The Birth of Christ (Matt. i. 18-25)

St Matthew Chapter I : Verses 18-25

Contents

⮚Matt. i. 1-17 Douay-Rheims text & Latin text (Vulgate)

⮚Notes on text

⮚Additional Notes

On the Date of the Nativity

Betrothed or married?

She was found with child, of the Holy Ghost.

Emmanuel

Her firstborn

   

Matt. i. 1-17

18 Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost.

Christi autem generatio sic erat : cum esset desponsata mater ejus Maria Joseph, antequam convenirent inventa est in utero habens de Spiritu Sancto.

 19 Whereupon Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing publicly to expose her, was minded to put her away privately.

Joseph autem vir ejus cum esset justus, et nollet eam traducere, voluit occulte dimittere eam.

 

The Vision of St Joseph. J-J Tissot. Brooklyn Museum.

20 But while he thought on these things, behold the angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost.

Hæc autem eo cogitante, ecce angelus Domini apparuit in somnis ei, dicens : Joseph, fili David, noli timere accipere Mariam conjugem tuam : quod enim in ea natum est, de Spiritu Sancto est.

 21 And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name JESUS. For he shall save his people from their sins.

Pariet autem filium : et vocabis nomen ejus Jesum : ipse enim salvum faciet populum suum a peccatis eorum.

 22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying:

Hoc autem totum factum est, ut adimpleretur quod dictum est a Domino per prophetam dicentem :

 23 Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Ecce virgo in utero habebit, et pariet filium : et vocabunt nomen ejus Emmanuel, quod est interpretatum Nobiscum Deus.

 24 And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife.

Exsurgens autem Joseph a somno, fecit sicut præcepit ei angelus Domini, et accepit conjugem suam.

 25 And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Et non cognoscebat eam donec peperit filium suum primogenitum : et vocavit nomen ejus Jesum.

Notes

    18. Now the generation of Christ, etc. St Matthew now proceeds to explain the miraculous conception of Jesus Christ. The MSS. vary here, and in some we have the word “birth” (γέννησις) instead of “origin” or “generation” (γένησις), which agrees better with the actual facts.

    Mary. The meaning of this name is much disputed, and various interpretations have been given, — e.g. star of the sea, mistress, the enlightened.[see also: lady, bitterness]

    espoused to Joseph. The espousal was a solemn ceremony by which the man and woman pledged their troth. The marriage took place about a year later.

    before they came together. Before Mary had been taken to the house of Joseph as his wife. The woman, after her espousal, still lived with her parents, but in seclusion.

    `of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost created the human Body of our Blessed Lord. The conception of Christ was the work of the Blessed Trinity, but as it was a sovereign act of goodness, grace, love, and fecundity, it is by appropriation ascribed to the Holy Ghost, because all such acts are attributed to Him, just as manifestations of supreme power are ascribed to the Father, and acts of wisdom to the Son.

    19. a just man. A common scriptural form of eulogy. Cf. Noe was a just and perfect man in his generation, he walked with God (Gen. vi. 9). This does not imply original justice and exemption from actual sin, but merely that he was earnest in the service of God ; this earnestness sprang from the heart, it was no exterior Pharisaism.

    to put her away privately, — i.e. without assigning any reason for the deed. The original word signifies literally “ to make an example of,” hence to put to shame (παραδειγματίσαι).

    The Law of Moses commanded that an unfaithful wife should be divorced, and, according to some writers, this also applied to those betrothed, but we cannot prove it from Scripture.

    20. the Angel of the Lord. Probably St Gabriel, the angel of the Incarnation.

    in his sleep. St Matthew relates four warnings given to St Joseph during dreams ; for the other three, see ch. ii. 13, 19, 22. God often revealed His will to the saints of the Old Law by means of dreams.

    Joseph, son of David. These words would recall to St Joseph the Messianic promises made to his own house and tribe. The very fact that the angel knew of Joseph’s doubts and fears, proved that the angelic messenger was sent by God.

    to take unto thee (παραλαβεῖν). The ordinary expression for taking a bride from her parents’ house to that of the husband.

    21. thou shalt call his name Jesus. These words shew that St Joseph was to be regarded as the father of Jesus, since, at the circumcision of a child, the father gave the name.

    he shall save, etc. The angel goes on to reveal the mission of Christ. Our Lord, in becoming man, took on Himself the office of Saviour, as it had been predicted. The very name Jesus which He chose, spoke of love and tenderness. The word Christ is a title, and not strictly a name.

    his people. Primarily the Jews, but the Gentiles were not to be excluded.

