.
485
Jesus announcement of His immanent betrayal begins His final address to the disciples before His death. Jesus last discourse in Luke warns
of the changing relationship between Jesus and His disciples which the
paschal mystery will bring. Lukes short final discourse divides thematically into three parts. In the first part, Jesus rebukes the ambition of the
Twelve and calls them to humble service in His image. At the same time,
He promises them a share in His kingdom as well as judicial authority in
the new Israel. In the second part, Jesus predicts Simons denial and subsequent repentant leadership. In part three, Jesus warns that the paschal
mystery will mark a radical change in the life of the disciples. In Acts, the
arrival of the Pentecostal Breath will usher in the third age of salvation,
the age of the Church.
As we have seen in another context, Luke transposes to the last supper
the disciples dispute about which of them ranks first. The evangelist places
their ambitious bickering after the institution of the eucharist and after
Jesus announcement of His immanent betrayal. As Luke narrates the
incident, Jesus announcement seems to provoke the dispute. Confronted
with the knowledge that one of them will betray Jesus, the disciples show
no concern for Jesus Himself. Instead they seek to exonerate themselves
as each claims a greater place in the kingdom than any of the others. As
we have also seen in the other two synoptics Jesuss response to this wrangling rebukes the envy which the rest of the Twelve feel toward James and
John when the two brothers try to secure privileged places in the kingdom. In Luke, Jesus speaks in response to squabbling among all the Twelve.
(Mk 10:41-3; Mt 20:24-8) Jesus denounces the envy, ambition, and competition of the Twelve:
The kings of the Gentiles exercise authority over them; and those in authority are called benefactors. But not so with you; rather let the greatest
among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. For
which is greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? It is not the one
who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves. (Lk 22:25-26)
By locating this saying at the last supper, Luke contrasts the divine
reign which the paschal mystery inaugurates with the Satanic kingdom
which will soon engineer Jesus legal assassination. Moreover, Lukes Jesus
not only forbids the disciples to lord it over one another, but He even
rules out their claiming the title of benefactors. First century GrecoRoman society had practically no middle class. Society divided for the
most part into the rich aristocracy and the great majority of the poor.
Pagan society, however, expected the rich to exercise a certain amount of
noblesse oblige, by funding public events for the masses. Benefactions
which only perpetuate class distinctions have, however, no place in the
kingdom of God. Jesus holds up instead the ideal of an egalitarian society
486
which does not divide into rich and poor. In that society, the disciples
should vie with one another in humble service, in doing what in the first
century slaves did for their owners. Moreover, Lukes Jesus, in contrast to
Marks and Matthews, again alludes to the youngest members of the community, the children, as the ideal the disciples should emulate. They should
relate to one another in powerlessness and in mutual vulnerability.
Finally, Lukes Jesus singles out those in authority especially as bound
to give leadership in service by imitating Jesus own service to others.
Lukes Jesus does not state explicitly that His service consists ultimately
in His death which ransoms the many, as does Marks Jesus. The fact,
however, that Jesus alludes to His service immediately after the institution of the eucharist calls implicit attention to the service of His impending death.76
Luke then counterbalances the call to service with a promise of the
rewards of authentic Christian leadership. Matthews Jesus says something analogous in His response to Peters question about the reward which
awaits those who have left all to follow Him. (Mt 19:27-9) Lukes Jesus
speaks, however, in somewhat different terms from Matthews:
You are those who have continued with Me in My trials; and I assign to
you, as My Father assigned to me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink
at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of
Israel. (Lk 22:27)
In Acts companionship with Jesus from the beginning of His ministry

will provide a key criterion for replacing Judas, the traitor. Here Jesus
proclaims such companionship a distinguishing and untransferable trait
of the Twelve. (Acts 1:21-22) Lukes Jesus also asserts that the Father has
given the kingdom into His hands. In other words, the Father has bestowed on Jesus royal dignity; and the Twelve will sit at the royal table in
the messianic banquet. That same royal dignity Jesus promises to share
with the Twelve by giving them authority to judge Israel. The promise of
the twelve thrones in Luke could conceivably allude, as it seems to do in
Matthew, to an apostolic role in the final judgment; but the images in
Luke do have other connotations. In Acts, Luke will portray the Twelve
exercising that judicial authority in the apostolic Church, the new Israel.
(Acts 5:1-11; 15:5-29)
In the second section of Jesus last discourse in Luke, Jesus predicts the
denial of Peter:
76. The fourth gospel describes how at the last supper Jesus washed the disciples feet. (Jn
13-1- 11) Since Luke transposes Jesus teaching about service from a different section
of Marks gospel, the evangelist need not allude to this event. Cf. Peter K. Nelson, The
Flow of Thought in Luke 22.24-27, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
43(1991), pp. 113-123.
487
Simon, Simon, behold Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift
you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and
when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren. And he said to
him, Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death. He said, I
tell you, Peter, the cock will not crow this day,77 until you three times deny
that you know me. (Lk 22:31-4)
Luke alone among the synoptics attributes Peters denial explicitly to

the activity of Satan. In the process, the evangelist indicates that Satan
has returned to test, not just Jesus, but the disciples as well, and Peter
especially. Peters denial of Jesus, his repentance, and his rehabilitation
will, however, in the providence of God prepare him to support the other
disciples after the passion.
Only in Luke does Jesus predict that Peter will in fact repent of his
denial of Jesus and once again assume a leadership position among the
Twelve. Only Luke attributes Peters repentance to Jesus prayer for Peter,
probably as a way of underscoring the efficacy of Jesus intercessory prayer.
Hence, in Luke, Peters repentance illustrates the efficacy of Jesus prayer.
In Acts Luke will portray Peter repeatedly strengthening the brethren
by exercising a leadership function in the apostolic Church.78 (Acts
1:15-26, 2:14, 4:22, 5:1-11, 10:1-11:18, 12:1-19, 15:7-12)
The last discourse to the disciples closes with Jesus warning that His
immanent death will change radically the disciples way of living and
relating to Him:
And He said to them: When I sent you out with no purse or bag or
sandals, did you lack anything? They said, Nothing. He said to them,
But now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a bag. And let him
who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one. For I tell you that this
scripture will be fulfilled in me, And he was reckoned with transgressors;
for what is written about me has its fulfillment. And they said to Him,
Look, here are two swords. And he said to them, It is enough. (Lk
22:35-8)
Only Luke records these words of Jesus. Jesus begins by recalling His
instructions in sending out both the Twelve and the seventy-two disciples
and Gods providential care for them. (Lk 9:1-6; 10:3-7) Jesus then re77. Lukes Jesus, like Matthews, mentions only a single cock crow. Mark mentions two.
(Mk 14:26-31; Mt 26:30-5)
78. Cf. Edmund F. Sutcliff, S.J., Et tu aliquando conversus, St. Luke 22,32, Catholic
Biblical Quarterly, 15(1953), pp. 305-310; Werner Foerster, Lukas 22,31 f.,
Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 46(1955), pp. 129-133; Eta
Linnemann, Die Verleugnung des Petrus, Zeitschrift fr die Theologie und Kirche,
63(1966), pp. 1-32; William J. Tobin, The Petrine Primacy, Evidence of the
Gospels, Lumen Vitae, 23(1968), pp. 27-70.
488
verses those same instructions as a warning to the disciples that a serious

crisis looms, one which will draw them into its toils. The fact, moreover,
that the coming tragedy fulfills a prophecy makes it clear that what followsthe death of Jesus as well as its aftermathexpresses a divine purpose. The passion will begin a new conflicted era in the preaching of the
gospel: the era of the Spirit and of the Church. The warning also foreshadows the persecution which the apostles will encounter as they proclaim the risen Christ in Acts.
In instructing the disciples to bring purse, bag, and sword, Jesus speaks
symbolically about the need for readiness to face the new situation which
confronts them all; but the foolish disciples understand Him literally and
show Him two swords. Jesus replies in apparent exasperation at their
obtuseness: It is enough. One might also translate His words as: Enough
of that. At the very moment when Jesus goes without resistance to His
own death, the disciples mistakenly imagine that He is urging them to
armed resistance.79
In Mark and in Matthew, Jesus and the disciples depart together from the
upper room. (Mk 14:17; Mt 26:20) In Luke, Jesus leads the disciples
forth, just as He led them in the journey discourse. The journey is continuing and will culminate finally in Jesus glorification and in the Pentecostal mission of the Church. The Churchs mission prolongs the journey. By having Jesus take the initiative to lead His followers into the
passion Luke links the passion to the journey discourse. The discourse
and the paschal mystery both illumine one another.80
As we have seen, Luke describes Jesus prayer in the garden very differently from either of the other synoptics. Luke makes no mention of
Gethsemane. Lukes Jesus exhorts all the disciples to pray, not just Peter,
James, and John; and Luke omits mention of any distress Jesus felt prior
to His prayer. In the other synoptics, Jesus separates Himself from all the
disciples in order to pray. In Luke Jesus prays only once (not three times
as in the other synoptics).
The disciples come off somewhat better in Lukes severely abbreviated
account of Jesus prayer in the garden. Luke does not insist on their fail79. Cf. R. Heiligental,Wehrlosigkeit oder Selbstschutz? Aspekte zum Verstndnis des
lukanischen Schwertwortes, New Testament Studies, 41(1994), pp. 39-58; Stephen
Hobhouse, And He that hath no Sword, Let him Buy one (Luke xxii, 35-38),
Expository Times, 30(1918- 1919), pp. 278-280; S.K. Finlayson, The Enigma of the
Swords, Expository Times, 50(1939), p. 563; Paul S. Minear, A Note on Luke
xxii.36, New Testament Studies, 7(1964-1965), pp. 128-134; Arthur Voorbus, The
Prelude to the Lukan Passion Narrative (Stockholm: Estonian Theological Society in
Exile, 1968); NJBC: 43:180-183; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1407-1435; Johnson,
489
ure to pray as Mark does. Luke even excuses their failure: Lukes disciples
sleep from sorrow. Luke, however, frames the story with a warning to the
disciples at its beginning and again at its end to pray lest they enter into
temptation. (Lk 22:39-46) The disciples confront the eschatological trial
and need to seek from God the strength to surmount it. That they sleep
instead dramatizes their unpreparedness for what will immediately follow.
The story, also, holds up Jesus persevering prayer in the face of
eschatological testing as a model for how the disciples should pray when
they themselves face the test of being drawn into the eschatological struggle
against the forces of evil. In Luke, all the disciples, not just Peter, James,
and John, witness Jesus prayer.81
Following Mark, Luke stresses the fact that one of the Twelve handed
Jesus over. Jesus responds to Judas treachery by saying: Judas, would
you betray the Son of man with a kiss? (Lk 14:47-8) In Mark, Jesus says
nothing. (Mk 14:45-6) In Matthew, Jesus says: Friend, why are your
here? (Mt 26:50) Matthews Jesus continues to call Judas friend even as
He challenges him to acknowledge the enormity of what he is doing.
Lukes Jesus, however, focuses on the hypocrisy of Judass act as a way of
jolting the disciple to self-knowledge and repentance. Even though Judas
serves as Satans instrument in handing Jesus over to His enemies, Jesus
continues to appeal to the disciples power to choose otherwise.82
Moreover, the Lukan Jesus knows what Judas is about to do even before the disciple does it. As we have seen, Matthews Jesus claims the
power to summon twelve legions of rescuing angels but refrains from
doing so. Even at the moment of betrayal, therefore, Lukes Jesus shows more
control over events than Marks does but less than Matthews Jesus. As we
shall see in the next volume, Johns Jesus shows the greatest mastery of all.
The other disciples persist in misunderstanding Jesus final words in
His last discourse and imagine that the time for armed resistance against
which He warned them has arrived. They ask: Lord, shall we strike with
the sword? (Lk 22:49) Luke alone records the question, which
contextualizes the attack on the servant of the high priest.
Lukes Jesus, however, once again rebukes the disciples incomprehension and violence with a curt order: That is enough! [Literally: Let
them be, even thus far (eate hos toutou).] Jesus then heals the severed ear.
(Lk 22:50-1) The other two synoptic evangelists make no mention of the
miracle, which in Luke exemplifies Jesus benevolence and forgiveness
even toward enemies. Luke also departs from Mark in failing to mention
the fact that the disciples then deserted Jesus.83
81. Cf. NJBC, 43:184; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, 1436-1446; Evans, Luke, pp. 808-813; Ernst,
op. cit., pp. 461-464.
490
While the other two synoptics situate the denial of Peter during Jesus
trial at night before the Sanhedrin, Luke, as we have seen, makes no mention of a night trial. Luke also edits Marks account of Peters denial. He
omits a number of descriptive details, including the fact that in his third
denial Peter cursed and swore that he did not know Jesus. Lukes Peter
simply says, Fellow, I do not know the man. (Lk 22:54-62)
As Luke describes the scene, however, those who arrest Jesus take Him
into a courtyard, kindle a fire and sit down. Peter follows and sits among
them. Luke, then, makes Peters denials of Jesus all the more poignant by
having Jesus witness them. After Peters denials, the Lord turns and looks
upon Him. Jesus gaze reminds Peter that Jesus has already forgiven Him in
advance. (Lk 22:31-4, 61) Peter, cut to the heart, remembers Jesus prediction, departs, and weeps bitter tears of repentance.84 (Lk 22:61-2)
As in the other synoptic gospels, Luke describes how the soldiers forced
Simon of Cyrene to carry the cross after Jesus. (Lk 23:26) As in the other
synoptics, Simon functions as an ironic type of the true disciple.85 (Cf. Lk
9:23)
Luke adds to the group of women disciples who witness Jesus death at
a distance some male disciples as well. (Lk 23:49) Following Mark, Luke
also records that Joseph of Aramathea, a member of the Sanhedrin and a
good and righteous man, asked Pilate for Jesus body. Luke edits out
from Mark Pilates surprise that Jesus has died so quickly.
Joseph wraps Jesus body in linen. Some think that the linen symbolizes immortality. Joseph then lays the body of Jesus in a rock-hewn tomb.
Luke adds the detail that the tomb has never seen use. Johns gospel records
the same tradition. (Jn 19:41) Matthew states that the tomb was new
but says nothing explicit about prior use, although Matthew does note
that Joseph had the tomb constructed for his own burial. Probably, then,
in Matthew too the tomb has never known use.
The women view where the body lies. Luke alone adds the detail that
they could not prepare the body properly for burial because the sabbath
was already beginning. Accordingly, the women go home and prepare
spices to embalm the body with the intention of returning after the sabbath rest passes. Only in Luke do the woman take this active role in Jesus
interment. Luck mentions no guards at the tomb.86 (Lk 23:50-56; Mk
15:42-47; Mt 27:57-61)
85. Like Mark, Luke suggests that Simon had come as a pilgrim to Jerusalem for the feast
of Passover. Like Matthew, Luke edits out the names of Simons sons, Alexander and
Rufus. Presumably, Marks community knew the two sons, while Lukes did not. (Lk
23:26; Mk 15:21)
86. Cf. Fernando Morell-Baldern, El Relato de la Pasin segun San Lucas, Estudios
Biblicos, 54(1996), pp. 79-114; NJBC: 43:194; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1523-1531;
491
The Disciples and the Risen Christ

Like Mark, Luke records that the women returned to the tomb at early
dawn on the Sunday after sabbath. They find the stone door of the tomb
rolled away and the tomb itself empty. Suddenly two young men in dazzling garments appear to them with the message: Why do you seek the
living among the dead? Remember how he told you, while he was in
Galilee, that the Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful
men, and be crucified, and on the third day rise. (Lk 24:1-11)
Luke transforms the young man in a white robe in Mark into two
young men whose sudden appearance and dazzling garments suggest their
angelic character. (cf. Lk 24:23) They foreshadow the two angels who
appear after the ascension and link the two events as facets of the same
mystery. (Acts 1:11) Luke does not call the youths angels, although the
women react to them as if they were: they bow to the ground in fright.
(Lk 24:4-5) Later, however, the disciples on the way to Emmaus will
describe them as angels. (Lk 24:23)
Lukes two angels speak a different message from the young man in
Mark. Marks young man tells the women that Jesus has risen and that
the disciples will see Him in Galilee. (Mk 16:5-7) Since Luke locates the
apparitions of the risen Christ on the road to Emmaus and in Jerusalem,
his angels make no mention of Galilee and simply allude to Jesus predictions of His own passion and resurrection. Later in his resurrection narrative, Luke will assert that Jesus resurrection fulfills not only His own
predictions of His death and glorification, but the entire Old Testament
as well.
Lukes relocation of the resurrection apparitions in Jerusalem rather
than in Galilee reflects the theological importance which movement plays
in his gospel. The journey discourse portrays the progress of the good
news from Galilee to Jerusalem. For the disciples to return to Galilee in
order to encounter the risen Christ would reverse the geographical movement of Lukes story and destroy the symbolism both of the journey discourse and of Jerusalem as the center of the Jewish world from which the
gospel of Jesus shall flow to the Gentiles.
Only after the women have seen the apparition of the angels and heard
the message does Luke name them: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the
mother of James, and other women. (Lk 24:10) The women in Luke, in
contrast to those in Mark, obey the angels and tell the apostles what they
have seen. The apostles, however, dismiss their story and refuse to believe
it. Luke, in contrast to Matthew, makes no mention of the womens encounter with the risen Christ.87 (Lk 24:11-12; cf. Mk 16:8; Mt 28:8)
87. Cf. Anton Dauer, Zur Authentizitt von Lk 24,12, Ephemerides Theologicae
Lovaniensis, 70(1994), pp. 294-318; F. Neirynck, Once More Luke 24,12,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 70(1994), pp. 319-340; J. Schmitt, Le rcit de la
resurrection dans lvangile de Luc; tude de critique litteraire, I, Recherches de Science
492
Luke alone records the apparition of Jesus to the disciples on the road
to Emmaus. The story contains many of the salient ideas in a Lukan
theology of the resurrection. 1) The resurrection so transformed Jesus
that it made it difficult for those who had known Him to recognize Him
initially. In the case of the disciples journeying to Emmaus, Luke says
specifically that their eyes were held from recognizing Him. (Lk
24:13-27) This detail lends considerable drama to the story. 2) Nevertheless, those who saw the risen Christ did in fact encounter the same Jesus
who had been crucified. 3) The encounter had a physical dimension,
because of the transformation of Jesus body. 4) The recognition of Jesus
came as an unexpected revelation. 5) The Old Testament predicted Jesus
resurrection. Hence, resurrection faith causes one to read the Old Testament with new eyes.88 6) The resurrection encounter transformed the
disciples from people bereft and distraught into joyful witnesses to the
risen Christ. 7) The resurrection encounter included a conversation with
the risen Jesus.
Jesus approaches two disciples on their journey to Emmaus and asks
them what they are talking about. They tell Him the things which recently occurred in Jerusalem. When He asks, What things? they narrate in astonishment Jesus prophetic mission, His passion, the womens
discovery of the empty tomb, and their vision of the angels announcing
His resurrection. (Lk 24:13-24)
Jesus then chides the two for their failure to understand the historical
necessity of all these events. He explains to them how Moses and the
prophetsthe entire Old Testamenthad foretold the inevitability of
all these things. As He speaks, He stirs their hearts profoundly. Evening
approaches as it had in the multiplication of the loaves. (Lk 9:12) The
disciples urge Jesus to stay with them. At supper He performs the eucharistic gestures of taking, blessing, breaking, and giving. Suddenly the disciples recognize Jesus in the breaking of the bread; but He vanishes
instantly. They return to Jerusalem with joy to report to the Eleven what
they have experienced only to hear that The Lord is risen indeed, and
has appeared to Simon! (Lk 24:25-35) It typifies the forgiveness of Lukes
Jesus that the risen Christ would appear first to the repentant Peter.
Luke stresses twice that these events happened to the two disciples on
the way (en te hodo). (Lk 24:32, 35) The phrase links the resurrection
appearance to the journey discourse and asserts that the Christian way
does not end at Jerusalem. On the contrary, the resurrection prolongs it
and inaugurates a new pilgrimage: the journey of the Christian disciples
in resurrection faith which Luke will narrate in Acts as they spread the
Religieuse, 25(1951), pp. 119-137; NJBC: 43:195; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1532-1553;
Johnson, Gospel, pp. 386- 391; Evans, Luke, pp. 885-900; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 497-501.
88. Luke makes this same point in Jesus third prediction of His passion. (Lk 18:31-34)
493
gospel to the heart of the Gentile world. Moreover, the fact that the disciples recognize Jesus in the breaking of the bread links resurrection
faith to eucharistic faith and in the process makes eucharistic faith an
intimate part of the way. As we have seen, the term the way designated the Christian movement as a whole.89 (Cf. Acts 9:2)
Even as the disciples from Emmaus hear the news of Jesus appearance
to Peter, Jesus Himself suddenly appears in their midst. The frightened
disciples think they are seeing a ghost. Jesus shows them his wounds and
insists that He is flesh and blood, not a ghost.90 When the disciples still
doubt, Jesus eats some broiled fish to convince them.91
Then Jesus says to them:
These are my words which I spoke to you, while I was still with you, that
everything written about Me in the Law of Moses and the prophets and
psalms must be fulfilled. Then He opened their minds to understand the
scriptures, and said to them, Thus it is written, that the Christ should
suffer and on the third day rise from the dead and that repentance and
forgiveness of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are my witnesses of these things. And behold I
send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are
clothed with power from on high. (Lk 24:44-9)
Jesus words here function in a manner analogous to the Great Commission in Matthew, even though in Luke the commission takes more
the form of a prophecy. Matthews Jesus as we have seen issues the Great
Commission as a direct command to baptize in the triune name. (Mt
28:16-20) In Luke the actual commissioning of the apostles will happen
after Jesus ascension, on Pentecost, when the arrival of the Holy Breath
transforms them into a prophetic community which witnesses to the paschal mystery. (Acts 2:1-41) Matthew, as we have also seen, links the commission to the resurrection and to faith in Jesus as Immanuel. We find no
such allusion to Immanuel in Luke.
89. Cf. Jeanne dArc, Catechesis on the Road to Emmaus, Lumen Vitae, 32(1977), pp.
143- 156; Un grand jeu dinclusion dans les perlins dEmmaus, Nouvelle Revue
Thologique, 99(1977), pp. 62-76; Friedrich Wulf, S.J., Sie erkannten ihn beim
Brechen des Brotes (Lk 24,35), Geist und Leben, 37(1964), pp. 81-83; Raymond
Orlett, An influence of the Early Liturgy upon the Emmaus Account, Catholic
Biblical Quarterly, 21(1959), pp. 212-219; J. Duncan M. Derrett, The Walk to
Emmaus (Lk 24, 13-35): The Lost Dimension, Estudios Biblicos, 54(1996), pp.
183-193; NJBC: 43:196; Fitzmyer, Gospel, II, pp. 1553-1572; Johnson, Gospel, pp.
90. The fourth gospel also states that Jesus risen body retained the wounds of crucifixion.
(Jn 20:24-7)
91. Cf. Gerald OCollins, Did Jesus Eat the Fish (Lk 24:42-43), Gregorianum,
69(1988), pp. 65-75.
494
Both evangelists, however, see the commissioning of the disciples as a

fulfillment of John the Baptizers prophecy of the coming of a mightier
one who will baptize with a Holy Breath and fire. In Luke the phrase
the promise of my Father alludes to Johns prophecy. In Matthew baptism in the triune name fulfills that prophecy. In Acts, as we have seen,
Christian baptism will perform the same function.92 (Acts 2:40-1; Mt
28:16-20)
Luke closes his gospel with a very cryptic account of the ascension of
Jesus. We find no mention at all of an ascension in the other two synoptics.
Johns gospel does, however, speak of Jesus ascension to the Father. (Jn
20:17-8) In Luke, Jesus departs for heaven with a blessing. Thereafter,
the disciples imitate the prophetess Anna in Lukes infancy narrative by
remaining continually in the temple blessing God. (Lk 24:50-3, 2:37)
Lukes Jesus ascends from the Mount of Olives, the scene of His prayer
with the disciples in Gethsemane. Jesus ascension also recalls the ascent
of Elijah (2 Kings 2:1-25), who in Luke frequently foreshadows Jesus and
His ministry. Like Elijah, Jesus too will return. (Mal 3:1-23)
Mountain tops in Luke and the Mount of Olives in particular have
rich Old Testament connotations. The Lukan Jesus prefers mountain tops
as a place of prayer. (Lk 6:12, 9:28) David, as Jesus messianic prototype,
wept and prayed on the mount of Olives after his betrayal by intimates:
Absalom, his son, and Ahitophel, his trusted counselor. (1 Sam 15:30)
Jesus was betrayed on the Mount of Olives by Judas. The fourteenth
chapter of Zechariah designates the Mount of Olives as the place where
God will stand when He pronounces final judgment. Jesus will return as
the apocalyptic Son of Man riding on the clouds of heaven (Dan 7:13);
and He will fulfill Zechariahs prophecy by pronouncing divine judgment on all the nations, including Israel.93
At the beginning of Acts, Luke says that the resurrection appearances
spanned a period of forty days. The forty days of resurrection appearances recall Jesus forty-day fast in the desert, which in turn recalls the
exodus. Luke also speaks of this period as a time of apostolic catechesis.
Jesus agenda has not changed an iota. In His risen glory, He instructs the
apostles in the reign of God whose proclamation will continue. In Acts,
moreover, Jesus appears to more people than the disciples journeying to
Emmaus and the Twelve. (Acts 1:1-5; Lk 4:1-13)
92. Cf. Peter Hebblethwaite, S.J., Theological Themes in the Lukan Post-Resurrection
Narratives, The Clergy Review, 50(1965), pp. 360-369; Joseph Plevnik, The Origin
of Easter Faith According to Luke, Biblica, 61(1980), pp. 492-508; J. Schmitt, Le
recit de la resurrection dans lvangile de Luc: tude de critique litteraire, II,
Recherches de Science Religieuse, 25(1951), pp. 219-242; NJBC: 43:197; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, II, pp. 1572-1585; Ernst, op. cit., pp. 508-513.
93. Cf. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, I, pp. 125-126; NJBC: 43:197-198; Fitzmyer,
Gospel, II, pp. 1572-1585; Johnson, Gospel, pp. 400-406; Evans, Luke, pp. 916-128.
495
Before Jesus ascends in Acts a gathering of disciples asks Him if He is

now going to restore the kingdom of Israel. Jesus replies:
It is not for you to know times and seasons (chronous e kairous) which the
Father has decided by His own authority; but you will receive power when
the Holy Breath comes upon you, and you will be my witnesses (martyres)
in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and even to the end of the earth.
(Acts 1:7-9)
Jesus refuses to give the disciples precise time tables; but He does not
completely rule out the restoration of Israel. He indicates, however, that
restoration will take a form which the disciples apparently do not expect.
First, the Samaritans and then the Gentiles must be incorporated into
the new Israel through the pneumatically inspired witness of the disciples
themselves. Jesus words in effect outline the plot of Acts, which will
narrate the Pentecost of the Jews, the conversion of the Samaritans, the
baptism of the first Gentiles, and Pauls Gentile missions.94
After saying this Jesus is taken up from the Mount of Olives (Acts
1:12) into heaven and received into a cloud, which marks this event as a
theophany. (Ex 13:22ff; Lk 9:34) The cloud also recalls the cloud on the
mount of the transfiguration. (Lk 9:35) As the disciples stare after Jesus,
two men, who recall the angelic duo who announced Jesus resurrection
to the women, appear and announce to the disciples:
Men of Galilee, why to you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus who was
taken up from you into heaven will return in the same way as you saw
Him going into heaven. (Acts 1:9-11)
The ascension terminates the apparitions of the risen Christ to the disciples who knew Him during His ministry. The next time they will see
Him He shall return as Son of man, riding the clouds of heaven. The
ascension, therefore, recalls the account of the second coming in Jesus
eschatological discourse (Lk 21:27) and foreshadows the parousia, when
Jesus will return on the clouds, this time in vindication and in judgment.
In the final age of salvation, the age of the Church, the risen Christ will
make His presence felt through the Holy Breath whose charisms will
empower the apostolic witness.95
94. Cf. Anthony Buzzard, Acts 1:6 and the Eclipse of the Biblical Kingdom, Evangelical
Quarterly, 66(1994), pp. 197-215.
95. Cf. NJBC, 44:17; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 5-8; Bruce, Acts, pp. 28-39; Hnchen, op.
cit., pp. 135-152; R.F. OToole, S.J., Activity of the Risen Jesus in Luke-Acts,
Biblica, 62(1981), pp. 471-498; Gilbert Bouwman, Die Erhhung Jesu, Biblische
Zeitschrift, 14(1970), pp. 257- 263; David L. Meland, The Phrase Many Proofs in
Acts 1,3, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 80(1989), pp. 134-135;
496

Like the other synoptic evangelists, Luke discovers genuine ambivalence
in the disciples relationship to Jesus prior to His passion. As in the other
two gospels, Jesus constantly challenges them to a repentant confrontation with their ambivalence. In the end, the disciples must choose in the
face of the paschal mystery.
A number of traits, however, distinguish Lukes portrait of the disciples
from that of the other synoptic evangelists. Mark stresses the sacrifices
demanded by a life of discipleship. Luke concedes the point but stresses
more its universal missionary character. In Luke, every disciple, not just
Church leaders, share the responsibility of spreading the good news.
Luke recognizes with Matthew that Jesus fulfills the Law and the prophets. In Luke, by fulfilling the Old Testament, the paschal mystery ushers
in the third and final age of universal salvation in Christ. Luke, however,
shows more concern than the other synoptic evangelists that, with the
postponement of the second coming, his Gentile Christians will yield to
the temptation of settling too comfortably into this world. More than
Mark or Matthew, therefore, Luke links eschatological hope and readiness for the final judgment to identification with and care for the poor
and weak.
Luke writes for a predominantly Gentile audience. Many of the issues
which most preoccupy Matthew, the Jewish Christian, do not preoccupy
Luke. Matthew writes to help Jewish Christians define their religious
identity in relationship to Torah and to the rest of Judaism. Luke realizes
that Gentile Christians should acknowledge their religious roots in Judaism; but Luke discerns an even more urgent need for them to define their
Christian identity over against the violent and oppressive reality of the
Roman empire, which he regards as Satanic. As we have seen, in Lukes
infancy narrative, the angels use an imperial formula to proclaim the birth
of the messiah. From the beginning of his narrative, Luke makes it clear
that Christian Gentiles need to choose between Jesus and the reign of
God, on one hand, and imperial Rome, on the other.
Accordingly, the evangelist insists that the acknowledgement of Gods
supreme sovereignty in prayer must claim the disciples first and absolute
allegiance. Confronted with the power of Rome they must even live willing to give their lives before allowing any created power to subvert that
allegiance. Prayer and reverence for God must root and ground their faith.
As we saw in volume one, Lukes Gentile Christians had to live in a
stratified class structure which concentrated enormous wealth in the hands
of the aristocratic few. In Roman society the middle class and the retainer
class of Roman bureaucrats and military personnel served the power inA.W.Zwep, The Text of the Ascension Narratives (Luke 25.50-3); Acts 1.1-2,
9-11), New Testament Studies, 42(1996), pp. 219-244.
497
terests of the ruling aristocratic elite. The vast majority of the populationthe peasants and urban poorlanguished in oppression, misery,
and need. Slaves formed the under class. The expendables, like beggars
and lepers, died on the fringes of organized society.
In this context Luke insists again and again that discipleship commits
one to active concern for the poor, the sick, and the marginal. Luke also
numbers woman among the socially margenalized groups which need
inclusion and empowerment within the Christian community, even
though in Lukes account of Church origins in Acts women play only a
minor role. Those on pilgrimage with Jesus into God must create a community which includes even the underclass and the expendables. Rich
Gentile Christians must recognize that accumulated wealth counts against
them in the eyes of God. No amount of symbolic benefaction will excuse
cupidity and greed.
In addition, Luke insists strongly that Jesus messianic reversal of values
demands the renunciation of all forms of coercive violence in dealing
with others. Romes ruthless use of violence to impose its oppressive will
must give way to mutual forgiveness, love of enemies, and mutual support in community. Christian leaders must renounce the ways of the kings
of the Gentiles. They and the entire Christian community must cultivate
humility and mutual service in the image of a servant messiah.
In the violent world of Roman society, Luke stresses even more than
the other evangelists that those who follow Jesus must walk the path of
mutual forgiveness and of non-violent prophetic resistance to all forms of
violence against persons. They must stand in solidarity with the masses of
the poor and oppose all forms of institutional oppression and corruption.96
The preceding chapters have considered how Luke modifies the positive, negative, and ambiguous dramatic linkages which he finds in Mark.
The time has come to examine how the third evangelist handles the other
Markan linkages. On this question the following chapter focuses.
96. Cf. Richard J. Cassidy, Jesus, Politics, and Society (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,
1983); Society and Politics in the Acts of the Apostles (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,
1987); Halvor Moxnes, The Economy of the Kingdom: Social Conflict and Economic
Relations in Lukes Gospel (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1946); Dennis M.
Sweetland, Our Journey with Jesus: Discipleship According to Luke-Acts (Collegeville,
MI: The Liturgical Press; Michael Glazier, 1990).
498
Chapter 16
Thematic and Allusive Linkages in Luke
This chapter examines the thematic linkages in Luke: Jesus teachings
and miracles. It also begins to reflect on the evangelists use of literary
allusion.
This chapter divides into three parts. Part one summarizes Lukes account of Jesus teaching. Part two reflects on Jesus miracles and exorcisms. Part three ponders how Luke uses literary allusion within his gospel.
(I)
As we have seen, Luke has his own distinctive way of handling the teachings of Jesus. He gathers them into a five small discourses but locates
most teachings in the great journey discourse. I have examined all of the
minor discourses: the sermon on the plain, the parabolic discourse, the
missionary commission to the Twelve, the eschatological discourse, and
the discourse at the last supper. The missionary discourse to the
seventy-two disciples forms, as we have seen, a part of the journey discourse. As we have also seen, Jesus directs only one of the minor discourses primarily to the crowds: namely, the eschatological discourse. All
the other minor discourses and especially the journey discourse target the
disciples.1
In the preceding chapters, I have analyzed the content of these discourses in some detail. In this section, I shall summarize the major themes
which each discourse develops. While this summary will entail some repetition of themes and ideas already analyzed, it should also give the reader
a sense of Lukes distinctive way of presenting Jesus teachings.
1) The sermon on the plain (Lk 6:20-49) announces the messianic reversal of values and enunciates basic moral conditions for discipleship.
The poor, the hungry, the sorrowing, the persecuted will inherit the kingdom, while the selfish rich, the self-sated, those who rejoice in
self-satisfaction, and those who enjoy worldly success will experience a
sharp reversal of fortunes.
Membership in the kingdom demands love of enemies, which
contextualizes non-violent resistance to evil. Love of enemies, moreover,
expresses the universalization of human love which life in the kingdom
demands. Universal love exemplifies the same kind of mercy which the
Father shows to both saint and sinner.
1. Cf. Jos Maria Casciaro, Contribucion al Estudio de los Discursos de Jess en los
Sinopticos, Estudios Biblicos, 50(1992), pp. 395-409.
Chapter 16: Thematic and Allusive Linkages in Luke
499
Only repentant self-confrontation in faith enables the disciples to lead

others in the path of holiness. Living the gospel identifies the true disciple. Moreover, Christian practice must spring from purity of intention.
Those who follow Jesus without living in His image will not survive the
hour of trail and testing.
In His inaugural sermon, then, Lukes Jesus develops four major themes:
1) the messianic reversal of values; 2) love of enemies and non-violent
resistance to evil; 3) repentance; and 4) the need for heartfelt living of the
gospel.2
2) The parabolic discourse (Lk 8:4-18) challenges the crowds to recognize that despite initial setbacks, the kingdom will bear abundant fruit.
The discourse also introduces the disciples to the mystery of the kingdom. It challenges them to steadfast and deep-rooted faith and to renounce the riches and pleasures of this life. Those who live so will bear
abundant fruit. Lukes Jesus exhorts the disciples to let the light of faith
draw others into the household of God.
In the parabolic discourse, Lukes Jesus develops the following themes:
1) the abundant fruit which will result from the proclamation of the
kingdom; 2) the need for deep rooted, practical, and other-worldly faith;
and 3) faiths capacity to draw unbelievers into the Church.
3) One may question whether the missionary commissioning of the
Twelve in Luke qualifies as a discourse, given its brevity. The commissioning has, however, more the form of a short discourse than of a pronouncement. Moreover the repetition of many of the same themes in the
commissioning of the seventy-two endows its message with importance.
The missionary discourse to the Twelve (Lk 9:1-6) and the discourse
which commissions the seventy-two disciples during the journey discourse
(Lk 10:1-12) develop the same themes as the parallel discourses in Mark
and Matthew: 1) urgency in proclamation, 2) trust in God, 3) the poverty of the apostolic life, 4) trust in the hospitality of the evangelized, and
4) withdrawal from hostile reception to the gospel.3
4) Deuteronomic themes and imagery fill the journey discourse. (Lk
9:51-19:27) Luke portrays Jesus not only as the joyful prophet of the
kingdom but as the one who fulfills Deut 18:15-18. The prophet like
Moses whom Deuteronomy foretold, Jesus brings about a new exodus, a
new liberation through his ministry, death, and glorification. Mosess
sufferings at the hands of Israel foreshadow Jesus passion. Jesus travels to
2. Cf. W. Grundmann, Die Bergpredigt nach der Lukasfassung, Studia Evangelica I,
(TU 73; 1959), pp. 180-187; Hans Werner Bartsch, Feldpredigt und Bergpredigt:
Redactionsarbeit in Luk. 6, Theologische Zeitschrift, 16(1966), pp. 5-18.
3. Cf. F.W. Beare, The Mission of the Disciples and the Mission Charge: Matthew 10
and Parallels, Journal of Biblical Literature, 89(1970), pp. 1-13; E. Schott, Die
Aussendungsrede Mt 10. Mc 6. Lk 9.10., Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 7(1906), pp. 140-159.
500
Jerusalem in order to reap the reward of a prophet, martyrdom in the

holy city. The first Moses led a rebellious people; the prophet like Moses
dies at the hands of the sinful generation to which He preaches. (Cf.
Acts 7:17-43)
During the journey discourse Luke also depicts Jesus as the journeying
guest. The many meals which punctuate the discourse re-enforce this
image. The meals foreshadow the eucharist, and the conflicts which take
place at them foreshadow the passion. After the passion, in the apparition at Emmaus, the journeying guest stands revealed as the Lord of the
banquet.
Conflicts during the journey discourse culminate in Jesus crucifixion
and in the paschal mystery. Jesus glorification effects the new exodus
which He as the new Moses has come to lead. The paschal mystery offers
Israel its last and best chance to renounce the sins of the past and accept
the forgiveness and reconciliation which Jesus proclaims and embodies.
The new exodus, however, reaches out to the Gentile world as well by
incorporating them into the new Israel which Jesus creates.4
Lessons in the Journey Discourse
The journey discourse divides roughly into three parts. A reference to
Jerusalem as Jesus destination occurs at the beginning of each part. (Lk
9:51-13:21, 13:22-17:10, 17:11-19:27) Since I have reflected in other
contexts on the different pericopes which constitute the journey discourse,
I seek here only to give the reader a sense of the journey discourse as a
whole and of the major themes which it develops.
As the first part of the discourse unfolds, it reflects on the following
themes: 1) the strenuous demands of discipleship (Lk 9:51-62), 2) its
missionary character (Lk 10:1-6), 3) the blessings of discipleship (Lk
10:17-24), 4) the inclusiveness of the kingdom (Lk 10:25-42), 5) the
need for expectant and persistent prayer (Lk 11:1-13), 6) the victory over
Satan (Lk 11:14-26), 7) obedience (Lk 11:27-28), 8) faith (Lk 11:29-36),
9) the evil of hypocrisy and legalism (Lk 11:37-12:1), 10) strength under
temptation (Lk 12:2-12), 11) the need to share ones goods with others
out of trust in the Fathers providential care (Lk 12:13-34), 12) the need
for eschatological vigilance (Lk:35-13:9), and 13) the ultimate triumph
of the kingdom despite opposition (Lk 13:10-21).
The second part of the journey discourse develops the following themes:
1) the difficulty of entering the kingdom (Lk 13:22-30), 2) the inevitability of Jesus prophetic martyrdom in Jerusalem (Lk 13:31-35), 3) heal4. Cf. David P. Mssner, Lord of the Banquet: The Literary and Theological Significance of
the Lukan Travel Narrative (Minneapolis, MI: Fortress Press, 1989); David L. Tiede,
Prophecy and History in Luke-Acts (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1980); Frank J.
Matera, Jesus Journey to Jerusalem (Luke 9,51-19,44): A Conflict with Israel,
501
ing (Lk 14:1-6) 4) humility (Lk 14:7-11), 5) the inclusiveness of the

