chhotebhai –
Where was the Holy Family when Herod ordered the killing of the children in Bethlehem? As we approach Christmas, this question began to haunt me. It forced me to look deeply into the infancy narratives in both Mathew’s and Luke’s gospels. As a layman without any scriptural studies, I also had to take recourse to the New Jerome Biblical Commentary (JBC), a standard in all Catholic seminaries.
My first question – Mathew records that shortly after the departure of the Magi the angel instructed Joseph to take his family and flee to Egypt (cf Mat 2:13-14). On his return from Egypt, he settled “in the town called Nazareth” (Mat 2:23), in Galilee; though he had initially wanted to settle in Judea. However, we are told that at the time of the Annunciation, Mary was already residing in Nazareth of Galilee (cf Lk 1:26). So why does Mathew give a different story?
Secondly, as per Mosaic Law, Jesus was circumcised when he was 7 days old (cf Lk 2:21, Lev 12:3). Where did this take place? On the 40th day, for the purification, now called the presentation in the Temple, they went to Jerusalem (cf Lk 2:22, Lev 12:3-4). So they were definitely not in Bethlehem. From Jerusalem they went back to their hometown of Nazareth (cf Lk 2:38).
So where does the flight into Egypt and the killing of the innocents fit into all this? This is a prima facie paradox; so who is correct, Mathew or Luke? For this we need the help of exegesis, as found in the JBC.
In an earlier article “Playing on his Mind” I had mentioned that Mathew was not concerned with writing history, but rather the mystery of his personal experience of Jesus. In contrast, Luke begins his gospel by affirming that he was writing “an ordered account” (Lk 1:4). So, historically speaking should we rely more on Luke? If so, was Mathew wrong?
Here again the answer lies in Mathew’s style of writing. We know that he was primarily addressing his fellow Jews. That is why he often used the term “that the scriptures may be fulfilled”. He was relating current events to his Judaic past. This style of writing is called Midrash (Midras in Hebrew). It is found in both the Testaments.
For example, in Mathew the visit of the Magi (Mat 2:1-12) is linked to “a star emerging” (Num 24:17); the flight into Egypt (cf Mat 2:13-15) with “I called my son out of Egypt” (Hos 11:1); and the killing of the innocents (cf Mat 2:16-18) with a similar incident of “Rachel weeping for her children … because they are no more” (Jer 31:15).
However, despite Mathew’s Midrashic writing exegetes still question the historicity of the event. Mathew says that “Jesus had been born in Bethlehem in Judea during the reign of King Herod” (Mat 2:1), while Luke states that this “took place while Quirinius was the governor of Syria” (Lk 2:2). The problem is that Herod the Great was a vassal king (rex socious) under the Roman empire from 37 – 4 BC, while Quirinius was the governor from 6 – 7 AD.
This anomaly raises further doubts about Mathew’s account of the killing of the innocents, who would have been 20 at most. The question still goes abegging – where was the Holy Family at the time – in Egypt, Nazareth or Jerusalem?
Another anomaly is the difference in the two genealogies. For example Mathew says that Joseph’s father was Jacob (cf Mat 1:16), while Luke says it was Heli (cf Lk 3:23). It therefore becomes extremely difficult to choose what or whom to believe.
Scholarship has no definite answer, so should we accept the infancy narratives in blind faith? The answer may be found in the wisdom of Rev Pedro Arruppe, the former Superior General of the Jesuits. He said that “in the spiritual life there is no such thing as mathematical assurance”. He himself was an accomplished scientist, so he knew what he was talking about. In maths 2+2 will always be 4. However, if we take 1 and 1 it could equal 2, 1, 11 or 0, depending on how the two numerals are placed and which mathematical sign is used; + – ./. = etc.
It is possible that these scriptural observations of mine could shake our faith or raise doubts in our minds. Again we could find the answer in Thomas, erroneously called the doubter. He should be called the Seeker, wanting an answer for his faith. Peter advocates a progression of faith – with goodness, understanding (knowledge), self-control etc (cf 2 Pet 1:18). Despite that Peter says of Paul, “In all his letters there are of course some passages which are hard to understand” (2 Pet 3:16).
Let us then be humble enough, like the eye witnesses Peter and Thomas to say “My Lord and My God” (Jn 20:28); to which Jesus replied “You believe because you can see me. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (Jn 20:29). To that I may add – blessed are those who cannot understand or comprehend and yet believe.
In this run up to Christmas I am asking another uncomfortable question – Is Jesus the Prince of Peace as prophesied 700 years before his birth (cf Is 9:6)? Isaiah, who made accurate prophecies about Jesus’ suffering, also made profound ones on his game-changing role for peace. Here are some of the better known texts that are placed before us in this Advent season:
“They will hammer their swords into ploughshares and their spears into sickles. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, no longer will they learn to make war” (Is 2:4)”. Again, “The wolf will lie with the lamb, the panther lie down with the kid, calf, lion and fat stock beast together, with a little boy to lead them … the lion will eat hay like an ox. The infant will play over the den of the adder; the baby will put his hand into the viper’s lair. But no harm will be done on all my holy mountain” (Is 11:6-8).
Jesus himself said in his last discourse, “Peace I bequeath to you, my own peace I give to you, a peace which the world can’t give, this is my gift to you” (Jn 14:27). Have we attained this peace? Are nations no longer at war with each other? Quoting Isaiah, some fundamentalist Christians don’t believe in taking medication. A pastor’s son was bitten by a poisonous snake but refused to take anti-venom serum. He died. So were these just empty promises?
Look at the wars in Ukraine, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Myanmar and sub-Saharan Africa. Innocent women and children are slaughtered, molested, enslaved. Can we boast of peace? Again, as with the conflicting claims of Mathew and Luke, what do we believe?
There is also a counter-veiling narrative, often used out of context. “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace on earth, it is not peace I have come to bring, but a sword. For I have come to set son against father … a person’s enemies will be the members of his own household” (Mat 10:34-36). At the Presentation too, Simeon makes an ominous prophecy, “He is destined for the fall and rise of many in Israel, destined to be a sign that is opposed, and a sword will pierce your soul too” (Lk 2:34).
We must again take recourse to science to solve a spiritual anomaly. There is a chemical process called electrolysis, where there is a cathode, anode and electrolyte. When electric current is passed through this electrolyte, electrolysis or anodisation takes place. Solids dissolved in the electrolyte move to the anode and get deposited there. This process is also known as electro-plating, as with gold or chrome.
Jesus is the electric current. Society/ family is the electrolyte. After encountering Jesus we cannot remain unmoved. The good will migrate to the anode and get a new lease of life. Those who reject Jesus’ message would resent this, thereby causing dissent or division. This is not intended by Jesus, but a negative fallout to his teaching or presence. This is how we can better understand Jesus’ peace that the world can’t give.
At another level, one could also ask if the world today, despite various conflicts, is more peaceful than it earlier was? That would be highly subjective, as there is no yardstick to measure peace. I would however say that in this era of breaking news, bad news travels at hypersonic speed. This could lead one to the hasty conclusion that things are going from bad to worse. If anybody still says that Jesus has failed to bring peace I would counter by saying that we haven’t given him a chance!
May all of us have an enlightened and peace-filled Christmas.
The writer advocates a scripture-based Christian spirituality.