    Cf. Other sheep I have, that are not of this fold ; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd (St John x. 16).

    22. Now all this was done, etc. St John Chrysostom, St Irenæus, and a few others look on these words as a continuation of the angel’s words, but this opinion is not generally accepted, for St Matthew frequently uses this expression. For examples see ii. 15, iv. 14, viii. 17, xii. 17, xiii. 35, where the words are manifestly those of the historian. St Matthew here corroborates the testimony of the angel by appealing to the words of the prophets. It was necessary that the attention of the Jews should be called to the fulfilment of the prophecies. The same remark applies to the other occasions when St Matthew employs a like expression.

    23. Behold a virgin, etc. This is a quotation from Isaias vii. 14. When Achaz was king of Juda, Kasin, king of Syria, and Phacee, king of Israel, made war against him. The kingdom of Juda was in great danger, and Achaz feared that his people would be exterminated. Isaias, having been sent to reassure him, bade him ask for some sign that the prophetic message came from God ; Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God, either unto the depth of hell, or unto the height above. And Achaz said : I will not ask, and I will not tempt the Lord. And he said : Hear ye, therefore, 0 house of David. . . . Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and hear a son, and his name shall he called Emmanuel (Is. vii. 11-14).

    which being interpreted. St Matthew adds this explanation. It is no part of the prophecy.

    24. Joseph . . . did as the Angel . . . had commanded. As the doubt of St Thomas strengthens our faith in the Resurrection, so St Joseph’s doubt confirms our faith as regards the virginity of our Lady.

    25. till she brought forth. Our Blessed Lady was always a virgin. Such is the universal teaching of the Church, and the use of the word “until” proves nothing to the contrary.

    St Jerome adduces several passages of Holy Writ to prove that the word “ until,” when employed after a negative, simply has reference to what is already done, and not to what may happen after some given event or time, e.g. —

(a) The raven did not return until the waters were dried up upon the earth (Gen.viii. 7), — i.e. the raven did not return at all.

(b) We will not go through the fields, nor through the vineyards, we urill not drink the waters of thy wells, hut we will go by the common highway, neither turning aside to the right hand nor to the left, till we are past thy borders (Numb. xx. 17). Evidently the Israelites did not return to commit any depredations in the territory of the Edomites.

(c) No man shall be able to resist thee, until thou destroy them (Deut. vii. 24). Clearly a dead man cannot retaliate.

    her first-born son. Jesus was the only son of Mary. The first-born son had special duties and privileges ; he alone was presented in the Temple and redeemed. On the lips of a Jew, the term “first-born” would have no more reference to other children than the titles Dauphin and Crown Prince have with us.

    he called his name Jesus. This happened on the eighth day after the birth, when the holy Infant was circumcised.

Additional Notes : 

On the Date of the Nativity

It is impossible to give with absolute certainty the day and month of our Saviour’s birth, but the ancient Catholic tradition places it on the 25th of December, and there is no reason for rejecting this date.

In giving 4 B.C. as the true 1 A.D., we are guided by the following data : —

    1. All chronologists are agreed that Herod died in 750 A.U.C.

    2. Josephus (Antiq., xvii. 6. 4) relates that a lunar eclipse occurred just before Herod’s death, and astronomical calculations enable us to place this eclipse on the night of the 12th to the 13th of March 750 A.U.C.

    3. From the gospels we gather that the following events happened before Herod’s death ; —

(1) The Birth of Christ.

(2) The Purification of our Blessed Lady.

(3) The visit of the Magi. 

(4) The Massacre of the Innocents.

    4. According to the generally accepted tradition, our Lord was not more than three or four months old at the time of the Flight into Egypt.

Consequently we are probably right in assuming that Jesus was born on the 25th of December 749 A.U.C., which corresponded with 5 B.C., for it is manifest that when, in the sixth century, Dionysius Exiguus gave the year of our Lord’s birth as corresponding with 754 A.U.C., he was placing it four years too late.

But it would be very confusing to change our chronology now by going back four years, and we can obtain approximate accuracy without any inconvenience by giving the date of the Nativity as 5 B.C. According to this calculation, Jesus was in His thirty-first year when He was baptized, and in His thirty -fourth when He was crucified.