kingdom (Lk 14:12-24), 6) self-denial and the willingness to renounce
ones possessions (Lk 14:25-33), 7) the evil of tepidity (Lk 14:34-35), 8)
divine forgiveness (Lk 15:1-32), 9) the sin of remarrying after divorce
(Lk 16:18) 10) right use of money (Lk 16:1-15) 11) the fulfillment of the
old Law in the new covenant (Lk 16:16-33) 12) the evil of giving scandal
and the need for mutual reconciliation (Lk 17:1-4), and 13) the importance in apostles of strong faith and of humble service (Lk 17:5-10)
The following themes structure the third and final part of the journey
discourse: 1) the importance of gratitude (Lk 17:11-19), 2) the immanent presence of the kingdom (Lk 17:20-21), 3) readiness to face final
judgment (Lk 17:22-37), 4) the importance of persevering prayer (Lk
18:1-8), 5) the need for humble repentance and the evil of self-righteousness (Lk 18:9-14), 6) childlike faith (Lk 18:15-17), 7) the danger of riches
and the need to renounce them (Lk 18:18-30), 8) the inevitability of
Jesus passion (Lk 18:31-34), 9) the power of faith to speed one joyfully
along the way of discipleship (Lk 18:35-43), 10) sharing ones goods with
others insures salvation (Lk 19:1-10), and 11) the need to cultivate the
gifts God gives if one wishes to avoid divine condemnation (Lk 19:11-27).
As the journey discourse unfolds, Luke sometimes treats the same theme
in more than one section. Repetition nuances the same theme and endows it with enhanced importance. The following themes recur with greatest frequency in the journey discourse: 1) the demands and privileges of
discipleship, 2) poverty, 3) faith, 4) prayer, and 5) eschatological readiness. Three other themes occur somewhat less frequently in the journey
discourse: 1) the difficulty of entering the kingdom, 2) the need for repentance, and 3) the reality of divine forgiveness. I begin with the theme
of the demands and privileges of discipleship.
As we have seen, the journey discourse begins with several reflections
on the demands of discipleship; but Luke returns again to this theme in
other contexts. Lukes Jesus requires the disciples to learn as their very
first lesson the need for non-violent resistance to hostility. (Lk 9:51-56)
In addition, the disciples must recognize that they follow a vagabond
leader, whose poverty they must imitate. Discipleship makes peremptory
demands which go beyond the most sacred family ties. (Cf. Lk 14:25) It
requires unconditioned commitment. It commissions one to proclaim
the kingdom, and it brings with it the assurance of life with God. (Lk
9:57-62)
In the second part of the journey discourse, Lukes Jesus equates discipleship with total self-abnegation. Day by day, one must carry the cross
behind Jesus. (Lk 14:25-35) The fact that discipleship demands that one
renounce all that one has means that one should consider carefully
whether or not one can make such sacrifices before one decides to join
502
Jesus pilgrimage into glory. (Lk 14:28-33) Christian self-denial permits

no backsliding. The tepid disciple resembles worthless salt which has lost
its taste. (Lk 14:34-35)
The third prophecy of the paschal mystery occurs in the third part of
the journey discourse. It challenges the disciples to recognize in the paschal mystery, in the death and resurrection of Jesus, events which fulfill
the scriptures and which embody an all encompassing divine plan of salvation. (Lk 18:31-4) That plan includes the disciples and draws them
into the passion.
The inevitability of Jesus passion makes it also inevitable that those
who follow Him will suffer persecution at the hands of the same powers
which murdered Him. In times of persecution, however, the disciples
should let reverential fear of the Fathers condemnation allay any fears
they may have of their persecutors. Instead, the disciples under persecution should bear fearless witness to Jesus in the assurance that on the day
of judgment He will testify to the Father on their behalf. Persecuted disciples should trust the Holy Breath to inspire their testimony to Jesus and
should avoid apostasy, which blasphemes the Breath. (Lk 12:4-12) In
Acts, Luke will describe how the disciples in prolonging Jesus mission
confront the same Satanic forces of evil which murdered Him. That confrontation will give them a share in Jesus passion.
Among the demands of discipleship, Lukes Jesus includes mutual care
for one another in community. He warns His disciples that they should
prefer death by drowning to giving scandal to anyone. (Lk 17:1-2) They
must also forgive a repentant offender as often as he or she asks for forgiveness. (Lk 17:3-4)
The parable of the pounds closes the journey discourse. Lukes Jesus
tells the parable to disciples who suppose that the kingdom of heaven will
appear immediately. (Lk 19:11) The parable makes practical readiness to
face final judgment, no matter when it comes, a fundamental demand of
discipleship. The disciples will live in readiness to face final judgment if
they use their gifts generously and courageously in order to advance the
reign of God. (Lk 19:12-27)
The universality of the kingdom poses another challenge to missionary
disciples. As we have seen, Luke uses Jesus teaching about the two great
commandments in order to stress the inclusiveness of the kingdom. The
parable of the good Samaritan interprets the great commandments in the
light of Jesus and of His message of universal reconciliation. The parable
forces the disciples to recognize that the kingdom reaches out to anyone
in need and heals them in ways which also liberate them. Moreover, Christian love extends even to enemies and heretics. (Lk 10:30-5)
The cure of the ten lepers begins the third part of the journey discourse. In its own way it too stresses the inclusiveness of the kingdom.
503
Jesus cures ten lepers, but only one of them, a Samaritan, returns to thank
Jesus. The Samaritans gratitude rebukes the ingratitude of the nine Jewish lepers and shows that grace and healing extend to non-Jews as well as
to Jews. The cured Samaritan returns to thank God in Jesus presence
because he recognizes in the very person of Jesus the presence and healing
power of God.5 (Lk 17:11-14)
Similarly, the story of Martha and Mary makes it clear that the kingdom also breaks down sexual barriers in society: Jesus calls and includes
women among His disciples. (Lk 10:38-42)
Jesus rebuke to the disciples who try to prevent parents from bringing
their infants to Him to touch makes two major points: 1) the innocence
of the babies, their weakness and vulnerability makes them ideals for the
disciples to imitate. 2) Their inclusion in the kingdom probably justifies
their baptism in the apostolic Church. (Lk 18:15-7)
Finally, the story of Zacchaeus also makes a statement about the
kingdoms inclusiveness. The kingdom embraces Jew as well as Gentile. It
even includes Jewish outcasts, like the toll collectors, provided they manifest repentance and obedience of faith. I shall consider the case of
Zacchaeus in greater detail below in reflecting on the right use of material possessions.
The second part of the journey discourse closes with the parable of the
unprofitable servant. The parable teaches the gratuitous character of salvation; and it excludes all boasting in those who serve. After they have
done all they should to, Jesus disciples must acknowledge that they have
only done their duty. (Lk 17:7-10)
Throughout the journey discourse, then Lukes Jesus insists that discipleship exacts stringent demands and genuine self-sacrifice. Discipleship, however, also has its privileges: 1) Discipleship empowers one to
cast Satan out of heaven by proclaiming the kingdom. 2) It gives one
access to the unique knowledge of the Father which Jesus embodies and
imparts. 3) It makes one privy to saving events which the prophets and
kings of the Old Testament longed in vain to see. 4) It insures that ones
name stands written in the book of life. (Lk 10:17-24)
Other recurring themes in the journey discourse implicitly expand and
deepen the readers insight into the demands and rewards of discipleship.
Among these themes, the renunciation of greed and practical care for the
poor enjoy special prominence. The parable of the rich fool rebukes the
folly of selfishly amassing great riches. (Lk 12:13-21) Christian sharing
with the poor expresses a trust in the Fathers providential care; and that
5. Cf. Dennis Hamm, What the Samaritan Sees: The Narrative Christology of Luke
17:11-19, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 56(1994), pp. 273-287; Wilhelm Bruners, Die
Reinigung der zehn Aussstzigen und die Heilung der Samaritners: Ein Beitrag zur
lukanischen Interpretation der Reinigung von Ausstzigen (Stuttgart: Katholisches
Bibelwerk, 1977); George, op. cit., pp. 67-78.
504
trust eliminates all anxiety about how much one owns. One finds similar
themes in Matthew and in Mark. Luke, however, more than the other
two synoptic evangelists stresses the eschatological character of Christian
sharing: it anchors the heart in heaven. (Lk 12:22-34)
Active concern for the poor requires that one befriend unrighteous
mammon. (Lk 16:1-9) Friendship with mammon requires a choice between God and wealth. One cannot have both. Indeed, the parable of
Lazarus and the rich man, a parable unique to Luke, teaches, as we have
seen, that greed and cupidity blind one to the misery of the poor, undermine faith in the resurrection during this life, and merit damnation in
the world to come. (Lk 16:19-31) Those, then, who befriend mammon
share liberally with the poor and needy. (Lk 14:12-14) When, therefore,
covetous Pharisees scoff at these teachings, Jesus warns them that greed
transforms one into an abomination in the sight of God. (Lk 16:10-5)
The warning targets hypocritical Christians who imagine that they can
cultivate wealth, ignore the poor, and still claim religious authenticity.
Attachment to riches makes the following of Jesus extremely difficult,
if not impossible, while renouncing riches and caring for the poor insure
a rich reward: abundant blessings in this life and eternal life in the world
to come. (Lk 18:26-30) Luke alone tells the story of Jesus encounter
with Zacchaeus as he enters Jericho. Zacchaeus, a tax collector, wants to
see Jesus, but his shortness of stature prevents him. He therefore runs
ahead of Jesus and climbs a tree in order to see the great rabbi. Jesus calls
Zacchaeus down from the tree and invites Himself to supper at the
tax-collectors house. Although people criticize Jesus for His action,
Zacchaeus announces that he is giving half of his possessions to the poor.
He also promises that should he discover that he has unwittingly defrauded anyone, he restores the loss fourfold to whoever suffered a it.
Jesus concludes: Today salvation has come to this house, since he also
is a son of Abraham. For the Son of man came to seek and save the lost.
(Lk 19:1-10) The story dramatizes a familiar theme in Luke: Jesus brings
salvation, but only generosity of heart and the liberal sharing of ones
good with the poor readies one to recognize that salvation.6 (Cf. Lk
4:18-19)
6. I agree with those who regard Zacchaeuss words as an expression of repentance. Cf.
Alan C. Mitchell, S.J., Zacchaeus Revisited: Luke 19,8 as a Defence, Biblica,
71(1990), pp. 153-176; The Use of sykophantein in Luke 19:8: Further Evidence of
Zacchaeuss Defence, Biblica, 72(1991), pp. 546-547; Dennis Hamm, S.J., Zacchaeus
Revisited Once More: A Story of Vindication or Conversion, Biblica, 72(1991), pp.
249-252; Luke 19:18 Once Again: Does Zacchaeus Defend or Resolve?, Journal of
Biblical Literature, 107(1988), pp. 431-437; D.A.S. Ravens, Zacchaeus: The Final
Part of a Lucan Triptych, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 41(1991), pp.
19-32; Robert F. OToole, S.J., The Literary Form of Luke 19:1-10, Journal of
Biblical Literature, 110(1991), pp. 107-116.
505
In the preceding paragraphs I have considered two themes which Luke

weaves together in the journey discourse: the demands and privileges of
discipleship, on the one hand, and active concern for the poor. The paragraphs which follow ponder a third prominent theme: namely, the importance of faith. More than once during the journey discourse, Jesus
rebukes unbelief and proclaims the saving power of faith.
In the first part of the journey discourse, Jesus condemns the curiosity
seeking crowds, who flock to Him, not from motives of faith, but simply
in order to see His miracles. Jesus warns that the faith of the Gentiles will
one day stand in judgment over the unbelief of Jesus own Jewish contemporaries. (Lk 11:29-32)
Luke follows this rebuke with an encomium of faith. Faith draws other
people into the household of God. (Lk 11:33) Like eyes which see, committed faith illumines the whole person. Unbelief, by contrast, plunges
one into utter darkness. (Lk 11:34-6) Even the tiniest scrap of genuine
faith can work seemingly impossible wonders.7 (Lk 17:5-6)
The healing of the blind man outside of Jericho dramatizes the power
of faith. The capacity to see causes the healed blind man to follow Jesus
joyfully; and his joyful following transforms him into a type of the true
disciple. (Lk 18:35-43)
The theme of prayer which also occurs with some frequency during the
journey discourse has a certain affinity for the theme of faith, since expectant and persevering prayer expresses faith. In the first part of the
journey discourse, a praying Jesus teaches the disciples the Father prayer.
As in Matthew, the prayer serves as the paradigm of Christian prayer. (Lk
11:1-4) The parable of the persistent friend teaches the need for perseverance in prayer. (Lk 11:5-8) Jesus promises the disciples that the Father
will answer their every prayer. Lukes Jesus does not say that the Father
will necessarily give the thing requested. He does say, however, that the
Father will give only good gifts. Moreover, the disciples should aspire
after the highest gift, the gift of the divine Breath Herself. (Lk 11:9-13)
The theme of constant prayer also blends with the theme of eschatological watchfulness. After telling the parable of the unjust judge, Lukes
Jesus assures the disciples that God will vindicate with speed those who
call upon Him day and night. Jesus then asks: Nevertheless, when the
Son of man comes, will He find faith on earth? (Lk 18:1-8) The question, as we have seen, suggests that unless the disciples cultivate expectant
faith through persevering prayer, it will vanish; and they will find themselves judged with unbelievers. The question also rebukes doubts about
the second coming caused by its apparent delay. That delay should in no
way undermine prayer motivated by expectant faith. The disciples should,
7. Cf. Susan R. Garrett, Lest the Light in You be Darkness: Luke 11:33-36 and the
Question of Commitment, Journal of Biblical Literature, 110(1991), pp. 93-105.
506
then, pray in expectation of the second coming; for prayers unanswered

in this life will find a response in the next. The eschatological dimensions
of prayer also link the latter to practical concern for the poor, which, in
Luke especially, anchors the heart in the next life.
In the first part of the journey discourse, Lukes Jesus teaches that readiness for the second coming demands active watchfulness not only from
ordinary disciples but also and especially from Church leaders. Watchfulness takes practical form in active concern for the poor. It also includes
readiness to face persecution and to share in Jesus passion. (Lk 12:35-53)
It enables one to read correctly the signs of the times and respond to Jesus
and His message. Finally, watchfulness demands both genuine repentance
and mutual reconciliation. Both deliver one from Gods judgment. (Lk
12:54-9) The parable of the wise and foolish virgins dramatizes the consequence of unreadiness for the second coming: exclusion from the kingdom. Lukes Jesus warns that many of His fellow Jews will suffer just such
a fate, while others, the Gentiles, take their place in the kingdom. (Lk
13:22-30)
One cannot, however, expect God to delay judgment indefinitely. (Lk
13:6-9) Aware that some people in his community think the opposite,
Luke seeks to shore up faith in the second coming by recalling the fulfillment of Jesus prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem. (Lk 13:31-35)
Still, Lukes Jesus refuses to set timetables for the parousia. Instead, he
warns the disciples that they need to live in readiness for its full establishment at the second coming. The day of judgment will arrive with total
and sudden unexpectedness, like the flood which destroyed the world in
the time of Noah, like the doom visited upon Sodom. On that day, possessions will offer no protection from judgment. Judgment will take place
publicly and openly. The obedient will know salvation, the disobedient
perdition. The inevitability of final judgment makes constant readiness
all the more important.8 (Lk 17:22-37)
Lukes Jesus proclaims a realized eschatology. When Pharisees ask Jesus
when the kingdom will come. He tells them not to look for observable
signs of its arrival because it already exists in their midst and within their
grasp. (Lk 17:20-1) The kingdom, however, has only begun to arrive. Its
full realization lies in the indefinite future. The parables of the mustard
seed and of the leaven predict the ultimate triumph of the kingdom.
Despite its humble beginnings in Jesus ministry, the kingdom, like the
mustard tree, will develop into a welcoming, encroaching and subversive
reality. It will subtly penetrate everything, like leaven in dough. (Lk
13:18-22)
8. Cf. Matthew Black, The Aramaic Dimension in Q with Notes on Luke 17:22 and
Matthew 24:26, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 40(1990), pp. 33-41.
507
The final victory of the kingdom will coincide with Satans final overthrow. All those who do not hold with Jesus scatter, including Satan and
his minions. (Lk 11:14-23) In a world of realized eschatology, however, a
share in the final victory over Satan requires present resistance to his wiles.
Unless something replaces an exorcised evil spirit, the one possessed remains vulnerable to repossession and even greater bondage. (Lk 11:24-6;
cf. Mt 12:43-5) Only obedience to the will of God provides protection
against demonic power. (Lk 11:27-8)
As the journey discourse unfolds, then, five major themes blend and
interweave: 1) the demands and privileges of discipleship, 2) poverty and
active concern for the poor; 3) faith, 4) prayer, and 5) eschatological readiness. The theme of the demands and privileges of discipleship contextualizes the other four themes; they concretize the first theme. Moreover,
the other four themes all imply one another. Prayer expresses faith. Faith
includes eschatological readiness and longing. Christian poverty and active care for the poor keep longing for the second coming alive and anchor the heart in the world to come.
Luke develops three subsidiary themes in the journey discourse. They
too blend and interweave with one another and with the five major themes.
I refer to the following motifs: 1) the difficulty of entering the kingdom;
2) the need for repentance; and 3) the reality of divine forgiveness.
The narrow gate which leads into the kingdom challenges both Jew
and Gentile. Jews by their unbelief risk forfeiting their right to sit at
table in the kingdom of God, but so do Christians who claim to know
Jesus but fail to practice the obedience of faith. (Lk 11:37-54; 13:10-17,
22-30, 14:15-35)
As elsewhere in Lukes gospel, during the journey discourse, the Pharisees and lawyers symbolize religious hypocrisy. Luke makes it clear, however, that Jesus demand for thorough repentance includes the disciples as
well. Hypocrisy among Christians can stifle the obedience of faith as effectively as the legalism of the Pharisees. Christians who apostatize commit the ultimate sin of hypocrisy. (Lk 12:1-12)
If unbelief, lack of repentance, and religious hypocrisy exclude one from
the kingdom, the humble confession of ones sinfulness wins Gods mercy
and justifies sinners in Gods eyes. In the third part of the journey discourse, the parable of the tax-collector and Pharisee who went to pray
dramatizes the need for the humble acknowledgement of ones sinfulness
as the only path to justification in the sight of God. (Lk 18:9-14) Those
who claim the forgiveness of God seek a boon which God rejoices to give.
(Lk 15:1-10)
The parable of the prodigal son dramatizes the fact that sinners can
never earn divine forgiveness. Instead they must accept it gratefully as a
free gift which they can never merit. The parable also challenges the
508
self-righteous to recognize that by trying to earn salvation they too have

sinned and need to repent. Unless they repent, they will find themselves
excluded from the banquet of the kingdom. (Lk 15:11-32) Repentance,
of course, bears fruit in a practical faith which takes concrete shape in the
prayer, the care for the poor, and the eschatological readiness which exemplify the meaning of discipleship.
5) The eschatological discourse (Lk 21:5-37) reproduces many of the
same themes as the discourse in Mark on which Luke patterns it: 1) the
need for readiness to face final judgment, 2) the destruction of Jerusalem,
3) the last judgment. Lukes Jesus, alone addresses this discourse to the
crowds in the Jerusalem temple, not just to the disciples. For Luke universal salvation implies universal judgment and universal readiness. In
extending eschatological readiness to all people, Luke explicitly includes
the disciples.9
6) In His final discourse at the last supper (Lk 22:21-38), Lukes Jesus 1)
censures ambition, 2) promises a share in His messianic authority to the
apostles, 3) predicts the denial and repentance of Peter, and 4) warns that
Jesus immanent death will introduce radical changes into the lives of His
disciples. In fact, in Lukes eyes, it ushers in the last age of salvation.
Luke, then, handles the teachings of Jesus very differently from both Mark
and Matthew. Mark scatters most of Jesus teachings throughout his gospel in pronouncement stories. While Mark invents the narrative convention of the discourse, he gathers Jesus obscurest teachings into two short
discourses, the parabolic and the eschatological. Marks parabolic discourse
portrays the gospel as secret wisdom to which only the disciples have
privileged access. Marks culminating eschatological discourse describes
life in the end time, predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, and describes
the second coming, which will effect the final, full disclosure of the kingdom.
Matthew, as we have seen, collects Jesus teachings into five discourses
which propound Christian Torah. Matthews gospel expresses strong
ecclesiological concerns. It reflects the evangelists predilection for Petrine
Christianity and his opposition to a nascent clericalism at Antioch.
Luke shares both Marks and Matthews concern with eschatology. Luke,
however, frets that the delay of the second coming is causing his Gentile
Christian community to settle too comfortably into this world. He fears
that they are neglecting the poor and absorbing from pagan society moral
attitudes irreconcilable with the gospel. Luke, therefore, insists more than
9. Cf. George, op. cit., pp. 321-347; R. Geiger, Die lukanischen Endzeitreden: Studien zur
Eschatologie des Lukas-Evangeliums (Bern: H. Lang, 1973), J. Zmijewski, Die
Eschatologiereden des Lukas-Evangeliums: Eine Traditions- und Redaktionsgeschichtliche
Untersuchung zu Lk 21, 5-36 und Lk 17:20-37 (Bonn: Hanstein, 1972).
509
the other synoptics evangelists that practical concern for the poor expresses eschatological hope; and he warns Gentile believers of the corrupting, Satanic influence of Graeco-Roman institutions and mores.
For Luke as for Matthew, readiness to meet Jesus when he returns demands that one actually live the gospel; but, while Matthews community
defines itself primarily over against the synagogue across the street, Marks
and Lukes communities define themselves over against the Roman empire. Mark sees the empire as a persecutor and warns the disciples that
they must walk the way of the cross, even though it lead to martyrdom.
Luke incorporates this Markan theme into His vision of Christological
knowing; but Luke sees the empire more as the Satanic embodiment of
moral attitudes incompatible with the day-to-day living of the gospel.
Luke, therefore, insists more than Matthew or Mark that his Christian
Gentile community eschew Roman violence, that they love their enemies,
and that they walk the path of non-violent resistance to oppression. As an
antidote to religious and moral compromise, Luke inculcates prayer, expectant faith, and mutual forgiveness. Active concern to include within
the community the poor and the marginal, including women and the
smallest children, anchors ones heart in the world to come and continues
to nourish eschatological longing, despite the delay of the parousia. Even
more than Matthew, Luke despairs of the collective conversion of Israel; but
he also warns repeatedly of the dire consequences of Christian unbelief.
This section has considered Lukes distinctive handling of the teachings of Jesus. The section which follows examines how the evangelist develops a second thematic link which he finds in Marks gospel: namely,
the miracles and exorcisms of Jesus.
(II)
Miracles and exorcisms punctuate Lukes narrative of Jesus ministry. The
journey discourse, which dominates the latter part of Lukes gospel contains, however, only three miracles. Luke derives most of his miracle stories from Mark, although he adds a few from independent sources. Like
Matthew, Luke records fewer miracles than Mark. Moreover, Luke shows
a concern to balance miracle accounts with teachings. In editing Mark,
Luke preserves some of the symbolic significance with which Mark endows Jesus mighty acts. Typically, however, Luke uses the miracles, the
exorcisms, and the response of wonderment and praise which they evoke
in order to portray Jesus as the joyful prophet of good news and His
miracles as the proleptic arrival of the kingdom.10
10. Cf. Ulrich Busse, Die Wunder des Propheten Jesus: Die Rezeption, Komposition, und
Interpretation der Wundertradition im Evangelium des Lukas (Stuttgart: Katholisches
Bibelwerk, 1977); Max Turner, The Spirit and the Power of Jesus: Miracles in the
Lucan Conception, Novum Testamentum, 33(1991), pp. 124-151; George, op. cit.,
pp. 133-148.
510
Luke locates the exorcism in the synagogue at Capernaum after Jesus

preaching and rejection at Nazareth. The miracle dramatizes Jesus pneumatic power over Satans realm and confirms His message to the people
of Nazareth. (Lk 4:38-39)
Like Matthew, Luke transforms Marks account of the beginning of
Jesus ministry into something like a day in the life of the messiah.11
Despite Lukes editing, the story makes some of the same doctrinal points
as in Mark. 1) The Breath of God endows Jesus teaching with a special
authority. 2) That authority extends to the demons and presages the destruction of Satans kingdom. 3) Luke also takes note of the Markan theme
of the messianic secret and has Jesus silence the demon who identifies
Him as the messiah. (Lk 4:31-7)
As in Mark, the healing of Simons mother-in-law follows; but Luke,
like Matthew, edits out Marks tacit reference to resurrection. Lukes Jesus
does not raise the woman up. Luke instead describes the fever as great.
Lukes Jesus stand over the woman and orders the fever to depart. These
Lukan details dramatize Jesus miraculous powers. (Lk 4:38-9; Mt 8: 14-5;
Mk 1:29-31) As in Mark, in the evening after the sabbath ends, a spate of
miracles and exorcisms follows this miracle. (Lk 4:40-1; Mk 1:32-4; Mt
8:16-17) The following morning Jesus after prayer decides to begin His
first tour of Galilee.12 (Lk 4:42-4; Mk 1:35-9)
As we have seen, Luke embellishes the call of the first disciples to become
fishers of men with the story of the astonishing catch of fish. In the process,
Luke focuses the story on the call of the sinful Peter.13 (Lk 5:1-11)
In Mark, as we have seen, the healing of the leper foreshadows Jesus
growing marginalization. (Mk 1:40-5) Like Matthew, however, Luke, tells
the story as a simple miracle of inclusion.14 In Mark, the crowds force
11. In Luke Jesus performs the miracle alone. In Mark the disciples witness it. (Lk 4:31;
Mk 1:21) Luke identifies Capernaum as a town of Galilee; Mark does not. (Lk 4:31)
Luke omits the comparison in Mark between Jesus style of teaching and that of the
scribes. (Lk 4:32; Mk 1:22) Luke describes the demoniac differently; he says the man
had the spirit of an unclean demon, while Mark describes the man as a person with
an unclean spirit. (Lk 4:33; Mk 1:23) Luke adds the exclamation Ha before the
demons question, an expression apparently of surprise and dismay. (Lk 4:34; Mk
1:23) Luke mutes the violence of the scene. He makes no mention of convulsions or
cries as the demon leaves the man. Instead, Luke says the demon threw the man down
and left him without having done him any harm. (Lk 4:35; Mk 1:26) Luke says Jesus
announces new teaching. Luke says He speaks gracious words. (Lk 4:36; Mk 1:27)
12. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 648-650; Ren Latourelle, Miracles de Jsus et
thologie du miracle (Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1986), pp. 103-108, 191-195; Busse, op.
cit., pp. 66-90.
13. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 896-904.
14. Luke edits Marks account of the incident in minor ways. In Mark the leper kneels;
in Luke, he prostrates before Jesus. (Lk 5:12; Mk 1:40) Luke suppresses any mention
of Jesus emotion. (Lk 5:13; Mk 1:41) Luke does not have Jesus send the man away.
(Lk 5:14; Mk 1:43)
511
Jesus to dwell where the leper once did. In Luke, however, Jesus typically
seeks solitude in the desert in order to pray. Luke edits from Marks original story the cured lepers disobedience to Jesus command to keep the
healing secret. (Lk 5:12-16; Mk 1:40-45) Miracle stories in Luke underscore the importance of obedience to Jesus.15 (Lk 5:25, 6:8)
As we saw in reflecting on the relationship between Jesus and the Pharisees, the cure of the paralytic opens the cycle of five conflict stories which
begin Jesus public ministry in Mark. As in the other synoptics, the miracle
reveals that Jesus possesses an authority proper to God: the authority to
forgive sins. In Luke, however, the theme of forgiveness enjoys special
narrative prominence. Typically, the crowds glorify God for the extraordinary events which they have witnessed.16 (Lk 5:17-26)
In the sabbath cure of a man with a withered hand, Luke describes
Jesus enemies as scribes and Pharisees. Mark calls them Pharisees and
Herodians. Luke also has Jesus read the minds of His adversaries. As in
Mark, Jesus justifies His sabbath healings by an appeal to traditional Jewish piety: namely, that doing good does not violate the sabbath rest. Luke
omits Marks observation that Jesus left His adversaries silenced.
In contrast to both Mark and Matthew, however, Luke suppresses any
mention of a plot against Jesus life as a result of this miracle. In Luke,
after the miracle, Jesus enemies simply begin to discuss what to do about
Him. In Luke this consultation does, however, begins the opposition to
Jesus and His ministry.17 (Lk 6:6-11; Mk 3:1-6; Mt 12:9-14)
In Luke, a summary account of Jesus mighty acts introduces the sermon on the plain. Matthew makes use of the same kind of material in
order to introduce the sermon on the mount. In both gospels, the acts of
healing and deliverance characterize the kingdom which Jesus proclaims.
Luke, however, adds the detail that when Jesus healed, power came forth
from Him. (Lk 6:17-19; cf. Mk 3:7-12; Mt 4:24-25)
In Matthew, the cure of the centurions servant follows the sermon on
the mount; and the healing functions primarily as a miracle of inclusion.
It foreshadows the conversion of the Gentiles; and it parallels the cure of
the leper, which in Matthew incorporates the expendable poor of Israel
in the kingdom. (Mt 8:5-13)
Luke uses the cure of the centurions servant for purposes similar to
Matthews. Since, however, Luke writes for a Gentile audience, he stresses
more than Matthew the faith of the centurion. In Luke synagogue elders
serve as the centurions messenger. They commend the centurion for his
15. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 701-706; Latourelle, op. cit., pp. 109-111; Busse,
op. cit., pp. 103-114.
16. Cf. Latourelle, op. cit., pp. 117-123; Busse, op. cit., pp. 115-134.
17. Cf. Latourelle, op. cit., pp. 123-126; Busse, op. cit., pp. 135-141.
512
love of the Jewish nation and for his philanthropy in building the synagogue in Capernaum, a detail absent from Matthew.
Matthews story culminates in Jesus prophecy of the conversion of the
Gentiles. Lukes story, however, culminates in Jesus exclamation: I tell
you, not even in Israel have I found such faith. Luke makes the statement in a response to a second delegation of the centurions friends who,
at the centurions behest, urge Jesus not to bother to come to the centurions
home but to perform the miracle at a distance. The first Jewish delegation dramatizes the bonds which can unite Gentile and Jew. The second
delegation dramatizes the depth to which Gentile faith can reach.18 (Lk
7:1-10; Mt 8:5-13) Luke, then, makes the same fundamental point as
Matthew. The righteousness and faith of the centurion foreshadows the
righteousness and faith of Gentile converts to Christianity and rebukes
Israels unbelief.19 (Acts 10:35)
As we have already seen, the raising of the widows dead son appears
only in Luke. The miracle reveals Jesus as a greater prophet than Elijah
because it foreshadows His power to impart risen life. The miracle also
expresses His predilection for the anawim, among whom widows hold a
prominent place.20 (Lk 7:11-17)
Luke, like Matthew, records Jesus response to the Baptizers question
about His personal messianic claims. In Luke, the exchange follows the
raising of the widows son. In both gospels, Jesus response gives us a
probable insight into how He Himself viewed His miracles: namely, as
signs that the messianic age has arrived in His person and ministry. Lukes
Jesus, like Matthews, eschews both Davidic messianism and the role of
the fire-breathing prophet of judgment whom John seems to have expected.21 (Lk 7:22-3)
In Luke as in the other two synoptics, the calming of the storm underscores the question of Jesus identity. It also provides the reader with an
important clue for answering that question. Jesus exercises the same sovereign, divine, creative authority over the forces of chaos as Yahweh. (Gen
1:1-5) Jesus thus discloses His divinity in act.22
18. Cf. Robert A. Gagnon, Statistical Analysis and the Case of the Double Delegation
in Luke 7:3-7a, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 55(1993), pp. 709-731; Lukes Motives
for Redaction in the Account of the Double Delegation in Luke 7:1-10, Novum
Testamentum, 36(1994), pp. 122-145.
op. cit., pp. 141-160.
op. cit., pp. 161-175.
21. Luke makes a passing reference to Jesus power to heal and exorcise when he notes that
Jesus had cured and delivered the women disciples who traveled with Him and
supported Him. (Lk 8:1-3)
22. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 924-933; Latourelle, op. cit., pp. 127-136; Busse, op.
cit., pp. 177-185.
513
As in the other synoptics, the calming of the sea also sets the stage for
the deliverance of the Gerasene demoniac possessed by Legion. Like
Matthew, Luke mutes the theme of conflict in Marks account; but the
possessed pigs still perish in the same waters of chaos which Jesus has
tamed with only a word. The pigs manner of perishing reveals His power
over Satan, over his demons, and over the principalities and powers of
this world, like the Roman empires legions.23 (Lk 8:22-34; Mk 4:35-5:14;
Mt 8:23-33)
As we have seen, in Luke as in Mark, the number twelve links the
daughter of Jairus symbolically to the woman with the flux of blood. The
number transforms them into symbols of the old and new Israels. The
miracles therefore disclose Jesus relationship to both Israels. He delivers
people, especially women, from the curse of the Law and imparts to believers the risen life of the new covenant, which gives access to the eucharist.
Instead, however, of having Jesus raise the dead girl up symbolically as
He does in Mark, Luke has her rise on her own power.24 (Lk 8:40-2; Mk
5:21-43; Mt 9:18-26)
As we have seen, Jesus communicates to the Twelve His power to heal
and to exorcize. (Lk 9:1) In Luke, however, the seventy-two evangelizing
disciples receive the same powers of healing and of deliverance. (Lk 10:17)
In Luke, then, the entire Christian community, not just its leaders, functions as an evangelizing source of both graces.
As in the other synoptics, Lukes single account of the miracle of the
loaves foreshadows the eucharist. In Luke, the miracle follows the parabolic discourse. As we have also seen, Luke tacitly links this miracle to the
resurrection when he observes that the miracle took place as the day began to wear away. At exactly the same time, the disciples in Emmaus will
recognize the risen Christ in the breaking of the bread. The appearance at
Emmaus reveals Jesus as the Lord of the banquet at the same time that it
dramatizes that faith in the resurrection and eucharistic faith coincide.25
(Lk 9:12-7, 24:28-35; Mk 6:35-44; Mt 14:15-21)
I have already considered how Luke modifies Marks account of the
exorcism of the epileptic demoniac boy. Here it suffices to note that Luke
in contrast to Mark portrays the miracle as an astonishing revelation of
the divine majesty.26 (Lk 9:37-42; Mk 9:14-27; Mt 17:14-18)
Four miracles punctuate the journey discourse: the healing of the bent
over woman, the healing of the dropsical man on the sabbath, the healing
23. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 650-653; Latourelle, op. cit., pp. 63-71; Busse, op.
cit., pp. 196-219.
24. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 708-710, 777-788; Latourelle, op. cit., pp. 146-156;
Busse, op. cit., pp. 219-231.
25. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 950-967; Busse, op. cit., pp. 233-248.
op. cit., pp. 249-267.
514
of the ten lepers, and the cure of the blind man. Each miracle advances
the didactic movement of the discourse. The healings of the bent over
woman and of the dropsical man on the sabbath underscore the evil of
religious hypocrisy and legalism. The womans healing also dramatizes
the dignity of women and the evil of viewing them as mere chattel. Jesus
cure elevates compassion over legalistic scruples.27 (Lk 13:10-17, 14:1-6)
The cure of the ten lepers opens the second section of the journey discourse. As we have seen, the story makes three fundamental points: the
importance of gratitude for divine gifts; the power of faith to save; and
the universal scope of salvation, which includes even enemies and heretics, like Samaritans. Moreover, as we have seen, the Samaritans faith,
which Jesus goes out of His way to praise, consists in recognizing that the
person of Jesus provides the appropriate place for acknowledging the healing power of God. (Lk 17:11-9) As in Mark, the cure of the blind man
foreshadows the gift of faith. (Lk 18:35-43)28
Lukes Jesus performs one final cure during His arrest. He heals the
severed ear of the servant of the high priest. (Lk 22:47-54) As we have
seen, among the synoptics, the miracle happens only in Luke. It dramatizes two prominent Lukan themes: the love of enemies and forgiveness
which Jesus saving death embodies.29 (Lk 22:51)
As we have seen, Mark uses Jesus miracles and healings for a variety of
narrative purposes; but Mark typically employs miracle stories as a way
rehabilitating the obtuse and unbelieving disciples. Their rehabilitation
assures a recently persecuted community that Jesus has the power to heal
and transform their most extreme blindness and weakness.
Matthew uses the miracles and exorcisms in order to portray Jesus
inaugural proclamation of the kingdom as an event of healing and deliverance. In Jesus exorcisms, Matthew also calls his community to recognize Jesus victory over the kingdom of Satan.
27. Cf. Elizabeth Schssler Fiorenza, Lk 13:10-17: Interpretation for Liberation and
Transformation, Theology Digest, 36(1989), pp. 303-319.
28. Cf. Meier, A Marginal Jew, II, pp. 384-685; 710-711; Latourelle, op. cit., pp. 180-187,
223-232; Busse, op. cit., pp. 268-335. Luke edits from Marks account of the cure of
the blind man the fact that he had the name Bartimaeus, the encouragement given the
blind man when Jesus calls him, and the fact that the healed blind man followed Jesus
symbolically on the way. Luke typically underplays the symbolic meaning of the
miracles in Mark and describes instead the joyful response which the miracle evokes.
Still, Luke preserves two key and interrelated symbolic elements from Marks narrative: namely, the fact that going from blindness to sight causes the cured man to follow
Jesus.
op. cit., pp. 335-336.
515
One finds echoes of Mark in Lukes handling of the miracle stories; but
Lukes severe editing of the Markan text eliminates many of Marks allusive references. Luke typically likes to portray the miracles and exorcisms
of Jesus as manifestations of divine power which reveal Him as a different
kind of messiah and as the joyful prophet of good news.
This section has reflected on Lukes use of Jesus miracles and exorcisms. The following section examines briefly the evangelists use of literary allusion.30
(III)
As we saw in reflecting on Marks allusive linkages, they cluster around
the two miracles of the loaves. Luke omits entirely the second miracle of
the loaves and much of the narrative material which surrounds it. In the
process, he eliminates one entire rete of Markan allusions.
Lukes editorial stylus eliminates other allusions from Marks text. Luke,
as we have seen, refers to the leaven of the Pharisees in his journey discourse; but he identifies it with hypocrisy. (Lk 12: 1) The richer connotations of Marks allusive reference to the leaven of the Pharisees and of
Herod disappear from Lukes narrative. Luke also edits out Marks insistence on the need to read deeply into the miracles of the loaves. (Mk
6:52) Lukes single miracle of the loaves does, however, foreshadow the
eucharist. Jesus actions of taking, blessing, breaking, and giving also link
the two events to the apparition at Emmaus. (Lk 9:16, 22:19)
Luke also plays havoc with other allusive linkages in Mark. He fails, for
example, to connect the cure of Peters mother-in-law, the raising of the
daughter of Jairus, and the deliverance of the epileptic demoniac boy
with resurrection, as Mark does. Luke also destroys Marks parallelism
between Jesus baptism and the call of the disciples, on the one hand, and
Jesus desert temptations and the exorcism at Capernaum, on the other.
(Lk 4:31-37, 5:1-11) While in Luke Peter, James, and John witness the
transfiguration and the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Lk 8:51, 9:28),
they play no special role either in occasioning the eschatological discourse
or in Jesus prayer in the garden. (Lk 21:5, 22:39-46) The healing of the
leper in Luke does not foreshadow Jesus marginalization as it does in
Mark. (Lk 5:12-16; Mk 1:40-45)
Like Matthew, however, Luke creates a number of literary allusions of
his own. Moreover, Luke makes somewhat more extensive list of this
particular literary device than Matthew does. First of all, Luke uses allusion in order to link events which take place within the gospel narrative
itself. For example, the praise of the disciples at the triumphal entry re30. . See also: Paul J. Achtemeier, The Lukan Perspective on the Miracles of Jesus: A
Preliminary Sketch, Journal of Biblical Literature, 94(1945), pp. 547-562; Busse, op.
cit., pp. 337-485.
516
calls the song of the angels at Jesus birth. (Lk 2:14, 19:38) The triumphal entry itself fulfills a prophecy of Jesus. (Lk 13:35) The widow of
Nain illustrates Lukes third beatitude (Lk 6:21, 7:11-17) The disciples
sleep on the mount of transfiguration foreshadows their sleep in
Gethsemane. (Lk 9:32, 22:45) When the two women discover the empty
tomb, they recall with understanding Jesus second prediction of His passion. (Lk 18:31-34, 24:6-7) Luke links through allusion the multiplication of the loaves, the last supper and, the supper at Emmaus (Lk 9:10-17;
22:19-20, 24:28-35) One could conceivably find other uses of literary
allusion in Lukes gospel, but the preceding list provides a representative
sample.
Of the three synoptic evangelists, only Luke wrote a two-volume study
of Christian origins. As a consequence, Luke probably makes his most
distinctive use of literary allusion when he employs it to link events in the
gospel to those in Acts. I shall, however, postpone considering this example of Lukan allusion until I have considered the Christology of Acts.
This chapter has reflected principally on Lukes use of thematic linkages. The time has come to reflect on the narrative Christology of the
Acts of the Apostles. To this task I turn in the following chapter.
Chapter 17: Jesus Christ Proclaimed: The Christology of Acts
517
Chapter 17
Jesus Christ Proclaimed: The Christology of Acts
In the Acts of the Apostles Luke makes his principal Christological statements in the preaching of Peter, of Stephen, and of Paul. He also portrays
all three men as examples of Christological knowing: by their proclamation of the risen Christ in the power of His Breath all three find themselves assimilated to Him, especially in His passion.1
This chapter divides into four parts. Part one examines Peters kerygmatic
Christology in Acts. Part two details Stephens Christological witness. Part
three presents Lukes version of Pauline Christology. Part three reflects on
Lukes portrayal in Acts of Peter, Stephen, and Paul as examples of Christological knowing. As we shall see, Luke uses Peter, Stephen, and Paul primarily
in order to situate the event of Jesus within the evangelists own theology of
salvation history. Part four examines how Luke uses literary allusiuon to tie
together his two-volume account of Christian origins.
(I)
In Acts, Peters Pentecost sermon begins the proclamation of the risen
Christ to the Jews. Peter addresses his words to the men of Judea, and all
you who live in Jerusalem; but he also speaks to them as men of Israel.
(Acts 2:14, 22) In other words, the message which Peter speaks to crowds
envisages ultimately the whole of Israel. (Cf. Acts 2:36)
Peters sermons to the Jews follow a typical pattern: 1) Peter first refers to a
startling or miraculous event which has just occurred. 2) Then he proclaims
in summary form Jesus ministry, death, and resurrection. That proclamation
denounces the people of Jerusalem and their religious leaders for causing
Jesus death. 3) Finally, Peter summons his hearers to repentance and faith. In
1. For scholarly reflections on the writing of Acts, see: Justin Taylor, S.M., The Making
of Acts: A New Account, Revue Biblique, 97(1990), pp. 504-524; Josep Ruis-Camps,
El Seguimiento de Jess, el Seor, y de su Espiritu in los Prologomenos de la Mision
(Hch 1-12), Estudios Biblicos, 51(1993), pp. 73-116; David L Meland, Hellenistic
Historians and the Style of Acts, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft,
82(1991), pp. 42-66; Erwin R. Goodenough, The Perspective of Acts, pp. 51-59;
Ulrich Wilckens, Interpreting Luke-Acts in a Period of Existentialist Theology in
Studies in Luke-Acts, pp. 60-83; C.D.F. Moule, The Christology of Acts in Studies
in Luke-Acts, pp. 159-185; Joseph A Fitzmyer, S.J., Jewish Christianity in Light of
Qumran Scrolls in Studies in Luke-Acts, pp. 233-257; Ernst Hnchen, The Book of
Acts as Source Material for Early Christianity in Studies in Luke-Acts, pp. 258- 278;
Patrick L. Dickenson, The New Character Narrative in Luke-Acts and the Synoptic
Problem, Journal of Biblical Literature, 116(1997), pp. 291-312.
518
summoning his Jewish audience to conversion, Peter typically employs a