N.B. — In computations based on the Christian Era, we proceed by subtraction when dealing with the years before Christ, and by addition as regards the years which follow (A.D.). Consequently the number 1 occurs twice in succession, since 1 B.C. is followed by 1 A.D. This being sometimes overlooked by the student, gives rise to errors and confusion. It must also be borne in mind that the Jewish year which began in Nisan (April) did not coincide either with the old Roman calendar (when the year originally began in March) or with the Julian calendar, but this difference in the two systems of computation offers no difficulty to the student of the New Testament.

Betrothed or married?

 

The Annunciation and Incarnation.  J-J Tissot. Brooklyn Museum.

   18. His mother Mary was espoused to Joseph. It is uncertain whether, when the Incarnation took place, the Blessed Virgin was espoused or married to St Joseph. There are many authorities on both sides.

    I. Arguments in favour of her being really married.

(a) Immediately after Gabriel had appeared to her, Mary went to visit Elizabeth. This would have been contrary to the Jewish custom, which recpiired the espoused virgin to lead a life of strict seclusion until the nuptials.

(b) If our Lady had only married St Joseph after her visit, Jesus would have been born six months after, and Mary’s honour might have been impugned.

(c) The word “espoused” was sometimes used as a synonym for “married,” and St Luke thus employs it in ch. ii. 5, “to be enrolled with his espoused wife ” At this time there could be no question of her being merely espoused.

Note. — This opinion has the weight of the greater number of authorities and the support of tradition.

    II. Arguments in favour of her being only espoused.

(а) St Joseph’s dream took place after the Incarnation, and before he had taken our Lady to his own home. Cf. “before they came together.” “Joseph took unto him his wife” (St Matt. i. 24).

(b) If St Joseph had been married to our Lady, he would have gone with her to visit Elizabeth, and would have heard the words of St Elizabeth : “ Whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me ? ” (St Luke i. 43).

(c) We are distinctly told that when St Joseph took unto him his wife, he “ did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him ” (St Matt. i. 24). Had Mary been his wedded wife, this command would have been superliuous. Hence the nuptials took place immediately after the Annunciation.

Patrizi, St Hilary, St Epiphanius, St Jerome, St John Chrys,, Maldonatus, Cornelius a Lapide, and many others favour this second opinion.

ON THE CEREMONY OF THE ESPOUSALS

This ceremony could take place either publicly in the Temple or privately in the house of the bride. A marriage tent or canopy, called the “chuppah,” was erected, under which the bride and bridegroom sat on a raised platform. This bridal chamber is mentioned in Ps. xviii. 6, 7 : “ He, as a bridegroom coming out of his bride-chamber, hath rejoiced as a giant to run the way.” The ceremony of the espousals was not a mere form of little weight, but a solemn ceremony binding on both parties, which only death or a hill of divorce could cancel. The bridegroom, in presence of witnesses, pledged his troth to the bride, and gave her a pledge in money. After the Babylonian Captivity it became customary to give a written form, signed by the bridegroom. Prayers were offered, and both parties drank of a cup of wine, after which a benediction was pronounced. The words “ Lo, thou art betrothed unto me,” were addressed to the woman, who lived henceforth in seclusion until the nuptials. If a virgin, this probation might extend to a year ; in the case of a widow, a month was the usual period. A breach of contract on her part, was considered equivalent to the sin of adultery. Marriages were generally arranged by parents, but if the bride had brothers, they had to be consulted. Cf. “ Sichem also said to her father and to her brethren : Let me find favour in your sight .... give me this damsel to wife” (Gen. xxxiv. 11, 12). The essential part of the nuptials was the taking of the bride to the home of the bridegroom. They were then considered to be man and wife.

    18. She was found with child, of the Holy Ghost. Some commentators take the words “ of the Holy Ghost ” as a simple explanation of the mystery of the Incarnation ; others understand that they refer to the knowledge which St Joseph had of this mystery before the angel appeared to him in a dream. Hence there are three views as to why St J oseph doubted : —

(a) Knowing that our Lady had conceived miraculously, he wished to cancel the betrothal as privately as possible, deeming himself unworthy to live under the same roof (Orig., Theop., Natalis, etc.).

(b) St Joseph suspected our Lady’s fidelity ; but this view seems “harsh, injurious to Mary, unworthy of St Joseph, oftensive to Jesus Christ, and not required by the context ” (Mass, S. J.).

(c) St Joseph was really in doubt, being unable to explain the actual facts, with what he knew of our Lady’s spotless character (St Jerome, St Bonaventure). This is the more generally accepted view.