variety of scriptural arguments.2
Pentecost and Peters Proclamation
Peters Pentecost proclamation begins by explaining the religious significance of the miracle of tongues. Peter speaks as the representative of the
Twelve, with the Eleven other apostles gathered about him. They symbolize and embody the new Israel which the arrival of the Pentecostal
Breath has begun to create.3
Peter first dismisses the crowds misinterpretation of glossolalia as drunkenness. The apostle points to the early hour, about 9:00 a.m., in support of
the disciples sobriety. (Acts 2:14) Finally, Peter explains the eruption of
glossolalic speech among the disciples by citing Jl 3:1-5. Peters citation contains four affirmations which illumine the Breaths Pentecostal arrival.
1) The descent of the Breath on the disciples begins Her universal outpouring. It seeks finally to encompass the whole of humankind. Her arrival therefore respects neither youth nor age. It overlooks gender differences and inspires women as well as men. It obliterates class distinctions and includes
slaves as well as free. In other words, the outpouring of the Breath brings into
existence the egalitarian community of faith which Jesus proclaimed.
2) The charismatic outpouring of the Breath fulfills the prayer of Moses
in Num 11:24-30 by creating an Israel whose members all respond to the
charismatic promptings of the Breath. Moreover, through its prophetic
response to the Breaths inspirations, the new Israel prolongs in space and
time Jesus own mission.
3) The descent of the Breath both begins and prepares the final arrival
of the day of the Lord. The apocalyptic signs of its final arrivalblood,
fire, columns of smoke, a darkened sun, the moon turned to the color
bloodunderscore the cosmic, eschatological, and apocalyptic significance of the Pentecost event as well as its judgmental character. In citing
Joel, Lukes Peter omits the prophets reference to the fact that people will
find the day of judgment terrible. (Jl 3:4) The omission gives rhetorical
prominence to the saving consequences of the Breaths arrival. (Lk 2:19-20)
4) In order to claim the salvation which the Breaths arrival begins, one
must call upon the name of the Lord.(Lk 2:21) As Peters Pentecost sermon
unfolds, it becomes plain that calling on the name of the Lord means confessing both the messianic mission and the Lordship of the risen Jesus.4 (Lk 2:39)
2. Cf. Eduard Schweizer, Concerning the Speeches in Acts in Studies in Luke-Acts, pp. 208211; John Knox, Acts and the Pauline Letter Corpus in Studies in Luke-Acts, pp. 279-289.
3. Cf. Ernst Ksemann, Ephesians and Acts in Studies in Luke-Acts, pp. 288-297; Klaus
Haacker, Verwendung und Vermeidung des Apostelsbegriffs im lukanischen Werk,
Novum Testamentum, 30(1988), pp. 9-38; George, op. cit., pp. 108-125.
4. Cf. Craig A.Evans, The Prophetic Setting of Peters Pentecost Sermon, Zeitschrift fr
die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 74(1983), pp. 148-150; Daniel J. Trier, The
519
The second part of the Pentecost sermon recapitulates the public ministry of Jesus and its divine endorsement by the miracles and portents
which God worked through Him. Peter appeals to the Jerusalem crowds
direct memory of these events. (Lk 2:22)
Peter then accuses the people of Jerusalem of having brought about
Jesus death by crucifixion through the connivance of the Gentile governor Pilate and his Gentile soldiers, all men outside the Law. Without
excusing the culpability of those responsible for Jesus death, Peter insists
that God allowed this sinful act to occur as part of His deliberate intention and foreknowledge. (Lk 2:23) Jesus suffered because divine providence intended from the beginning to undo by His death and resurrection the consequences of the sins of those who conspired to nail Him to
a cross: You killed Him; but God raised Him to life. (Acts 2:23b)
In Lukes interpretation of salvation history, then, the people of Jerusalem and their leaders conspired especially with Pilate to kill Jesus; but
they acted in ignorance. They did not realize that they were crucifying
the messiah. Moreover, ironically and paradoxically, their action realized
Gods plan of salvation. In Acts, the proclamation of that plan produces
deep divisions within Israel, just as Simeon had foretold.5
Peter cites Ps 16:8-11 as a prophecy of Jesus resurrection. Luke attributes the psalms composition to David on the presupposition that
David authored all the psalms. The alleged Davidic authorship of the
psalm also gives bite to the argument which Peter develops from the text.
The psalm promises that God will not abandon my soul to Hades nor
allow your holy one to experience corruption. (Acts 2:27; Ps 16:10)
Peters exegesis implicitly invokes Jesus empty tomb as an argument for
the resurrection. Peter tacitly contrasts the tomb of David, which still
contains his corrupted remains with that of the risen Christ, which by
implication does not:
Brothers, no one can deny that the patriarch David himself is dead and
buried; his tomb is still with us. But since he was a prophet, and knew that
God had sworn him an oath to make one of his descendants succeed him
on the throne, what he foresaw and spoke about was the resurrection of
Christ; He is the one who was not abandoned to Hades, and whose body
did not experience corruption. God raised this man Jesus to life, and all of
us are witnesses to that. Now raised to the heights by Gods right hand, He
has received from the Father the Holy Breath, who was promised, and
Fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32: A Multiple Lens Approach, Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society, 40(1997), pp. 13-26.
5. Cf. Frank J. Matera, Responsibility for the Death of Jesus According to the Acts of the
Apostles, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 39(1990), pp. 77-93; Daniel
Marguerat, Juifs et chretiens selon Luc-Actes: Surmonter le conflit des lectures,
Biblica, 75(1994), pp. 126-146; Lawrence M. Wills, The Depiction of Jesus in Acts,
520
what you see and hear is the outpouring of that Breath. For David himself
never went up to heaven; and yet these words are his: The Lord said to
my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for
you. For this reason the whole house of Israel can be certain that God has
made this Jesus whom you crucified both Lord and Christ. (Acts 2:29-36)
Here several points need noting:

1) The empty tomb alone does not prove the resurrection. When coupled
with the testimony of the apostles who saw the risen Christ, however, it
becomes a motive for faith and evidence which supports the reality and
truth of their claim.6
2) The resurrection exalts Jesus to the right hand of God and reveals
Him as both Lord and Christ. His exaltation reveals His universal sway
and His victory over those who killed Him. The paschal mystery, therefore, provides the privileged point for interpreting the ultimate significance of Jesus person and ministry.
3) The resurrection answers the conundrum which Jesus posed to the
scribes during His Jerusalem ministry. Peter in testifying to Jesus resurrection cites the same text from the psalms as Jesus had on that occasion.
Jesus had challenged the scribes to explain why in Ps 110:1 David speaks
of the Christ as Lord, when in fact the messiah is supposed to be his son.
(Lk 21:41-2) The resurrection reveals the answer: Jesus messianic authority derives from a source which far transcends his Davidic descent,
namely, from His divine Lordship.7
4) The outpouring of the Breath flows from and manifests Jesus resurrection. Jesus rises as the source of the Breath. Her charismatic transformation of the apostles gives divine sanction to their testimony to the
risen Christ and invites the faith assent of Peters hearers.
5) Among the enemies whom God will transform into the risen
messiahs footstool, Peter seems to include the whole house of Israel. (v.
36) In the past Israel had obstinately resisted the prophets sent them by
God. The resurrection of Jesus, however, now offers Israel its last and best
chance to repent of its obstinacy by acknowledging the risen messiahs
claim upon their faith.8
Journal of Biblical Literature, 104(1985), pp. 631-654; Helmut Merkel, Israel im
lukanischen Werk, New Testament Studies, 40(1994), pp. 371-398.
6. Cf. Gerald OCollins, The Resurrection Revisited, Gregorianum, 79(198), pp.
169-172.
7. Cf. Michel Gourgues, O.P., Lecture Christologique du psalm CX et fte de la
Pentecote, Revue Biblique, 83(1976), pp. 5-24.
8. Cf. Marion L. Soards, The Speeches in Acts in Relation to Other Pertinent Ancient
Literature,Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 70(1994), pp. 65-90; Miguel Rodriguez
Ruiz, Hacia una Definicion del Disurso Misionario: los Discursos misionarios de los
Hechos de los Apostolos a la Luz de la Retorica antigua, Estudios Biblicos, 49(1991),
pp. 425-450; Robert Sloan, Signs and Wonders: A Rhetorical Clue to the Pentecost
521
Peters second proclamation of the risen Christ to the Jews in Jerusalem

follows the healing of the cripple at the Beautiful Gate to the temple. In
the Pentecost sermon, the miracle of tongues provides the point of departure for Peters proclamation. Here the healing of the cripple in the
name of Jesus Christ, the Nazarene provides the occasion for Peters proclamation. (Acts 3:6)
Peter rebukes his fellow Israelites for their astonishment at the cripples
cure and immediately disclaims any credit for the miracle. Peter has not
wrought the miracle by his own power and holiness. (Acts 3:12) Peter has
invoked the name of Jesus in working the miracle. Jesus name identifies
the ultimate source of the miracle. (Acts 3:15-6) The God of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob has glorified Jesus, who has wrought this cure in His
risen glory and by the divine power which the name of Jesus now reveals.9
(Acts 3:13)
In Peters temple sermon, the proclamation of the resurrection precedes the recall of the passion, precisely because the glorification of Jesus
explains the miraculous act of power which Peter has just performed. A
recall of the passion, however, quickly follows. Peter again accuses his
fellow Israelites of having handed over (paredokate) Jesus to Pilate and
of having disowned (ervesasthe) Him in Pilates presence. The handing
over assimilates Jesus to the servant of Yahweh in Deutero-Isaiah. (Is
53:12) The disowning alludes to the fact that the Israelites treated Jesus
as they had once treated Moses. (Cf. Acts 7:35)
The fact that during Jesus trial Lukes Pilate had decided to release
Jesus only compounds the guilt of those who handed Him over and disowned Him. (Lk 23:15-22) The people of Jerusalem together with their
leaders responded to Pilate with a triple accusation of guilt which they
directed, with unconscious irony, against the Holy and Just One (ton
hagion kai dikaion). (Acts 3:14) The messianic titles the Holy and Just
One take on transcendent connotations when read in the light of Peters
earlier proclamation of Jesus Lordship on Pentecost. (Acts 2:36)
The title prince of life has similar connotations. It occurs in Peters
ironic accusation: You demanded the reprieve of a murderer and killed
the prince of life (ton de archegon tes zoes). (Acts 3:14-5) The term
archegon means leader and designates Jesus as the one who opened
the pathway to life with God; but it can also mean prince, originator,
Discourse, Evangelical Quarterly, 63(1991), pp. 225-240; Stanley E. Porter,
Thucydides 1.22.1 and Speeches in Acts: Is There a Thucydidean View?, Novum
Testamentum, 32(1990), pp. 121-142; Helen Schuengel-Straumann, Pfingstliche
Geistkraft/Lebenskraft (ruah): Alttestamentiche Wurzeln einer verdrngten weiblichen
Vorstellung, Diakonia: Internationale Zeitschrift fr die Praxis der Kirche, 21(1990),
pp. 149-157; John J. Kilgallen, S.J., A Rhetorical and Source-Tradition Study of Acts
2, 23, Biblica, 77(1996), pp. 178-196; NJBC, 44:20-27; Conzelmann, Acts, pp.
13-22; Bruce, Acts, pp. 49-72; Hnchen, Acts, pp. 166-189.
522
and founder. These last three terms also acquire transcendent connotations when understood in the light of Jesus Lordship.
An exhortation to repentance and to faith then follows. Peter alludes to
Jesus forgiveness of His enemies on the cross. (Lk 23:34) He concedes
that, when they killed Jesus, neither the people nor their leaders realized
what they were doing. In His providence, however, God used their very
ignorance to accomplish what He had already foretold through the prophets: namely, that Christ must suffer. (Acts 3:17-8) As in Peters Pentecost
sermon, the paschal mystery offers forgiveness to Israel and begins the
messianic age: the time of comfort, the universal restoration.10 (Acts
3:20-1; cf. Jer 15:19; Mal 3:22-3)
The paschal mystery reveals Jesus as the prophet like Moses foretold
in Dt 15:15-8. That revelation confronts Israel with a unique opportunity: Moses and the entire prophetic tradition which he founded have
foretold the coming of Jesus. As the second Moses, Jesus brings that tradition to its culmination. (Acts 3:21-4)
In his peroration, Peter therefore addresses his hearers as heirs of the
prophets and heirs of the covenant. He calls on them to acknowledge
in Jesus resurrection the fulfillment of Gods promise to Abraham that
all the families of the earth would find blessing in him. (Gen 12:3) As a
prelude to effecting that universal salvation, God calls for the repentance
and conversion of Israel itself. For that purpose He has raised Jesus up as
the one who will bless Israel by turning every one of you from your
wicked ways. (Acts 3:25-6)
Peters second proclamation of the risen Christ hearkens back to Jesus
sermon in Nazareth. There Jesus announced that God had chosen Israel
as His instrument for effecting a universal salvation. The Nazarenes had
on that occasion turned against Him. Now Peter, in the wake of the paschal mystery, makes the same proclamation to those responsible for Jesus
death. Will they finally hear the message?11
Luke dramatizes the challenge which the paschal mystery poses for Israel by having the Sanhedrin arrest Peter and the apostles for proclaiming
Jesus resurrection. Luke notes that Sadducees, who denied the resurrection, acted as the principal agents in the arrest. (Acts 4:1)
9. Cf. J.A. Zskern The Name of Jesus in the Acts of the Apostles, Journal for the Study
10. Cf. Frank J. Matera, Responsibility for the Death of Jesus According to the Acts of
the Apostles, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 29(1990), pp. 77-93; Julian
Carron Perez, El Significado de Apokatastasis en Hch 3,21, Estudios Biblicos,
50(1992), pp. 375- 394.
11. Cf. Navone, op.cit., pp. 38-46, 185-187; William S. Kurz, S.J., Acts 3:19-26 as a Test
of the Role of Ecclesiology in Lukan Christology, SBL Seminar Papers, 1977, edited
by P.J. Achtemeier (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977), pp. 309-323; NJBC,
44:29-31; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 27-30; Bruce, Acts, pp. 76-88; Hnchen, Acts, pp.
203-212.
523
Instead of intimidating the apostles, their arrest and interrogation provides them with an opportunity to proclaim the risen Christ to the very
body which decided on His death. Asked by what power he has cured the
cripple at the Beautiful Gate, Peter recalls Jesus death, and announces
the universal salvation made available through the risen Christ. (Acts
4:8-12)
Peter proclaims not only to the Sanhedrin but to the whole of Israel
that he has healed the cripple at the Beautiful Gate in the power of the
name of Jesus Christ, the Nazorean. (Acts 4:9-10) The Sanhedrin condemned Jesus and caused His crucifixion; but God in raising Him from
the dead has reversed their judgment. In so acting, God has revealed the
universal saving significance of Jesus name: that the name of Jesus and it
alone has the power to save every human on the face of the earth. (Acts
4:10-2) In other words, the paschal mystery has endowed Jesus name
with divine, saving significance. Since God alone saves, Peter is equivalently asserting that the human name of Jesus has become the divine
name. The miraculous healing of the cripple makes manifest the saving
power of the resurrection, which has transformed Jesus from the stone
rejected by the buildersi.e., by the leaders of Israelinto the keystone. He unifies and holds together every other saving act of God in
human history. (Cf. Ps 118:22)
Peters proclamation to the Sanhedrin echoes his discourse at the Beautiful Gate. Luke ascribes Peters inspiration to the Breath of the risen
Christ. (Acts 4:7) The Sanhedrin, which had closed its ears to the action
of the prophetic Breath in both John and Jesus (Lk 20:1-8), now finds
itself astonished at the assurance with which uneducated laymen proclaim Jesus resurrection.
In Jesus case, the Sanhedrin had acted decisively to destroy Him. (Lk
22:66-7:1) Now, however, they waffle, embarrassed by the fact that the
people know that Peter has cured the cripple in Jesus name. They repeatedly warn the apostles to stop proclaiming the risen Christ, but the apostles
make it clear that they have no intention of obeying. The apostles explain
why: obedience to God takes precedence over obedience to mere humans.12 (Acts 4:13-22)
The little Pentecost follows immediately upon the apostles release
and reaffirms the divine sanction of their preaching. When the apostles
narrate their interrogation by the Sanhedrin to the Jerusalem church, the
entire community responds with a spontaneous prayer. (Acts 4:23-31)
The community addresses the Father as Master (despota), i.e., as possessing sovereign, divine authority over all the world. In Lukes infancy
gospel, Simeon had used the same title of God in welcoming the messiah
and in predicting the divisions within Israel which Jesus began and which
12. Cf. NJBC, 44:33-35; Bruce, Acts, pp. 89-96; Hnchen, Acts, pp. 213-224.
524
the apostles are perpetuating. (Lk 2:29) The sovereign God created all
thingsheaven, earth, and sea and everything in them. Through the
action of the divine Breath the same God also inspired David the psalmist to foretell the futile opposition of the powers of this world to Christ.
Ps 2:1-2 predicted that the nations would arrogantly conspire with the
peoples of Israel to oppose the Lord and His anointed. (Acts 4:24-9)
In referring to the alliance (synechthesan) of Herod and Pilate against
Jesus, the prayer alludes to their roles in effecting Jesus death and to their
subsequent reconciliation. (Lk 22:12) Herod and Pilate in the very act of
collaborating in Jesus crucifixion had unwittingly served as Gods providential instruments. Through them God effected a salvation which
through the prophets He had already predicted would happen.
Having asserted Gods triumph over all this-worldly opposition, the
prayer then begs God to respond to the threats against the apostles by
begging an astonishing outpouring of miracles which will confirm and
strengthen the apostles persistent proclamation of the risen Christ. (Acts
28:29-31) God responds with a renewal of the communitys first Pentecostal experience. The house rocks as the apostles experience a renewed
outpouring of the Breath. The earthquake symbolizes Gods power and
authority over heaven and earth and sea, and everything in them. The
Breath sends the apostles forth anew, just as She did on the first Pentecost
to proclaim the gospel with new boldness.13 (Acts 4:31)
Peters proclamation of the risen Christ draws the apostles into the passion of Jesus. They must confront the same forces as crucified Him. At
the same time, the apostles preaching swells the ranks of new Jerusalem
converts. It finds confirmation in the abundance of the miracles which
the apostles work, in the crowds who flock to them for healing, and in
the communitys fidelity after the little Pentecost to the same kind of
gospel living as characterized the first Pentecost converts. (Acts 4:32-4,
5:12-6) The very success of the apostolic preaching in Jerusalem, however, leads to a second confrontation with the Sanhedrin. The high priest
and other Sadducees lead the attack. (Acts 5:17-8, 34-42)
The Sanhedrin accuses Peter and the apostles of disobeying their order
to cease preaching and reproaches them for blaming the Sanhedrin itself
for Jesus death. The apostles again reply that they owe first obedience to
God. (Acts 5:29) They justify this claim by appealing to Gods action in
raising Jesus from the dead after the Sanhedrin had Him crucified. (Acts
5:30) The paschal mystery itself gives divine sanction to their proclamation. In raising Jesus, God has appointed Him Israels leader and savior.
Finally, Peter appeals to the inspiration of the Pentecostal Breath who
empowers their preaching. Submission to Her guarantees obedience to
13. Cf. NJBC, 44:35; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 34-35; Bruce, Acts, pp. 97-100; Hnchen,
Acts, pp. 225-229.
525
God. If the Sanhedrin resists that authority, they only betray their sinful
lack of repentance. (Acts 5:32)
This reply infuriates the Sanhedrin who desire to kill the apostles as
they had killed Jesus. Only the intervention of Gamaliel the Pharisee
stays their hand. He urges a wait-and-see policy in dealing with the new
movement. The Sanhedrin, however, orders the apostles flogged. The
apostles for their part rejoice at having known the honor of suffering
humiliation for the sake of the name. The name of Jesus now designates
both the apostles message and the transcendent reality for which they
suffer. Despite persecution, the proclamation of the risen Christ continues without interruption.14 (Acts 5:34-42)
In Acts, the deacon Philip converts the Samaritans and baptizes the
first Gentile, an Ethiopian eunuch.15 (Acts 8:4-8, 36-40) Luke also prepares for Pauls Gentile mission by having Peter persuade the mother
church in Jerusalem to sanction the baptism of uncircumcised Gentiles.
The fact that Peter, not Paul, brings about the official admission of uncircumcised Gentiles into the Church dramatizes the continuity between
his mission to the Jews and Pauls to the Gentiles. Indeed, the evangelization of Cornelius and his household marks the culmination of Peters
proclamation of the risen Christ.
Independent and parallel visions lend unmistakable divine sanction to
Peters action. (Acts 10:1-33) An angel appears to Cornelius, a
God-fearing Gentile convert to Judaism. (Acts 10:3-8) A voice from
heaven tells Peter three times not to regard as unclean what God has
purified. (Acts 10:9-16; 11:7)
Peters evangelization of Cornelius and his household lacks the polemic
tone of his speeches in Jerusalem. The apostle tells the God-fearers:
[God] sent the word to the children of Israel, announcing the good news
of peace through Jesus Christ. He is the Lord of all. You must have known
the substance of what happened throughout the whole of Judaea beginning from Galilee after John preached baptism, concerning Jesus from
Nazareth: how God anointed Him with a Holy Breath and power, how He
went about doing good and curing all those overpowered by the devil, and
that God was with Him. And we bear witness to all the things he did in the
region of Judaea and Jerusalem. Him they killed hanging Him on a tree.
14. Cf. Robert C. Tannehill, The Composition of Acts 3-5: Narrative Development and
Echo Effect, SBL Seminar, 1984, edited by Kent Harold Richards (Chico, CA:
Scholars Press, 1984), pp. 217-240; Jacob Jervill, Luke and the People: A New Look at
Luke-Acts (Minneapolis, MI: Augusburg, 1972), pp. 75-112; John T. Carroll, Lukes
Portrayal of the Pharisees, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 50(1988), pp. 604-621; NJBC,
44:39-41; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 40-43; Bruce, Acts, pp. 109-117; Hnchen, Acts, pp.
247-258.
15. Cf. Patrick L. Dickenson, The Sources of the Account of the Mission to Samaria in
Acts, Novum Testamentum, 39(1997), pp. 210-234.
526
Him God raised on the third day, and allowed Him to show Himself, not
to all the people, but to those witnesses whom God chose in advance,
[namely] to us who ate and drank with Him after he rose from the dead;
and he ordered us to announce to the people and to bear witness to the
fact that He it is who has been designated by God judge of the living and
the dead. To Him all the prophets bore witness: so that all who believe in
Him might receive the forgiveness of sins through His name. (Acts
10:36-43)
Here several things need noting.

1) Jesus proclamation of the good news of peace reveals Him as the
eschatological prophet foretold by Second Isaiah. (Is 52:7) The peace
proclaimed in Christ takes the form of the forgiveness of sins: the reconciliation of humans to God and to one another.16 (v.43)
2) Peters designation of Jesus as especially anointed by God recalls His
messianic commissioning after His baptism by John. (Lk 3:21-2) Jesus
own Breath-inspired ministry of proclamation and healing reveals Him
as one who enters compassionately into the suffering and woundedness
of the human condition. (Is 61:1)
3) The paschal mystery endows Jesus with divine authority by transforming Him into the judge of the living and the dead. His appearance
to the apostles authorizes their proclamation of His divinely sanctioned
authority.
The Pentecost of the Gentiles follows Peters sermon. The Breath of
the risen Christ pours out the charisms upon Cornelius and his family as
a sign that God wills their incorporation into the Church through ritual
baptism in the sanctifying Breath of Christ.17 (Acts 10:44-48)
In justifying to the Christian community in Jerusalem his baptism of
Cornelius and his household, Peter appeals to Johns prophecy of the
Breath-baptizer. (Acts 11:15-7) As we have seen, Pentecost in Luke fulfills the promise of the Father proclaimed by John the Baptizer. The first
Pentecost, which culminated in ritual baptism, fulfilled that prophecy.
The spontaneous extension to Gentiles of the same gifts which announced
the arrival of the Breath on Pentecost gave divine sanction to Peters decision to baptize the Gentile converts.18 (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:4)
Later in Acts at the Jerusalem convocation which meets to decide
whether or not to sanction the Gentile mission of Paul and of Barnabas,
Peter appeals to Gods sanction of his baptism of Cornelius and his house16. Cf. Robert F. OToole, Eirene, an Underlying Theme in Acts 10, 34-43, Biblica,
77(1996), pp. 461-476.
17. Cf. NJBC, 44:58-64; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 78-84; Bruce, Acts, pp. 201-218.
18. Cf. John J Kilgallen, S.J. Did Peter Fail to Get a Word in? Acts 11:15), Biblica,
71(1990), pp. 405-410.
527
hold as evidence of Gods general approval of the baptism of uncircumcised Gentiles.19 (Acts 15:7-11)
(II)
In Lukes story of Christian origins, the baptism of Cornelius and his
household sets the stage for Pauls Gentile mission. So does the ministry
and martyrdom of Stephen. The death of Stephen breaks partially the
impasse between the nascent Jerusalem church and the high priests. The
persecution of Hellenistic Christians which Stephens death inaugurates
begins both a geographical and an historical movement which culminates in Pauls Gentile mission.
Within the mother church, Stephen emerges as the leader of the Hellenist Christians. They seem to have functioned as the radical left of the
Christian community in Jerusalem. Jesus during His own ministry denounced abuses in temple worship and predicted the eventual destruction of
the temple itself. (Acts 6:14) The Hellenists, who seem to have had links to
diaspora Judaism, radicalized Jesus polemic against the temple by proclaiming that Jesus had replaced both it and its worship.20 (Cf. Acts 7:44-50)
The Witness of Stephen
Stephen defends his preaching before the Sahnedrin by taking the offensive. He challenges the hypocrisy which motivates his adversaries alleged
zeal for the Law and temple: You who had the Law brought to you by
angels are the very ones who have not kept it. (Acts 7:53) In addition,
Stephen decries his adversaries resistance to Jesus and to Stephens own
proclamation of the risen Christ. The eloquent deacon portrays the refusal of Jesus enemies to believe in Him as the culmination Israels historical repudiation of the prophets sent them by God.
Stephens address to the Sanhedrin summarizes the development of salvation history from Abraham to Jesus. In divides that history into four
sections: Gods dealings with Abraham (vv. 2-80), Gods dealings with
Joseph (vv. 9-16), Gods dealings with Moses (vv.17-43), and the late and
dispensable construction of the Jerusalem temple (vv. 44-50). The per19. Cf. NJBC, 44:63-65; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 85-86; Bruce, Acts, pp. 219-223;
Hnchen, Acts, pp. 343-363; Roland Barthes, Lanalyse structurale du recit a propos
dActes X-XI, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 58(1970), pp. 17-37; Robert W. Wall.,
Successors to the Twelve According to Acts, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 53(1991),
pp.628-643; Ronald D. Witherup, Cornelius Over and Over Again: Functional
Redundancy in the Acts of the Apostles, Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
49(1993), pp. 45-66; Joseph B. Tyson, The Gentile Mission and the Authority of
Scripture in Acts, New Testament Studies, 33(1987), pp. 619-631; Mark A. Seifrid,
Messiah and Mission in Acts: A Brief Response to J.B. Tyson, Journal for the Study
20. Cf. F. Scott Spencer, Neglected Widows in Acts 6:1-7, Catholic Biblical Quarterly,
56(1944), pp. 715-733.
528
oration of the speech then denounces Israels resistance to all the prophetic voices sent them by God from Abraham to Jesus.
The account of Gods dealings with Abraham diverges in details from
the account in the Pentateuch. In his recall of the covenant with Abraham,
Stephen stresses the fact that God made it when Abraham had neither
land nor offspring. In other words, Stephen dissociates the covenant from
the possession of the Holy Land and from racial descent. Gods mandate
to Abraham to worship Him in the promised land sets the context for the
rest of Stephens speech. The protomartyr will present the temple as the
culminating expression of Israels refusal to offer to God the kind of authentic worship which He enjoined upon Abraham.(Acts 7:1-8)
As Stephens account of Jewish salvation history unfolds, God predictably holds the initiative in guiding its events. Stephen observes ironically,
however, that the covenant of circumcision did not prevent the eleven
jealous patriarchs from selling their brother Joseph into slavery. Stephen
contrasts the perfidy of the eleven with Gods fidelity to Joseph even in
his slavery. God not only delivers Joseph but transforms him into the
savior of his treacherous brothers. (Acts 7:8-16) Like the figure of Moses
whom Stephen describes next, the figure of Joseph clearly prefigures Jesus,
the savior treacherously betrayed by His own.
The growth of Israel in Egypt sets the scene for the emergence of Moses.
Stephen depicts Moses prior to the exodus somewhat inaccurately as a
charismatic leader like Jesus (or like Stephen himself ), mighty in word
and work. (Acts 7:17-22) Moreover, Stephen paints Moses relationship
to Israel as marred by contention from the beginning. When Moses slays
an Egyptian for abusing a Hebrew, the people of Israel refuse to accept
Him as leader and judge. Instead, they publicize his deed, and force
him to flee into temporary exile. (Acts 7:23-9) God, however, responds
to this intransigence on the part of His chosen people by appointing
Moses leader and redeemer despite Israels rejection of him. (Acts 7:35)
Luke underscores the parallelism between Moses and Jesus by noting that
Moses himself prophesied Jesus, when he foretold the coming of another
prophet like himself. (Acts 7:37)
Israels initial rejection of Moses repeats itself in the forty years of desert
wandering. There despite the manifest signs of Gods authorization of
Moses prophetic ministry and despite the fact that God communicated
the Law itself to Israel through Moses, the people refused to listen to him
and hankered for the fleshpots of Egypt. (Acts 7:39) Worse still, instead
of obeying the Law, the Israelites forced Aaron to lead them in idolatrous
worship. Israels forty years of infidelity in the desert foreshadowed the
idolatry which sent them into exile in Babylon. (Acts 7:41-3, Am 5:25-7)
In the fourth section of his defence, Stephen turns his attack on the
temple itself. He points out, that until the time of David, God expressed
529
no desire to dwell in a temple; but instead dwelt in a moveable tent constructed exactly according to the pattern God revealed to Moses. (Acts
7:44-5) While David asked God in prayer to build a temple as His dwelling place, the temple Solomon built did not fulfill either Gods promise
to Abraham or Davids own prayer. Here Stephen cites Is 66:1-2 in support of the experience of diaspora Judaism that Jews do not need a temple
to discover and worship God, because the whole world serves as Gods
temple. (Acts 7:46-50)
In the polemical peroration which ends Stephens speech, the inspired
deacon accuses the whole of Israel of having obstinately resisted the word
of God; of having ignored, persecuted, and murdered the prophets God
sent them; and of having suffered the destruction of the kingdoms of
Israel and of Judah as a just punishment for their disobedience. Invoking
the familiar Lukan theme that the prophets all foretold the coming of
Jesus, Stephen draws a pointed parallel between the behavior of former
Jews and the attitude of the Sanhedrin. While their ancestors murdered
those who foretold the coming of Christ, the Sanhedrin has compounded
their sins by murdering and betraying the Just One once He appeared.
The intransigent stubbornness of the Sanhedrin, which perpetuates the
intransigent stubbornness of their ancestors, unmasks their pagan hearts
and pagan ears, their unrepentant and persistent resistance to the Holy
Breath of God, who inspires Christian faith and worship. The phrase
pagan hearts and ears also rebukes priestly concessions to pagan culture
and religion. In Stephens eyes (and therefore in Lukes as well), Jewish
resistance to Jesus and to His Breath brings to a culmination Israels rejection of the leaders divinely sent them throughout the history of salvation.
Moreover, their rejection of Gods own Son and resistance to His Breath
vitiates their worship in Gods eyes.21 (Acts 7:51-3)
Stephens diatribe infuriates the Sanhedrin, who stubbornly ground
their teeth at him. (Acts 7:54) Stephens martyrdom does not, however,
flow from his rehearsal of Israels resistance to Gods word, a common
enough theme in the Old Testament itself. Nor does Stephens death result from his endorsement of the attitudes of diaspora Judaism toward
21. Cf. NJBC, 44:45-53; Hnchen, Acts, pp. 275-290; John J. Kilgallen, S.J., The
Function of Stephens Speech, Biblica, 70(1989), pp. 173-193; Dennis D. Sylva,
The Meaning and Function of Acts 7:46-50, Journal of Biblical Literature, 106(1987),
pp. 261-275; Earl Richard, Acts 7: An Investigation of the Samaritan Evidence,
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 39(1977), pp. 190-208; Charles Scobe, The Use of
Source Material in the Speeches of Acts III and VII, New Testament Studies,
25(1978-1979), pp. 399-421; John Kilgallen, The Stephen Speech (Rome: Biblical
Institute Press, 1976); Johannes Bihler, Die Stephanusgeschichte (Munich: Max Hber
Verlag, 1963); Gerhard Schneider, Stephanus, die Hellenisten und Samaria in Les
Acts des Aptres, tradition, redaction, thologie, edited by J. Kremer (Leuven: University
Press, 1979), pp. 215-240.
530
the Jerusalem temple. Rather, it flows most immediately from his visionary experience, which immediately follows his defence.
Filled with the Holy Breath, Stephen sees the heavens thrown open
in an apocalyptic rent which recalls Jesus messianic commissioning at
the beginning of Lukes gospel. (Lk 3:22) Stephen also sees the Son of
Man standing at the right hand of God. (Acts 7:56) Scripture scholars
debate the reason for the Son of Mans unusual standing posture. Ordinarily one would expect to find Him seated at Gods right hand. Some
see in the risen Christs posture a rhetorical but insignificant variation of
more traditional enthronement imagery. Others see the Son of Man standing to welcome His martyr into heaven, or to intercede for Stephen with
the Father (Cf. Lk 12:18), or to pass judgment over the unbelief of Israel.
In any case, Stephen clearly identifies the figure of the Son of Man with
the risen Christ. Stephens intent appears more clearly in his prayer as the
Sanhedrin stones him for blasphemy: Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. (Acts
7:5-9) Stephens prayer to Jesus parallels the dying prayer of Lukes Jesus.
(Lk 23:46) Stephens final words also echo the crucified Jesus forgiveness
of His murderers. Stephen dies praying: Lord, do not hold this sin against
them. (Acts 7:60; Lk 23:34)
While Jesus prayed to the Father, Stephen prays to the Lord Jesus. The
parallel not only assimilates Stephens death to Jesus but also attributes
to Jesus in Stephens prayer a dignity parallel to that which the Father
holds in Jesus prayer. In other words, in Lukes account, the stoning of
Stephen, while motivated in part by his anti-temple polemic, flows most
immediately from his confession of the Lordship of Jesus and his divine,
judicial authority as Son of Man: beliefs which sound blasphemous in
pious Jewish ears.
Stephens death partially breaks the stalemate between the Sanhedrin
and the embryonic Christian community in Jerusalem. It inaugurates a
bitter persecution of the Christian Hellenistic community, spearheaded
by Saul. (Acts 8:1-3) Moreover, the fact that those who stone Stephen lay
their cloaks at the feet of the approving Saul not only dramatizes his
approval of the execution but also suggests that he played a leading role
in Stephens arrest and trial.
Stephens trial and death seem to have crystallized Sauls zeal to effect
the total destruction of the Church through relentless persecution. Ironically, the scattering of the Hellenistic church from Jerusalem effects the Pentecost of the Samaritans. It begins the spread of the gospel which the converted Saul, as Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles, will one day spearhead.22
22. Cf. NJBC, 44:50; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 47-58; Bruce, Acts, pp. 119-160; Hnchen,
Acts, pp. 291-299; C. Kingsley Barrett, Stephen and the Son of Man in Apophoreta
(Berlin: Verlag Alfred Topelmann, 1964), pp. 32-38; P. Doble, The Son of Man
Saying in Stephens Witnessing: Acts 6.8-8.2, New Testament Studies, 31(1984), pp.
531
(III)
Saul, in pursuing his relentless persecution of the Hellenist Christians,
receives authorization to carry the persecution of the Lords disciples to
the town of Damascus. (Acts 9:1-2) The phrase the Lords disciples
again suggests that the confession of the Lordship of Jesus especially stirred
Pauls animus against the first Jewish converts to Christianity.
Paul, who was probably walking from Jerusalem to Damascus, finds
himself surrounded by a light from heaven and hears a voice ask: Saul,
Saul, why are you persecuting me? When Saul asks the voice to identify
itself, it replies: I am Jesus, and you are persecuting Me; but get up and
go to the city, and you will be told what you must do. (Acts 9:3-6)
Pauls Conversion and Ministry
Luke describes the conversion of Saul three times in the course of Acts.
The repetition probably dramatizes the irresistible power of the risen Christ
to transform the persecutor into a missionary of the gospel. Elsewhere in
Acts, triple repetition also expresses divine authoritativeness. (Cf. Acts
10:16)
Lukes three accounts of Pauls conversion, however, exhibit apparent
verbal inconsistency. (Cf. Acts 9:1-19; 22:5-16; 26:10-18) In his first
account, the evangelist says that those who accompanied Saul heard the
voice but saw no one. In the second account, Paul in testifying before the
Sanhedrin says that his companions saw the light but did not hear the
voice. Nuances of meaning in the Greek text may account for the discrepancy. In Acts 9:7, the verb to hear (akouein) takes a genitive object
(phons). In Acts 22:9, it takes an accusative object (phonn). Akouein
with the genitive means to hear without understanding; with the accusative it means to hear with understanding. In other words, in Acts 9:7
Luke says that Pauls companions heard the voice without understanding
it; and in Act 22:9 he says that they did not hear with understanding. In
other words, a nuanced reading of the verb akouein eliminates the chief
discrepancy between the first two accounts.23
The first two accounts also display a discrepancy in describing what
Pauls companions saw. In account one, they see no one; in account two
they see a light. One can resolve this second discrepancy as well, if one
interprets Luke to mean in the second account that Pauls companions
saw a light but failed to see Jesus in the personal way in which Paul did.
68-84; M Sabbe, The Son of Man Sayings in Acts 7.56 in Les Actes des Aptres,
tradition, rdaction, thologie, edited by J. Kremer (Leuven: University Press, 1976),
pp. 241-279; Joesph Pathrapankal, Die Kirche der Apostelgeschichte als Modell fr
unsere Zeit, Zeitschrift fr Missionswissenschaft und Religionswissenschaft, 70(1986),
pp. 275-287.
23. Cf. W. Hedrick, Pauls Conversion: A Comparative Analysis of the Three Reports
in Acts, Journal of Biblical Literature, 100(1981), pp. 415-432.
532
The variations in narrative detail among the three accounts probably reflect as well the fluidity of oral narrative and its relative indifference to
textual consistency.
Only in the third account do both Paul and his companions fall to the
ground. (Acts 26:14) This third discrepancy poses a less serious problem,
since failure to mention it in the first two accounts amounts to less than
a denial that it happened. In any case, Luke seems to assert in the three
accounts that Pauls companions shared in His experience but only partially
and that only Paul saw the risen Jesus personally and conversed with Him.
In all three accounts, the risen Christ reveals Himself to Saul while the
latter is engaging in the very act of opposing Him by persecuting His
disciples. In the verbal exchange between the risen Christ and Saul, Jesus
identifies totally with His disciples: in persecuting them, Saul persecutes
Jesus Himself. Moreover, despite his opposition to the gospel, the risen
Christ has already chosen Saul as His special instrument for the spread of
the gospel especially to the Gentiles.24 (Acts 9:15)
Luke tells the story of Sauls encounter with the risen Christ in a way
which dramatizes the utter gratuity of Sauls conversion. Sauls encounter
with the risen Lord transforms him from one who persecutes the way
into an aggressive witness to the resurrection.
Sauls conversion develops another theme in Acts: namely, that all attempts to suppress the spread of the good news not only fail but end by
causing it to spread all the more. The persecution of the Hellenistic church
in Jerusalem causes the Pentecost of the Samaritans; and Saul, the persecutor of the Hellenistic Church, finds himself predestined by his encounter with the risen Christ and by His conversion to Christianity to
become the apostle of the Gentiles. (Acts 9:15)
The exchange between Saul and the risen Jesus makes another important point: just as Jesus during his ministry had identified with the poor,
the marginal, and the suffering, so too the risen Christ, especially in times
of persecution, identifies with His disciples.25
24. Cf. John J. Kilgallen, S.J., Paul Before Agrippa (Acts 26,2-23): Some Considerations, Biblica, 69(1988), pp. 170-195; Ronald D. Witherup, S.J., Functional
Redundancy in the Acts of the Apostles: A Case Study, Journal for the Study of the New
Testament, 48(1992), pp. 67-68; NJBC, 44:53, 113, 124; Conzelmann, Acts, pp.
70-73, 185-188, 208-212; Bruce, Acts, pp. 180-189, 414-418, 461-468.
25. Cf. NJBC, 44:53-54; Johnson, op. cit., pp. 161-169; Hnchen, op. cit., pp. 318-329;
Gerhard Lohfink, The Conversion of Paul: Narrative and History in Acts, translated and
edited by Bruce J. Maling (Chicago, IL: Franciscan Herald Press, 1967); Hans
Windisch, Die Christusepiphanie vor Damaskus und Act 9,23 und 26 und ihre
relgionsgeschitlichen Parallelen, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft,
31(1932), pp. 1-23; David M. Stanley, S.J., Pauls Conversion in Acts: Why Three
Accounts, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 15(1953), pp. 315-338; C.S. Mann, Saul and
Damascus, Expository Times, 99(1987-1988), pp. 331-334; Dennis Hamm, Pauls
Blindness and Its Healing: Clues to Symbolic Intent (Acts 9: 22 and 26), Biblica,
533
Sauls conversion results directly from his encounter with the risen
Christ; but in Lukes first account, Sauls conversion does not reach completion until his baptism in the city of Damascus by a Christian disciple
named Ananias. The conversion culminates in the baptism in two ways.
First, Luke dates Sauls infilling with the Holy Breath with his baptism by
Ananias. Second, the baptism heals Sauls physical blindness. The scales
which fall from Sauls eyes after his baptism symbolize the new vision of
faith which his infilling with the Breath brings. (Acts 9:17-9)
Luke dramatizes with two parallel visions the divine providence and
predestining authority which sanctions this baptism. The risen Christ
appears to Ananias and tells him to go baptize Saul at the same time that
Saul sees a vision of Ananias coming to baptize him. (Acts 9:10-2) Besides lending special divine sanction to Sauls baptism and apostolic commissioning, the double vision also links this event to the Pentecost of
the Gentiles, which follows soon after Sauls conversion. Both the pagan
Cornelius and Peter receive simultaneous visions which lead to Peters
baptizing the first uncircumcised Gentile converts with the Jerusalem
communitys subsequent sanction. (Acts 10:1-33) The official inclusion
of the first Gentile converts into the Christian community without prior
circumcision sets the stage for Pauls Gentile mission, a task for which the
risen Christ has already designated Saul in his baptism.
The words of the risen Lord to Ananias introduce another theme which
Luke will develop in the rest of his narrative; namely, Pauls identification
with Jesus in His passion. In assuring Ananias that he has nothing to fear
in confronting the former persecutor of Christians, the risen Jesus says:
I Myself will show him how much he himself must suffer for My name.
(Acts 9:16)
Through baptism Saul becomes Paul. Pauls newfound faith finds expression in his proclamation in Damascus that Jesus is the Son of God.
(Acts 9:20) His boldness and effectiveness earns him the enmity of the
Jews of Damascus, who plot against his life. The persecutor, as the risen
Jesus predicted, has joined the ranks of the persecuted.
Through the mediation of Barnabas, Saul reports to the apostles in
Jerusalem his encounter with the risen Lord and his bold proclamation in
Damascus in the name of Jesus. Moreover, Saul continues that ministry of proclamation in Jerusalem, until his arguments with immigrant
Jews, whom Luke calls Hellenists, puts his life again in jeopardy; and
the disciples spirit him off to Tarsus.26 (Acts 9:26-30; Gal 1:18-9)
(71(1990), pp. 63-72; S. Reymond Paul sur le chemin de Damas: Ac 9. 22 et
26,Nouvelle Revue Thologique, 118(1996), pp. 520-538.
26. Cf. NJBC, 44:55-56; Johnson, op. cit., pp. 170-175; Hnchen, Acts, pp. 330-336; J.
Dupont, Les trois premiers voyages de Saint Paul as Jerusalem in tudes sur les Actes
des Aptres (Paris: itions du Cerf, 1967), pp. 167-171; J. Cambier, Le voyage de S.
Paul Jerusalem en Act. ix. 26ss et le schema missionaire thlogique de S. Luc, New
Testament Studies, 8(1961-1962), pp. 249-257.
534
Luke narrates the foundation of the church of Antioch immediately

after the baptism of the first Gentiles, because it will serve as the initial
center of the missionary activity of the apostle to the Gentiles. (Acts
11:18b-30) During Pauls first missionary journey, he and Barnabas first
attempt to proclaim the risen Christ to the Jews of the Diaspora; but
their stubborn resistance forces them to turn instead to the more approachable Gentiles.
In Antioch of Pisidia Paul proclaims the risen Christ in one of the
synagogues.27 Paul begins by calling explicitly upon the diaspora Jews in
his audience and on the God-fearing Gentiles among them. (Acts 13:17)
The salutation marks off the three sections of Pauls address. The speech
summarizes Lukes view of salvation history.
In the first section of his address, Paul summarizes rapidly the history
of Israel from the time of the patriarchs to John the Baptizer. Pauls account of the events of the Old Testament culminates in David as the
prototype of the messiah. Paul points to Jesus as the one who fulfills the
Davidic messianic promise, but he does so as a way of introducing the
figure of John the Baptizer whose ministry publicly opens the second
stage of salvation history.
Paul explicitly cites the Baptizers prophecy of the mightier Breath-baptizer, a prophecy which Jesus glorification fulfills. Paul recognizes that
Jesus mediates between the phase of salvation which focused upon the
Jews and the dawning of universal salvation. Because Jesus, who stands at
the center of salvation history, brings the first phase of salvation history
to its climax, Paul feels constrained to proclaim the risen Christ first to
the Jews. (Acts 13:17-25, 46)
Paul announces to the Jews that God in the first instance intends the
salvation accomplished in Christ for them. (Acts 13:26) Paul portrays
the people of Jerusalem and their leaders as the unwitting instruments of
Gods saving providence when they unjustly condemned Jesus and handed
Him over to Pilate for crucifixion. Their actions fulfilled the prophecies
read weekly in every synagogue on the Sabbath. After Jesus burial, however, God undid everything Jesus enemies had done. God raised Him
from the dead. He appeared to many witnesses.28 (Acts 13:27-31)
Paul appeals to several Old Testament texts in order to interpret the
meaning of the resurrection. 1) Jesus resurrection fulfills the verse from
the messianic psalm 2: You are my son; today I have begotten you. (Ps
2:7) Paul points to Jesus divine Sonship as the ground of His messianic
authority. 2) Paul also cites Is 55:3 LXX. He uses the text to depict Jesus
as the heir of the sure and holy things promised to David. (Acts 13:32-4)
27. Cf. Richard E. Oster, Supposed Anachronisms in Luke-Acts use of synagoge, New
28. Paul attributes Jesus burial, not to Joseph of Aramathea, but to Jesus enemies. Lukes
Paul wants to contrast rhetorically what the enemies of Jesus did with Gods reversal
of their perfidy.
535
These sure and holy things Paul explains by alluding to Ps 16:9. As we

have seen, Peter cited the same text in his Pentecost sermon. Moreover, as
in the case of Peter, the allusion implicitly invokes the empty tomb as an
argument for the reality of the resurrection. The tomb takes on revelatory
significance when understood in the light of the testimony of those who
saw the risen Christ. David died, was buried, and experienced corruption; but Jesus resurrection from the dead after his burial manifests that
He received the true and holy things of which David spoke, namely,
the incorruption promised to Gods holy one in Ps 16:9. (Cf. Acts
2:29-36)
The final section of Pauls discourse challenges his audience to respond
to Gods present action in the post-Pentecostal Church. The challenge
takes the form of an exhortation and a warning. Diaspora Jews like those
in Pisidian Antioch must recognize that God accomplishes human justification and the forgiveness of sins through the risen Christ. Through the
resurrection and through faith in the glorified Jesus, God effects something the Law could never accomplish. Those who hear the resurrection
proclaimed must, therefore, either believe or perish. Those who fail to
respond in faith will fulfill Habakkuks prophecy of persistent unbelief in
the face of Gods saving action.29 (Acts 13:38-41; Hab 1:5)
At first Paul and Barnabas find a positive response among many Jews
and among the Gentile God-fearers. On the next sabbath, however,
when great crowds of Gentilesalmost the whole townshow up in
order to hear Paul and Barnabas preach, the Jews of Pisidian Antioch
turn on the two apostles. While Paul has absolved them of any guilt for
Jesus death (Acts 13:27-9), they nevertheless now join their fellow countrymen in Jerusalem in rejecting Pauls message. (Acts 13:42-52) As in his
account of Jesus confrontation with the people of Nazareth, Luke now
portrays the majority of the Jewish people in Antioch refusing the revelation of Christ because they will not see themselves as chosen by God for
the sake of a universal salvation.
In its review of salvation history, Pauls speech to the Jews in Pisidian
Antioch recalls Stephens speech, which engaged in a similar rhetorical
strategy. Moreover, as in the case of Stephen, Paul experiences rejection, this
time at the hands of diaspora Jews. That rejection marks the turning point in
Lukes account of Pauls ministry. Thereafter, he and Barnabas turn to the
Gentiles as their principal target for evangelization.30 (Acts 13:44-9)
29. Cf. NJBC, 44:71-75; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 101-107; Bruce, Acts, pp. 250-264;
Hnchen, Acts, pp. 405-418.
30. Cf. John J. Kilgallen, Acts 13,38-39: Culmination of Pauls Speech in Pisidia,
Biblica, 69(1988), pp. 480-506; Huub van der Sandt,Acts 28,28: No Salvation for
the People of Israel? An Answer in the Perspective of the LXX, Ephemerides
Theologicae Lovaniensis, 70(1994), pp. 341-358; Dixon Slingerland, The Composition of Acts: Some Redactional-Critical Observations, Journal of the American
536
Later Luke will assimilate Paul to Stephen even more closely in the
formers speech to the Jews in Jerusalem. On that occasion, Paul alludes
to Stephens death and to his own part in it before announcing his divine
commission to proclaim the risen Christ to the Gentiles. That announcement causes Pauls audience to cry for his blood just as the Sanhedrin had
once demanded Stephens execution. (Acts 22:17-21) Instead of martyrdom, Paul suffers arrest.31
During Pauls second missionary journey and before his arrest in Jerusalem, he proclaims the risen Christ in Athens. Paul debates not only Jews
and God-fearers but Epicurean and Stoic philosophers as well. The latter mock Pauls message, calling him a parrot. They deride his preaching as propaganda for some outlandish religion. Nevertheless, they invite
Paul, out of Athenian delight in new ideas and speechifying, to speak
before the council of the Areopagus (Acts 17:16-22)
In his speech, Paul initially avoids Christological references. Instead,
he proclaims to the Athenians the Unknown God to whom they have
unwittingly erected an altar. This God, the Lord of heaven and earth,
does not dwell in pagan shrines and needs nothing from humans. Rather
He gives everything, including life and breath to everyone.
The unknown God made the human race from a single stock, and He
rules the nations and their destinies. This God dwells close to everyone,
because, as a pagan poet suggested, in Him we live, move, and have our
being. Scholars debate to which poet Lukes Paul is actually referring.32
As children of God and members of the same family, humans should
never worship any idol constructed by human hands. Rather, God is callAcademy of Religion, 56(1988), pp.99-113; Burkill, Now Light on the Earliest Gospel,
pp. 48-120; Friedrich W. Horn, Paulus, das Nasirat und die Nasirer, Novum
Testamentum, 39(1997), pp. 117-137.
In Thessalonika, Paul during his second missionary journey again appeals first to the
diaspora Jews in his preaching. He argues from Scripture for three consecutive
sabbaths how it was ordained that the Christ should suffer and rise again. He then
identifies Jesus as the messiah whom Scripture foretold. He makes converts among
some Jews; but more God-fearers, Greeks, and women convert than Jews, who
accuse Paul of giving Jesus more authority than the emperor. (Acts 17:1-15)
In Corinth, Paul, joined now by Silas and Timothy, again proclaims to the Jews that
Jesus is the Christ, but finds mostly rejection. Paul, therefore, turns again to the
pagans. (Acts 18:5-6)
31. Cf. NJBC, 44:71-76; Hnchen, Acts, pp. 405-418; J. Dupont, udes sur les Actes des
Aptres, pp. 335-337; Robert F. OToole, S.J., Christs Resurrection in Acts 13,
13-52, Biblica, 60(1974), pp. 361-372; John J. Kilgallen, Acts 13, 38-39: Culmination of Pauls Speech in Pisidia, Biblica, 69(1988), pp. 180-506; Josep Ruis-Camps,
La Mision hacia el Paganismo avalada por el Senor Jesus e el Espiritu Santo (Hch
13-15), Estudios Biblicos, 52 (1994), pp. 341-360.
32. Cf. M.J. Edwards, Quoting Aratus: Acts 17,28, Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische
Wissenschaft, 83(1992), pp. 266-269.
537
ing all nations to repent of such pagan follies, because he has fixed a day
when the whole world will be judged, and judged in the gospel righteousness, and he has appointed a man to be the judge. And God has
publicly proved this by raising the man from the dead. (Acts 17:22-31)
Pauls sermon on the Areopagus makes, then, one already familiar
Christological point: namely, that the resurrection manifests the risen
Christs divine authority to pass final judgment over the whole world.
The resurrection, however, proves an intolerable stumbling block for most
of Pauls audience. He makes only a handful of converts in Athens. (Acts
17:32-34) If Pauls speech at Pisidian Antioch dramatizes Lukes perception of why Jews often found the Christian kerygma unacceptable, Pauls
speech on the Areopagus dramatizes important reasons for Gentile unbelief: philosophical dilettantism and an unwillingness to credit the resurrection of the body. In Acts, then, the paschal mystery poses a radical
challenge for Gentile as well as Jew. It marks a new and decisive intervention of God within human history which requires a radical break with
conventional beliefs and attitudes, whether Jewish or pagan.33
Pauls farewell speech to the elders at Ephesus contains a few Christological references. The speech marks the changing of the guard: Paul the
apostle is handing over leadership responsibilities to the elders who will
succeed him.
Paul reminds the elders of the work he has accomplished in proclaiming the Lord Jesus and expresses his desire to complete the task entrusted
to him. (Acts 20:18-24) Paul urges the elders to feed the Church of God
which He [Jesus] bought with His own blood. (Acts 20:28) His saving
death has brought it about that those who believe in Jesus now belong to
Him.
Paul concludes by exhorting the community to care for the weak by
citing a saying of Jesus: There is more happiness in giving than in receiving. (Acts 20:34-5) This saying which Paul attributes to Jesus echoes an
aphorism of Ben Sirah (Si 4:31); but nowhere in the gospels does it turn
up on Jesus own lips. Its citation reflects, however, Lukes habitual concern for the poor. Paul makes the citation in the context of exhorting
33. Cf. NJBC, 44:94; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 136-195; Bruce, Acts, pp. 328-344;
Hnchen, Acts, pp. 515-531; Karl Olav Sandnes, Paul and Socrates: The Aim of
Pauls Areopagus Speech, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 50(1993), pp.
13-26; Jean Calloud, Paul devant lAreopagus dAthens, Recherches de Science
Religieuse, 69(1981), pp. 209-248; Paul Schubert, The Place of the Areopagus Speech
in the Composition of Acts in Transitions in Biblical Scholarship, edited by J. Coret
Rylaarsdan (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 1968), pp. 235-261; Hans
Conzelmann, The Address of Paul on the Areopagus in Studies in Luke-Acts, edited
by Leander E. Keck and J. Louis Martyn (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1966), pp.
217-230; N. Clayton Croy, Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the
Resurrection (Acts 17:18,32), Novum Testamentum, 39(1997), pp. 21-39.
538
Church leaders never to burden those they serve and to show special
concern for those in greatest need.34
Examples of Christological Knowing
In telling the story of Peter, Stephen, and Paul, Luke portrays them as
examples of Christological knowing without, of course, using that term
as such. Still, Luke makes it clear that Breath-baptism inspired their witness to the risen Christ and assimilated them to Him.
In His appearance to Saul on the road to Damascus, the risen Christ
insists that in persecuting His disciples Paul is persecuting Jesus Himself.
(Acts 9:5; 22:8; 26:15) As we have seen, however, the persecution and
stoning of Stephen had already made the same point dramatically. Stephen,
the prototypical Christian martyr, dies as an alter Christus. With his dying words he echoes the prayer of the dying Christ. (Acts 7:55-60; Lk
23:34, 46)
Acts also assimilates both Peter and Paul to Jesus. Like Jesus, the two
apostles confirm their teaching by performing the same kinds of miracles
as Jesus had. Like Jesus, both Peter and Paul cure cripple. (Lk 5:15, 7:23;
Acts 3:1-10, 14:8-10) All three raise the dead to life. (Lk 7:11-17; Acts
9:36-42, 20:7-12) Like Jesus, first Peter, then Paul, draw to themselves
crowds of people seeking healing and exorcism. (Lk 6:17-19; Acts 12:13-6,
19:11-2)
Both apostles also find themselves drawn into the passion of Jesus because they proclaim His resurrection. Both experience miraculous deliverances from the persecutors. Both deliverances dramatizes the victory of
Christ and the power of His resurrection. (Acts 5:17-21, 12:1-19,
16:25-34) In assimilating Stephen, Peter, and Paul to Christ, Luke tells
their stories in a manner which also suggests that the mantle of apostolic
leadership passed from Peter to Paul as the Jewish people stiffened their
resistance to the apostolic kerygma.35
The assimilation of the three protagonists of Acts to Jesus raises the
question of Lukes use of allusion to tie together his account of Christian
34. Cf. NJBC, 44:105-108; Conzelmann, Acts, pp. 172-176; Bruce, Acts, pp. 387-396;
Hnchen, Acts, pp. 589-598; J. Lambrecht, Pauls Farewell Address at Miletus in Les
Actes des Aptres, traditions, redaction, thologie, pp. 307-337; Christoph Zettner, Amt,
Gemeinde und kirchliche Einheit in der Apostelgeschichte des Lukas (Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Lukas, 1991); John J. Kilgallen, Pauls Speech to the Ephesian Elders: Its
Structure, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis, 70(1994), pp. 112-121; J.M. Ross,
The Extra Words in Acts 18:21, Novum Testamentum, 34(1992), pp. 247-249;
Eckhard Plmacher, Eine Thukydides-reminiszenz in der Apostelgeschichte (Act
20,33-35Thuk. 97, 3f), Zeitschrift fr die Neutestamentlische Wissenschaft, 83(1992),
pp. 270-275.
35. Cf. David P. Mossner, The Christ Must Suffer: New Light on the Jesus-Peter,
Stephen, Paul Parallels in Luke-Acts, Novum Testamentum, 28(1986), pp. 220-256.
539
origins. In the section which follows, therefore, I shall complete the analysis
of Lukes use of literary allusion which I began in the last chapter.
(IV)
This section ponders two ways in which Luke uses literary allusion in
Acts. First, the evangelist uses it in order to assimilate Paul to Peter. Second, Luke uses literary allusion in order to tie together his gospel and the
story of Acts.
Since the figures of Peter and Paul dominate the story of Acts, Luke
makes most extensive use of allusion in recounting their exploits. The
evangelist dramatizes the continuity between Petrine and Pauline Christianity by having Paul in his ministry do the same things as Peter. Both
apostles speak four major discourses. (Acts 2:14-36, 3:12-26, 10:34-43;
13:15-41, 14:15-17, 15:7-11, 20:18-35; 22:1-21) Both apostles heal someone crippled from birth. (Acts 3:2-9, 14:8-11) Both Peter and Paul call
down the Pentecostal Breath on baptized believers who have not experienced Her charisms: Peter on the Samaritans, Paul on the disciples in
Ephesus baptized with Johannine baptism. In both cases, those on whom
the apostle imposes hands speak in tongues. (Acts 8:16-17, 19:5-6) Both
Peter and Paul go up to the temple in order to pray. (Acts 3:1, 22:17)
Both encounter a hostile magician. Peter rebukes Simon (Acts 8:9), while
Paul strikes the magician Elymas temporarily blind. (Acts 13:6-8) Both
Peter and Paul refuse adoration by others. Peter does it in the house of
Cornelius; Paul, in Lystra. (Acts 10:25-26, 14:15) Both apostles pronounce
words of divine judgment: Peter on Ananias and Sapphira, Paul on Elymas.
(Acts 5:3-11, 13:10-11) Both apostles show extraordinary powers of healing. (Acts 5:15-16, 19:11-12) Both deal with people who covet their charismatic powers: Peter with Simon, Paul with the sons of Sceva. (Acts
8:18-19, 19:13-17) Both apostles raise the dead. (Acts 9:36-42, 20:9-12)
In their inaugural discourse, both apostles implicitly invoke the empty
tomb in order to elicit faith in Jesus resurrection. (Acts 2:29-34, 13:34-37)
Peter and Cornelius have corresponding visions prior to the latters conversion, while Ananias and Saul have corresponding visions before Sauls
conversion and baptism as Paul. (Acts 10:1-48) Both Peter and Paul experience extraordinary deliverances from prison: Peter in Jerusalem, Paul
and Silas at Philippi. (Acts 12:3-11, 16:22-26) Both Peter and Paul receive a special mission to the Gentiles in a vision: Peter to Cornelius and
Paul to the Macedonians. (Acts 10:9-16, 16:9-10) Both apostles profess
their fidelity to the Torah (Acts 10:14, 25:8), but both also confess that
the Law alone cannot save one.36 (Acts 15:10-11, 13:38-39)
Of the three synoptic evangelists, only Luke writes a two-volume study
of Christian origins. It therefore comes as no great surprise that Luke
36. Cf. George, op. cit., pp. 50-58, 79-84.
540
DIAGRAM III: THE ASSIMILATION OF PAUL TO PETER IN ACTS

Peter
Paul
Acts 2:14-36; 3:12-26; Four Discourses Acts 13:15-4 1; 17:22-3 1;

10:34-43; 15:6-11
20:18-35: 22:1-21
Acts 3:2-9 Cures one crippled Acts 14:8-11
from birth
Acts 8:16-17 Lays hands on those baptized Acts 19:1-7
who have not manifest charisms
Acts 8:9 Encounters a magician
Acts 16:6-8
Acts 10:6 Refuses to be adored Acts 14:15

Acts 5:3-4:9 Pronounces judgment Acts 13:10-11
Acts 5:15-16 Heals the crowds
Acts 19:11-12
Acts 8:18-19 Has charismatic powers coveted Acts 19:13-17

Acts 9:36-42 Raises the dead to life Acts 20:9-12
Acts 2:29-34 Refers to empty tomb Acts 13:34-37
in inaugural discourse
Acts 10: 1-48 Parallel visions Acts 9:10-19
Acts 12:3-11 Freed from prison Acts 16:22-26
Acts 10: 14 Professes fidelity to the Law Acts 25:8
Acts 15:10-11 Confesses Law cannot save Acts 13:38-39
Acts 10: 1-48 Sent by revelation to Gentiles Acts 16:19
probably makes his most characteristic use of literary allusion by foreshadowing in his gospel events which will transpire in Acts.
The prologue of the gospel (Lk 1:1-4) obviously finds a parallel in the
prologue to Acts. (Acts 1:1-5) The account of the ascension which ends
the gospel (Lk 24:50-53) anticipates the ascension account which begins
Acts. (Acts 1:5-11)
Luke underlines the importance of Pentecost by repeatedly alluding to
it in the course of his gospel. The Breaths outpouring in the infancy
gospel (Lk 1:42, 67, 2:25-26, 36-38) anticipates her creation of the Church
on Pentecost morning. (Acts 2:1-4) Jesus mission of the Twelve (Lk 9:1-2)
and of the seventy-two disciples (Lk 10:1-16) alludes to the missioning
on Pentecost of the disciples gathered in the upper room. Jesus prayer at
the time of the Breaths descent upon Him (Lk 3:21) anticipates the disciples prayer for their Pentecostal Breath-baptism after the ascension in
Acts. John predicts that the mightier one will baptize in a sanctifying
541
Breath and fire. (Lk 3:16) Johns prophecy, moreover, anticipates Jesus
reference to the Father promise at the end of the gospel (Lk 24:49) and
at the beginning of Acts. (Acts 1:4-5) The fiery tongues fulfill both the
prophecy and the promise. John also predicts that the coming mightier
one will pronounce judgment in wind and fire (Lk 1:17); and on Pentecost the Breath arrives under the sign of wind and fiery tongues. The
prophetic Pentecostal Church imitates the activities of the prophetess
Anna, who foreshadows its proclamation of the risen Christ by her proclamation of the infant messiah. (Lk 2:36-38, Acts 1:14, 3:1) Marys presence on Pentecost (Acts 1:14) recalls her obedient faith in the infancy
gospel. (Lk 1:38) The repentance of the crowds who hear John (Lk 3:10)
foreshadows their repentance on Calvary (Lk 23:48); and their repentance on Calvary foreshadows their conversion on Pentecost. (Acts 2:37)
Jesus counsel to the disciples to beg the Father to give the Breath as His
best gift (Lk 11:23) finds obedient fulfillment in Acts in their prayer for
the coming of the Pentecostal Breath.
Luke also foreshadows in his gospel the opposition to the proclamation
of the risen Christ which the evangelist details in Acts. Simeons prophecy that Israel will experience Jesus as a sign of contradiction (Lk 2:29-32)
finds its fulfillment not only in Palestinian opposition to Jesus ministry
but also in widespread Jewish opposition to the apostles proclamation of
the risen Christ. The Sanhedrin persecutes the apostles just as they persecuted Jesus. (Acts 4:23-31) The prayer uttered during the little Pentecost
in Acts cites Ps 1:1-2: Why do the Gentiles rage and the peoples plot in
vain? The kings of the earth took their stand and the rulers made common cause against the Lord and against His anointed. (Acts 4:25-26)
The citation recalls the connivance of the chief priests, Herod, Pilate,
and the people of Jerusalem in Jesus death. Their murder of Jesus also
dramatizes Satans claim in Jesus desert temptations that the kingdoms
of this world do indeed belong to him and obey him. (Lk 4:6-7) Hence,
Jesus legalized murder reveals his murderers as the tools of Satan. (Lk
22:53) Their assault upon Jesus recalls, therefore, Satans decision after
Jesus desert temptation to put Him to the test at a more opportune time.
(Lk 4:9-13) In addition, however, Jesus final victory over Satan in His
desert temptation anticipates by reverse allusion Satans victory over
Ananias and Sapphira in Acts. (Acts 5:1-11) The unfortunate couple succumb to Jesus final temptation by putting God to the test. The Sadducees
denial of the resurrection in Lukes gospel (Lk 20:27-40) anticipates their
opposition to the proclamation of Jesus resurrection in Acts. (Acts 4:1,
23:6-8) In the same way, Jesus trial before the Sanhedrin prepares the
trials of Peter, of Stephen, and of Paul by that same body. (Lk 22:66-23:1;
Acts 4:1-22, 5:21-33, 22:30-23:11) The evangelist, as we have seen, actually transposes narrative details from Jesus trial in Mark to Stephens
542
trial in Acts. The death of Stephen, the protomartyr in Acts, recalls Jesus
death on Calvary. (Lk 23:34; Acts 7:59-60)
Other events in Jesus story find an echo in Acts. Jesus sermon on the
plain and Lukes reference to the paschal mystery as an exodus in the
transfiguration (Lk 6:17-49, 9:29-36) take on clearer theological mean-
543
DIAGRAM IV CONTINUED
LUKE'S GOSPEL
ACTS
Jesus last desert temptation Satans victory over Aranias and Sapphira
Opposition of Sadducees to Jesus Opposition of Sadducees to apostles
(Lk 20:27-40)
(Act, 4: 1; 23:6-8)
the sermon on the plain
(Lk 6:17-49)
pascal mystery as exodus
(Lk 9:29-36)
Stephens proclamation of
Jesus as the prophet like Moses
(Acts 7:17-43)
the miracle of the loaves

(Lk 9:10-17)
the last supper
(Lk 22:1
the meal at Emmaus
(Lk 24:30-33)
Jesus meals with

disciples between
resurrection and ascension
(Acts 1:4, 10:41-43)
the meals in the journey section

Jesus teaching about the sign of Jonah Pauls Gentile mission
(Lk 10:13-15)
journey discourse and Jesus' appearance
to the disciples on the way
The Church becomes the Way

(Acts 9:2)
the angels at the tomb two angels at the ascension in Acts

rending of the heavens at
the Breaths decent on Jesus
rending of the heavens in Stephens

vision of the Son of Man
ing in Stephens proclamation of Jesus as the prophet like Moses in Acts.

(Acts 3:22-24, 7:17-43) The many meals which Jesus shares with others
in the gospel find a parallel in the miracle of the loaves (Lk 9:10-17), in
the last supper (Lk 22:19-22), and in Jesus breaking bread with the disciples at Emmaus. (Lk 24:30-33) All these meals, moreover, find their
fulfillment in the meals which the risen Christ shares with His disciples
prior to His ascension in Acts. (Acts 1:4) Jesus teaching about the sign of
Jonah (Lk 11:29-32) foreshadows Pauls Gentile mission in Acts. Two of
Jesus miracles (Lk 5:17-26, 7:11-17) foreshadow miracles done by both
Peter and Paul in Acts. (Acts 9:32-43, 14:8-18, 20:7-12) The appearance
of Jesus to the disciples on the way to Emmaus (Lk 24:30) recalls Lukes
journey discourse on the way to Jerusalem and to glory at the same time
that it anticipates the transformation of Jesus movement into the Way
544
Part 4: The Pragmatic Meaning of Christological Knowing
in Acts. (Acts 9:2) The two angels at Jesus tomb in the gospel (Lk 24:4-5)
anticipate the two angels to Jesus ascension in Acts. (Acts 1:10) The
rending of the heavens prior in Stephens vision of the risen Lord recalls
the rending of the heavens when the Breath descended on Jesus at the
Jordan. (Luke 3:21; Acts 7:56)
I have noted other Lukan allusions in commenting on both his gospel
and Acts. The preceding catalogue, however, illustrates sufficiently well
how the evangelist employs literary allusion to tie together his two volumes. In the process the preceding catalogue also dramatizes the contrast
between Lukan use of this literary device and the use made of it by the
other synoptic evangelists.
Luke alone among the evangelists actually describes the proclamation of
the risen Christ. Like other ancient historians, the evangelist himself composed the speeches which his main characters pronounce. As a consequence, while Luke remains sensitive in Acts to the situational relevance
of each kerygmatic proclamation which he describes, the speeches of Peter, of Stephen, and of Paul all reflect Lukan theological concerns and
develop the evangelists own theory of salvation history as a context for
understanding the saving significance of Jesus and of the paschal mystery.
Luke, writing as a Pauline Christian for a predominantly Gentile audience, presents apostolic proclamation as culminating in Pauls Gentile
mission, which brings the gospel from Jerusalem, the heart of first-century
Judaism, to Rome, the then center of the mediterranean Gentile world.
Unlike Matthew, who sees Petrine Christianity as the solid rock on which
to build the Church, Luke sees Petrine Christianity as a prelude to the
establishment of the Pauline churches.
Both Luke and Matthew attested to the resistance among many Jews to
the Christian kerygma. Matthew warned that their unbelief would bring
down judgment on their Pharisaical hypocrisy. Luke, however, discoverd
two specific reasons for Jewish resistance to the gospel: Israel refused to
acknowledge the divinity of Jesus and would not recognize that God chose
them for the sake of saving the Gentiles in Christ. Ironically, Jewish resistance to the gospel in Acts accomplishes Gods universal saving purpose
anyway by motivating Pauls Gentile mission.
This chapter concludes the dialectical analysis of synoptic narrative
Christology. The chapter which follows probes its implications for developing foundational Christology.
Chapter 18: Imagination and the Christian Conscience
545
Part 4
The Pragmatic Meaning of
Chapter 18
Imagination and the Christian Conscience:
The Practice of Christological Knowing
The first volume of this study undertook two speculative tasks. First, it
attempted to clarify how one can legitimately understand the humanity
of Jesus in a contemporary, North American context. Second, it began to
examine the ways in which faith in the paschal mystery graces and transvalues natural human hope.
The second volume of this study has focused on the intuitive dimensions of Christian faith rather than on Christian hope; and it has examined the narrative Christology of the three synoptic gospels for the light
they shed on the practical meaning of Christological knowing. The time
has come to summarize the conclusions of that investigation. Such a summary will give a unified account of the analogy of Christological knowing which the synoptic gospels exemplify. By the analogy of Christological knowing, I mean the way in which each of the evangelists modifies the telling of Jesuss story so that it addresses the conversion needs of
the community for whom the evangelist writes.
Analogy means similarity in difference. In attempting to advance
Christological knowing, the three synoptic evangelists share much in common. They also stress different aspects of the Christians relationship to
Christ in faith.
An insight into the analogy of Christological knowing articulated in
the synoptics will tell us much about the synoptic gospels as Christian
classics. As we saw at the beginning of this volume, a literary work qualifies as a classic when it continues to speak to generation after generation
of readers. Taken together, both the broad areas of narrative consensus
and the emphases peculiar to each synoptic evangelist yield an insight
into the perennial significance of their gospels. In every generation, those
who ponder them in faith find in them practical help in advancing in
Christological knowing.
In the synoptics, the analogy of Christological knowing results from
the different conversion needs of the historical communities whom each
evangelist addresses; but the analogy of Christological knowing also en-
546
gages contemporary Christians who meditate the synoptics. Contemporary Christians have conversion needs of their own. Accordingly, in the
second part of this chapter, I shall begin to show how the kind of Christological knowing which the synoptic gospels promote promises to heal,
perfect, and elevate the contemporary Christian conscience. In the final
section of volume three, I shall draw on the creative work of William
Spohn and of Roberto Unger in order to develop further the construct of
the Christian conscience here presented.
In challenging their communities to greater assimilation to Jesus in the
power of His Breath, all three synoptic gospels presuppose a context of
faith. All three challenge the reader to repentance. All three demand commitment to a utopian religious vision which places very specific demands
on those who espouse it.
This chapter divides, then, into four parts. Part one examines the context of faith which the synoptics propose as the condition for advancing
in Christological knowing. Part two ponders the kind of repentance which
progress in Christological knowing demands. Part three meditates the
utopian vision of the kingdom to which Christological faith commits
believers. Part four analyzes how the practice of Christological knowing
heals, perfects, and elevates the human conscience.
(I)
All three synoptic gospels use both positive dramatic linkages and the
miracles of Jesus in order to define the context of faith required for assimilation to Jesus in the power of His Breath. In all three gospels, Jesus
relates positively to John the Baptizer, to the Father, and to the Breath.
Each relationship fleshes out a different dimension of Christological knowing.
Positive Dramatic Linkages: The Context of Faith
All three synoptic evangelists endorse the ministry of John the Baptizer as
genuinely prophetic. All three insist that John prophesied the coming of
a mightier one than himself who would baptize with a sanctifying Breath.
In other words, all three synoptics use the Baptizer as a way of dramatizing that Jesus, not John, baptizes in the divine Breath. Moreover,
Breath-baptism provides the realistic context for the disciples growth in
Christological knowing. It also implies Jesus divinity since only God can
function as the source of a divine reality.
All three synoptics develop Jesus superiority to John in ways which
disclose the mystery of Jesus own person. Jesus, not John, confronts one
as the divine Bridegroom especially endowed with divine authority to
forgive sins. Breath-baptism reveals Jesus alone as the anointed Son of
God and therefore as messiah. As Breath-baptizer Jesus begins both a
547
new Israel and a new creation. Both Jesus and John suffer martyrdom;
but only Jesus rises from the dead and sends the Breath. While John
stands on the threshold of the messianic age, Jesus begins it. John functions as the Elijah who prepares for Jesus coming; but Jesus inaugurates
the end time.
Matthew and Luke endorse the preceding themes in Marks portrait of
Jesus; but each nuances Marks portrait in slightly different ways. On the
whole, the nuances tend to converge or to complement rather than to
contradict one another.
Occasional contradictions do, however, surface. Mark and Luke both
seem to concede to Johannine baptism the power to forgive sins. Matthew reserves that power to the paschal mystery and Christian baptism.
All three evangelists, however, discover a sanctifying power in Christian
baptism which goes beyond Johannine baptism. That sanctification results from the fact that Christian baptism confers the Breath of God,
while Johannine baptism does not. Of the three, Luke portrays
Breath-baptism most clearly as both sanctification in Jesus image and as
charismatic empowerment. Mark does not mention the charisms as such;
and Matthew warns against valuing charismatic prowess more than the
obedience of faith.
Both Matthew and Luke distinguish the way in which the divine Breath
relates to Jesus, on the one hand, and to the disciples, on the other. She
comes to Jesus in order to reveal Him as Son of God in a unique and
privileged sense, as messiah, as suffering servant, and as the beginning of
a new Israel. She comes to the disciples under the sign of fire, and therefore in purification and in judgment.
Both Matthew and Luke agree that the arrival of the Breath-baptizer
puts Israel in a new kind of relationship with God. After Jesus and the
paschal mystery, obedience to God in His image, not racial descent, incorporates one into the new Israel.
Luke stresses more than Mark or Matthew the continuity between Jesus
ethical doctrine and Johns; but Lukes theology of history also sharpens
both the contrast and the continuity between the two ministries.
The fact, however, that the synoptic gospels offer on the whole convergent and complementary theological portraits of Jesus rather than contradictory ones means that all three synoptic gospels can and ought to
contribute to the formation of the Christian conscience. Contemporary
Christians will probably find most useful that gospel which originally
addressed a social situation analogous to the contemporary one in which
believers find themselves. Communities struggling with persecution, injustice, and oppression may, for example, find that Marks gospel best
illumines their situation. Contemporary Christians wrestling with questions about the Church may well find greatest help in Matthew. Chris-
548
tians struggling to preserve their moral and religious identity as Christians in the face of morally and religiously corrupting secular powers may
find the greatest guidance in Luke.
All three synoptic gospels portray the Father as the source of Jesus messianic commissioning, although Luke stresses somewhat more than the
other two evangelists the gratuity and sovereignty with which the Father
acts to save us. All the synoptics portray Jesus as sharing with the Father
the divine power to forgive sins.
Matthew asserts the divinity of Jesus by portraying Him as Immanuel,
as God-with-us. Moreover, Matthews Jesus stands fully revealed as
Immanuel when, as the risen Christ, He baptizes with the divine Breath
by sending the disciples to baptize in the triune name. For Matthew,
then, the fact that Jesus baptizes in the Breath of God reveals His divinity.
Resurrection also transforms Jesus into the Breath-baptizer.
Both Matthew and Luke portray Jesus as standing in a unique revelatory relationship with the Father and as divinely empowered to reveal the
Father to whomever He chooses. Luke stresses even more than Matthew
that the divine Breath inspired in Jesus this special Abba awareness.
All three evangelists portray Jesus relationship to the Father as paradigmatic of the disciples relationship to Him. Discipleship draws one into
the family of God. It teaches one to call God Father in Jesus image. It
demands that one relate to Jesus as a brother and to the other members of
Gods family with sibling intimacy.
All the synoptics use Jesus relationship to the Father in order to describe the most fundamental moral conditions for Christological knowing. Assimilation to Jesus in His relationship to the Father requires of the
disciples unquestioning obedience, absolute trust, and all consuming love.
All three evangelists agree that one must interpret the two great commandments of the old Law in the light of Jesus and of His ministry; but
each gives this insight a slightly different twist. Mark insists that one
must interpret the great commandments in the light of the kingdom which
Jesus proclaims. Matthew invokes the notion of fulfillment in interpreting the two great commandments: while they fulfill the Law and the
prophets, Jesus fulfills all four. Luke universalizes the second commandment with the parable of the good Samaritan.
Because they preserve more teachings of Jesus than Mark, both Matthew and Luke spell out in greater detail the moral consequences of commitment to the Father in faith. In the beatitudes Matthew asserts that
living as Gods child in the image of Jesus transforms one into a peace
maker. He also teaches that legal and moral purity of heart culminates in
the face-to-face vision of God. Both Matthew and Luke use the Our
Father in order to describe the fundamental moral stance of the believing
disciple toward the Father. That stance includes 1) longing for the estab-
549
lishment of Gods just reign; 2) trust in the Father to provide one with
bread and the other supports of life; 3) the repentant desire for forgiveness; 4) the willingness to forgive others in imitation of Gods forgiveness; 5) reverential trust in the Father in times of testing. Matthew, however, seems to stress more the reverential attitude which the disciples ought
to have toward Our Father enthroned in heaven.
The same two evangelists use Jesus temptations in the desert in order
to describe His stance toward the Father in accomplishing His messianic
mission. In the temptations, Jesus looks to the Father in unconditioned
trust. Jesus also founds the kingdom, not on coercive power, but on authentic prayer. Both evangelists, moreover, test the authenticity of prayer
by a mutual forgiveness which includes even ones enemies. Luke, however, even more than Mark or Matthew portrays Jesus prayer to the Father as the paradigm of Christian prayer.
In both gospels, Satan tempts Jesus as the beginning of the new Israel.
As a consequence, Jesus responses to the tempter model for the members
of the new Israel how they must respond to similar temptations. Jesus
responses therefore commit the disciples to the same ideals as He embodies.
Matthew, partly from a concern to temper nascent Christian clericalism, regards the temptation to model Gods kingdom on worldly kingdoms as the supreme temptation of Christians. Luke, however, presents
testing God as the supreme temptation. Moreover, Luke equates testing
God with hypocritically pretending to piety while neglecting the poor
and the needy. All three evangelists regard the amassing of wealth as incompatible with trust in Gods providential care; but Luke stresses this
aspect of Christian faith more than either Mark or Matthew. In addition,
Luke portrays care of the poor as an expression of eschatological hope
and greed as an obstacle to resurrection faith. These Lukan themes express his concern to distance his Gentile Christians from the institutionalized greed of Greco-Roman society.
All three evangelists look to the Father as the ultimate source of salvation. All three agree that the Father can save even the rich and that He
can raise from the dead.
In all three synoptic gospels the Breath impels Jesus and His disciples
into conflict with Satan and the powers of evil. All three synoptic evangelists assert that the divine Breath conforms one to Jesus in His passion by
empowering the disciples to testify to Him even at the risk of their own
lives.
Matthew and Luke, however, use the temptation narrative in order to
stress that the divine Breath also inspires Jesus religious and moral vision. In all three synoptics the Breath presides over Jesus temptation in
the desert. In Matthew and Luke, however, She also inspires Jesus re-
550
sponses to each of Satans temptations. Those responses in both gospels