     20. The Angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep. The angel Gabriel was sent to Mary before the Incarnation had taken place, and he appeared to her when she was awake; to St Joseph, the angel announced the mystery in a dream, after it had taken place. Maldonatus explains this different line of conduct thus : Mary had to give her consent before the mystery of the Incarnation could be effected, whereas, in the case of Joseph, the angel had simply to announce an event that had been accomplished; secondly, it was fitting that Mary should know the dignity of Jesus, and how His conception had been wrought. [Ed. Cf. Joseph, son of Jacob and the references to dreams]

    23. Emmanuel. The name “ Emmanuel ” was a recognised name of the Messias, as we see from the following passages of Isaias : —

“ And the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, 0 Emmanuel. , . . . Take counsel together, and it shall be defeated : speak a word, and it shall not be done : because God is with us ” (Is. viii. 8, 10). “ For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, and the government is upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come, the Prince of peace. His empire shall be multiplied, and there shall be no end of peace : he shall sit upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom to establish it and strengthen it with judgment and with justice, from henceforth and for ever : the zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this ” (Is. ix. 6, 7. See also xi. 1-10).

 

The The Birth of Jesus.  J-J Tissot. Brooklyn Museum.

    25. She brought forth her first-born son. This did not prevent her virginal integrity, since “ante partum, in partu, post partum,” our Lady was a virgin. Tradition teaches that she experienced “ neither pain, nor lassitude, nor weakness of any sort, being free from the curse entailed on other mothers by sin; — in dolore paries filios” (Gen. iii. 16). St Gregory of Nyssa says ; “ Though coming in the form of man, yet not in everything is He subject to the law of man’s nature ; for while His being born of a woman tells of human nature, virginity becoming capable of childbirth, betokens something above man. Of Him, then. His Mother’s burden was light, the birth immaculate, the delivery without pain, the Nativity without defilement. ... For as she, who by her guilt engrafted death into her nature, was condemned to bring forth in trouble, it was meet that she who brought life into the world should accomplish her delivery with joy.”

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per te, Maria.

The Genealogy of Christ (Matt. i. 1-17)

St Matthew Chapter I : Verses 1-17

Contents

   ⮚Matt. i. 1-17 Douay-Rheims text & Latin text (Vulgate)

   ⮚Notes

   ⮚Endnote: harmonizing the Matthew and Luke genealogies.

👈The Tree of Jesse, Family Tree of the Virgin. 

David, Gerard (peintre) 

Date: 1490.Musée des Beaux-Arts de Lyon

Matt. i. 1-17

1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham:  
2 Abraham begot Isaac. And Isaac begot Jacob. And Jacob begot Judas and his brethren.  

3 And Judas begot Phares and Zara of Thamar. And Phares begot Esron. And Esron begot Aram.  

4 And Aram begot Aminadab. And Aminadab begot Naasson. And Naasson begot Salmon. 

5 And Salmon begot Booz of Rahab. And Booz begot Obed of Ruth. And Obed begot Jesse. 

6 And Jesse begot David the king. And David the king begot Solomon, of her that had been the wife of Urias.  

7 And Solomon begot Roboam. And Roboam begot Abia. And Abia begot Asa.  

8 And Asa begot Josaphat. And Josaphat begot Joram. And Joram begot Ozias.  

9 And Ozias begot Joatham. And Joatham begot Achaz. And Achaz begot Ezechias.  

10 And Ezechias begot Manasses. And Manasses begot Amon. And Amon begot Josias.  11 And Josias begot Jechonias and his brethren in the transmigration of Babylon.  

12 And after the transmigration of Babylon, Jechonias begot Salathiel. And Salathiel begot Zorobabel.

13 And Zorobabel begot Abiud. And Abiud begot Eliacim. And Eliacim begot Azor.  

14 And Azor begot Sadoc. And Sadoc begot Achim. And Achim begot Eliud.  

15 And Eliud begot Eleazar. And Eleazar begot Mathan. And Mathan begot Jacob.  

16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.  

17 So all the generations, from Abraham to David, are fourteen generations. And from David to the transmigration of Babylon, are fourteen generations: and from the transmigration of Babylon to Christ are fourteen generations.