indicate which aspect of the Law Jesus especially fulfills. As we have just
seen, they commit Jesus and those who follow Him to unconditioned
trust in the Father and to founding the kingdom on His authentic worship.
Matthew and Luke make it clearer than Mark that Breath-baptism and
Christian baptism coincide. Matthew does it in the great commission
which closes his gospel; Luke does it by describing the effects of Breath
baptism on Pentecost. In Acts the Breath first teaches the baptized to
embody corporately the vision of the kingdom which Jesus proclaimed;
but in addition She empowers by Her charisms their prophetic witness to
the risen Christ. That witness not only conforms the disciples to Jesus
morally but draws them with moral inevitability into his passion.
All three synoptic evangelists use the miracles and exorcisms of Jesus in
order to flesh out the context of faith in which Christological knowing
transpires. In all three gospels, the exorcisms dramatize the eschatological
struggle with evil which Jesus inaugurates. Moreover, in all three gospels,
Jesus actively commissions the disciples to perpetuate that struggle. Jesus
exorcisms reveal that He comes to break the power of Satan. Among the
synoptics Mark stresses most the reality of the conflict between Jesus and
Satan. Matthew insists most on Jesus sovereign victory over Satan. Both
Mark and Luke believe that Satans power takes concrete shape in oppressive institutions like the Roman empire. Luke, perhaps, stresses this point
most eloquently by insisting that his Gentile Christians renounce the
greed and violence of the principalities and powers of this world which
the Roman empire exemplifies.
All three synoptic gospels use Jesus cosmological miracles in order to
assert His divinity. The story of the calming of the storm alone makes
this assertion; but both Mark and Matthew re-enforce this point by having Jesus calm the waters of chaos a second time after walking on the
waves and invoking the divine name. In the Bible, only God can perform
both acts. Of the three synoptic writers, Mark alone makes extensive use
of allusive linkages in order to portray faith in the divinity of Jesus as an
explicit condition for eucharistic faith.
All three synoptic gospels use the healings of Jesus in order to shore up
expectant confidence in His capacity as risen Lord to inspire faith and
courageous witness in the disciples. He can give them new eyes to see the
truth of the gospel and new ears to hear it. He can loose their tongues to
proclaim it. He can strengthen them to serve one another faithfully. Mark
uses allusive linkages in order to assert the eucharistic character of Christian faith and practice. Through literary allusion, the mighty acts of Marks
Jesus disclose the deep meaning of eucharistic faith. The editorial pens of
both Matthew and Luke shred Marks carefully constructed network of
551
literary allusion, even though the other two evangelists use other literary
allusions of their own contrivance in order to embellish their own theological portraits of Jesus. Matthew transforms the Great Commission into
the culminating event of Jesus story. Luke uses allusion in order to assimilate Peter, Stephen, and Paul to Jesus, in order to dramatize the continuity between Peters and Pauls ministry, and in order to foreshadow in
His gospel the story of the apostolic Church narrated in Acts.
I have considered how the synoptic evangelists use positive dramatic
linkages as well as Jesus miracles and exorcisms in order to define the
context of faith in which Christological knowing happens. All three evangelists also use negative dramatic linkages in order to specify the kind of
repentance which Christological knowing demands. To this aspect of
Christological knowing I turn in the section which follows.
(II)
In all three synoptic gospels, the Breath of Christ presides over Jesus
confrontation with Satan. Mark, who stresses demonic conflict more than
Matthew or Luke has the Breath drive Jesus into conflict with the prince
of devils. Since in His temptations Jesus embodies the new Israel which
He begins, the disciples too should look to the Breath to strengthen them
in times of temptation. Like Jesus, they must expect Her to inspire their
responses in times of persecution and testing.
Negative Dramatic Linkages: The Demands of Repentance
In all three synoptic gospels, Satan functions as the enemy of faith in
Jesus. Lack of faith leaves one powerless to drive out demons with a word
of exorcism.
Because he puts Jesus to the test in the desert and in His passion, Satan
also confronts the reader of the synoptic gospels as the incarnation of
anti-Christ. Satan takes concrete embodiment in all those persons and
institutions who foster sin, death, and oppression. In Mark and especially in Luke, Satan takes concrete embodiment in the Roman empire
and its clients. The corrupt temple priests also function as Satans instruments. In Matthew especially, so do the Pharisees, who symbolize both
the Pharisaical leaders of the synagogue across the street and clericalizing
Christian leaders.
Mark uses the metaphor of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod
in order to designate the kinds of values and attitudes of which the faithful disciple of Jesus must repent. Matthew and Luke use a different narrative strategy. They make dramatic use of Jesus desert temptations in order to unmask Satans plan for frustrating Jesus saving mission. The sins
to which Satan tempts Jesus identify the sins of which His disciples must
especially repent. They must renounce especially sinful self-reliance; and
552
they must trust God instead. They must never test God by setting conditions on their willingness to trust Him. They must never replace the kingdom of God with the kingdoms of this world.
As we have seen, all three synoptic evangelists use Jesus exorcisms in
order to proclaim His victory over Satan and the powers of evil and chaos.
Here it suffices to note that Jesus victory seeks to motivate repentance of
all those things which Satan symbolizes. Luke in addition portrays the
very proclamation of the gospel as casting Satan out of heaven. Jesus
message of forgiveness deprives the angelic prosecuting attorney described
in Job of any meaningful function in the Fathers court. Marks narrative
heightens the conflict between Satans forces and those of God.
Mark and Matthew both warn against the unforgivable sin of attributing to Satan works wrought by the Breath of God. Matthew attributes
Breath-blasphemy especially to Pharisaical hypocrisy. Luke equates the
unforgivable sin with Christian apostasy. Both sins exemplify attitudes of
which Christians need to repent.
In all three synoptic gospels, the Pharisees symbolize the following sins:
self- righteousness, legalism, religious snobbery, lack of compassion for
the disadvantaged, judgmental elitism in dealing with sinners, substituting human customs for the divine will, unbelief, the refusal to credit
Jesus ability to forgive sin, testing God. In pitting Jesus against the Pharisees, all three synoptic evangelists dramatize the fact that the sins which
they symbolize contradict the kind of faith commitment which Jesus demands of His followers. These sins therefore require repentance. All three
evangelists require Christians to renounce the leaven of the Pharisees.
Leaven in Mark means all the sinful attitudes which the Pharisees incarnate. In Matthew it means their false teaching. In Luke it means their
hypocrisy and, by implication, especially their greed.
The scribes tend to symbolize the same sins as the Pharisees. Moreover,
all three synoptic gospels tend to refer to members of the Sanhedrin as
scribes. The Jerusalem scribes sin especially in their exploitation of the
poor and in their sympathy for a militaristic form of messianism. In Mark,
Jerusalem scribes blaspheme the Breath of God by accusing Jesus of exorcising by the power of Beelzebul. In Matthew, the Pharisees do. In Luke,
the crowds make the accusation. In all three gospels the accusation expresses a blasphemous unbelief of which one must repent if one hopes to
escape damnation.
The conflict between Matthews Jewish Christian community and the
Pharisaical leadership of the synagogue across the street lead him to
paint a particularly black portrait of the Pharisees. As a consequence,
Matthew extends somewhat the list of sins which the Pharisees exemplify
and which Christians must renounce. Matthews Pharisees refuse intransigently to repent. Matthews Jesus calls Christians to a more demanding
553
form of righteousness than that practiced by the scribes and Pharisees.

Christians must replace Pharisaical legalism with mercy and compassion.
Matthew also denounces the attempts of the Pharisees to undermine
faith in Jesus. Their poisonous doctrine transforms them in his gospel
into a brood of vipers. Specifically, the evangelist rebukes Pharisaical
refusal to credit Jesus resurrection. In Matthew, the woes against the
Pharisees catalogue the evils they embody: unbelief and the subversion of
faith in others, a cupidity which undermines the binding character of
oaths, narrow concern with the superficial aspects of Torah, replacing
repentance with superficial ritual purity. Finally, Matthew assimilates
nascent Christian clericalism to Pharisaical hypocrisy.
Luke also records Jesus woes but divides them between the Pharisees
and the lawyers. Lukes Jesus accuses both of hypocrisy but reserves the
accusation of violence of heart for the lawyers. Moreover, in Luke after
the triumphal entry, the Pharisees play no part in Jesus Jerusalem ministry. The chief priests and scribal members of the Sanhedrin single-handedly
engineer His death. Luke, moreover, more than once equates Pharisaical
hypocrisy with the Christian sin of pretending piety while neglecting the
poor.
In all three synoptic gospels, Herod apes the oppressive ways of the
kings of the Gentiles. He therefore symbolizes a kind of violence and
oppression of which all Christians, but especially Christian leaders, need
to repent.
Of the three synoptic evangelists, Mark makes the most explicit symbolic use of Herod in order to summon the disciples of Jesus to repentance. He demands as a condition for eucharistic faith the renunciation
of the leaven of both the Pharisees and of Herod. Moreover, as in the case
of the Pharisees, Mark leaves the meaning of the term leaven suggestively vague. Marks Christians must repent of all the evils which Herod
symbolizes. An examination of Marks portrait of Herod suggests that he
especially symbolizes superstition, moral and religious vacillation, sensuality, human respect, covetousness, violence of heart, the oppression of
others, and unbridled passion.
Luke also makes symbolic use of Herod, but Luke uses different narrative strategies from Mark. Instead of pitting Herod against John the Baptizer, as Mark and Matthew do, Luke pits him directly against Jesus. Luke
does so because he desires to make Herod conspire with Pilate to kill
Jesus. Lukes Herod, together with Pilate, symbolizes, therefore, the principalities and powers of this world over against which Lukes Gentile believers must define their Christian moral identity. As Christians they must
renounce Satan and all the principalities and powers whom he owns and
rules.
554
In all three synoptic gospels, the chief priests incarnate all the sinful
attitudes which Christian leaders especially need to renounce and avoid.
Like the Pharisees, they exhibit an intransigent lack of repentance. Their
greed leads them to commercialize divine worship and to use it for their
own worldly advantage. The Sadducees pretend to religious faith while
skeptically denying Gods power to raise from the dead.
The chief priests religious hypocrisy cloaks a murderous violence of
heart. Given the responsibility to lead others in faith, they usurp the
authority of God by refusing to recognize that it sanctions Jesus proclamation of the kingdom and summons them to repentance. Their lack of
belief tests God and ultimately leads them to condemn the very Son of
God to death. Spiritually barren and politically ruthless, they refuse to
credit the divinity of Jesus.
In Matthew, the chief priests connive with the Pharisees to discredit
Jesus resurrection. Moreover, Matthew speaks of the leaven of the
Sadducees rather than of the leaven of Herod, as Mark does. That
suggests that Matthew regarded skepticism about Jesus resurrection as
an even greater threat to the faith of his community than the violence
and injustice of secular rulers.
Luke, for his part, focuses Jesus struggle with the chief priests on the
issue of who will control the temple. The chief priests win the struggle
and doom the temple to destruction. By portraying the chief priests as
Jesus special enemies and by insisting on their hypocrisy, Luke transforms them into a special symbol of everything which Christians leaders
need to abjure.
In all three synoptic gospels, Pilate too embodies everything which
Christian leaders must avoid. They must eschew the kind of ambition
which would prompt them to ape the oppressive ways of Gentile rulers
like Pilate. Instead, they must imitate the humble service of Jesus.
While all three synoptic gospels place the blame for Jesus death primarily on the high priests, they all hold Pilate criminally co-responsible for
Jesus death. Matthew uses the dream which Pilates wife has in order to
underscore Pilates culpability. Matthew also suggests that Pilate, like the
high priests, would have wanted to discredit Jesus resurrection. Luke
insists that in the end Pilate in crucifying Jesus committed legalized murder of an innocent man. The suggestions makes Pilate into a symbol of
Gentile immorality, cruelty, oppression, and unbelief. As we shall see in
the next volume, the fourth gospel will make this point even more explicitly than Matthew.
Luke alone among the synoptics calls attention to the atrocities which
Pilate did in fact commit as governor of Judea. Luke does so as a way of
summoning all believers to renounce the kinds of violence which the
Roman empire so effectively institutionalized. All three synoptic evange-
555
lists summon Christians to imitate Jesus non-violent, prophetic opposition to institutional oppression; but Luke makes a special point of this
dimension of Christian repentance and commitment, probably because
he found violence all too rampant in pagan society.
If the synoptic evangelists seek to advance the process of Christological
knowing by exemplifying in Jesus enemies all those attitudes which His
disciples need to renounce, they use ambiguous dramatic linkages as well
as Jesus teachings in order to describe the utopian religious ideal of the
kingdom which binds Christians both religiously and morally. To this
aspect of Christological knowing I turn in the paragraphs which follow.
(III)
All three synoptic evangelists portray Jesus call to discipleship as prophetic and peremptory. It demands finally that one abandon everything
else in order to follow Him. Abandoning all includes the willingness to
walk the way of the cross, if necessary. Among the three evangelists, only
Mark clearly parallels both the call of the disciples and Jesus baptism, on
the one hand, and the exorcism at Capernaum and Jesus temptations in
the desert, on the other.
Ambivalent Dramatic Linkages: The Way of Discipleship
All three evangelists agree that the call to discipleship culminates in mission, although Luke stresses this point most of all. Involvement in Jesus
mission draws the disciples into conflict with Satan and the other forces
of evil which conspired to nail Him to a cross. Mark and Matthew both
make the point that those who would with Peter dissuade Jesus from the
cross fail to see reality with Gods eyes and side instead with Satan.
All three evangelists teach that discipleship incorporates one into Gods
family. Obedience to God transforms one into a child of God and sibling
of Jesus. In addition, all three synoptic evangelists agree that the members of Gods family must avoid cliquishness and scandal. They must
renounce ambition and serve one another in the image of Jesus. Mark
and Matthew teach that discipleship commits one to life-long marital
fidelity. Lukes Jesus repudiates remarriage after divorce.
The three synoptic evangelists all insist on the disciples blindness and
weakness prior to Breath-baptism, although Mark insists most on this
point, probably because the evangelist wishes to assure a shattered, persecuted community that grace has the power to heal the worst expressions
of human blindness and weakness. Both Mark and Matthew teach implicitly that Breath-baptism has the power to heal ones sinful obtuseness
and vacillation. Of the two, Mark especially uses the healing miracles of
Jesus in order to foreshadow the transformation which Breath-baptism
will effect in the disciples. So to some extent does Luke; but in Acts Luke
556
describes explicitly how Breath- baptism shaped the shared life and apostolic witness of the first Christians. Matthew too uses miracles of healing
in order to foreshadow the transformation which resurrection faith will
work in the disciples, but he does so somewhat less systematically than
Mark.
In summoning the disciples of Jesus to come to terms with any lingering ambivalence in their relationship to Him, the synoptic gospels implicitly endorse the need for ongoing conversion. Despite ones baptismal
commitment of faith, the same forces which Jesus opposed can undermine ones commitment to Him. Ongoing self-examination and
re-commitment to Christ in the power of His Breath can, however, prevent backsliding.
All three synoptic gospels insist that one must face the ambivalence in
ones relationship to Jesus and that one must do so in the light of the
paschal mystery. They all use the same narrative strategy in order to make
this point: they all portray the paschal mystery as the time of decision for
the disciples. The disciples reactions during the passion provide a menu
of possible ways of responding to Jesus. Like Judas, one can betray Him
and despair. Like Peter, one can deny Him and repent. With Simon, the
ironic symbol of the faithful disciple, one can carry the cross behind Him.
With Joseph, one can reverently bury Him.
Each synoptic evangelist, however, portrays the disciples response to
Jesus resurrection differently. In Mark, the women conceal the resurrection out of fear, although the evangelist clearly desires the reader to recognize the inappropriateness of their response and to act otherwise. Mark
also probably desires to assure the Roman church that despite human
fear and weakness the truth about the risen Christ will out. Matthew
allows for doubt on the disciples part even after the resurrection; but he
also makes it clear that the resurrection effects the Great Commission: it
reveals Jesus finally and fully as Immanuel and as Breath-baptizer. As
God-with-us and as the source of the Breath, the risen Christ sends His
disciples forth to proclaim the good news to all creatures and to baptize
them in the triune name.
Of the three synoptic writers, Luke develops the most systematic narrative theology of resurrection. Luke insists on the reality of the risen
body but also on its difference from Jesus former body. In Luke, the
paschal mystery provides salvation history with its illuminating center:
the paschal mystery alone makes sense of the prophecies and longing of
the Old Testament. The encounter with the risen Christ effects a radical
conversion in those who experienced it; but their conversion serves as a
prelude to the Pentecostal outpouring of the divine Breath. That event
fulfills the Baptizers prophecy of the mightier Breath-baptizer. The outpouring of the charisms creates the Christian community. Breath-baptism
557
in Acts teaches the disciples first of all to embody Jesus vision of the
kingdom; but, through the action of the charisms, Breath-baptism also
transforms the Christian community into a prophetic community sent
to testify to the risen savior.
All the synoptic gospels agree that entry into the kingdom requires a
repentance which precludes all forms of religious self-righteousness. All
agree that in the person and ministry of Jesus the reign of God has already arrived even though its full realization lies in the future. In the last
analysis, it must await the second coming.
The three synoptic gospels all teach that Christian conversion demands
an interiorization of ones commitment to God. That interiorization carries one beyond all forms of superficial religious ritualism and legalism.
All agree that obedience to God in the image of Jesus incorporates one
into Gods family. Moreover, one finds in the synoptic tradition broad
agreement about the moral conditions for life in the kingdom.
The synoptic Jesus embodies unconditioned trust of the Father and
requires the same trust of His disciples. Those who trust God live in
confidence of His providential care of them. That trust frees one to share
ones possessions, the physical supports of ones life with others. It rules
out all forms of covetousness as well as the actual amassing of wealth.
The unconditioned character of Christian trust comes to practical expression in two ways. Because sharing with others expresses trust, unconditioned trust demands unconditioned sharing in this sense: one shares
on the basis of need and not of merit only. As a consequence, Christian
sharing reaches out to sinners, to the poor, to the marginal, to the expendable, even to ones enemies. It seeks to include them all in the family
of God. Such sharing universalizes Christian mercy and charity. The most
radical expression of unconditioned trust in God finds practical embodiment in love of enemies and in ones willingness to lay down ones life for
Jesus and for the gospel. All three synoptic writers assert that witness to
Jesus draws one inevitably into His passion.
The synoptic gospels also agree that one can never found the reign of
God on law and coercive violence in the manner of the kingdoms of this
world. As a consequence, membership in the kingdom commits one to
humble, self-effacing, mutual service in the image of a servant messiah.
Authentic worship of the Father provides the only sound basis for building Gods kingdom on earth. The synoptic gospels, moreover, suggest
two practical tests of the authenticity of prayer. One cannot pray authentically while simultaneously oppressing the poor. Nor can one pray authentically without forgiving others as God forgives us. That forgiveness
includes love of enemies. Moreover, of the three synoptic evangelists, Luke
insists most on the fact that love of enemies commits one to the same
non-violent, prophetic opposition to evil as Jesus Himself practiced.
558
In all the synoptic gospels, the kingdom has an eschatological dimension: the kingdom has already arrived in Jesus and in the paschal mystery;
but it will arrive in the plentitude of divine power only at the second
coming. In the meantime, one can expect that both cataclysm and persecution will punctuate the history of the Christian community. Even in
the midst of suffering and persecution, however, Christians continue to
long for the second coming as the vindication of their faithful service of
the risen Lord. Eschatological faith also demands that one live ready at
any time to confront the Son of Man. Readiness means the practical living of the gospel.
All three synoptic gospels insist that Christians, and especially Christian leaders, must never ape the oppressive ways of Gentile tyrants. Of
the three, however, Matthew shows the greatest concern to summon
Christian leaders to repent of the sin of clericalism. As an antidote to
clericalism, Matthew calls the Christian community, and especially its
leaders, back to the egalitarian vision of Jesus in which the least important and most vulnerable hold the places of greatest honor.
Each synoptic evangelist stresses different aspects of this utopian moral
and religious vision. Mark insists on its eschatological dimensions. He
portrays the kingdom as both hidden and manifest, as both realized and
still to come. Moreover, Mark looks to God finally to make the kingdom
a reality: it continues to spread, even when those who sow the seed of
faith sleep.
Matthew portrays the kingdom as fulfilling the Law and the prophets.
By that the evangelist means that Jesus utopian vision of the kingdom
provides the correct lens for reading the true intent of Torah piety. He
also means that the kingdom demands more, not less, than the Law ever
did because it transforms negative precepts of Torah piety into more demanding religious and moral ideals.
Of the three synoptics, Luke places greatest narrative insistence on the
fact that the kingdom effects the messianic reversal of values. His journey
discourse stresses especially care for the poor, eschatological readiness,
faith, prayer, divine forgiveness, the sacrifices of discipleship, and its missionary character.
In all three synoptic gospels the crowds function as the backdrop of
Jesus ministry. All three synoptic evangelists use the parabolic discourse
in order to contrast the unbelief of the crowds with the faith of the disciples; all three synoptic evangelists also use the very ambivalence of the
crowds toward Jesus in order to foreshadow the masses of people ripe for
conversion to Jesus. The synoptic Jesus, moreover, models for the disciples the way in which they too must relate to the crowds. Despite the
crowds confusion and failure finally to understand Jesus true identity
and message, Jesus Himself never wavers in His compassion and pastoral
559
concern for them. He teaches them tirelessly. He heals them and delivers
them from the power of Satan. He summons them to share His gentle
yoke. Christians in proclaiming the gospel need to approach unbelievers as Jesus approached the unbelieving crowds. In their capacity for conversion, the crowds foreshadow the Christian family of God, whom Jesus
feeds eucharistically on the bread of wisdom.
In Matthew and in Luke especially, the unbelief of the crowds challenges the disciples to evangelical witness. In Matthew, the disciples mission to the lost sheep of the house of Israel foreshadows the great universal commission which ends his gospel. Even Matthews polemic against
the Pharisees has in the end an evangelical thrust. Matthew desires the
first Israel to recognize that in calling for Christs blood they in fact called
down upon themselves the atoning blood of divine forgiveness.
In Luke, the trust and forgiveness with which Jesus dies moves the
hostile crowds to repentance. Lukes Jesus addresses the crowds as well as
the disciples in His eschatological discourse: all stand under the same
divine judgment. All must live in readiness for the second coming. Moreover, Luke places more narrative insistence on the fact that all disciples
share in the prophetic ministry of proclaiming Jesus to the whole world.
Their faith must light unbelievers into the household of the faith.
This section has reflected on the utopian vision of faith to which the
synoptic gospels bind believers. The section which follows reflects on the
way in which the analogy of Christological knowing engages contemporary Christians. It argues that a sound insight into Christological knowing makes imagination and narrative forms of thinking central and constitutive to the Christian formation of conscience.1
(IV)
This section of the present chapter reflects on the ways in which the kind
of Christological knowing which synoptic narrative promotes has the
capacity to heal, perfect, and elevate the natural workings of the human
conscience. In the course of this chapter I shall develop the following
theses:
1) Christological knowing engages the entire person.
2) Christological knowing commits one to embodying Jesus utopian
vision of Gods kingdom.
3) The utopian character of the kingdom demands that Christians practice a morality of ideals.
4) In a Christian melioristic morality of ideals, the creative imagination mediates between utopian moral ideals and given reality.
1. Cf. William C. Spohn, Parable and Narrative in Christian Ethics, Theological Studies,
51(1990), pp. 100-114; John Langan, S.J., The Christian Difference in Ethics,
Theological Studies, 49(1988), pp. 131-150.
560
5) The religious character of the Christian ideal of the kingdom as well

as the graced character of Christian living together demand that the illumination of Gods Breath suffuse and transform Christian practice.
6) Communities grow in Christological knowing through shared faith
consciousness; individuals grow in Christological knowing through sharing in and contributing to that shared faith consciousness.
Let us consider each of these theses in turn.
1) Christological knowing engages the entire person.
As we have just seen, synoptic Christological knowing presupposes a context of faith. It summons one to recognize in Jesus the human embodiment of God who models for us the kind of relationship to the Father to
which we are called in faith. The illumination and empowerment of the
divine Breath conforms us to Jesus in two ways. First of all, She frees us to
live together the religious vision which He lived and proclaimed. Second,
through Her charisms she transforms us into a prophetic community
who proclaims Christ to the world.
Christians, then, relate in faith differently to Father, Son, and Breath.
They relate to the Father as the ultimate source and goal of human salvation. They relate to the Son as the one who reveals the Father and mediates the Breath. They relate to the Holy Breath as a source of conversion,
sanctifying enlightenment, and charismatic empowerment. She teaches
us to know who Jesus is by conforming us to Him. She conforms us to
Him by drawing us into His Abba experience.
This threefold relationship to each of the divine persons engages every
aspect of the human person. It springs from justifying faith, from the
passage from unbelief to belief in the God revealed historically in Jesus
and in His sanctifying Breath. It orients the human self to the reality of
the triune God. By focusing the entire person on the saving reality of
God, Christian faith elevates the human conscience.
Faith in the triune God engages the affections because it demands repentance as its precondition. Synoptic Christology makes it clear that the
failure to repent transforms self-professed religious people into hypocrites.
One may pretend to believe in God all one wants; but, unless one confronts personal shame and guilt, the fear which causes one to avoid confronting God, and the inner rage which fuels ones capacity for violence,
all religious posturing betrays one into lying to oneself, to others, and to
God.
One must face and renounce not only disordered personal passions but
also the human institutionalizations of neurosis and psychosis which breed
disordered passions. One must renounce all forms of bigotry which teach
the human heart to hate the Others: racism, sexism, classism, chauvinism, religious prejudice. The three synoptic evangelists rebuke all these
561
attitudes. Repentance requires us also to abjure the paranoia embodied in

militarism and other forms of social defensiveness. In contemporary
America institutionalized fear and violence have fueled the cold war and
have turned not only our streets but even our schools into armed camps.
Repentance also demands that we acknowledge and bring to healing the
self-loathing and guilt born of dysfunctional familial and social relationships.
Repentance begins in the heart, but it engages the conscience as well;
for disordered passions transform themselves into disordered choices; and
disordered choices which contradict the will of God count as sin. Moreover, in the confrontation with passional disorders, Christian repentance
requires us to face and renounce not only personal sins but the corrupting influence of social sin as well.
The Christological knowing born of justifying faith engages the human intelligence because it presupposes a context of faith, of religious
belief. Faith demands that we see the world through Gods eyes. Seeing
the world through Gods eyes means in turn affirming and proclaiming
the divine reality made visible in Jesus and in His indwelling Breath. We
see the world with Gods eyes when we can both imagine and explain it
incarnationally. We perceive reality incarnationally when we discover God
personally embodied in Jesus and corporately embodied in the community created by His indwelling Breath.
As conversion and justifying faith heal the human heart, they inspire
theological hope. As they inform the mind, they inspire theological faith.
As they transform the conscience, they inspire charity and the Christian
search for justice.
The theological virtue of faith engages both intuitive and rational forms
of thought by demanding that both kinds of thinking acknowledge the
historical truth of a self-revealing God. Theological faith also demands
that we abjure all personal prejudices and social ideologies which blind
the human heart to that reality.
Theological faith takes two forms: the shared faith of the Christian
community and the personal faith of its members. The former nurtures
personal faith to adult maturity. Adult personal faith contributes to and
enhances the shared faith of the Church through personal holiness and
charismatic witness.
The Christological knowing engendered by justifying faith transforms
one practically. It demands that one live in Jesus image. It therefore also
engages the Christian conscience.
Because the human conscience develops in social dialogue with other
persons and with the institutions which persons embody, it struggles with
two kinds of moral questions. When the conscience ponders the rights
and duties of other persons, it raises questions of personal morality. When
562
the human conscience seeks to create a social order in which all can readily
contribute to and benefit from the common good, the conscience raises
questions of public morality.
The Christological knowing which results from justifying faith demands
that one resolve questions of personal and public morality in the light of
the realities and ideals which Jesus lived and proclaimed. It therefore also
demands that one repudiate as sinful and unjust any human actions and
institutional arrangements which contradict both that reality and those
ideals.
As Christological knowing conforms us to the pattern of Jesus sinless
obedience to the Father, it heals us. Christological knowing also teaches
us to transcend our natural limitations by universalizing human love and
the graced hope from which Christian charity springs. Christian faith in
turn affirms and embodies that same universal commitment. In all these
ways, Christological knowing perfects human nature.
2) Christological knowing commits one to embodying
Jesus utopian vision of Gods kingdom.
Jesus of Nazareth would have found any pretense to religious commitment which separates faith from issues of both personal and public morality hypocritical. The vision of the kingdom which He embodied and
proclaimed addresses directly both kinds of religious and moral practice.
Jesus did not teach a rational ethics. Enlightenment rationalists who
try to depict Jesus as another Socrates, as a philosopher of prudential
morality, replace the reality of Jesus with shallow lies about Him. Jesus
did proclaim a moral vision; but it did not rest on natural prudential
reason. Jesus proclaimed a morality of faith. His moral vision gave concrete, practical meaning to His relationship to the Father in faith. He
called that vision the reign of God.
The reign of God which Jesus proclaimed has a utopian character. It
holds up the ideal of a certain kind of religious community; but even
those who espouse it have never lived it perfectly. As a consequence, the
vision of the kingdom lures and enraptures the corporate and personal
consciences of Christians at the same time that it stands in judgment
upon their sins and shortcomings.
The utopian character of the kingdom could easily tempt the human
heart to dismiss it as irrelevant to the real world as we know it. If after
centuries of trying, Christians have never succeeded perfectly in living
the religious ideals they espouse, then why keep trying?
I know of only one answer to that question. The context of faith within
which we discover Gods reign revealed transforms abandoning the ideal
of the kingdom into sin. Because Jesus confronts us as the very reality of
God in human form, His utterly unique, historically particular religious
563
vision reveals to us more perfectly than any other moral or religious vision the saving mind of God. Jesus Himself never swerved from that
vision even though it led Him to Calvary. Moreover, as the New Testament insists, His fidelity even to death in proclaiming Gods reign revealed the perfection of His sinlessness.
For the Christian conscience, then, anything which deviates from or
contradicts the kingdom counts as sin. Its historical proclamation by Gods
only Son therefore endows the utopian religious vision of the kingdom
with moral ultimacy and with moral absoluteness. Something claims us
with moral ultimacy when it requires that we not only live for it but, if
necessary, die for it. It claims us with moral absoluteness when it binds us
in all the circumstances of our lives. By summoning believers to martyrdom, if necessary, synoptic narrative Christology leaves no doubt about
the absolute and ultimate claims which the vision of the kingdom makes
on the Christian conscience.
3) The utopian character of the kingdom demands that
Christians practice a melioristic morality of ideals.
Because Christological knowing commits one with moral absoluteness
and ultimacy to living the utopian vision of the kingdom, it requires of
believers a certain kind of moral idealism. The moral ideal of Gods kingdom calls the disciples of Jesus beyond all forms of conventional wisdom
and morality, beyond the equation of morality with law and order, beyond any mere rational ethic, and beyond all natural law morality.
In all the synoptic gospels the Pharisees symbolize conventional religion and morality. The fact that the Pharisees refuse to move beyond
received attitudes, beyond received human wisdom, beyond received faith,
and beyond received morality blinds them to the utterly new reality which
Jesus embodies. Synoptic Christology leaves no doubt about the fact that
the refusal to recognize the radical novelty of the kingdom and to abide
by its moral demands transforms religious faith into religious hypocrisy.
Conventional wisdom takes different forms: affective, intellectual, moral,
and institutional. The divine reality incarnate in Jesus and in His vision
of the kingdom poses an intransigent challenge to all four forms of conventional wisdom. It calls us beyond the personal and institutional neurosis and psychosis which suffuse human relationships and institutions
with sinful injustice, violence, and oppression. It calls us beyond religious prejudices which refuse to see in Jesus the very embodiment of God
and to acknowledge His power to forgive sin. It warns us that the refusal
to see the Breath-inspired word of God in Jesus ministry and message
betrays one into Breath-blasphemy. As the gospel of Matthew teaches,
the divine reality incarnate in Jesus and in His vision of the kingdom
564
fulfills all other forms of personal and public morality by demanding