1 Liber generationis Jesu Christi filii David, filii Abraham.  2 Abraham genuit Isaac. Isaac autem genuit Jacob. Jacob autem genuit Judam, et fratres ejus.  3 Judas autem genuit Phares, et Zaram de Thamar. Phares autem genuit Esron. Esron autem genuit Aram.  4 Aram autem genuit Aminadab. Aminadab autem genuit Naasson. Naasson autem genuit Salmon.  5 Salmon autem genuit Booz de Rahab. Booz autem genuit Obed ex Ruth. Obed autem genuit Jesse. Jesse autem genuit David regem. 6 David autem rex genuit Salomonem ex ea quae fuit Uriae.  7 Salomon autem genuit Roboam. Roboam autem genuit Abiam. Abias autem genuit Asa.  8 Asa autem genuit Josophat. Josophat autem genuit Joram. Joram autem genuit Oziam.  9 Ozias autem genuit Joatham. Joatham autem genuit Achaz. Achaz autem genuit Ezechiam.  10 Ezechias autem genuit Manassen. Manasses autem genuit Amon. Amon autem genuit Josiam.  11 Josias autem genuit Jechoniam, et fratres ejus in transmigratione Babylonis.  12 Et post transmigrationem Babylonis : Jechonias genuit Salathiel. Salathiel autem genuit Zorobabel.  13 Zorobabel autem genuit Abiud. Abiud autem genuit Eliacim. Eliacim autem genuit Azor.  14 Azor autem genuit Sadoc. Sadoc autem genuit Achim. Achim autem genuit Eliud.  15 Eliud autem genuit Eleazar. Eleazar autem genuit Mathan. Mathan autem genuit Jacob. 16 Jacob autem genuit Joseph virum Mariae, de qua natus est Jesus, qui vocatur Christus.  17 Omnes itaque generationes ab Abraham usque ad David, generationes quatuordecim : et a David usque ad transmigrationem Babylonis, generationes quatuordecim : et a transmigratione Babylonis usque ad Christum, generationes quatuordecim.

Notes

    1. The book of the generation of Jesus Christ. A few commentators take these words as the title of the gospel, but, judging from analogous passages in the Old Testament (e.g. The book of the generation of Adam, Gen. vi.) it is more probable that they refer exclusively to the genealogy given in verses 1-17.

    By a Jewish idiom any short document was called “ a book” ; thus Jeremias, speaking of a contract, says, I wrote it in a hook and sealed it (xxxii. 10).

    The Jews kept their genealogies very carefully, and these family records were preserved in the Temple archives. The Jews were exact on this point for three reasons : —

1. Marriage. The Jews held aloof from all other nations, with whom intermarriage was forbidden by the Law of Moses.

2. Priesthood. The priesthood was reserved to the seed of Aaron, and no man could officiate if there was a flaw in his descent, neither could a priest contract marriage with a woman who was not of pure Jewish blood.

3. The Messianic promise. The Messias was to be born of the seed of Abraham, and of the royal house of David.

    Note 1.— In the Old Testament genealogical rolls are numerous (see Par. ix. 1, Esdras ii.59), but in the New Testament we only find that of our Lord traced. These records were no longer of paramount importance after the birth of the Messias. The true Church was henceforth to be universal, and the priesthood was perpetuated by the Sacrament of Holy Order, and not by carnal descent.

    Note 2. — St Matthew, writing for the Hebrews, commences by proving that our Lord was of pure and royal Jewish descent, and thus he establishes the true foundation of our Lord’s claim to the Messiahship.

    Jesus, — i.e. Saviour. This name expresses our Lord’s mission as our Redeemer.

    Jesus was a common Hebrew name, met with in varying forms ; — Josue, Jeshua, Jehoshua, Osee, Hoshea, etc. In the New Testament we also find it : Jesus that is called Justus (Col. iv. 11).

    Josue was a type of our Lord, since he delivered the Israelites from their enemies, and led them into the Promised Land.

    Christ, — i.e. anointed. Prophets, priests, and kings were anointed. This title is only found in the opening of the gospels (see supra, i. 1 ; St Mark i. 1 ; St John i. 17). Only once does our Lord speak of Himself as Jesus Christ : Now this is eternal life: That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent (St John xvii. 3).

    the son of David. The Messias was to be born of the seed of David, in accordance with the promises, — e.g. I will raise up thy seed after thee .... and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house to my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever (2 Kings vii. 12, 13). I will make his seed to endure for evermore ; and his throne as the days of heaven (Ps. lxxxviii. 30). Hence the Messias was frequently referred to as the "branch" of David (see Jer. xxiii. 5). The “son of David” was a title frequently employed. Only “ a son of David ” could be the true Messias ; and this, perhaps, explains why the Evangelist places David before Abraham. (Cf. Jesus asked them, saying: What think you of Christ ? whose son is he ? They say to him : David’s (xxii. 41, 42).

    son of Abraham. The words “ son of” relate to David, since in all Hebrew genealogical trees each name relates to the one that immediately precedes it. God had especially favoured Abraham and David in announcing to each personally that the Christ should be of his seed.

    Note. — In the genealogy of Christ, as given by St Matthew, note that St Matthew divides it into three parts, which embrace —

(а) From the birth of Abraham to the birth of David.                  B.C. 1996-1085.

(b) From the birth of David to the Babylonian Captivity,           B.C. 1085-588.

(c) From the Captivity to the Nativity of Christ.                         B.C. 588-4.

Only the first and third gospels give the genealogy of Christ, and the two tables given present differences as regards — 

(1) Place. (2) Method. (3) Matter.

1. Place. — St Matthew places the genealogy first, before relating the birth of Christ. St Luke places it just before the Public Life of our Lord.

2. Method. — St Matthew traces the line from ancestor to descendant. St Luke traces it from the son to the father.

3. Matter. —   (a) St Matthew traces Christ’s descent from Abraham. (a) St Luke traces it back to Adam.

                        (b) St Matthew gives fewer generations and totally different names in two sections, i.e. from David to the Captivity, from the Captivity to Joseph. (b) St Luke gives a longer and fuller list, and does not agree with St Matthew in the two sections mentioned.

Four explanations have been given to account for these differences : —

    1. St Matthew gives the real descent, St Luke the legal descent of St Joseph.

    2. St Matthew gives St Joseph’s royal descent, St Luke his real descent.

    3. St Matthew gives the Blessed Virgin’s descent on her mother’s side, St Luke on her father’s side.

    4. St Matthew gives St Joseph’s real descent, and St Luke gives our Lady’s real descent. [See Endnote below]

    2. Judas and his brethren. The twelve sons of Jacob, the patriarchs of Israel. Judas (or Juda), though not the first-born, is mentioned, because the Messias was to be born of the tribe of Juda.

    The sceptre shall not be taken away from Juda, nor a ruler from his thigh, till he come that is to be sent, and he shall be the expectation of nations (Gen. xlix. 10).

    3. Phares and Zara. The twin sons of Judas and Thamar.

    Thamar. Women are not usually mentioned in the Jewish genealogical records.

    Four other names of women occur in the genealogy of our Lord,— Rahab, Ruth, the wife of Urias (i.e. Bethsabee), and Mary the Mother of Jesus. Of these five, our Blessed Lady is the only one whose character was unsullied. Rahab and Ruth were not Jewesses.

👈[Ed. See Crushing Satan's Head, by Fr James Mawdsley; New Old, 2022. He considers the typology of these women]

    4. Aminadab. Aaron married Aminadab’s daughter Elizabeth (see Exod. vi. 23).

    Naasson. He was the prince of the house of Juda when the Israelites were delivered out of Egypt. Cf. There shall be with you the princes of the tribes .... of Juda, Naasson the son of Aminadab (Numb. i. 4, 7).

    Note. — As the Israelites were in bondage in Egypt for 430 years, and as to this long period St Matthew assigns only four generations, viz. Phares, Esron, Amran, and Aminadab, we must conclude that some names are omitted. Perhaps St Matthew had in his mind God’s promise to Abraham : In the fourth generation they shall return hither (Gen. XV. 16).

    5. Jesse. He is mentioned in one of the Messianic promises : There shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of his root (Is. xi. 1).

    6. David the king. Here the royal line begins, for God Himself chose David to govern His people. Only three names, viz. Booz, Obed, and Jesse, are given between Salmon and David. Now, we know that 480 years after the deliverance, and in the fourth year of his reign, Solomon built the Temple. David reigned 70 years, and the Israelites wandered in the desert for 40 years (480 — (40 + 70 + 4) = 366). Hence the three generations mentioned above are insufficient to cover 366 years, and St Matthew has evidently passed over some names.

    8. Joram begot Ozias. St Matthew again omits some links of the chain. If we refer to 1 Par. iii. 11, 12, we find that the list stands thus : Joram, Ochozias, Joas, Amasias, Ozias. Consequently, three names are omitted in the genealogy of our Lord, viz. Ochozias, Joas, and Amasias. According to Maldonatus, “ the Evangelist did this to include all the generations to Christ in fourteen, and that these were passed over rather than others because they were sinners, and had mixed the royal blood of Judah with that of Achab. This is the opinion of St Hilary and St Jerome, and it is followed by others” (Maldonatus, Commen. on St Matt.., vol. i.).

    11. Josias hegot Jechonias. Josias was the grandfather of Jechonias. It is possible that there is a' copyist’s error here, and that the passage should run ; “Josias begot Joakim, and Joakim begot Jechonias”.