more than they do, not less.
Moreover, the very utopian character of the kingdom grounds the
kingdoms ability to fulfill other forms of morality. The kingdom confronts us as an ideal which continually challenges any purely rational or
natural moral arrangement by demanding that we re-evaluate all natural
prudential choices in the light of the moral demands of Christian faith.
That same ideal simultaneously challenges those who espouse it to live
what they espouse ever more perfectly.
The kingdom calls us beyond a law-and-order morality whether that
morality enjoys either purely prudential or religious sanction. Law and
order morality gives institutional embodiment to conventional moral
wisdom; and conventional moral wisdom mixes responsibility with irresponsibility, moral wisdom and moral folly. Even the briefest reflection
on the laws delays and on the insolence of office teaches that truth eloquently enough.
In the synoptic gospels, intransigent adherence to law-and-order morality suffuses Pharisaical piety with a self-righteous judgmentalism which
contradicts the most fundamental moral demands of the kingdom.
Self-righteousness commits one to a campaign of religious self-justification
instead of humbly accepting as pure gift the divine forgiveness incarnate
in Jesus. Because law-and-order morality commits one to the defense of
the status quo, it cannot submit to the novel moral demands of the kingdom. As a consequence, those who choose to adhere to a morality of law
and order instead of submitting to the kingdom transform that
pseudo-morality into sin. On this point, narrative synoptic Christology
leaves no doubt whatever.
The utopian vision of the kingdom also calls one beyond all natural
law morality. All moral decision making must, of course, take account of
the laws operative in concrete moral situations. The commitment to moral
living presupposes epistemological realism. As a consequence, judgments
of conscience which ignore the developing laws which govern events transform moral utopias into irrelevant pipe dreams.
Nevertheless, the vision of the kingdom calls us beyond natural law
morality because it demands that we re-evaluate all natural moral judgments in the light of the practical demands of Christian faith. In what
concerns this life, the utopian vision of the kingdom articulates those
practical demands.
Moreover, when natural law theory grounds itself in the essence fallacy
it promotes the same kind of moral conservatism as the law-and-order
conscience. The essence fallacy reifies abstract essences as principles of
being and then uses their essential immutability in order to justify an
ethics of conformity and of conservatism. When one fallaciously equates
565
the natural laws inherent in things with fixed and immutable essences,
then morality consists in conforming to what one already is naturally.
The vision of the kingdom, however, demands not conformity to the
given but its creative transformation in faith. It therefore fulfills an
essentialistic, natural-law ethic in Matthews sense of the term fulfillment. It demands far more than any pseudo-ethics of natural conformity might require.
The vision of the kingdom redefines, then, the meaning of sin. We sin
when we choose evil in the sight of God. The Christian conscience needs
to regard as sin whatever contradicts the kingdom. In this sense the utopian vision of the kingdom stands in judgment on the human conscience.
The Christian conscience also needs to view as moral and religious imperfection anything which falls short of the kingdom. In this sense the
vision of the kingdom lures the Christian conscience to ever more perfect
embodiment.
4) In a Christian melioristic morality of ideals, the creative imagination
mediates between utopian moral ideals and given reality.
Utopian ideals which make absolute and ultimate claims orient the conscience toward its ultimate moral and religious goals. Those goals lure the
conscience by their excellence at the same time that they judge the concrete decisions which the conscience sanctions. Utopian morality challenges the conscience to bridge the gap melioristically between those ultimate aims and reality as given. It challenges the conscience, in other
words, to transform given reality so that it better approximates the ultimate ideals and realities to which one has committed ones life.
The Jesus of the synoptics preaches a demanding utopian morality; but
he never demands of His followers instant perfection. On the contrary, as
I suggested above, Jesus preaches a spirituality and religious morality of
the off day. He always assumes the sinfulness and imperfection of the
people he confronts, including His own disciples; but neither sin nor
imperfection prompts Him to abandon them. Instead, He never ceases
to challenge them to do better. Utopian morality invites constant moral
growth. It never rests satisfied with the given; because the given always
falls short of the ideal. Nevertheless, as a morality of the off day, a
melioristic utopianism deals patiently and lovingly with human limitations and frailty. Legalism, rigorism, perfectionism all contradict the patience and compassion which Jesus embodies, as the stories of His conflicts with the Pharisees make abundantly clear. In other words, a
melioristic utopian morality of ideals gives rise to an ethics of process and
of ongoing development. At the same time, among the ideals which the
kingdom inculcates, one must include both ongoing repentance of Phari-
566
saical perfectionism and the frank and honest confession of ones imperfection and sinfulness before a forgiving God.
The correct formation of a conscience committed to an utopian morality demands first of all that one never lie to oneself or in any way water
down the ideals to which one stands committed in principle. When Christians substitute some other form of morality for the kingdom they do
precisely that.
The results of developmental psychology suggest that the majority of
Americans function at the level of conventional morality and religion.
Since one cannot endorse conventional values and live a fully responsible
life, it follows that the majority of Americans live morally and religiously
unconverted lives. Morally unconverted Americans tend to substitute for
Christian morality an ethically compromised law-and-order ethics. I say
ethically compromised for no legal system incarnates ultimate moral
perfection. Catholic Christians have in the past all too often replaced the
demands of Christian discipleship with a kind of Stoic, natural law morality. Evangelical Protestant Christians have often tended to replace a
New Testament utopian morality with the ten commandments or with
fundamentalistic moral rigorism. In this country, self-righteous, conservative, religious fundamentalists hypocritically find militaristic, right wing
politics completely congenial. That should come as no surprise, since the
New Testament warns repeatedly that religious self-righteousness masks
unrepented violence of heart. Liberal Protestants have tended to replace a
Christian utopian morality with some version of rationalistic, Enlightenment morality.
When one lies to oneself about the ideals to which one stands absolutely and ultimately committed as a Christian, one replaces Gods purposes with some inadequate human moral scheme. In making the substitution, one lies to oneself and to others about the moral conditions for
salvation. In other words, one transforms oneself, in Jesus words, into a
pretender, a hypocrite. By salvation I mean standing in a life-giving relationship with God.
As we saw in the preceding section, the vision of the kingdom holds up
to the disciples of Jesus an ideal of a certain kind of community of faith.
Christian faith demands a practical trust in Gods providential care for
human communities and for the individuals who make them up. That
trust frees one to share ones bread, the physical supports of ones life
with others. Since the amassing of wealth deprives the poor of what rightfully belongs to them, Christian faith demands the renunciation of greed,
cupidity, and fortune building. It commits one to building a community
of faith which provides for the needs of all, especially the poor, the marginal, the expendable. Christian sharing includes both unbelievers and
heretics in its practical concern. It also includes ones enemies; for the
567
sharing which Christian faith demands seeks to express the universal forgiveness and mercy of God revealed and embodied in Jesus. Christian
faith seeks, then, to create a genuinely universal community, one so universal that it encompasses finally the entire human race. Because the goods
which the Christian community can share include the divine Breaths
inspirations, faith also requires that one also share in community Her
charismatic promptings.
If the realistic functioning of the Christian conscience demands that
one never lie to oneself about the utopian moral and religious ideals to
which both communities and individuals stand absolutely and ultimately
committed, moral realism also demands that one never lie to oneself about
the nature of the moral situation which one confronts. Situations take on
a moral character when they engage ideals, values, and realities which
make ultimate and absolute claims.
In judging a moral situation realistically, one must first appreciate the
genuine values and goods it embodies. The human heart cannot, however, appreciate realistically threatening moral situations until it faces their
threat. Threatening situations tend to evoke from us negative responses
of fear, shame, guilt, or rage. Until one allows such feelings to surface
consciously and puts them in their proper realistic and moral perspective, one tends to project them inappropriately on present reality. As a
consequence, one finds it difficult to perceive accurately the genuinely
valuable aspects of the persons and realities which summon up emotional
ghosts from the past. Negative emotions function cognitively like negative judgments. Repressed negative emotions tend to function like cognitive blinders. Ghosts from the past stand between us and reality. They
blur our vision.
The need to face the negative feelings which new and challenging moral
situations evoke from us demands ongoing repentance. Faith transforms
affective conversion into repentance. Affective conversion commits us to
the ongoing cultivation of healthy and realistic emotional responses to
reality. Ongoing repentance commits us to the same enterprise in faith
and in discerning responsiveness to the inspirations of Gods Holy Breath.
The experience of ongoing repentance frees one to appreciate what is
genuinely good and valuable in the persons and situations which pose
ethical and religious challenges. In appreciating situations of personal
and social conflict, the Christian conscience sincerely tries to understand
all the sides of any dispute.
The current debate over abortion illustrates what I am saying. Those
who use physical violence to oppose abortion by attacking or even by
seeking to assassinate those who work at abortion clinics give good evidence of having failed to face their own violence of heart. Even if one
opposes abortion on demand and supports the right to life (as I do per-
568
sonally), one needs to understand the medical facts about human conception as well as the ways in which they might nuance ones moral judgments about this complex issue. Abortion opponents also need to understand the legitimate human and moral concerns which might motivate
one to take a pro-choice stance. One also needs to appreciate the positions of those who oppose abortion personally but support honestly
pro-choice legislation, even if one finally chooses to disagree with the
positions some people take. Experience has shown that the failure to understand or appreciate the legitimate needs and moral concerns of others
transforms pro-life opposition to abortion into a kind of self-righteous
moral fundamentalism which has little to do with Christian love and
compassion. On the contrary, it can exemplify precisely the kind of Christian rigorism which according to the gospels excludes one from the kingdom of God and which the synoptic evangelists stigmatize as Pharisaism.
Having appreciated the good and valuable aspects of a conflicted moral
situation, one then needs to regret those aspects of the situation which
either contradict or fall short of the ideal to which one is called in Christ.
Contradictions demand reversal. As a Christian, one can never consent
to murder, rape, child abuse, or any other serious violation of human
rights and of gospel living.
Merely reversing sinful contradictions so that they conform to the demands of gospel living fails, however, to satisfy fully the demands of a
Christian morality of ideals. One must also regret the imperfections in a
given moral situation. By imperfections, I mean the ways in which the
situation falls needlessly short of the ideal of the kingdom to which Christian faith commits the believing disciple.
Having renounced those things which contradict the practical demands
of gospel living and having regretted those aspects of the situation which
fall short of the gospel ideal, one must then use ones imagination in
prayer and in faith in order to advance the situation creatively the next
possible step toward the gospel ideal. In any conflicted moral situation of
any complexity one will probably fall short of achieving the ideal; but
commitment to a melioristic ethics of ideals demands that one make every effort to improve the situation compassionately and patiently until it
better approximates the ideal.
Economic Justice for All, the pastoral letter of the National Catholic
Conference of Bishops on the United States economy, illustrates well how
a utopian Christian morality works.
First of all, the bishops letter dramatizes the fact that the Christian
conscience works corporately and ecclesially. It commits one to social
dialogue with people of every kind of relevant opinion, even when those
opinions conflict or contradict ones own and one another. The extensive
public hearings which the drafting committee held on the economy to-
569
gether with the public discussion of the different drafts of the letter exemplify the kind of dialogue which an appreciative Christian morality
demands.
Having made a sincere effort to get their facts straight and to hear all
sides of a disputed moral question, the bishops in approaching the American economy first appreciated its strengths and achievements. The bishops then discussed those aspects of the kingdom which relate directly to
economic morality. From the ideal of the kingdom the bishops derived
moral principles which would serve to guide their ethical choices.
Preferential option for the poor exemplifies one such moral principle.
The bishops concluded quite correctly that in the moral assessment of
economic policies the gospel requires us to measure their ethical consequences from the standpoint of the most economically vulnerable members of society. Anyone who claims to follow Jesus must do the same or
stand judged before God as a moral and religious hypocrite.
A preferential option for the poor sets one in direct conflict with the
most aggressive aspects of an aggressive, predatory capitalism and its
manifold institutionalizations of manipulative and aggressive greed. In
its less corrupt and more humane expressions, capitalism gives top priority to the good of employees, second priority to quality of product, and
third priority to turning a profit. Economic leaders who cannot see beyond the need to maximize profits overlook not only the needs of the
poor but also of their own employees. Blind to any notion of common
good, they end by grinding to pieces the little people, the anawim for
whom God especially cares, in the impersonal machinery of an exploitative free-market economy. In a capitalistic market place, only the rich
enjoy freedom to manipulate the economic system to their own advantage. In the Third World, transnational corporations have transformed
this kind of oppression into a fine art which hides hypocritically behind
the mask of respectability.
The bishops derived from reflection on the gospel another fundamental moral principle relevant to economic morality: namely, the responsibility of federal and state governments to care for the common good by
seeing to it that all citizens can contribute adequately to and benefit from
the goods which our society furnishes. The gospel requires that we serve
one another rather than lord it over one another in acts of legal and physical
oppression. A government which serves its people seeks to realize the
common good of all.
Having derived from the vision of the kingdom moral principles to
guide United States economic policy, the bishops next regretted those
aspects of the American economy which fall short of the religious ideals
and moral principles which they had enunciated. The bishops then used
their imaginations to suggest policies which promised to remedy the eco-
570
nomic injustices which trickle-down economics had spawned. Trickle

down economics promised that one could increase national revenues by
cutting taxes. The promise never materialized. Nothing trickled down
except the self-serving indifference of the rich to the suffering of the poor.
As the rich got richer, the poor ended on the streets. Those just above the
poverty line sank below it. The middle class began to dwindle. The economic policies enunciated in Economic Justice for All sought to reverse all
of these manifest injustices and to mend the critical rents in the economic safety net which trickle-down theory had torn. The so-called Contract with America concocted in right-wing think tanks would for all
practical purposes have removed the federal safety net altogether without
the sure promise of replacing it with anything but tax breaks to swell the
coffers of the rich.
Finally, the bishops then left it to committed Christians to use their
creative imaginations in order to formulate strategies which would transform the policies which they had suggested into realities. They also allowed for the modification of those policies in ways which conform to
the ideals and principles which they enunciated.
I have been arguing that Economic Justice for All illustrates the contribution which the creative imagination makes to the formation of the
conscience when a progressive Christian ethics of ideals confronts questions of public morality. I have described a seven stage process of moral
decision making:
1) One needs to get the facts of the moral situation straight by open
dialogue with all of those concerned, including with those with whom
one disagrees and who may disagree with one another.
2) To the extent that one can, one needs to reach a repentant appreciation of the genuine values ingredient in the situation one faces and in all
the viewpoints involved.
3) One needs to articulate the religious and moral ideals to which gospel living calls the disciples of Jesus.
4) From gospel ideals, one needs to derive moral principles relevant to
the conflicted moral situation one faces.
5) One needs to regret whatever in the situation either contradicts or
falls short of the ideal of the kingdom and of the principles it grounds.
6) One then needs to use ones imagination creatively in faith in order
to formulate policies a) which will reverse those factors of the situation
which contradict the gospel and b) which will advance the situation the
next possible step toward the ideal of the kingdom.
7) In addition, one needs to use ones creative imagination discerningly
and in faith in order to devise strategies which will transform policies
into realities. In volume three, I shall reflect further on the ways in which
571
commitment to Jesus as the incarnation of God influences imaginative

judgments of conscience.
In questions of personal morality, one can often dispense with stage
six. Policies shape institutional morality but need not function in a significant way in interpersonal moral conflicts.
In both personal and public morality, however, a Christian ethics of
ideals requires two kinds of choices. One must choose between good and
evil when aspects of the situation contradict gospel living. One must,
however, also choose between good and better as one struggles concretely
to advance a moral situation which falls needlessly short of the ideal of
the kingdom the next possible step toward embodying that ideal.
In many respects, the choice between good and better poses the more
complicated moral challenge because it engages human generosity. The
greater the generosity which Christians bring to the moral enterprise the
greater their likelihood of embodying something like the gospel ideal to
which the kingdom calls us corporately and personally. Moreover, the
Jesus of the synoptics promises that greater generosity will yield greater
growth and greater reward.
5) The religious character of the Christian ideal of the kingdom and the
graced character of all Christian living together demand that the action of
Gods Breath suffuse and transform Christian practice.
In this chapter I am not only arguing for the inherently practical character of Christological knowing; but I am also attempting to draw upon
synoptic narrative Christology in order to endow the idea of Christological knowing with operational specificity and concreteness. We clarify
the meaning of any idea when we grasp its operational consequences,
whether those consequences engage conceptual activity or practical decision.
I have also attempted to show that the idealism inherent in Christological knowing engages the creative imagination and commits one to an
ethic of personal and social transformation. I have suggested that when
imaginative creativity functions within Christological knowing, it must
always transpire in faith. The time has come to attempt to endow the
phrase in faith with greater operational clarity. The phrase designates
not so much what one chooses as the way in which one goes about the
process of choosing. One makes moral decisions in faith when one seeks
the guidance of the Breath of the risen Christ at every stage of the process
of utopian, melioristic, moral deliberation. Prayer and ongoing dialogue
with a discerning community of faith must shape and guide ones deliberations and decisions. An ethical decision reached in faith transforms
natural human prudence into discernment.
572
Prudential thinking engages imagination and feeling. So does prudential thinking informed by charismatic docility to the Breath of Christ.
The use of the creative moral imagination in order to bridge the gap
between ethical ideals and given reality demands that one deal with conflicted ethical situations in all of their concreteness and specific orientations. The moral imagination gropes its way deliberatively to a sense of
the fitting moral response demanded by specific moral circumstances.
We deliberate when we ponder mutually exclusive interpretative, practical, or moral options.
Despite its often nominalistic presuppositions, Christian casuistry exemplifies in its own way how the moral imagination wrestles with concreteness. Casuistry begins with a relatively simple moral situation which
it gradually complexifies by adding modifying conditions. The issue of
abortion can again serve as an example. A casuist might conclude rather
quickly to the immorality of abortion on demand but then ask: what if a
woman has been raped? Might the fact of rape justify abortion in a specific instance? What if the raped woman was also mentally deficient and
incapable of raising a child? What if childbearing put her own life at risk?
How serious must the risk be before it might justify an abortion? And so
forth.
A Christian ethics of the fitting deals, as we have seen, with more than
the choice between good and evil. Because it also deals with human limitation and imperfection, it must also choose between good and good,
between good and better, between good and less good.
The creative, imaginative, intuitive character of Christian moral reasoning makes it more susceptible to graced transformation in the Breath
of Christ. Rational deduction and induction endow human evaluative
responses with greater precision; but these forms of reasoning buy precision at the price of tight rational control. One can learn to reason prayerfully, but it takes self-knowledge and considerable familiarity with God.
Left to itself, the controlled character of rational thinking encourages
natural human self-reliance rather than prayerful docility to the Breath of
Christ.
Imaginative, intuitive thinking grasps the same realities as the rational
mind. The right image may on occasion endow the intuitive grasp of the
real with a remarkable precision, although the conceptual precision of an
image differs from logical precision. It differs because images mean through
connotation and free association rather than through controlled logical
definition.
Creative thinking never follows logical rules. Even creative rational
thinking advances intuitively rather than through rational control. It does
so by balancing alternatives prudentially. Logic has no rules for telling
the scientific mind how to come up with the right explanatory hypoth-
573
esis. Instead, in confronting an unanswered scientific question, the scientific mind needs to play imaginatively with the relevant data and with
contrasting explanations of that data in order to leap intuitively to the
right hypothetical explanation. The educated scientific mind knows the
wisdom of following its best hunches.
The fact that imaginative thinking advances without tight rational control entails its openness to novel possibility. As a consequence, imaginative thinking develops in obediential openness to Gods touch and guidance. That openness helps explain the spontaneous affinity between religious insight and intuitive forms of thinking like poetry, prophecy, story,
ritual.
A Christian morality of ideals engages the human creative imagination
in transforming sinful and imperfect human situations into social arrangements which better approximate the ideal of the kingdom. It therefore invokes a kind of thinking which possesses a natural obediential susceptibility to graced transvaluation in faith. The Christian consciences
transvaluation in faith suffuses it with the discerning enlightenment of
the Breath of the risen Christ.
6) Communities grow in Christological knowing through shared faith consciousness; individuals grow in Christological knowing through sharing in
and contributing to shared faith.
Christological knowing has an inherently practical character, for it conforms one morally and religiously to Jesus. Since Christological knowing
exemplifies Christian faith, that faith has an inherently practical character. Personal faith which exemplifies Christological knowing advances
under the guidance and charismatic inspiration of the Breath of the risen
Christ. All the more, then must the shared faith of the Church exhibit
the same two constitutive characteristics of practicality and charismatic
inspiration, since the shared faith of the Church nurtures personal faith
and is enhanced by it.
Communities like the Church grow in consciousness differently from
individuals. Individuals grow in consciousness by making distinctions
and by grasping relationships among consciously distinguished realities.
We experience these basic cognitive activities every day of our waking
lives.
An example will illustrate what I mean. Once during a camping trip in
Kings Canyon, a friend of mine identified the Oregon junco. He made
the identification in my presence. When I returned to Berkeley I found it
suddenly full of Oregon juncos. The birds had always lived there, of course,
but I had not seen them because I could not distinguish them from sparrows. Once I could, I saw them consciously as juncos.
574
Once we raise things to consciousness by making distinctions, we can

begin to explore their relationship to other realities. That exploration
further enhances our conscious grasp of their significance. Having identified the junco as a genus of bird, I began, for example, to explore the
analogies between an Oregon junco and other kinds of junco.
Communities come to consciousness by much more complex conceptual processes. Small communities like families or groups of friends grow
in shared consciousness through directly shared experiences. In large, historical communities, especially in a world-wide, historical community
like the Church, its members cannot all share the same experiences directly. As a consequence, larger, enduring communities come to shared
consciousness by more complex social processes of interpretation.
Large historical communities achieve a sense of self-identity by reaching a consensus about the meaning of the event which founds them. That
consensus seeks to interpret both the founding event itself and the history which links the community to it. As in the case of any developing
reality, a communitys history defines its essence, what it is. The reappropriation of the past creates a shared sense of identity among the
communitys members.
Communities emerge from a specific past. They also aspire toward a
future. As a consequence, communities cannot achieve full shared consciousness until they also reach a consensus about their ultimate and proximate goals. Ultimate goals endow a communitys future with its defining
purpose. Proximate goals seek to advance the community toward the realization of that purpose.
The achievement of shared consciousness, however, also engages decision. A community remains a mere discussion club until it mobilizes its
members practically to advance toward the ultimate goals to which it
stands corporately committed. Consensus about the past creates shared
memories. Consensus about the future creates shared hopes. The realization of the latter consensus creates shared lives.
Natural human communities reach shared consciousness by relying on
human insight and by collaboration untouched by religious faith. The
Christian community, however, comes into existence as a result of the
historical self-revelation of God in Jesus and in His divine Breath. As a
consequence, the Christian community can only come to shared consciousness in faith and in response to the Breaths enlightenment. As a
consequence, the sharing of the charisms of the Holy Breath create the
shared consciousness of the Christian community. Let us try to understand how this happens.
In the Church, conversion to Christ creates faith consciousness. As a
consequence, the Church will always need prophets and evangelists to
proclaim the gospel to it in a way which summons it to initial and ongo-
575
ing conversion. Gifts of prayer and of healing deepen and intensify the
Christian communitys sense of standing in a developing, efficacious, historical relationship with the God it proclaims. Through prayer and the
experience of healing in faith, we become present to the God who lives
present to us.
Christian teachers foster shared faith consciousness by recalling to the
Christian community its story. To this process of corporate recall, eucharistic worship together with the other sacraments make an important
contribution; but the corporate recall of the Christ event and of the history which links the living Church to it also involves the work of both
scholarly and pastoral theologians.
The work of Christian teachers endows the Christian community with
shared memories. The work of prophets and pastoral leaders, ordained or
not, endows it with shared hopes. Those endowed with a charism of leadership enable a community of shared faith to reach corporate decisions
about the concrete, immediate future to which God is calling it.
Not everyone teaches or leads with equal competence. As a consequence,
the achievement of a sound consensus about the meaning of the history
which defines the Churchs developing historical reality and about the
future to which God calls it engages the gift of discernment. The Christian community needs discerners in order to distinguish sound from unsound doctrine, grace-filled from disgraceful practice, a liberating Church
order from theologically rationalized ecclesiastical oppression.
Finally, the Church will never achieve shared consciousness in faith
without practical gifts of action. The Church needs pastors, community
organizers, almsgivers, and others inspired in faith by the Breath of God
to mobilize the Christian community to live out the gospel ideals to which
it stands corporately committed.
I have spoken of the dynamics of ecclesial growth in a shared faith
context. Here we need to know that it coincides with what I have called
Christological knowing. The Christ event defines the Churchs identity
initially and fundamentally. The history which links the Church to that
event tells the story of the extent to which the Church has developed in
fidelity to its founder or in contradiction of what Jesus embodied and
proclaimed. As a consequence, the whole of Christian doctrine and practice has a Christological foundation and develops according to Christological norms. Christian theology needs to articulate a doctrine of God,
an account of the incarnation, a doctrine of salvation, a sacramental doctrine, a doctrine of the Church, and a moral doctrine. Each of these areas
of theology has its own history, but each also must conform to basic
Christological norms.
A Christian doctrine of God explains the way in which the Christ event
stands in historical judgment on other human conceptions of the deity.
576
The Christ eventthe coming of Jesus, His glorification, and His sending of the divine Breathreveals the inner social life of the triune God.
Christology, therefore, reveals the trinity at the same time that the trinity
contextualizes Christology. As a consequence, Christology and trinitarian
theology must always develop in tandem; for one judges the orthodoxy
of trinitarian doctrine by its ability to advance the process of Christological knowing. Orthodox trinitarian doctrine advances the assimilation
of the Christian community to Jesus in the power of His Breath. Heterodox trinitarian doctrine does not.
Often by the term Christology, theologians mean a purely speculative account of the incarnation. Purely speculative logic, however, mires
theological thinking in a serious logical fallacy. It assumes dualistically
that thinking has no relationship to decision and to practice. In point of
fact, however, one cannot understand any reality, and especially not the
reality of God, without interacting with it. Nor can one understand either rationally or intuitively the meaning of any Christian doctrine until
one explicitates its practical consequences. One can, then, develop an
adequate doctrinal Christology, only if one replaces the a priori, deductive logic which has for so long dominated European theological thinking with a sound pragmatic logic of consequences. When one uses such a
logic to construct a Christology, it allows one to invoke practical Christological knowing as the norm of sound Christological doctrine. Those
Christological doctrines count as orthodox which advance the practical
assimilation of the Christian community to Jesus in the power of His
Breath. Those which fail that test count as heterodox.
By a doctrine of salvation, one normally means the way in which the
action of divine grace transforms human nature and unites it to the living, triune God. In a doctrine of salvation, then, nature and grace function as correlative terms. As a consequence, the interpretation of each of
these correlatives can either illumine or distort one another.
A sound understanding of human nature engages Christological faith;
for the incarnation redefines the meaning of the human by recreating it.
As we shall see in greater detail in volume three, sin diminishes, distorts,
and destroys the human. Humans do not lose all humanity when they
sin; but sinful humanity falls far short of the created perfection for which
God has destined it. As a consequence, any sound theological understanding of human nature invokes Christological knowing, which heals,
perfects, and elevates the human, as a norm for understanding the full,
graced potential of human nature.
Soteriology includes eschatology, of course. Eschatology projects the
ultimate shape of saved reality on the basis of a present experience of
being saved. Eschatological thinking presupposes, therefore, a normative
insight into the ultimate teleology of Christological knowing.
577
Sacramental theology applies the doctrine of salvation to Christian

worship. As a consequence, it examines the way in which shared worship
seeks to advance the process of Christological knowing. Because Christology seeks to offer a sound insight into the experience of Christological
knowing, every sacramental theology needs to rest on a sound Christological foundation. It judges as sound any sacramental doctrine which
advances Christological knowing and as unsound any sacramental doctrine which does not.
In the first instance, Christological knowing engages the entire Christian community. The Breath transforms believers corporately into the
image of Jesus through the sharing of the charisms. As a consequence,
Christological knowing also judges the orthodoxy or heterodoxy of ecclesiastical institutions. Only those Church institutions can claim legitimacy
which advance the process of shared and personal Christological knowing. Those which undermine it count as heterodox. Because ecclesiology
engages Christological knowing in normative ways, it too must rest on a
sound Christological foundation. Of the three synoptic evangelists, Matthew grasped this truth most profoundly.
Finally, a Christology which invokes a logic of consequences also serves
as the foundation of Christian moral practice, since the practical, moral
consequences of Christological faith clarify its very doctrinal meaning. In
other words, the process which I have called Christological knowing coincides with the Christian communitys growth in practical, shared faith
consciousness; and practical, shared faith consciousness provides the context within which individual believers also advance in Christological knowing. They experience conscious practical assimilation to Jesus in the power
of His Breath to the extent that they allow the shared faith of the Church
to nurture in them an ongoing, integral conversion to Christ. That conversion, however, culminates in their own charismatic anointing. When
the members of the Church share their charisms with others, they enhance the shared faith consciousness of the Church. The inherently practical character of Christological knowing necessarily entails the inherently practical character of shared and personal Christian faith. The practical character of Christian faith requires the doctrinal theologian to invoke a sound pragmatic logic of consequences which clarifies the relationship between doctrinal belief and Christian practice. The third volume of this study will develop this understanding of doctrinal Christology in a systematic way.
Relevance for the RCIA
This volume has studied synoptic narrative Christology for the practical
light which it throws on the meaning of Christological knowing. The
aims of the RCIA and Christological knowing coincide. Those who enter
578
the restored catechumenate ought to have already experienced an initial

conversion to Christ. They need, in other words, to have grasped and
interiorized the basic realistic and moral conditions for growing in the
knowledge of Jesus through practical assimilation to Him in the power of
His Breath. The catechumenate and the mystagogy which follows initiation both seek to advance such assimilation to the person of Jesus in
initially significant ways. In the end, of course, the project of Christological knowing encompasses a lifetime.
This volume presents a strategy for introducing catechumens to some
of the major Christological insights of the three synoptic gospels. That
strategy advances in two stages. First, it invites prayerful meditation on
each of the synoptic gospels as narrative wholes by pondering in prayer
the dramatic, thematic, and allusive linkages which structure and unify
each one as a story. Second, the strategy developed in this volume proposes a dynamic construct of Christian moral deliberation which exemplifies a practical plan for helping catechumens to integrate the intuitive
insights of synoptic narrative Christology into their conscientious reflection on the practical demands which gospel living makes upon them. As
catechumens interiorize the narrative message of the synoptic gospels and
apply it to their lives, they will advance in Christological knowing if they
look to the Breath of Christ to teach and inspire growth in faith. Their
progress will, moreover, exemplify the analogy of Christological knowing
enshrined literarily in the gospels, since the faith development of each
convert emerges from a different personal and historical context but converges on the same divine ideal incarnate in Jesus.
In the preceding chapters, I have not attempted to write a Christological catechesis for the restored catechumenate but to lay Christological
foundations for such a catechesis. Catechetical teams will need to apply
pastorally the preceding insights into synoptic narrative Christology and
into the practical dynamics of Christian conversion. That application
will require catechists to deal selectively with the materials made available
in this volume; but a basic mastery of those materials will enable any
catechetical team to select wisely and intelligently which narrative insights into the person and ministry of Jesus promise to advance a given
catechumens integral conversion to Christ.
Conclusion
In the course of this volume I have attempted to argue that synoptic
narrative Christology seeks to advance the process of Christological knowing. I have also attempted to endow the term Christological knowing
with greater conceptual precision by explicitating some of its principal
operational consequences.
579
The story of Jesus, when told from the standpoint of the paschal mystery, advances Christological knowing because it fosters the prayerful
openness of both communities and individuals to the sanctifying, charismatic action of the Breath of the risen Christ who transforms them in
His image. In so transforming believers the Breath of the risen Jesus teaches
humans to know Him in a unique, normative, and unitive way. Any person or community may have the experience; but it only happens in faith,
only when one meets the incarnate Son of God on the terms set by the
Father.
Because the story of Jesus introduces us to an experience of humanity
made sinless by its personal union with God, it has the capacity to illumine the sinful corners of both of our personal lives and of the institutions we create, whether secular or ecclesiastical. Contradictions between
our own corporate and personal life choices and the moral and religious
realities which Jesus embodies require repentance. The perfection of Jesus
sinless obedience to God challenges our pusillanimity and narrow
self-preoccupation. As the only historical story of God personally embodied in human experience, Jesus story in virtue of its very historical
uniqueness and sinlessness makes ultimate and absolute claims on every
human conscience. It therefore stands in judgment over every other personal and institutional story.
When one understands the dynamics of Christological knowing in the
light of synoptic narrative Christology, then sharp distinctions between
narrative and doctrinal Christology begin to blur. So does the distinction
between doctrinal Christology and Christian moral practice. Synoptic
narrative Christology tells the story of Jesus with a focus on Christian
practice. It seeks to advance the practical assimilation of believers to Jesus
in the power of His Breath; but it also presupposes a doctrinal context as
the expression of the realistic conditions for advancing in Christological
knowing.
In the third and final volume of this study, I shall analyze the gospel of
John as narrative Christology transforming itself into doctrinal Christology. In Johannine Christology the narrative focus shifts from practical
assimilation to Jesus in the power of His Breath to the doctrinal context
which enunciates the realistic conditions for such Christological knowing. As we shall see, however, while the gospel of John uses narrative in
order to enhance the importance of doctrine, like the synoptics, the fourth
gospel recognizes the importance and normativity of the kind of practical
Christological knowing which the synoptic tradition inculcates. The third
volume of this work will also reflect on the development of post-Biblical
Christological doctrine. I shall argue that rationally formulated doctrinal
Christology leads necessarily to practical Christology; for until one un-
580
derstand the practical consequences of Christological doctrines one fails

finally to understand their very doctrinal meaning.
The present volume has, however, attempted enough for one book.
Some might judge that it has attempted too much. In any case, the systematic exploration of the relationship between narrative, doctrinal, and
practical Christology must await volume three. As I explore these relationships, I shall return to the doctrinal questions which I raised at the
beginning of volume one; and I shall lay systematic theological foundations for answering them.
Glossary
581
Glossary
ABDUCTION: in pragmatic logic, an inference which concludes to a case from
a rule and a result; in other words, an inference which gives an initial
classification to data in need of explanation on the basis of a law assumed to
function in reality; the formulation of an hypothesis
ABSOLUTE: unconditioned; as an ethical category, commitment to particular
ideals and principles no matter what the circumstance
ABSTRACT: lacking concreteness
ACCOMMODATION: adjustment; in developmental psychology, adaptive
growth
ACT: as a technical philosophical term, the determination of a potency
ACTUAL: in a metaphysics of experience, factual, or pertaining to the realm of
decision
ADAPTATION: change with regard to a situation; in developmental psychology, adjustment to an environment through accommodation or assimilation
ADOPTIONISM: the heterodox doctrine that Jesus first existed as a human
person and only subsequently became the Son of God by an act of divine grace
AESTHETICS: in pragmatic logic, the normative study of ideals and of the
habitual forms of behavior which appreciate and respond to them
AFFECT ATTUNEMENT: in social psychology, the capacity of an adult to
share empathetically and symbolically in the emotional experiences of an
infant and vice versa
AFFECTION: in a metaphysics of experience, the emotive perception or
judgment of reality
AFFECTIVE CONVERSION: the decision to take adult responsibility for ones
own subsequent emotional development
ANALOGY: similarity in difference
ANALOGY OF CHRISTOLOGICAL KNOWING, THE: practical assimilation to Jesus in the power of His Breath in different historical situations
ANALYTIC: dividing into elemental parts or basic principles
ANONYMOUS CHRISTIAN: the questionable theological doctrine that all
persons experience an a priori, graced orientation to Jesus Christ prior to the
act of faith in Him
ANTHROPOLOGY: a more or less organized account of the human
APOCALYPTIC: revelatory
APOCALYPTIC THEOLOGY: a visionary account of the end time: i.e., of the
final stage or salvation and of final judgment
APOLLONARIANISM: the heterodox doctrine that in the incarnation Jesus
divinity and humanity blend into a third theandric reality
APOPHATIC THEOLOGY: a doctrine of God which holds that created reality
can only reveal what God is not
A PRIORI: before the fact; the character of an argument which fallaciously claims
validity without evidence to support it
ARIANISM: the heterodox theological denial of the divinity of Jesus and of his
divine Breath
582
ASCETICISM: cultivated physical austerity, often for moral or religious motives

ASSIMILATION: in developmental psychology, biological adaptation through
ingestion
ATHEISM: the denial of the reality of God
PRACTICAL: the failure to accept the practical consequences of ones alleged
belief in God
ATONEMENT: reconciliation; the restoration of a ruptured relationship by
accepting the suffering which reconciliation requires
AUTONOMY: in a metaphysics of experience, the bare capacity to initiate
activity
BEATIFIC VISION: the face-to-face vision of God in the next life
BEATITUDES, THE: the eight blessings of the new covenant which open the
sermon on the mount in Matthews gospel
BEAUTY: the intuitive perception of excellence; the simultaneous intuitive grasp
of goodness and of truth in some reality
BEELZEBUL: the Lord of the Flies; in the Old Testament, the name of the god
of the Philistine city of Ekron; in the New Testament, a Hebrew name for the
prince of demons
BEING: really existing
BELIEF: in pragmatic logic, a proposition for whose consequences one stands
willing to assume responsibility
BENEDICTUS, THE: in Lukes gospel, the prayer of praise uttered by Zechariah
after the birth of his son, John the Baptizer
BIBLICAL CHRISTOLOGY: an account of what the New Testament says
about Jesus Christ
BIGOTRY: rigid stereotyping of the members of an out-group combined with
overt hostility toward them
BLASPHEMY: insulting God
BODY: in a metaphysics of experience, the immediate environment from which
a finite self emerges
CAPITALISM: an economic system which buys human labor for producing,
handling and marketing goods, which promotes a so-called1 free market
system as well as the private and corporate ownership of the means of
production, and which seeks to maximize the profits of businesses and
corporate investors
CASE: in pragmatic logic, the classification of data in inferential thinking
CATECHUMENATE: an organized period of preparation for receiving the
sacraments of Christian initiation
CATEGORY: a predicate; an concept used in interpreting reality
CELIBACY: the deliberate renunciation of genital sex
CERTAIN: beyond the shadow of a doubt
CHALCEDONIAN CHRISTOLOGY: the doctrine that the person of Jesus
unites His divinity and His humanity without blending them into a third
reality
1. The freedom of the capitalistic market varies with ones economic assets. Wealthy
corporations, the rich, and the affluent experience considerable freedom in a capitalistic market. The starving poor tend to find it oppressive rather than liberating.
Glossary
583
CHARISM: a particular manifestation of the gift of salvation accomplished in the

missions of Jesus and of His Breath; a supernatural empowerment which
renders one docile to the inspirations of the Breath of Jesus
CHRISTIAN CONVERSION: the decision to respond to the revelation of God
in Jesus Christ and in the mission of His Breath on the terms which that
revelation demands
CHRISTIAN ORIGINS, CRITERION OF: a norm for authenticating historically words or actions of Jesus which asserts that any historical portrait of Jesus
must offer a plausible account of how the movement He headed could have
evolved into the Christian Church
CHRISTOLOGICAL KNOWING: the knowledge of Jesus Christ which
results from practical assimilation to Him in the power of His Breath
CHRISTOLOGICAL QUESTION, THE: asking how divinity and humanity
relate in the person of Jesus
CHRISTOLOGY: a more or less organized account of the person and ministry
of Jesus Christ
OF HOPE: a foundational theological account of how commitment to Jesus
Christ in justifying faith heals, perfects, and elevates natural and sinful human
hopes
NARRATIVE: a foundational theological account of how commitment to
Jesus Christ in justifying faith transforms intuitive perceptions of His person
and mission communicated in story form
DOCTRINAL: a foundational theological account of how commitment to
Jesus Christ in justifying faith transforms inferential perceptions in faith of His
person and mission
PRACTICAL: a foundational theological account of how commitment to
Jesus Christ in justifying faith transforms both personal moral conversion and
socio-political conversion
CHRISTOPRAXIS: living out the practical consequences of commitment to
Jesus Christ in justifying faith
CLASSIC: a work of art or literature which from generation to generation makes
human life and experience meaningful
CLASSISM: the fallacious ideological justification of giving to one or more social
groups privileged access to the benefits of a society to the detriment and even
oppression of other social groups
CLERICALISM: the sinful abuse of ecclesiastical authority through self-serving
domination over others
CO-EXISTENCE: the simultaneous enjoyment of reality
COHERENCE, CRITERION OF: a norm for authenticating as historical
words and actions of Jesus on the basis of their compatibility with other words
and actions already authenticated by other norms
COLONIALISM: a policy which extends and maintains the control of one
nation over foreign dependencies
COMMON GOOD: a social arrangement which ensures that every member of
society has the opportunity to share with reasonable adequacy in that societys
benefits and to contribute to those same benefits
584
COMMON SENSE: colloquially, the ability to deal realistically with ones

world; as a technical philosophical term, the power to correlate sense perceptions
COMMUNICATIO IDIOMATUM: literally, Latin for the communication
of traits; in theology, a doctrinal account of the way human and divine traits
relate in Jesus Christ
COMMUNICATION: in a metaphysics of experience, symbolic activity which
expresses to one mind the evaluative perceptions of another about some entity
COMMUNICATIONS: a functional theological specialty which uses the results
of theological reflection in order to re-establish dialogue among the members
of a religious community when lack of conversion causes dialogue to break
down
COMPLEMENTARITY: the assertion of true propositions about interrelated
realities
CONCEPT: in a metaphysics of experience, a particular way of responding
evaluatively to ones world
CONCUPISCENCE: those corrupting forces in the environment of a baptized
person immanent to experience which differ from that persons own sins but
which nevertheless come from sin and lead to sin
CONSCIENCE: personal judgment of moral right and wrong
CONSCIOUSNESS: awareness
PERSONAL: awareness which begins with distinguishing ones own body
from its surrounding environment and which develops by making distinctions
and asserting relationships
COMMUNAL: the consciousness of a community which results from its
shared memories, shared hopes, shared lives, practice of atoning love and
degree of conversion
CONTRADICTION: the assertion of mutually exclusive propositions about
the same reality
CONVERGENCE: the assertion of true but different propositions about the
same reality
CONVERSION: the decision to pass from irresponsible to responsible behavior
in some realm of human experience
INITIAL: ones first assumption of adult responsibility in some realm of
experience
ONGOING: living out the consequences of initial conversion
COORDINATION OF CATEGORIES, THE: reflection on the relationship of
categories which derive from different disciplines which study the same or
related realities
CONSUMERISM: an economic system which seeks to persuade buyers to
regard luxuries, i.e., possessions which enhance class status, as necessities
CORRELATION, METHOD OF: a mode of thinking which interrelates
different realities under investigation
COUNCIL OF THE CHURCH: a plenary meeting of leaders and teachers of
the Christian community in order to decide doctrinal and pastoral questions
Glossary
585
COUNTERDYNAMIC OF CONVERSION: the tendency of the lack of

conversion in one realm of experience to undermine the presence of conversion in another realm of experience
COVENANT: a mutually binding agreement among persons
CREATION: as a divine act, Gods ongoing constitution of the developing
universe as a reality; as an object, the developing spatio-temporal universe
viewed as a product of divine activity
CRITICAL COMMON SENSISM: a doctrine of pragmatic logic which maintains that if one attempts to doubt seriously ones spontaneous beliefs, one will
find some beliefs which one cannot doubt
CULTURE: reality mediated and conditioned by human symbolic behavior
DECISION: in a metaphysics of experience, an action which makes reality
concretely this rather than that; a fact
DEDUCTION: in pragmatic logic, an inference which concludes from a case
and a rule to a result; in other words, the prediction of facts not yet in evidence
but implied by a particular abduction
DEISM: a philosophical system which posits the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and universal moral principles but which denies divine
intervention in human history
DELIBERATION: in a metaphysics of experience, disjunctive thinking; the
weighing of mutually exclusive alternatives for choice
AESTHETIC: disjunctive thinking about how best to communicate an
intuitive grasp of excellence
PRUDENTIAL: disjunctive thinking about ethical choices
PRACTICAL: disjunctive thinking about how best to get a job done
DEMIURGE: in Platonic philosophy, a quasi-deity who fashions the material
universe
DEMYTHOLOGIZATION: the substitution of rational explanation for a
mythic grasp of reality
DE-OBJECTIFICATION: the process of replacing inferential thinking which
claims to grasp things as they are in themselves with a mode of thought which
recognizes the relational character of all reality and of all knowing
DEPRAVITY: moral corruption; as a theological term, the doctrine that sin has
so corrupted human nature that it can of itself perform no morally good acts
DIALECTIC: a functional theological specialty which compares and contrasts
different doctrinal frames of reference in order to assess if and why they agree
or disagree
DIOHYPOSTATIC THEOLOGY: an early form of heterodox trinitarian
theology which focused on the existence of two subsistent realities in the
Christian Godhead, the Father and the Son, but which left the Sons eternal
existence and co-equality with the Father vague
DI-POLAR NOMINALISM: a philosophical doctrine which reduces human
knowing to the subjective interrelation of concrete percepts and abstract
concepts
DISCERNMENT: a charism of the Holy Breath which renders human deliberation receptive to Her inspirations
586
DISCONTINUITY, CRITERION OF: a principle for authenticating historically words and actions attributed to Jesus which argues that if one cannot trace
them either to the milieu in which Jesus lived or to the apostolic Church they
probably originated in Jesus Himself
DISPENSATIONAL THEOLOGY: a descriptive account of Gods saving
action in human history
DIVINITY: divine reality; the nature of deity
DOCTRINES: a functional theological specialty which distinguishes sound
from unsound doctrine by the formers ability to advance an integral five-fold
conversion and by the latters tendency to undermine integral five-fold
conversion
DUALISM: the fallacious conception of two interrelated realities in such a way
that their real relationship to one another becomes subsequently unintelligible
COSMIC: conceiving time and eternity in such a way that their real
relationship to one another becomes subsequently unintelligible
MATTER-SPIRIT: the characterization of reality as divided into essentially
different realms, one embodied and the other disembodied, with the result that
their interrelationship becomes subsequently unintelligible
OPERATIONAL: the conception of human powers of activity in such a way
that their interaction becomes subsequently unintelligible
SUBSTANTIAL: the division of the human person into two essentially
different substances whose essential difference makes the unity of the person
unthinkable
SUBJECT-OBJECT: an interpretation of a cognitive relationship in such a
way that the act of knowing becomes subsequently unintelligible
DUTY: a moral obligation to respond to the need of some person or persons
DYNAMIC OF CONVERSION: the tendency of one kind of conversion to
re-enforce another
ECCLESIOLOGY: a more or less organized account of the Church
ECLECTICISM: the endorsement of beliefs on the basis of taste and without
much concern for their mutual compatibility
EGO: in psychology, the conscious person
EGO DEFLATION: the conflicted, painful psychological state of one whose
ego-inflation has led to positing an act with destructive consequences to
oneself and/or others
EGO INERTIA: in clinical psychology, the human tendency to resist challenges
to personal attitudes, beliefs, or commitments
EGO INFLATION: a psychological state of exaggerated self-confidence resulting from lack of realistic contact with potentially destructive, unconscious
impulses and with ones own limitations
EMBARRASSMENT, CRITERION OF: a norm for authenticating historically
words or actions of Jesus which argues that, if a New Testament author records
something about Jesus disconcerting either to the one who records it or to the
Christian community, then the event in question probably took place
EMOTION: in a metaphysics of experience, the affective perception or judgment of reality
Glossary
587
SYMPATHETIC: a benevolent attitudinal response like affection, sympathy,

friendship, love which functions as the affective equivalent of a logical yes
NEGATIVE: an attitudinal response which function as the affective equivalent of a logical not, like fear, anger, shame, guilt
EMPIRICAL THEOLOGY: a theology which requires that all theological
propositions find verification in the historical events which reveal God in space
and time
ENLIGHTENMENT, THE: an intellectual movement in the eighteenth century which defended the superiority of scientific knowing nominalistically
conceived, moral individualism, the purely subjective character of moral and
religious judgments, and social contract theory
ENLIGHTENMENT FUNDAMENTALISM: the spontaneous and dogmatic
endorsement of the untenable aspects of Enlightenment philosophy
ENVIRONMENT: in a metaphysics of experience, the physical universe from
which the self emerges, most immediately its own body but also the surrounding world from which it derives its physical life
EPISTEMOLOGY: a philosophical account of human knowing
ESCHATOLOGICAL: pertaining to the eschaton
ESCHATOLOGY: a more or less organized account of the final age of salvation
inaugurated by the incarnation and by the paschal mystery
ESCHATON: the final age of salvation inaugurated by the incarnation and by
the paschal mystery
ESSENCE: what something is; in a metaphysics of experience, a mode of
evaluative perception abstracted from the one perceiving and the reality
perceived
ESSENCE FALLACY: the indefensible reification of essences as existing in
experienced reality instead of regarding them as fallible modes of perception
ESSENTIALISM: a philosophy which endorses the essence fallacy
ETERNAL OBJECT: in Whiteheadean philosophy, a concept in the conceptual
pole of the divine experience
ETHICS: a moral code which measures human conduct by norms, principles,
and ideals which make absolute and ultimate claims
EUCHARIST: thanksgiving; the ritual, sacramental recall of the paschal mystery
through the re-enactment of Jesus last supper with His disciples
EVALUATION: in a metaphysics of experience, a quality of experience viewed
as an intentional, cognitive relationship
EVALUATIVE CONTINUUM: in a metaphysics of experience, the entire
network of intentional, evaluative relationships in human experience which
includes, sensation, emotion, memory, intuition, inference, and deliberation
EVANGELIST: the author of one of the canonical gospels
EXCELLENCE: a realitys capacity to evoke in another the simultaneous
intuitive perception of goodness and of truth
EXCEPTIVE CLAUSE: in Matthews gospel, the phrase except for uncleanness
(porneia) which qualifies Jesus prohibition of Mosaic divorce practices
EXEGESIS: the interpretation of texts
EXISTENTIALISM: a phenomenological account of the human subjects relationship to Being understood as the total pattern of meaning
588
EXORCISM: the ritual driving out of a demon, or evil spirit, which assumes the
personality of a human being and controls the persons bodily movements,
including speech
EXORCIST: one who performs an exorcism
EXPERIENCE: in a metaphysics of experience, a process composed to relational
elements called feelings; the higher forms of experience contain three kinds of
relational elements: evaluations, decisions, and tendencies
REALM OF: an distinctive habitual way of responding evaluatively or
decisively
FACT: in a metaphysics of experience, a decision, an action which makes
reality concretely this rather than that
FACULTY PSYCHOLOGY: an account of the human person which explains
human activity by grounding it in really and essentially distinct powers with
fixed formal objects
FAITH: commitment to a self-revealing God on the terms which that self-revelation
demands
JUSTIFYING: an initial religious conversion which conforms the convert to
the divine will and therefore commits one to ongoing religious conversion
THEOLOGICAL: the graced transformation of intellectual conversion
CHARISM OF: a gift of the Holy Breath which enhances the social visibility
of ones commitment to God by rendering it more prayerful, more docile to
the movements of grace, and more willing to take personal risks for the sake
of God
FALLACY OF UNIVERSAL TEXTUALITY, THE: the false belief that one can
characterize every entity as a text
FALLIBILISM: in pragmatic logic, the philosophical doctrine that if one admits
that one can err in interpreting reality one has a better chance of reaching the
truth than if one denies ones capacity for error
FALSE: the characteristic of a belief which contradicts the evidence
FEELING: in a metaphysics of experience, a relational element within experience, which in its higher forms manifests three such kinds of relational
elements: evaluations, decisions, and tendencies
FEMINISM: a movement of social reform with scholarly and theological
underpinnings which seeks to vindicate the rights of women to freedom from
personal and institutional oppression on the basis of sex
FINITUDE: limitation
FORMAL OBJECT: the object of a power of operation which defines the essence
of that power by specifying the aspect under which it operates on its object
FOUNDATIONS: a functional theological specialty which proposes a strictly
normative account of the forms, dynamics, and counterdynamics of conversion
FREEDOM, ELEMENTARY: the power to act or not or to choose to do this
rather than that
FUNCTIONAL SPECIALTY: a realm of theological investigation which raises
a particular kind of theological question requiring a distinctive method to
answer it
Glossary
589
FULFILLMENT: an event which keeps a promise and/or makes a prediction

come true
GENEALOGY: a family tree
GOODNESS: desirability, the exemplification of excellence
GOSPEL: a narrative account of Jesus told in the light of the paschal mystery
SYNOPTIC: the accounts of Jesus written by Mark, Matthew, of Luke;
literally, at a glance, a term derived from the practice of reproducing these
gospels in parallel columns for the purpose of comparative analysis
GRACE: as a theological term, Gods utterly gratuitous intervention in human
history in order to undo the consequences of human sinfulness and in order
to unite humans to God and to one another
HERESIARCH: the principal intransigent propounder of a heresy
HERESY: the tenacious defence and propagation of a heterodox belief
HERMENEUTICAL CIRCLE, CLOSING THE: a theological method characteristic of liberation theology which beings by investigating a situation of
institutional injustice, searches divine revelation for norms which promise to
rectify the injustice, and then devises specific strategies for effecting the desired
rectification
HERMENEUTICS: a theory of interpretation
HETERODOX: in theology, the characteristic of a belief which interprets divine
revelation incorrectly
HIGH CHRISTOLOGY: an account of the person and mission of Jesus which
beings with reflection on His divinity and which sometimes sacrifices His
humanity to His divinity
HISTORICAL-CRITICAL METHOD: the scholarly interpretation of a text in
the light of the circumstances which originally inspired its composition
HISTORY: developments in space and time; in the metaphysics of experience,
the unfolding of spatio-temporal experience; as a functional theological
specialty, a scholarly account of a religious communitys development
HOLY BREATH: the third person of the trinity conceived as a sanctifying source
of divine life
HOMOIOUSIOS: similar in being; a technical Greek theological term for
asserting that the Son and Holy Breath have a divine reality similar to the
Fathers
HOMOOUSIOS: one in being; a technical Greek theological term for asserting
that the Son and the Holy Breath have identically the same divine reality as the
Father
HOPE: in a metaphysics of experience, the intuitive perception of a desirable
future
HUMANITY: the nature possessed by finite, embodied persons
HYLEMORPHISM: a philosophical doctrine which asserts that finite substances consist of a potential principle called matter (in Greek, hyl) and an
actual principle called form (in Greek morph)
HYPOSTATIC UNION: the uniting of divinity and humanity in the second
person of the trinity without their blending into some third reality neither fully
divine nor fully human
HYPOSTASIS: in theology, the Greek term for a particular, subsistent reality
590
HYPOTHESIS: an abduction
IDEAL: a desirable possibility which makes normative claims
IDEOLOGY: the false and deceptive rationalization of a situation of injustice
IMAGINATION: the capacity to interpret reality through the use of images
IMMATERIAL: purely spiritual, devoid of matter
IMMORALITY: the decisive violation of ethical ideals and principles
IMMUTABILITY: the inability to change
IMPASSIBILITY: the inability to suffer
IMPOSSIBLE: what cannot or could not have happened; the character of a belief
which defies verification under any circumstances
IMPLAUSIBLE: the character of a belief which the preponderance of the
evidence calls into question without, however, ruling it out altogether as false
or impossible
IMPROBABLE: the characteristic of a belief which the evidence calls seriously
into question but without establishing the likelihood of another interpretation
INCARNATION: embodiment; as a theological term, the embodiment of the
second person of the trinity
INCULTURATION: evangelization or theological thinking which uses the
symbols of a particular culture, which invokes the gospel to challenge that
cultures sinfulness, and which establishes a dialogue between a particular
culture and the Church universal
INDIVIDUALISM: the ideological belief that society consists of atomic individuals with only accidental and artificial relations to one another
EXPRESSIVE: the self-isolating ideological belief that one must defend ones
core self from the incursions of others
UTILITARIAN: the ideological belief that one can justifiably do anything
necessary to advance ones own interests and to succeed
THERAPEUTIC: psychological theories and healing practices which inculcate the ideological belief in oneself as an atomic individual with only
accidental and artificial relationships with others, relations which one can
sacrifice as needed in order to insure personal self-fulfillment
INDIVIDUALITY: the results of individuation; the traits which make one
individual differ qualitatively from another
INDIVIDUATION: the process of becoming an individual qualitatively distinct
from other individuals
INDUCTION: in pragmatic logic, an inference which concludes from a result
and a case to a rule; the verification of a deductively clarified abduction which
establishes the reality of the rule which a prior abduction presumed to obtain
in reality
INFANCY NARRATIVE: an account of the birth of Jesus in the light of the
paschal mystery
INFERENCE: in pragmatic logic, an argument which interrelates a rule, a case,
and a result
INFINITE: that which encompasses every other thing and is encompassed by
nothing
INFUSED KNOWLEDGE: preternaturally communicated perceptions of reality
Glossary
591
INSTITUTION: a group of persons acting in socially sanctioned ways

INTELLECT: in philosophy, the spiritual power which grasps Being cognitively
as true
AGENT: in scholastic philosophy, the spiritual power of the human soul
which uses an image in the imagination as an instrument for imprinting an idea
on the passive intellect
PASSIVE: in scholastic philosophy, the spiritual power of the soul which the
active intellect enables to grasp sensible being as true
INTELLECTUAL CONVERSION: the decision to take adult responsibility for
the truth or falsity of ones beliefs and for the adequacy or inadequacy of the
frames of reference in which one fixes ones beliefs
INTELLIGIBILITY: something possessing significance or meaning
INTERPLAY OF CATEGORIES: the interpretation of categories derived from
one intellectual discipline by categories derived from another intellectual
discipline
INTERPRETATION: a meaningful account of symbolic significance; as a
functional theological specialty, exegesis, or a scholarly account of the significance of religious texts and artifacts
INTUITION: in a metaphysics of experience, knowledge mediated by images
and affections
JESUSOLOGY: a rational account of Jesus humanity and mortal ministry
JOURNEY DISCOURSE: Lk 10:51-19:27; Lukes account of Jesus final
pilgrimage to Jerusalem in which He instructs His followers about the
demands of discipleship
JUBILEE: an English term for the law enunciated in Lv 25:8-17, 29-31, which
called for the periodic rectification of injustice in Israel
JUDGMENT: in pragmatic logic, the fixation of a belief
JUSTIFICATION: in theology, passage from a state of sin to the obedience of
faith
KENOSIS: the Son of Gods free self-emptying in becoming human and
suffering crucifixion
KENOTIC CHRISTOLOGY: a Christology which interprets the meaning of
the divine self-emptying which occurred in the incarnation
KINGDOM OF GOD: Jesus central message; Jesus egalitarian vision of a new
Israel founded 1) on unconditioned trust in God; 2) on the free sharing of the
physical supports of life, especially with the poor, the marginal, and the
expendable; 3) on prayer; 4) on mutual forgiveness even of ones enemies; and
5) on non-violence
LAW: in the metaphysics of experience, a general tendency
LIBERATION THEOLOGY: a theology which takes as its starting point social,
economic, and political injustice and which invokes gospel values to overcome
such injustice
LIBERTY: in a metaphysics of experience, responsible human freedom; freedom
to live for the beautiful, the good, and the true
LINKAGE: a literary device employed by an evangelist in order to unify into a
coherent narrative anecdotes about Jesus
592
ALLUSIVE: the literary use of repetition in order to interrelate different parts

of a gospel
DRAMATIC: the way in which Jesus relates to identifiable constituencies in
a gospel narrative
THEMATIC: the development of a theological idea through different
incidents in a gospel
LOGIC: a normative account of the way the human mind ought to think
KANTIAN: transcendental logic, which recognizes only deductive inference
and which offers an a priori account of the structure of human subjectivity
LOGICAL: inferentially self-consistent; lacking internal contradictions in meaning
LOGICAL ADEQUACY: in pragmatic logic, the ability of a theory to interpret
all relevant data
LOGICAL APPLICABILITY: in pragmatic logic, the ability of a theory to
interpret some relevant data
LOGICAL COHERENCE: the characteristic of a theory whose key terms
remain unintelligible apart from one another
LOGOS: the Greek term for word; as a Christological term, a title of the incarnate
second person of the trinity which portrays Him as a divine communication
LOGOS-ANTHROPOS CHRISTOLOGY: a Christology which claims that
the incarnate Son of God possesses a complete humanity which consists of
both a body and a soul
LOGOS-SARX CHRISTOLOGY: a heterodox Christology which claims that
in the incarnation the divine Logos replaces the human soul in Jesus humanity
with the result that the second person of the trinity in becoming incarnate
possesses a human body but not a human soul
LOW CHRISTOLOGY: a Christology which begins by reflecting on Jesus
humanity but which sometimes fails to offer an adequate account of His
divinity
MAGNIFICAT: Marys prayer of praise to God in Lukes infancy narrative
MATTER: physical reality; in Aristotelian philosophy, the pure potency for
substantial change
MEANING: in a metaphysics of experience, evaluation viewed as the intentional
grasp of significance
MEDIATION: the establishment of a relationship between or among distinct
realities
MELIORISM: an ethical system which sanctions those choices which best
approximate a moral ideal
MEMORY: the ability of recall past experiences
MESSIAH: the anointed one; in Jewish apocalyptic theology one anointed by
God to effect the deliverance and salvation of Israel
MESSIANIC AGE: in apocalyptic theology, the era of peace and prosperity
resulting from the victory of a messiah
MESSIANIC SECRET: in Marks gospel, Jesus unsuccessful attempt to conceal
his messianic identity
MESSIANISM: belief in the coming of a messiah
Glossary
593
METAPHOR: the intuitive grasp of analogy through the verbal identification of

two partially similar realities
METAPHYSICS: an organized account of reality in general; a theory of the
whole of reality which develops systematically a root metaphor for Being
METAPHYSICS OF EXPERIENCE: a theory of the whole which takes experience as a root metaphor for the whole of reality
METHOD: a set of recurrent and related operations yielding cumulative and
progressive results
MIAHYPOSTATIC THEOLOGY: an early heterodox form of theology which
discovers only one subsistent reality in the Christian deity
MIA PHYSIS: the Greek phrase meaning one nature; as a Christological term,
Cyril of Alexandrias unusual term for the person of the incarnate Word
MODEL: a representation of some reality
MONOPHYSITISM: Apollonarianism; the heterodox Christological doctrine
which taught that the divinity and humanity of the incarnate Word blend into
a third nature neither fully divine nor fully human
MORALITY: a code of conduct which measures choices by ideals, principles, and
realities which make ultimate and absolute claims on the human conscience
PERSONAL: a code of conduct which invokes rights and duties in resolving
interpersonal conflicts
PUBLIC: a code of conduct which measures institutional justice by the
common good
MULTIPLE ATTESTATION, CRITERION OF: a principle for validating
historically words and actions of Jesus which claims that, when different New
Testament authors bear witness to the fact that Jesus said or did something, He
probably did, especially if the authors in question represent independent
historical traditions about Jesus
MYSTERY: whatever eludes explanation or cognitive comprehension
MYSTAGOGY: the last phase of the catechumenate which instructs newly
baptized Christians in the demands of Christian living
MYTH: a story which creates an adult world of value and reality
NARCISSISM: morbid self-preoccupation
NARRATIVE: a tale told by a story-teller to an audience about a world
NATURAL: in a metaphysics of experience, the character of an experience which
responds legitimately to created value only and which ignores the historical
self-revelation of God
NATURAL LAW: a tendency operative in the cosmos
NATURE: in philosophy, a realitys essence viewed as the source of its activity;
in theology, created reality untransformed by saving, supernatural grace
NATIONAL SECURITY: an ideology which claims that a government has the
right to do anything at all which secures its own interests
NEO-ARIANISM: the heterodox tendency in contemporary Christology to
portray Jesus as a graced human person
NEO-ORTHODOXY: a movement in Protestant theology which rejects metaphysical thinking and which recognizes only the analogy of faith as a legitimate
theological method
594
NEO-PLATONISM: a school of Platonism which fused middle Platonic philosophy and contemplative religious impulses
NESTORIANISM: the heterodox denial that Mary is the mother of God
NOMINALISM: the philosophical denial of real generality
CLASSICAL: the reduction of universal concepts to mere spoken words and
of reality to concrete sensibles
CONCEPTUAL: the restriction of real generality to conceptual universals
which exist only in human subjectivity
NORM: that which measures something else
NORMATIVE SCIENCES: philosophical disciplines which reflect on the way
in which one ought to respond to reality aesthetically, ethically, and logically
NOTE: in theology, a category which assigns to a particular belief a degree of
verifiability
NUNC DIMITTIS: in Lukes infancy narrative, the prayer of Simeon in
response to his seeing the messiah
OBJECTIFICATION: the attempt to portray reality as it exists in itself instead
of portraying it as inherently relational
ONTOLOGICAL: metaphysical; pertaining to a theory of the whole
ONTOLOGISM: the philosophical doctrine which claims that created minds
have immediate access to the ideas in the mind of God
OPERATIONAL: pertaining to activity
OPTIMISM: the tendency to focus on good and pleasant realities rather than on
evil and unpleasant realities
ORALITY: the characteristic of a culture which communicates through the
spoken rather than through the written word
PRIMARY: the way language functions in purely oral cultures
SECONDARY: the way orality functions in literate cultures
ORIGINAL SIN: the totality of human sinfulness minus ones own personal sins
ORTHOPRAXIS: decisive behavior which conforms to appropriate norms
ORTHODOXY: shared religious beliefs which conform to the norms of truth
and adequacy in interpreting the historical self-revelation of God
OUSIA: a Greek term for being; as a technical trinitarian term, the reality
common to the three members of the trinity
PARABLE: a comparison, which, when expressed in narrative form, usually seeks
to subvert a familiar world in order to open its audience to an alternative way
of viewing reality
PARADIGM: in grammar, a list of inflectional forms; in the philosophy of
science, an organized way of asking and answering questions which invokes an
appropriate method, appropriate instrumentation, appropriate models, and
appropriate concepts for dealing with a problem
PARADIGM SHIFT: the abandonment of one organized rational way of asking
and answering questions for another
PAROUSIA: Jesus second coming in divine judgment in order to vindicate those
who believe in Him
PASCHAL MYSTERY: Jesus death, resurrection, and mission of the divine
Breath
PASSION: the affective perception of interpersonal relationships
Glossary
595
PENTECOST: literally, the fiftieth day; a Jewish harvest festival during which
the Breath of the risen Christ created the Church through an outpouring of
Her charisms
PERCEPT: a concrete, sensible reality viewed as an object of knowledge
PERFECTIONISM: the moral doctrine that one ought always to choose the
more perfect option
PERSON: an autonomous, subsistent reality enjoying continuity of life and
capable of entering into responsible social relationships with other realities like
itself
PERSONAL MORAL CONVERSION: the decision to take adult responsibility
for respecting the rights and duties of others
PESSIMISM: the tendency to focus on evil and suffering rather than on good,
pleasant, beneficial realities
PHANTASM: in scholastic philosophy, a term for an image in the imagination
PHARISEE: the member of a Jewish sect which resisted the Hellenization of
Jewish religious faith by requiring that Jews observe not only the Torah but
pious oral traditions as well
PHENOMENOLOGY: the organized description of what appears in experience
without attempting to distinguish between reality and illusion
PHILOSOPHY: critical reflection on lived human experience
PHYSIS: the Greek term for nature
PLATONISM: the school of philosophy founded by Plato in the fourth century
b.c. which divides reality into an unchanging, spiritual realm of ideas and
ideals and a material realm of constant change and illusion
MIDDLE: a school of Platonism which located ideas and ideals in a quasi-divine
intellect
PLAUSIBLE: the character of a belief supported by some evidence without that
evidence ruling out other possible or even probable interpretations
PLURALISM: the characteristic or a situation which permits of a variety of
interpretative approaches and evaluations
PNEUMATOLOGY: a more or less organized account of the Holy Breath, the
third person of the trinity
POLICY: an institutionally sanctioned practice
POSSESSION, DEMONIC: the seizure of a human person by an evil spirit
which thereafter controls that persons bodily movements, including speech
POSSIBLE: the character of a belief which could conceivably enjoy verifiability
despite the fact that little evidence supports it
POSSIBILITY: that which could occur; an idea or ideal capable of real or actual
exemplification
POST-MODERNISM: a vaguely organized movement in contemporary western thought which seeks to advance beyond the presuppositions of modern
culture, sometimes characterized by the denial of any subject of discourse and
by extreme skepticism concerning linguistic meaning
POTENCY: as a technical philosophical term, the capacity for actualization
PRAGMATIC LOGIC: a theory of inference which holds that the deductive
operational consequences of any abduction define the whole of its meaning
596
PRAXIS: decisive activity which seeks to transform reality, especially oppressive

social institutions
PRE-CATECHUMENATE: the first phase in the instruction of candidates for
Christian baptism which seeks to introduce them to the Christian community
and to evoke from them an initial Christian conversion
PRECONSCIOUS: capable of recall
PRE-EXISTENCE: a technical Christological term for the mode of being
enjoyed by the second person of the trinity prior to the incarnation
PREFERENTIAL OPTION FOR THE POOR: a principle of Christian ethics
which insists that in the resolution of disputed questions of public morality the
needs of the socially, economically, and politically disadvantaged take
precedence over those of the advantaged and affluent
PREHENSION: in Whiteheadean philosophy, a concrete fact of relatedness
which includes a subject, its initial datum (or what it prehends at the beginning
of its processing), the subjects objective datum (or perspective on the
universe), its negative prehensions (which distinguish it from other prehensions), and its subjective form (or way of prehending the universe)
PREJUDICE: an opinion formed without sufficient attention to the facts
PRE-OPERATIONAL: in developmental psychology, a characteristic of the
cognitive behavior of children who have yet to develop the capacity for
abstract rational thought
PRESENTATIONAL IMMEDIACY: in a metaphysics of experience, the way
in which an evaluative response makes the mind present to its world and the
world to it
PRETERNATURAL: beyond the powers of created nature
PRIEST: one who mediates between God and humanity
PRINCIPLE: a rule of conduct derived from an ideal
PRINCIPLE OF ALTERNATION: in logic, a rule which asserts that the mind
should focus by turns on the investigation of particular problems and the
readjustment of its metaphysical theory of the whole in the light of the results
of a focused investigation
PROBABLE: the character of a belief which the preponderance of the evidence
favors without, however, establishing its certitude
PROCESS THEOLOGY: an account of God which equates all reality with
change and development
PROPHET: one who speaks for God in summoning a community to repentance
and to hope
PROSPON: a Greek term for the mask worn by an actor in classical Greek
theater; as a theological term, prospon has many different meanings, some
orthodox, some heterodox
PRUDENCE: deliberation ruled by sound moral principles
PSYCHIC CONVERSION: Robert Dorans term for the kind of conversion
which transforms human affectivity; ordering disordered affectivity in the
light of sound insights generated by intellectual conversion
PSYCHOLOGY: the scientific study of human behavior
EMPIRICAL: the scientific study of human behavior which measures its
hypotheses against the behavior of control groups
Glossary
597
DEVELOPMENTAL: a branch of empirical psychology which argues that

human behavior develops in predictable stages
SOCIAL: the scientific study of how individual persons and institutions
interact
QUALITY: in a metaphysics of experience, an instance of particular suchness
QUESTS FOR THE HISTORICAL JESUS: the rational attempt to validate
words and actions of Jesus (the new quest) and to situate them in the historical
context in which He lived (the third quest)
RACISM: prejudice and bigotry directed toward the members of a particular race
RCIA: The Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults; the restored catechumenate
REACTION: a way of dealing with an impinging reality
CIRCULAR: in developmental psychology, an activity whose pleasurable
character tends to motivate its repetition
PRIMARY: in developmental psychology, an infantile circular reaction which
focuses on the infants own body
SECONDARY: in developmental psychology, an infantile circular reaction
which focuses on object other than the infants own body
TERTIARY: in developmental psychology, an infantile circular reaction
which explores the childs environment
REAL: in a metaphysics of experience, pertaining to the mode of existence of a
tendency
REALISM: in philosophy, a defense of the minds ability to grasp reality in
opposition to subjectivism, or a defence of the existence of real generality in
opposition to nominalism, or the simultaneous defence of both positions
REDACTION CRITICISM: the interpretation of a text in the light of its editing
REDEMPTION: reacquisition; as a theological term, salvation viewed as the
divine reacquisition of a religious backslider
REFORMED SUBJECTIVIST PRINCIPLE: an axiom of Whiteheadean philosophy which asserts that apart from the experiencing of subjects there is
nothing, nothing, nothing, bare nothingness
REJECTION AND EXECUTION, CRITERION OF: a norm for authenticating historically words and actions of Jesus which asserts that any historical
portrait of Jesus must offer a plausible account of why He suffered condemnation and crucifixion
RELATIVISM: the philosophical denial of binding, universal norms for human
behavior and cognition
RELIGION: an organized way of relating to God
REPENTANCE: the conscious repudiation of ones former sinfulness
RESEARCH: in theology, a functional specialty which provides other theologians with the tools which they need in order to think theologically
RESPONSIBILITY: accountability to oneself, to others, and ultimately to God
RESPONSIBLE, PERSONAL FREEDOM: the liberty to choose the beautiful,
the true and the good which results from an integral five-fold conversion
RESULT: in pragmatic logic, the descriptive identification of data in need of
explanation
RESURRECTION: total transformation in God after death
REVELATION: in theology, Gods historical self-disclosure
598
REVERSION: a technical term in Whiteheadean philosophy for the experience

of novel possibility by prehending an eternal object in the mind of God
RHETORIC: the study and practice of the art of persuasion
RIGHT: a personal need which makes legitimate claims on another person or
persons
ROOT METAPHOR: in philosophy, an intuitive grasp of analogy which serves
as a conceptual model for Being in general
RUAH: the Hebrew word for breath or wind in motion; in Christian theology
a Hebrew term for the third person of the trinity
RULE: in pragmatic logic, the conceptual formulation of a real law or tendency
SACRAMENT: most broadly, an event which simultaneously reveals and
conceals the reality of God; in sacramental theology, an official act of new
covenant worship which expresses the shared faith of the Christian community, which therefore requires a minister sanctioned by that same community,
and which challenges Christians assembled in worship to committed faith in
the paschal mystery and in the triune God which the paschal mystery reveals
SADDUCEES: a religious sect in Judaism which fostered obedience to the Torah
but which, in contrast to the Pharisees, denied bodily resurrection, the
existence of angels, and did not regard unwritten Jewish religious practices as
binding
SALVATION: in theology, the state of standing in a life-giving relationship with
the triune God
SAMARITAN: an inhabitant of Samaria, a province of first-century Palestine
between Galilee and Judea; in the first century, orthodox Jews tended to regard
Samaritans as heretics, enemies, and Roman collaborators
SANHEDRIN: the supreme governing council of Palestinian Jews, composed of
elders, priests, and scribes
SATAN: the Biblical personification of all those forces which oppose God and
put those who believe in God to the test; in the New Testament, the
personification of anti-Christ
SAVIOR: one who puts another in a life-giving relationship with the triune God
SCHEMA: in developmental psychology, a technical psychological term for an
acquired cognitive habit
SCHOLARSHIP: systematic study which eschews the technological instrumentation and precise mathematical measurement of the empirical sciences
SCIENTIA BEATA: in theology, a Latin term for the special transformation of
Jesus human self-awareness effected by the incarnation
SCRIBE: in the ancient world, a member of the literate class charged with making
and keeping records
SECOND COMING, THE: the parousia, Jesus return in divine judgment in
order to vindicate those who believe in Him
SECULARISM: an ethos which either subordinates religious values and realities
to values and realities which have nothing to do with religion or which replaces
religious realities and values with non religious ones
SELF: in the metaphysics of experience, an autonomously functioning tendency
Glossary
599
SEPTUAGINT: literally, seventy; the name of the Greek translation of the Old
Testament made in Alexandria, allegedly by seventy-two scribes, before the
Christian era, probably in the third century b.c.
SENSATION: initial perception of environmental impact on a conscious animal
SEXISM: discrimination and oppression for reasons of gender
SIGNIFICANCE: in the metaphysics of experience, the intelligibility of events
and of symbolic communications
SIN: a deliberate violation of the will of God
SINLESSNESS: perfect obedience to the divine will
SOCIO-POLITICAL CONVERSION: the decision to take responsibility for
seeking to end institutional oppression through commitment to some just
cause of universal human significance
SOUL: an animating principle
SOTERIOLOGY: a more or less organized account of Gods saving activity in
human history
SPIRIT: in philosophy, immaterial reality
SPIRIT CHRISTOLOGY: an explanation of the person and ministry of Jesus
which focuses on His relationship to the divine Breath
STRATEGY: a concrete plan for implementing a policy or principle
STRICTLY NORMATIVE THINKING: critical reflection of ones own behavior in the light of ideals and principles which one has appropriated and
interiorized
SUBJECT: in a metaphysics of experience, an emerging, experiencing self; in
substance philosophy, an underlying reality
SUBJECTIVISM: the philosophical belief that one can experience only ones
own subjectivity
SUBJECTIVITY: the evaluative responses of an experiencing self contrasted
with the realities that self experiences
SUBSISTENCE: in a metaphysics of experience, autonomous functioning
SUBSTANCE: in philosophy, that which exists in itself and not in anything else
as a subject of inhesion
SUPERNATURAL: that which exceeds the power of created nature; in theology,
pertaining to the realm of saving grace
SUPERNATURAL EXISTENTIAL: an alleged a priori, graced expansion of the
formal object of the agent intellect which endows it with a spontaneous
longing for the beatific vision and for the God revealed in Jesus Christ
SYMBOL: in the metaphysics of experience, whatever mediates the symbolic
grasp of significance
COMMUNICATION: an evaluative response expressed by one mind to
another through decisive activity
EXPRESSIVE: a significant event
INTERPRETATIVE: an unexpressed evaluative response
SYNECHISM: the philosophical assertion of continuity in development
SYNTHETIC: pertaining to the perception of relationship and of unified wholes
SYSTEMATICS: in theology, a functional specialty which examines relationships among sound theological doctrines
600
TENDENCY: in a metaphysics of experience, a general law in reality; a habitual

orientation to decide or evaluate in a particular way
THEANDRIC: combining divine and human traits
THEISM: belief in the reality of God
THEOLOGY: a more or less organized account of God
MEDIATING: the theological retrieval of a religious tradition; the functional
specialties of research, interpretation, history, and dialectics
MEDIATED: the theological reformulation of a religious tradition; the
functional specialties of foundations, doctrines, systematics, and communications
THEOTOKOS: a Greek term meaning mother of God; in theology, the
doctrine that Mary is the mother of the second person of the trinity
THERAPEUTIC CHRISTOLOGY: an interpretation of the person and mission of Jesus in the light of the psychological study of human behavior
THOMISM: philosophical and theological ways of thinking inspired by the
thought Thomas Aquinas
TIME: the present transformation of a past into a future
CLOCK: measured motion
REAL: in a metaphysics of experience, the present movement of experience
from a past toward a future
TRANSACTION: decisions which put autonomous selves into social relationship
TRANSCENDENTAL THOMISM: the reformulation of the thought of
Thomas Aquinas in the light of Kantian logic and the turn to the subject
TRANSDUCTIVE: in developmental psychology, pre-rational, intuitive thinking
TRANSMUTATION: change relationally, aesthetically, and organically conceived
TRANSVALUATION: the re-evaluation of a reality, actuality, or possibility by
transposing it from one frame of reference to another
TRINITY: three persons in one God; the Christian deity
TRIUMPHALISM: a view of the Catholic Church which presents it alone as the
one, true Church and which de-emphasizes or denies its flaws and sinfulness
TRUTH: the correct interpretation of reality
TURN TO COMMUNITY, THE: a methodological shift from preoccupation
with the individual subject to concern with the way in which persons
interrelate socially and institutionally
TURN TO EXPERIENCE, THE: the systematic use of experience as a central
category in ones account of reality
TURN TO THE SUBJECT, THE: critical reflection on human intentionality
which typically invokes Kantian logic
ULTIMATE: final; in ethics, the characteristic of some reality or value worth not
only living for but, if necessary, worth dying for; in Whiteheadean philosophy,
universally predicable
UNCERTAIN: in logic, unsupported by evidence which would force a judgment
one way or the other
UNCONSCIOUS: lacking awareness
Glossary
601
UTOPIA: the title of a book by Saint Thomas Moore describing an ideal society;
an unrealizable ideal world
VAGUE: the character of a belief which one can neither verify or falsify until one
first clarifies its meaning
VALIDITY: in logic, the characteristic of thinking which follows sound methodological principles
VALUE: desirability; in a metaphysics of experience, a particular mode of
perception
VIRTUAL INFINITY: the alleged ability of a finite power of operation to aspire
to infinite satisfaction
VULGATE, THE: the Latin translation of the Bible made by St. Jerome
WILL: in philosophy, a spiritual power to make decisions
WOMANIST THEOLOGY: a strain in feminism usually promoted by women
of color which criticizes the ethnic and class bias of white feminists
WORLD RELIGION: an organized way of relating to God professed by a large
number of people of different racial, national, and cultural backgrounds
WORLD SOUL: in philosophy, the animating principle of the universe
602

INDEX OF PERICOPES
THE GOSPEL OF MARK
The Preface: Mk 1:1, 26-27, 73-74

The Ministry of John the Baptizer: Mk 2-8, 28-30, 50, 73,138
The Baptism of Jesus: Mk 9-11, 30-31, 37-38, 41, 50, 125, 135, 138, 141, 144,
146, 160, 172-173, 190-191
Jesus Temptations: Mk 1:12-13, 32, 51, 53-54, 138, 174-175, 191, 194, 382
Jesus Message: Mk 1:14-15, 32. 38, 87-88, 125, 276
The Call of the First Disciples: Mk 1:16-20,51. 54, 88-89, 118, 125, 138, 145,
200, 245
Preaching and Exorcism in Capernaum: Mk 1:21-28, 38, 51, 54-55, 84, 89,
125, 132, 136, 138, 199, 400, 446
The Healing of Simons Mother-in law: Mk 1:29-31, 88-89, 118, 132, 143144, 146
Evening Cures and Exorcisms: Mk l:32-34, 55, 132, 136, 138, 237, 400-401
Jesus Tours Galilee: Mk 1:35-39, 88-89, 118, 125, 138, 363, 436-437, 510
The Cure of a Leper: Mk 1:40-45, 33, 82-84, 134, 136-137, 237, 510-511, 515
The Cure of a Paralytic: Mk 2:1-12, 38-39, 60-61, 63, 130, 137, 145, 205, 363,
406
The Call of Levi: Mk 2:13-14, 61, 63, 89, 137, 250
Table Fellowship with Sinners: Mk 2:15-17, 61-63, 89-90, 130, 137, 145, 205
The Controversy over Fasting: Mk 2:18-22, 33-34, 62-63, 90, 137, 145, 163164, 206, 355, 406
Picking Corn on the Sabbath: Mk 2:23-28,62-63, 69-70, 90, 130, 132, 137
The Sabbath Cure of a Man with a Withered Hand: Mk 3:1-6, 63-64, 66, 134,
137, 145, 208, 311, 405, 407, 417, 511
Jesus and the Crowds: Mk 3:7-12, 84-85, 90, 125, 132, 138, 311, 434, 511
The Call of the Twelve: Mk 3:13-19, 55, 88, 90-91,118, 132, 138, 250
Jesus Family: Mk 3:20-21, 39-40, 131, 137-138, 183, 454
The Controversy over Beelzebul: Mk 3:22-30, 51, 59, 64, 137, 191-192, 196,
369, 403, 530
Jesus True Family: Mk 3:31-35, 39-40, 84, 125, 137, 364, 454
The Sermon on the Lake: Mk 4:1-34, 91, 107, 126, 138, 453-454
The Parable of the Sower: Mk 4:1-9, 59, 91-91, 126-127
Speaking in Parables: Mk 4:10-12, 84-85, 95, 239, 290, 292, 438
The Allegory of the Sower: Mk 4:13-20, 84-85, 95, 126, 276
The Parable of the Lamp: Mk 4:21-23, 92-93, 126
The Parable of the Measure: Mk 4: 24-25, 92-94, 126, 321, 454
The Parable of the Growing Seed: Mk 4:26-29, 92, 126-127, 199, 453
The Parable of the Mustard Seed: Mk 4:30-34, 85, 92, 126-127, 453
Jesus Calms a Storm: Mk 4:35-41, 55-57, 134, 141, 201, 513
The Gerasene Demoniac: Mk 5:1-20, 55, 58-59, 132, 134, 136, 141, 201-202,
320, 401, 513
A Woman Cured, A Young Girl Raised: Mk 5:21-43, 88, 118, 132-134, 136,
142-143, 146, 247, 321
Index
603
Rejection at Nazareth: Mk 6:1-6, 94,125

The Mission of the Twelve: Mk 6:7-13, 91, 94, 132, 138, 401, 456, 465
Jesus and Herod: Mk 6:14-16, 34, 68, 356, 416
John the Baptizer Beheaded: Mk 6:17-29, 35-36, 68, 100, 145, 169-170
The First Multiplication of the Loaves: Mk 6:30-44, 86, 94-95, 125, 134-135,
138, 140-142, 254, 311, 320, 438, 456-513
Jesus Walks on Water and Invokes the Divine Name: Mk 6:45-56, 55-57, 75,
86, 129, 141, 320-321, 363, 437, 455, 515
The Traditions of the Pharisees: Mk 7:1-13, 41-42, 64, 95, 137, 145, 210, 222
What Makes One Unclean: Mk 7:14-23, 95-96, 130, 210-211, 154, 456
The Syrophoenician Womans Daughter: Mk 7:24-30, 86, 113, 210-211, 254,
456
A Deaf and Dumb Man Healed: Mk 7:31-37,135, 144, 321, 456
The Second Multiplication of the Loaves: Mk 8:1-10, 86, 134-135, 254, 311
Pharisees Seek a Sign: Mk 8:11-13, 65, 145, 439
The Leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod: Mk 8:14-21, 65, 68-69, 84, 96-97,
129, 145, 226, 320
A Blind Man Cured in Stages: Mk 8:22-26, 135-136, 457
Peters Confession: Mk 8:27-33, 35, 41, 59-60, 73, 75, 136-138, 141, 366
The First Prophecy of the Passion: Mk 8:31-33, 65, 69, 129, 137, 257, 457, 471
The Way of the Cross: Mk 8:34-9:1, 41-43, 73, 88, 99, 103, 118, 129, 136, 138,
370, 458
The Transfiguration: Mk 9:2-8, 42-43, 73, 88, 99, 103, 118, 129, 136, 138139, 141, 144, 247,258
The Discussion about Elijah: Mk 9:9-13, 65, 99-100, 129, 136
The Epileptic Demoniac Boy: Mk 9:14-29, 65-66, 100-101, 129, 132, 135,
137, 143-144, 146, 202, 321
The Second Prophecy of the Passion: Mk 9:30-34, 101, 137, 294
Ambition Rebuked: Mk 9:35-37, 101-102, 129, 137, 222, 462, 513
The Strange Exorcist: Mk 9:38-40, 84, 101-102, 129, 132, 462
Charitys Reward: Mk 9:41, 102, 129
Avoiding Scandal: Mk 9:42-50, 101-103, 130, 295
Marriage and Divorce: Mk 10:1-12, 42, 66, 101, 103, 130, 184, 212
Jesus and the Children: Mk 10:13-16, 104, 130, 478
The Call of the Rich Young Man: Mk 10:17-22, 44, 130, 378
The Peril of Riches: Mk 10:23-27, 44, 130
Renunciation Rewarded: Mk 10:28-34,65, 69, 118, 139
The Third Prophecy of the Passion: Mk 10:28-31, 104, 137, 379-480
The Ambition of James and John: Mk 10:35-40, 104-105, 130, 137
Leadership in Service: Mk 10:41-45, 77, 105, 130-131, 137, 222, 232, 381
The Cured Blind Man Follows on the Way: Mk 10:46-52, 105-106, 135, 321
The Triumphal Entry: Mk 11:1-11, 70, 87, 106, 139, 146, 414, 442
The Fig Tree Cursed: Mk 11:12-14, 44-45, 70, 106-107, 134, 227, 428
The Cleansing of the Temple: Mk 11:15-19, 44-45, 66, 70-71, 87, 106-107,
137, 227-228, 423
The Withered Fig Tree: Mk 11:20-25, 44-45, 70, 107, 118, 134, 227, 477
Jesus Authority: Mk 11:27-33, 66, 71, 87, 137, 214, 358
604
The Parable of the Evil Tenants: Mk 12:1-12, 71-72, 422