    12. after the transmigration, — i.e. after the “ deportation ” to Babylon, not after the “ Captivity.” The Jews were led away as captives to Babylon at three different periods — in B.C. 606, in B.C.  598, and B.C.  588. Of these three deportations, the first and second are often referred to as “ transmigrations,” whereas the third, which took place after the destruction of Jerusalem and of Solomon’s Temple, was always spoken of as “ the Captivity.”

    Jechonias begot Salathiel. From the book of Jeremias we learn that Jechonias was to be childless. Cf. Thus saith the Lord : Write this man barren, a man that shall not prosper in his days : for there shall not he a man of his seed that shall sit upon the throne of David, and have power any more in Juda (Jer. xxii. 30).

    These words are generally understood as meaning that no child of Jechonias should ever prosper and rule over the temporal kingdom of Israel. Jechonias may have adopted Salathiel, and hence was only his legal father.

    Salathiel hegot Zorohahel. According to 1 Par. hi. 17, Salathiel was the grandfather of Zorobabel, not his father : The sons of Jechonias were 

Asir Salathiel .... Phadaia, etc . of Phadaia were horn Zorobabel and Semei. Patrizi solves the difficulty by supposing that the Zorobabel mentioned by St Matthew and St Luke (and also in 2 Esdras xii. 1 and Aggeus i. 1) is not the same as the Zorobabel mentioned in the book of Paralipomenon.

    Note. — After Zorobabel we find none of the ten names given by St Matthew recorded in the Old Testament, and to cover this same interval St Luke gives eighteen generations. St Matthew, however, gives sufficient to cover the intervening years, but undoubtedly he omits certain links, probably in order to keep to his systematic arrangement of three series of fourteen generations.

    17. So all the generations, etc. We should therefore expect to find forty-two generations (14 x 3), instead of which we find only forty-one. This renders it doubtful how to group the three series of names. The difficulty has been solved by taking Jechonias twice, either considering him in the first place as king, and secondly as a private individual, or taking the name as applying each time to a different person. This latter suggestion, put forward by St Augustine, and adopted by Patrizi, enables us to give the three series of fourteen (tesseradecades) complete.

Endnote. Harmonizing the genealogies of St Matthew and St Luke

St Matthew gives St Joseph’s ancestors, and St Luke gives the Blessed Virgin’s. This solution is based on the tradition that the Blessed Virgin was an heiress, and therefore obliged to marry in her own tribe. In this case, the husband inherited the titles and property of his wife, and was regarded as the legal descendant of his father-in-law. This would explain why St Joseph is called both “the son of Jacob” and “the son of Heli,” Jacob being his actual father, and Heli his legal father. It was contrary to Jewish custom to trace the genealogy through a woman ( “ Genus patris vocatur genus : genus matris non vocatur genus ” ). Modern exegetical writers favour this view (Lightfoot, Bengel, Godet, Plumptre, Lange, etc.). The table would then stand thus : —

In favour of this view we have the following arguments : —

(a) If both lists refer to St Joseph, the reputed father of Jesus, then Jesus was descended from David only by a kind of legal fiction.

(b) St Luke gives great prominence to the Blessed Virgin, and carefully points out Jesus as the “supposed” son of Joseph. This being the case, how could he consistently identify the ancestors of Christ only with those of His reputed father ?

(c) The registers of births were carefully preserved by the Jews, and therefore it is perfectly natural (particularly in the case of the royal race of David) that in the Holy Family two genealogical documents existed, the one giving the ancestors of St Joseph, the other that of Heli (or Joachim).[There is, it is true, a tradition which gives “ Joachim ” as the father of our Blessed Lady, but the names Joachim and Heli (or Eliachim) seem interchangeable, as we see from the book of Judith, where the high-priest Elia (iv. 5 and 10) is also called Joachim (xv. 9). According to the Talmud, Heli was the father of our Lady.]

(d) “We should expect to have had preserved both the relationship through Joseph, the representative of the civil, national, theocratic side, and the descent through Mary, the organ of the real human relationship. Was not Jesus at once to appear and to be the son of David ? — to appear such through him whom the people regarded as His father ; to he such through her from whom He really derived His human existence ? The two affiliations answered to these two requirements ” (Godet, St Luke, p. 204).

Ed. (e) St Matthew undoubtedly wrote his gospel chiefly, though not exclusively, for the Jewish converts of Palestine. His principal aim was to prove to the Jews, that Jesus was truly the Messias, since in His Person the prophecies of the Old Testament were fulfilled, and by Him the true Messianic kingdom was inaugurated. These inferences are clearly deducible from —

1. The fact that the gospel was originally written in Aramaic.

2. The primary mission of the aj)ostles to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

3. The testimony of the earliest Christian writers.

4. The internal evidence afforded by the gospel.

    St Irenæus, and Origen have other references to the object and aim of St Matthew’s gospel : — ‘‘ The gospel of St Matthew was written for the Jews, who specially desired that it should be made clear that Christ was of the seed of David. St Matthew endeavours to satisfy this wish, and therefore he begins his gospel with the genealogy of Christ ” (St Irenæus, Hær., lib. hi. 9). “St Matthew wrote for the Hebrews, who expected the Messias to be of the seed of Abraham and David ” (Origen, in lib. iv.). Other patristic writers speak equally clearly on this subject : —

“ Matthew composed his gospel in the Hebrew tongue for the special use of those Jews who believed in Christ ” (St Jerome, in Matt., lib. iv.). St John Chrysostom (in Matt. Horn., i. 7) confirms the statements made by Eusebius in his history of the Church. The quotations given above suffice to shew the general trend of Catholic tradition, and to confirm its teaching.

  

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

The Gospel of St Matthew

St Peter & St Paul.  El Greco. (1590-1600)
Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya. 

Background

This site was established in 2019 to provide a platform for presenting and illustrating the life of Christ. This was in response to an idea which seemed to speak from the last line of the motto I had adopted in the same year (see below and at the end of each post):

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

 D.G.(per Mariam), I have so far produced three lives, followed by a study of the Acts of the Apostles:

• The first Life followed the format of The Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ by the remarkable artist James J Tissot (1897). The posts began on the 14th of October 2019 and concluded on the feast of the Ascension, the 21st of May 2020.
• The second Life followed the work of l'Abbé Constant Fouard:  La Vie de N-S Jésus-Christ (1880). The first post was published on the feast of Corpus Christi (11th of June 2020) and the series concluded on the 4th of October 2020.
• The third Life followed the Gospel of St Mark, making extensive use of a work by Madame Cecilia published in 1904 entitled The Gospel according to St Mark. This Life opened on the Feast of St Mark (25th April 2022) and concluded on the 26th of June 2022.
• The series of posts on the Acts of the Apostles also made extensive use of Madame Cecilia's work published in 1907 entitled The Acts of the Apostles. The series began on the 29th June 2022 and concluded on the 11th of September in the same year.

St Peter and St Paul

I pray that tomorrow's feast of St Peter and St Paul will serve as a suitable launching point for my next project: The Gospel according to St Matthew. Once again, I shall be making extensive use of Madame Cecilia's work. Her study of St Matthew's Gospel received its imprimatur on the 8th of June 1906 and comprises two Books. Madame Cecilia was a religious of St Andrew's Convent, Streatham (London) and produced a number of volumes in her series Catholic Scripture Manuals.

Dedication

Exposition in the chancel of Corpus Christi.
Andy Scott. CC BY-SA. 2018.

👈The image here shows the chancel of Corpus Christi Church in Maiden Lane, Covent Garden. The statues of St Peter and St Paul are set in elevated niches on either side of the altar. Like the rest of the interior, these statues have been extensively and richly restored since the days when I first  knew the church (in the 1980's)..

Following treatment in King’s College Hospital for an injury received in the Brixton riots in April 1981, I was making my way back home across London when I stumbled by chance upon this church. I decided to pop inside and, quite providentially, I was just in time for Mass. There was an almost palpable atmosphere of reverence and I was especially impressed by the solemn demeanour and dignity of the priest, Father Henry Dodd. I was to return many times and the church was to play an important part in my family, albeit for a tragically brief period of time.

Fr Dodd was especially impressive in his sermons where, without any notes, he displayed a powerful eloquence and an effortless erudition - so much so that some of his expressions remain with me to this day. He had a particularly strong devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and to Our Blessed Lady. One Saturday each month he led devotions which included all the mysteries of the most Holy Rosary, interspersed with readings and hymns, and which finished with Benediction. This devotion was nicknamed the "Mariathon."

In praying that St Peter and St Paul will, on this their feast day, extend their help to this project, I offer the work to our gentle Queen and Mother, with a petition that she present it as an act of reparation to her Divine Son so as to heal the wounds, repair the damage and undo the scandal caused by sins against His Most Sacred Heart and against the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.