Paying Caesars Taxes: Mk 12:13-17, 45-46, 66, 131, 216, 389, 422
The Controversy over Resurrection: Mk 12:18-27, 46-47, 72, 137, 380-381,
423
The Greatest Commandment: Mk 12:28-34, 47-48, 67, 131, 186, 367
Davids Lord: Mk 12:35-37, 51, 66-67, 87, 192, 423
Scribal Hypocrisy: Mk 12:38-40, 67, 131, 222
The Widows Coin: Mk 12:41-44, 67
The Eschatological Discourse: Mk 13:1-37, 47-48, 107-112, 118, 126, 128,
145
Introduction: Mk 13:1-4, 88, 107, 145, 443
The Beginning of Sorrows: Mk 13:5-13, 51, 108, 443
The Fall of Jerusalem: Mk 13:14-23, 108-110
The Coming of the Son of Man: Mk 13:24-32, 110
Eschatological Watchfulness: Mk 13:33-37, 110-112
The Priests Conspire Against Jesus: Mk 14:1-2, 87,112, 115, 137
Jesus Anointed: Mk 14:3-9, 112-113, 139
Judas the Traitor: Mk 14:10-11, 72. 113. 115. 229. 424
The Preparations for Passover: Mk 14:12-16, 113, 119, 139, 482
Judass Treachery Foretold: Mk 14:17-21, 113-115, 488
The Eucharist: Mk 14:22-25, 114-115, 119, 139, 141-142, 320, 363
Peters Denial Foretold: Mk 14:26-31, 116
The Agony in the Garden: Mk 14:32-42, 48, 88, 116-117, 144, 187, 247, 363
Jesus Arrested: Mk 14:43-52, 67, 72, 115-117, 119-120, 146, 188, 321, 425,
489
Jesus Before the Sanhedrin: Mk 14:53-65, 68, 72-76, 137, 139, 141, 229, 321,
384, 425
Peter Denies Jesus: Mk 14:66-72, 118
Jesus Tried by Pilate: Mk 15:1-15, 68, 76, 78-79, 87, 137, 233, 242, 426
Scourging and Mockery: Mk 15:16-20, 79, 137
The Way to Calvary: Mk 15:21-22, 120, 270, 431
The Crucifixion: Mk 15:23-27, 79, 137-138, 234
Jesus Mocked: Mk 15:28-32, 76, 137, 234
Jesus Dies: Mk 15:33-39, 48-49, 73, 79-80, 137-138, 146, 189, 234-235, 432,
510
The Women Witnesses: Mk 15:40-41, 121
Joseph Buries Jesus: Mk 15:41-47,121, 235, 270, 433, 490
The Young Man in the Tomb: Mk 16:1-8, 120-122, 139-140, 144, 146, 321,
491
Other Apparitions: Mk 16: 9-20, 118, 122, 132
THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW
Jesus Genealogy: Mt 1:1-17, 154-155, 314
Jesus Immanuel: Mt 1:18-22, 152, 155-156, 171-172, 189, 193, 336, 359
The Coming of the Magi: Mt 2:1-12, 152,157-158, 324-325
Index
605
The Flight to Egypt and Massacre of the Innocents: Mt 2:13-18, 152, 158-159,
205, 314-315
The Return from Egypt: Mt 2:19-23, 152, 158-159, 315, 319
The Ministry of John the Baptizer: Mt 3:1-12, 161-162, 167, 171-173, 189,
193, 204, 226, 314, 316, 322, 325, 350, 352, 382
Jesus Baptized: Mt 3:13-17, 162-163, 191, 194-196, 316-318, 321-322, 361363, 397-398, 400, 482
Jesus Tempted: Mt 4:1-17, 173-175, 191, 194-196, 316-318, 321-322, 361363, 397-398, 400, 482
The Call of the First Disciples: Mt 4:18-22, 245-246
An Outpouring of Miracles: Mt 4:23-25, 200, 237, 247, 306, 511
The Sermon on the Mount: Mt 5:1-7:29, 152, 247, 276, 277-287, 322
The Beatitudes: Mt 5:1-10, 176, 220, 237, 277-279, 322
The Parables of Salt and Light: Mt 5:11-16, 280
Jesus and the Law: Mt 5:17-19, 149-150, 186, 204, 254, 281, 313-314
The New Morality: Mt 5:20-48, 177, 213-214, 254, 281-284, 195
Secret Almsgiving: Mt 6:1-4, 177, 284-285
Secret Prayer: Mt 6:5-6, 177, 284
The Lords Prayer: Mt 6:7-15, 177-180, 187, 196, 286, 363-367
Secret Fasting: Mt 6:16-18, 284, 372
Treasure in Heaven: Mt 6:19-21, 285, 372
The Parable about the Eye: Mt 6:22-23, 285-286, 273
God and Money: Mt 6:24, 285, 473
The Parable about the Lilies of the Field: Mt 6:25-34, 184, 246, 285
Do Not Judge: Mt 7:1-5, 286, 451
Pearls and Swine: Mt 7:6, 286
Confident Prayer: Mt 7:7-11, 181
The Golden Rule: Mt 7:12, 285
The Two Gates: Mt 7:13-14, 285
The Fruits of Prophecy: Mt 7:15-20, 286
True Discipleship: Mt 7:21-29, 181, 202, 286-287, 452
The Cure of a Leper: Mt 8:1-4, 237, 306-307, 322
The Centurions Servant Healed: Mt 8:5-13, 307, 511-512
The Cure of Peters Mother-in-law: Mt 8:14-15, 200, 307-308, 318, 321
Many Cures and Exorcisms: Mt 8:16-17, 200-201, 237, 308
The Wandering Messiah: Mt 8:18-22, 204-205, 238, 246, 464
Jesus Calms the Sea: Mt 8:23-27, 201-202, 238, 347-348, 308, 513, 455
The Demoniacs of Gadara: Mt 8:28-34, 201, 350, 308-309, 320, 510, 513
The Cure of a Paralytic: Mt 9:1-8, 205, 309, 363, 406
Matthew Called: Mt 9:9, 250
Table Fellowship with Sinners: Mt 9:10-13, 205-208, 250, 406
The Debate over Fasting: Mt 9:14-17, 163-165, 206, 355, 406
A Woman Cured, a Girl Raised: Mt 9:18-26, 247, 309-310, 321
Two Blind Men Healed: Mt 9:27-31, 310
A Dumb Demoniac Exorcized: Mt 9:32-34, 196-197, 251, 310, 403
The Ripe Harvest: Mt 9:35-37, 250, 465
The Missionary Discourse: Mt 10:1-11:1, 152, 238, 276, 287-290, 401
606
The Sending of the Twelve: Mt 10:1-16, 246, 250-251, 287-288, 465

Missionaries Persecuted: Mt 10:17-25, 180, 191, 196-197, 251, 257, 288289, 482
Fearless Proclamation: Mt 10:26-33, 180-181, 251, 288-289, 370
Final Teachings: Mt 10:34-11:1, 238, 252-253, 289-290, 345, 471, 485
The Baptizers Question: Mt 11:2-5, 165, 311, 356
Jesus Praises John: Mt 11:6-15, 166-168, 238, 357
The Fickle Children: Mt 11:16-19, 168-169, 197, 238, 356
The Unbelief of the Lake Towns: Mt 11:20-24, 238
Jesus Reveals the Father: Mt 11:25-30, 182-183, 239, 314, 325, 389, 507
Picking Corn on the Sabbath: Mt 12:1-8, 206-208
A Man with a Withered Hand Cured: Mt 12:9-14, 205, 208, 3111, 405, 407
Jesus the Servant Heals: Mt 12:15-21, 191-192, 311, 318
The Controversy over Beelzebul: Mt 12:22-32, 191-192, 196-198, 209, 251,
311, 369, 390, 403
Speech Discloses the Heart: Mt 12:33-37, 192
The Sign of Jonah: Mt 12:38-42, 208-210, 226
The Unclean Spirit Returns: Mt 12:43-45, 198, 209, 507
Jesus True Family: Mt 12:46-50, 183, 239, 252, 364, 454
The Parabolic Discourse: Mt 13:1-52, 152, 239, 276, 290-293
Introduction: Mt 13:1-3, 291
The Parable of the Sower: Mt 13:4-9, 291
Speaking in Parables: Mt 13:10-17, 239-240, 252, 286, 291, 318, 438
The Allegory of the Sower: Mt 13:18-23, 291-292
The Parable About Weeds in the Wheat: Mt 13:24-30, 291-292
The Parable of the Mustard Seed: Mt 13:31-32, 291
The Parable of the Leaven: Mt 13:33, 291
Teaching in Parables: Mt 13:34-35, 239, 291, 319
The Allegory of the Weeds in the Wheat: Mt 13:36-43, 198-199, 253, 292
The Parables of the Treasure and the Pearl: Mt 13:44-46, 253, 292-293
The Parable about the Net Full of Fish: Mt 13:47-50, 253, 292
The Ideal Scribe: Mt 13:51-52, 150, 253-254, 293
Rejection at Nazareth: Mt 13:53-58, 240, 435
Jesus and Herod: Mt 14:1-2, 225, 416
The Death of the Baptizer: Mt 14:3-12, 169-170, 205, 225-226
The First Multiplication of the Loaves: Mt 14:13-21, 240-241, 254, 3111, 438,
451, 484, 513
Jesus and Peter Walk on the Water: Mt 14:22-33, 248-250, 320, 322, 324
Many Cures at Gennesaret: Mt 14:34-36, 437
The Traditions of the Pharisees: Mt 15:1-9, 183, 210, 254
What Makes One Unclean: Mt 15:10-20, 183-184, 205, 210-211, 241, 254
The Canaanite Womans Daughter Delivered: Mt 15:21-28, 202, 205, 312,
325
Many Cures Near the Lake: Mt 15:29-31, 241, 325
The Second Multiplication of the Loaves: Mt 15:32-39, 241, 254, 311-312,
325
Reading the Signs of the Times: Mt 16:1-4, 226, 229
Index
607
The Leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees: Mt 16:5-12, 211-212, 226, 254,
322
Peters Profession: Mt 16:13-20, 150, 240, 246, 254-256, 320, 366, 412, 457
The First Prophecy of the Passion: Mt 16:21-23, 187, 227, 256-257, 324
The Demands of Discipleship: Mt 16:24-28, 257, 270
The Transfiguration: Mt 17:1-8, 257-258, 322
The Discussion about Elijah: Mt 17:9-13, 258
The Moonstruck Boy: Mt17: 14-21, 202, 240, 258-259, 312, 321, 477
The Second Prophecy of the Passion: Mt 17:22-23, 227, 259
Peter and the Tax: Mt 17:24-27, 218-220, 324
The Ecclesial Discourse: Mt 17:24-18:35, 152, 259, 276, 293-298
Becoming a Child: Mt 18:1-4, 294
Avoiding Scandal: Mt 18:5-11, 184, 294-295
The Lost Sheep: Mt 18:12-14, 295-296, 375
Mutual Correction: Mt 18:15-18, 296, 477
Prayer in Common: Mt 18:19-20, 181, 296-297
The Unforgiving Servant: Mt 18:23-35, 179-180, 197-198
Marriage and Divorce: Mt 19:1-12, 184, 212-214, 241, 259-260
Jesus and the Children: Mt 19:13-15, 260, 363, 478
The Call of the Rich Man: Mt 19:16-26, 185, 260-261, 378
The Reward of Renunciation: Mt 19:27-30, 261-262, 381
The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard: Mt 20:1-16, 262-263
The Third Prophecy of the Passion: Mt 20:17-19, 227, 480
The Mother of James and John: Mt 20:21-23, 263-264
Leadership in Service: Mt 20:24-28, 232, 264
Two Blind Men Healed: Mt 20:29-34, 310
The Triumphal Entry: Mt 21:1-11, 207, 241-242, 264, 318-319, 442
The Cleansing of the Temple: Mt 21:12-17, 228-229, 242
The Barren Fig Tree: Mt 21:18-22, 227, 264-265, 314, 428
Jesus Authority: Mt 21:21-27, 229
The Parable of the Two Sons: Mt 21:28-32, 214-215
The Parable of the Wicked Tenants: Mt 21:33-46, 215, 228, 242, 422
The Parable of the Wedding Feast: Mt 22:1-14, 216-217, 265-266
Paying Caesars Taxes: Mt 22:15-22, 185-186, 216, 380, 422
The Debate over Resurrection: Mt 22:23-33, 186-212, 226, 229, 423, 485
The Greatest Commandment: Mt 22:34-40, 186, 367
Davids Lord: Mt 22:41-46, 192
Pharisaical Hypocrisy and Christian Clericalism: Mt 23:1-12, 217-218
The Woes: Mt 23:13-36, 220-222
The Lament over Jerusalem: Mt 23:37-39, 222-223, 260
The Eschatological Discourse: Mt 24:1-25:46, 153, 266, 276, 298-304
Introduction: Mt 24:1-3, 298, 443
The Beginning of Tribulations: Mt 24:4-14, 298-299, 443
The Destruction of Jerusalem: Mt 24:15-25, 299-300, 469
The Second Coming: Mt 24:26-36, 300-301, 469
Eschatological Readiness: Mt 24:37-44, 300-302, 469, 471
True Stewardship: Mt 24:45-51, 302
608
The Parable of the Bridesmaids: Mt 25:1-13, 302-303

The Parable of the Talents: Mt 25:14-30, 303
The Parable of the Sheep and the Goats: Mt 25:31-46, 187, 303-304, 324
The Priests Conspire Against Jesus: Mt 26:1-5, 225, 242, 424
The Anointing at Bethany: Mt 26:6-13, 266
Judas Betrays Jesus: Mt 26:14-16, 229, 324
Passover Preparations: Mt 26: 17-19, 267
The Last Supper: Mt 26:20-25, 267, 324, 484, 488
The Eucharist: Mt 26:26-29, 153, 161, 187, 267, 320
Peters Denial Predicted: Mt 26:30-35, 267-268, 324
The Agony in the Garden: Mt 26:36-46, 187, 268, 363
The Arrest: Mt 26:47-56, 153, 188, 269, 319, 324, 425, 489
Jesus Faces the Sanhedrin: Mt 26:57-68, 153, 267
Peter Denies Jesus: Mt 26:69-75, 153, 267
Judas Despairs: Mt 27:1-10, 229-231, 270, 324, 484
Jesus Before Pilate: Mt 27:11-26, 231, 233, 242-243, 322, 426
Jesus Scourged and Mocked: Mt 27:27-31, 233-234, 243, 322
The Crucifixion: Mt 27: 32-38, 233-234, 243, 322
The Crucified Jesus Mocked: Mt 27:39-44, 231, 244, 321, 482
Jesus Dies: Mt 27:45-56, 153, 189, 234-235, 247, 325
Joseph Buries Jesus: Mt 27:57-61, 235, 270-271, 324, 433, 490
The Guards at the Tomb: Mt 27:62-66, 235
The Empty Tomb: Mt 28:1-8, 153, 247, 271, 322, 324, 491
Jesus Appears to the Women: Mt 28:9-10, 153, 271-272, 324
Lies about Jesus Resurrection: Mt 28:11-15, 223, 236
The Great Commission: Mt 28:16-20, 171-172, 189, 193, 244, 247, 272-273,
307, 319, 322-325, 493-494
THE GOSPEL OF LUKE
Prologue: Lk:1-4, 329-330, 540
Johns Birth Foretold: Lk 1:5-25, 334-337, 359, 433, 541
The Annunciation: Lk 1:26-38, 334,337, 359, 541
The Visitation, The Magnificat: Lk 1:39-56, 334, 338-340, 346, 359, 439
The Birth and Circumcision of John: Lk 1:57-66, 335, 340, 359
The Benedictus: Lk 1:67-79, 334, 340-341, 359-360, 540
Johns Boyhood: Lk 1:80, 341
Jesus Birth: Lk 2:1-20, 334, 341-344, 360, 414, 464, 516
The Circumcision and Presentation: Lk 2:21-38, 344-347, 360, 494, 540-541
Jesus Hidden Life: Lk 2:39-40, 347, 360, 540
The Finding in the Temple: Lk 2:41-52, 333-334, 347-348, 360
John the Baptizer Preaches: Lk 3:1-18, 349-353, 360, 387, 391, 416, 420, 427,
434, 445, 541
John Imprisoned: Lk 19-20, 352-353, 416
Jesus Baptized: Lk 3:21-22, 353-354, 361, 387-388, 526, 540, 544
Jesus Genealogy: Lk 3:23-38, 360-361, 422
Index
609
Jesus Tempted: Lk 4:1-13, 342, 361-363, 382, 397-400, 430, 439, 464, 495,
541
Jesus at Nazareth: Lk 4:14-30, 345, 388-389, 420, 435-436, 504, 541
The Exorcism at Capernaum: Lk 4:31-37, 400, 446, 510, 515
Simons Mother-in-law Healed: Lk 4:38-39, 446- 510
Evening Cures: Lk 4: 40-41, 400-401, 510
Jesus Tours Judea: Lk 4:42-44, 436-437, 510
The Call of the First Disciples: Lk 5:1-11, 363, 446-447, 515
A Leper Cured: Lk 5:12-16, 511, 515, 538
A Paralytic Cured: Lk 5:17-26, 363, 406, 511, 543
The Call of Levi and Table Fellowship with Sinners: Lk 5:27-32, 354, 406, 447
The Debate over Fasting: Lk 5:33-39, 354-355, 406-407
Picking Grain on the Sabbath: Lk 61-65, 407
A Withered Hand Healed: Lk 6:6-11, 407, 511
The Call of the Twelve: Lk 6:12-16, 448, 494
The Crowds Seek Jesus: Lk 6:17-19, 437, 511, 538
The Sermon on the Plain: Lk 6:20-49, 44-452, 498-499, 543
The Beatitudes and Woes: Lk 6:20-26, 448-450
Love of Enemies: Lk 6:27-35, 450-451
Compassion and Generosity: Lk 6:36-38, 451
Avoiding Judgment: Lk 6:39-45, 451
True Discipleship: Lk 6:45-49, 451-452
The Centurions Servant Healed: Lk 7:1-10, 511-512
The Raising of the Widows Son: Lk 7:11-17, 365, 452, 512, 538, 543
The Baptizers Question: Lk 7:18-22, 355-356, 512
Jesus Praises John: Lk 7:23-30, 356, 365, 438, 512, 538
The Fickle Children: Lk 7:31-35, 356
The Sinful Woman: Lk 7:36-50, 407-409
Women Disciples with Jesus: Lk 8:1-3, 416, 453
The Parabolic Discourse: Lk 8:4-18, 363, 453-454, 499
The Parable of the Sower: Lk 8: 4-10, 438 453
Teaching in Parables: Lk 8:9-10, 438
The Allegory of the Sower: Lk 8:11-15, 401, 453-454
The Parable of the Lamp: Lk 8:16-18, 440-441, 453-454
Jesus True Family: Lk 8:19-21, 364, 455
Jesus Calms a Storm: Lk 8:22-25, 401, 455, 513
The Gerasene Demoniac: Lk 8:26-39, 365, 401, 455, 513
A Woman Cured, A Girl Raised: Lk 8:40-56, 455-456, 513
The Missionary Discourse: Lk 9:1-6, 401-402, 456, 487, 499-500
Jesus and Herod: Lk 9:7-9, 356-357, 416-417, 457
The Multiplication of the Loaves: 9:10-17, 437-438, 456, 492, 513, 515-516,
543
Peters Profession: Lk 9:18-21, 366, 417, 437, 456-457
The First Prophecy of the Passion: Lk 9:22, 420, 457-459
The Way of the Cross: Lk 9:23-26, 458-459, 490
The Transfiguration: Lk 9:28-36, 401, 417, 459-460, 494-495, 543
The Epileptic Demoniac Boy: Lk 9:37-43, 365, 402, 461
610
The Second Prophecy of the Passion: Lk 9:44-45, 463

Avoiding Ambition: Lk 9:46-48, 461-462
The Strange Exorcist: Lk 9:49-50, 462
The Journey Discourse: Lk 9:51-19:27, 463-480, 500-508
The Inhospitable Samaritans: Lk 9:51-56, 463-464, 501
The Demands of Discipleship Lk 9:57-62, 464, 501
The Mission of the Seventy-Two: Lk 10: 1-16, 402-403, 454, 465-466
The Seventy-Two Return: The Fall of Satan like Lightning: Lk 10:17-20,
403, 466-467, 487-488, 503, 513
Jesus Reveals the Father: Lk 10:21-22, 366-367, 389-390, 503
The Privileges of Discipleship: Lk 10:23-24, 240-467, 503
The Great Commandment: Lk 10:25-28, 367-368
The Parable of the Good Samaritan: Lk 10:29-37, 368, 502
Martha and Mary: Lk 10: 38-42, 468, 503
The Father Prayer: Lk 11:1-4, 363-364, 468, 505
The Parable of the Persistent Friend: Lk 11:5-8, 378, 468
Persistent Prayer: Lk 11:9-13, 389-390, 468, 505
The Controversy About Beelzebul: Lk 11:14-23, 369, 403-404, 507, 541
The Unclean Spirit Returns: Lk 11:24-26, 507
A Woman Blesses Jesus: Lk 11: 27-28, 27-28,
The Sign of Jonah: Lk 11:29-32, 439-440, 505, 543
The Parable of the Lamp Revisited: Lk 11:33-36, 440-441, 505
Woes to the Pharisees and Lawyers: Lk 11:37-54, 222, 409-411, 507
The Leaven of the Pharisees: Lk 12: 1-3, 412-413, 441, 515
Facing Persecution: Lk 12:4-12, 369-370, 390-391, 398, 403, 412, 439,
482, 503
Against Hoarding: The Rich Fool: Lk 12:13-21, 370, 439, 469, 503, 530
The Parable of the Ravens and the Flowers: Lk 12:22-32, 372-372, 469, 504
Almsgiving: Lk 12:33-34, 469
Eschatological Readiness: Lk 12:35-48, 372-373, 469, 472-473, 506
Jesus Second Baptism: Lk 12:49-50, 357, 391, 506
Reading the Signs of the Times: Lk 12:54-59, 441-442, 506
Pilates Violence: Lk 13:1-5, 428
The Parable of the Barren Fig Tree: Lk 13:6-9, 428-430
A Woman Healed on the Sabbath: Lk 13:10-17, 365, 404, 507, 514
The Parable of the Mustard Seed: Lk 13: 18-19, 453
The Parable of the Yeast: Lk 13:20-21, 506
Who Will Find Salvation: Lk 13:22-30, 506-507
Herod the Fox: Lk 13:31-33, 405, 412, 417
The Lament over Jerusalem: Lk 13:34-35, 328, 417-418, 502, 516
A Dropsical Man Healed on the Sabbath: Lk 14:1-6, 407, 514
On Cultivating Humility: Lk 14:7-11, 436
Hospitality to the Marginal: Lk 14:12-14, 504
The Parable of the Wedding Feast: Lk 14:1524, 507
The Kingdom and Family Relationships: Lk 14:25-27, 501
Renouncing Possessions: Lk 14:28-33, 501
Against Tepidity: Lk 14:34-35, 501-502
Index
611
The Parable of the Lost Sheep: Lk 15:1-7, 374-375, 412-413

The Parable of the Lost Coin: Lk 15:8-10, 374-375, 412-413
The Prodigal Son and the Dutiful Son: Lk 15:11-32, 375-376, 413-414,
475, 508
The Crafty Steward: Lk 16:1-8, 373, 504
Using Money: Lk 16:9-13, 373-374. 504
Pharisaical Greed: Lk 16:14-15, 373. 474-475
Storming the Kingdom: Lk 16:16, 357, 476
The Law Remains: Lk 16:17, 357, 476
Marriage and Divorce: Lk 16:18, 476
The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus: Lk 16:19-31, 475, 504
Avoiding Scandal: Lk 17:1-3a, 502
Mutual Forgiveness: Lk 17:3b-4, 477, 502
Increasing Faith: Lk 17:5-6, 477, 505
Unprofitable Servants: Lk 17:7-10, 477-478, 503
Ten Lepers Cured: Lk 17:11-19, 365, 514
The Coming of the Kingdom: Lk 17:20-37, 469-471
The Widow and the Unjust Judge: Lk 18:1-8, 377, 471-472, 505
The Pharisee and the Publican: Lk 18:9-14, 376-377
Jesus and the Little Infants: Lk 18:15-17, 478
The Call of the Rich Ruler: Lk 18:18-27, 3778-379, 504
The Reward of Renunciation: Lk 18:28-30, 471, 480, 516
The Third Prophecy of the Passion: Lk 18:31-34, 471, 480, 516
A Blind Man Cured: Lk 18:35-43, 417. 505, 514
Jesus and Zacchaeus: Lk 19:1-10, 504
The Parable of the Pounds: Lk 19: 11 4-27, 479, 486, 502
The Entry into Jerusalem: Lk 19:28-40, 365. 414-415, 442, 482-481, 486
The Lament over Jerusalem: Lk 19:41-44, 412, 414-415
The Purification of the Temple: Lk 19:45-48, 421
The Source of Jesus Authority: Lk 20:1-8, 358, 442, 523
The Parable of the Wicked Tenants: Lk 20:9-19, 421-422, 442
Paying Caesars Taxes: Lk 20:20-26, 380, 422
The Controversy over Resurrection: Lk 20:17-40, 380-381, 422-423, 541
Davids Lord: Lk 20:41-44, 423
Scribal Hypocrisy: Lk 20:45-47, 222, 423, 442
The Widows Coin: Lk 21:1-4, 421,482
The Eschatological Discourse: Lk 21-38, 441-444, 508
Introduction: Lk 21:5-7, 442
The First Tribulations: Lk 21:8-19, 443, 482
Jerusalem Destroyed: Lk 21:21-24, 443
The Coming of the Son of Man: Lk 21:25-28, 443-444, 495
Eschatological Readiness: Lk 21:29-38, 444
The Conspiracy against Jesus: Lk 22:1-6, 424, 442, 482
The Preparation of Passover: Lk 22:7-13, 483
The Last Supper: Lk 22:14-18, 483
The Eucharist: Lk 22:19-20, 483-484, 515-516, 543
The Last Discourse: Lk 22:21-38, 363, 381-382, 465, 469, 484-487, 508, 538
612
Jesus Prays in the Garden: Lk 22:39-46, 382-383, 391, 488-489, 538

The Arrest: Lk 22:47-53, 424-425, 489, 514, 516, 541
Peter Denies Jesus: Lk 22:54-65, 425, 290
The Morning Trial: Lk 22:66-23:1, 383-384, 425-426, 542
Jesus Before Pilate, I: Lk 23:2-7, 426-428
Jesus Before Herod: Lk 23:8-12, 418-419, 426, 428, 430
Jesus Before Pilate, II: Lk 23:13-25, 426, 430, 521
The Way to Calvary: Lk 23:26-32, 412, 431-432, 490, 513
The Crucifixion: Lk 23:33-34, 384, 426-427, 432, 513, 522, 530, 542
Jesus Mocked: The Good Thief: Lk 23:35-43, 534, 384-385, 427, 432, 530
Jesus Dies: Lk 23:44-46, 385, 432
The Centurion and the Crowds: Lk 23:47-49, 427, 432, 434, 445
Joseph Buries Jesus: Lk 23:50-56, 433, 490
The Empty Tomb: Lk 24:1-12, 463, 491, 516, 544
The Way to Emmaus: Lk 24:13-35, 359, 438, 492-493, 513, 543-544
Jesus Appears to the Disciples in Jerusalem: Lk 24:36-49, 351, 385-386, 493,
526, 541
The Ascension: Lk 24:50-54, 494, 540
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
Prologue: Act 1:1-5, 331, 351, 390, 491, 526, 540-541, 543
The Ascension: Act 1:6-11, 471, 495, 540, 544
The Disciples in the Upper Room: Act 1:12-14, 346, 391-392, 5117-518, 541
Replacing Judas: Act 1:15-26, 2:1-13, 346, 484, 517-518
Pentecost: Act 2: 1-13, 352, 382, 388, 390, 391-394, 468, 493, 517
Peters Pentecost Sermon: Act 2:14-36, 346, 382, 394, 487, 493, 517-520, 539,
543
The First Baptisms: Act 2:37-41, 346, 382, 394-395, 493-494, 541
The Jerusalem Community: Act 2:42-47, 395, 521
The Cure at the Beautiful Gate: Act 3:1-10, 521, 538-539, 541
Peters Temple Discourse: Act 3:11-26, 521-522, 539
The Apostles before the Sanhedrin: Act 4:1-22, 522-524, 541-542
The Little Pentecost: Act 4:23-31, 523-524
Ananias and Sapphira: Act 5:1-11, 382, 398-399, 486, 541
Arrest and Deliverance: Act 5:17-21a, 524, 538, 542
The Second Appearance before the Sanhedrin: Act 5:21b-33, 524-525, 542
Gamaliels Intervention: Act 5:34-42, 524-525
The Seven Deacons: Act 6:1-15, 425
Stephens Arrest and Speech: Act 7:1-54, 521, 527-530, 543
The Death of Stephen: Act 7:55-8:3, 530, 538, 542, 544
Philip in Samaria: Act 8:4-8, 525
Simon the Magician: Act 8:9-25, 382, 539
Philip Baptizes a Eunuch: Act 8:26-40, 525
The Conversion of Saul: Act 9:1-19, 493, 531-533, 538, 544
Paul in Damascus: Act 9:20-25, 533, 539
Paul in Jerusalem: Act 9:26-31, 533, 539
Index
613
Peter Cures a Paralytic: Act 9:32-35, 538, 543

Peter Raises a Woman: Act 9:36-43, 538-539
Peter Comes to the Household of Cornelius: Act 10:1-33, 487, 525, 539
Peters Speech in the House of Cornelius: Act 10:34-43, 512, 526, 539
Peter Baptizes the Household of Cornelius: Acts 10:44-48, 526
Peter Defends His Baptism of the Household of Cornelius: Act 11:1-18a, 525
The Foundation of the Church at Antioch: Act 11:18b-30, 534
Peters Arrest and Miraculous Deliverance: Act 12:1-19, 487, 536, 538-539
Paul and Elymus: Act 13:4-12, 539
Paul at Antioch in Pisidia: Act 13:13-43,534-535, 539
Paul and Barnabas Turn to the Pagans: Act 13:44-52, 534-535
Paul Heals a Cripple: Act 14:8-18, 487, 538-539, 543
The Convocation in Jerusalem, Act 15:1-21, 527, 539
The Apostolic Letter: Act 15:22-29, 382, 486
Paul Sent by Vision to Macedonia: Act 16:9-10, 539
Paul and Silas Imprisoned and Delivered: Act 16:16-40, 538-539
Paul in Athens: Act 17:16-22a, 536-537
Pauls Speech before the Areopagus: Act 16:22b-34, 537
The Disciples at Ephesus: Act 19:1-7, 539-540
The Jewish Exorcists: Act 19:11-20, 538-539
Paul Raises a Dead Man: Act20:7-12, 538-539
Pauls Farewell to the Elders of Ephesus: Act 20:17-38, 382, 537, 539
Pauls Address in Jerusalem: Act 22:1-21, 531-533, 536, 538, 539
Paul before the Sanhedrin: Act 22:30-23:11, 487, 541-542
Paul Appeals to Caesar, Act 25:1-12, 539
Pauls Speech before King Agrippa: Act 26:1-23, 346, 531-533, 538
Paul in Rome: Act 28:30-31, 328, 524
Marquette Studies in Philosophy

Andrew Tallon, Editor
Standing orders accepted
All books available as eBook
Harry Klocker, S.J. William of Ockham and the Divine Freedom. ISBN 0-87462-001-5.
141 pages, pp., index. $15. Second edition, reviewed, corrected and with a new
Introduction.
Margaret Monahan Hogan. Finality and Marriage. ISBN 0-87462-600-5. 122 pp. Paper.
$15.
Gerald A. McCool, S.J. The Neo-Thomists. ISBN 0-87462-601-1. 175 pp. Paper. $20.
Max Scheler. Ressentiment. ISBN 0-87462-602-1. 172 pp. Paper. $20. New Introduction
by Manfred S. Frings.
Knud Lgstrup. Metaphysics. Translated by Dr. Russell Dees ISBN 0-87462-603-X.
Volume I, 342 pp. Paper. $35. ISBN 0-67462-607-2. Volume II, 402 pp. Paper. $40.
Two volume set priced at $70.
Howard P. Kainz. Democracy and the Kingdom of God . ISBN 0-87462-610-2. 250 pp.
Paper. $25.
Manfred Frings. Max Scheler. A Concise Introduction into the World of a Great Thinker
ISBN 0-87462-605-6. 200 pp. Paper. $20. Second ed., rev. New Foreword by the
author.
G. Heath King. Existence Thought Style: Perspectives of a Primary Relation, portrayed
through the work of Sren Kierkegaard. English edition by Timothy Kircher. ISBN 087462-606-4. 187 pp., index. Paper. $20.
Augustine Shutte. Philosophy for Africa. ISBN 0-87462-608-0. 184 pp. Paper. $20.
Paul Ricoeur. Key to Husserls Ideas I. Translated by Bond Harris and Jacqueline Bouchard
Spurlock.With a Foreword by Pol Vandevelde. ISBN 0-87462-609-9. 176 pp., index.
Paper. $20.
Karl Jaspers. Reason and Existenz. Afterword by Pol Vandevelde. ISBN 0-87462-611-0.
180 pp. Paper. $20.
Gregory R. Beabout. Freedom and Its Misuses: Kierkegaard on Anxiety and Despair ISBN
0-87462-612-9. 192 pp., index. Paper. $20.
Manfred S. Frings. The Mind of Max Scheler. The First Comprehensive Guide Based on the
Complete Works ISBN 0-87462-613-7. 328 pp. Paper. $35.
Claude Pavur. Nietzsche Humanist. ISBN 0-87462-614-5. 214 pp., index. Paper. $25.
Pierre Rousselot. Intelligence: Sense of Being, Faculty of God. Translation of LIntellectualismse
de saint Thomas with a Foreword and Notes by Andrew Tallon. ISBN 0-87462-6153. 236 pp., index. Paper. $25.
Immanuel Kant. Critique of Practical Reason. Translation by H.W. Cassirer. Edited by G.
Heath King and Ronald Weitzman and with an Introduction by D.M. MacKinnon.
ISBN 0-87462-616-1. Paper. 218 pp. $20.
Gabriel Marcels Perspectives on The Broken World. Translated by Katharine Rose Hanley.
The Broken World, A Four-Act Play followed by Concrete Approaches to Investigating the Ontological Mystery. Six orignal illustrations by Stephen Healy. Commentaries by Henri Gouhier and Marcel Belay. Eight Appendices. Introduction by Ralph
McInerny. Bibliographies. ISBN 0-87462-617-X. paperbound. 242 pp. $25.
Karl-Otto Apel. Towards a Transformation of Philosophy. New Fore-word by Pol
Vandevelde.ISBN 0-87462-619-6. Paper. 308 pp. $35.
Gene Fendt. Is Hamlet a Religious Drama? As Essay on a Question in Kierkegaard. ISBN 087462-620-X. Paper. 264 pp. $30.
Marquette Studies in Theology

Andrew Tallon, Editor
Standing orders accepted
All books available as eBook
Frederick M. Bliss. Understanding Reception. ISBN 0-87462-625-0. 180 pp., index,
bibliography. Paper. $20.
Martin Albl, Paul Eddy, Rene Mirkes, OSF, Editors. Directions in NewTestament
Methods ISBN 0-87462-626-9. 129 pp. Annotated bibliography. Paper. $15. Foreword by William S. Kurz.
Robert M. Doran. Subject and Psyche. ISBN 0-87462-627-7. 285 pp. Paper. $25. Second
ed., rev. With a new Foreword by the author.
Kenneth Hagen, editor. The Bible in the Churches. How Various Christians Interpret the
Scriptures ISBN 0-87462-628-5. 218 pp. Paper. $25. Third, revised editon. New
chapter on Reformed tradition. Index.
Jamie T. Phelps, O.P., Editor. Black and Catholic: The Challenge and Gift of Black Folk.
Contributions of African American Experience and Thought to Catholic Theology. ISBN
0-87462-629-3. 182 pp. Index. Paper. $20. Foreword by Patrick Carey.
Karl Rahner. Spirit in the World. New, Corrected Translation by William Dych.
Foreword by Francis Fiorenza. ISBN 0-87462-630-7. COMPUTER DISK VERSION.
$10. Available on 3.5 inch disk; specify Macintosh or Windows. By a special
arrangement with Continuum Publishing Co.
Karl Rahner. Hearer of the Word. New Translation of the First Edition by Joseph Donceel.
Edited and with anIntroduction by Andrew Tallon. By a special arrangement with
Continuum Publishing Co. ISBN 0-87462-631-5. COMPUTER DISK VERSION.
$10. Available on 3.5 inch disk; specify Macintosh or Windows.
Robert M. Doran. Theological Foundations. Vol. 1 Intentionality and Psyche. ISBN 087462-632-3. 484 pp. Paper. $50.
Robert M. Doran. Theological Foundations. Vol. 2 Theology and Culture. ISBN 0-87462633-1. 533 pp. Paper. $55.
Patrick W. Carey. Orestes A. Brownson: A Bibliography, 1826-1876. ISBN 0-87462-634X. 212 pp. Index. Paper. $25.
John Martinetti, S.J. Reason to Believe Today. ISBN 0-87462-635-8. 216 pp. Paper. $25.
George H. Tavard. Trina Deitas: The Controversy between Hincmar and Gottschalk ISBN
0-87462-636-6. 160 pp. Paper. $20.
Jeanne Cover, IBVM. LoveThe Driving Force. Mary Wards Spirituality. Its Significance
for Moral Theology ISBN 0-87462-637-4. 217 pp. Paper. $25.
David A. Boileau, Editor. Principles of Catholic Social Teaching. ISBN 0-87462-638-2.
204 pp. Paper. $25.
Michael Purcell. Mystery and Method: The Other in Rahner and Levinas. With a Foreword
by Andrew Tallon. ISBN 0-87462-639-0. Paper. 394 pp. $40.
W.W. Meissner, S.J., M.D. To the Greater Glory: A Psychological Study of Ignatian
Spirituality. ISBN 0-87462-640-4. Paper. 657 pp. $50.
Catholic Theology in the University: Source of Wholeness. Virginia M. Shaddy, editor. ISBN
0-87462-641-2. Paper. 120 pp. $15.
Subscibe to eNews from Marquette University Press
Email [email protected] with the word subscribe as the subject.
Visit Marquette University Press online: www.marquette.edu/mupress/

Synoptic Christology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Synoptic Christology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Synoptic Christology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Donald L. Gelpi, S.J.

Marquette Studies in Theology

Cover image compliments of St. Isaac of Syria Skete.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be

For My Mother, Alice,

Donald L. Gelpi: The Firstborn of Many

tiqued the section of Marks gospel in an earlier, more primitive version

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative

community. Dialectic compares and contrasts different theological frames

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

evangelists begin the story of Jesus with an infancy narrative. As in oral

Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative

contrast dialectically each evangelists narrative Christological frame of

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

In attempting a dialectical analysis of the three synoptic gospels, I make

Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative

Comic narrative engages the negative emotions. Satire, for example,

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

it in believing Christians defined one of their major purposes in writing.

Chapter 1: Understanding Gospel As Narrative

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Jesus temptation in the desert follows immediately upon His baptism.

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Nevertheless, the prediction has theological significance for Mark, for

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

The Baptizers martyrdom clearly foreshadows Jesus own death on the

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Jesus confrontation with the Pharisees in the bread section of Marks

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

glorified state. The temporal reference alludes to Ex 24:16. There God

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Absolute Trust in the Father

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Jesus uses deliberate hyperbole in order to underscore the point that,

Part 1: Marks Narrative Christology

Chapter 2: Positive Dramatic Linkages in Mark

Jesus also challenges the presupposition on which the Sadducees have