Luke 2:22-40

 

The Flowering of Israel (3)  -  Light and Shadow

Still in deference to Jesus’ Jewishness, Luke had Mary and Joseph formally present him to God in the temple. Primitive tradition believed the first-fruits of everything belonged to God, whether of the fields or of the womb, of animals or of humans. In the fiercely patriarchal culture of the period, only male offspring were taken account of. Things were made sacred to God by being removed from secular use, either by being killed, consumed in some other way (eaten or poured out) or set aside for the exclusive use of the priestly caste. In pre-Hebrew tradition, human sacrifice was not uncommon (and may have provided an echo for the story in Genesis where the proposed sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham was averted, by intervention of an angel, and a ram was killed instead). In Israelite culture human sacrifice was replaced by substituting animals for humans. The offering made by Jesus’ parents was the offering made by the poor, among whom Mary, Joseph and Jesus were accounted. Since the birthing process also involved bleeding on the part of the mother (blood was seen as bearer of life and so as sacred to God), she too had to be purified (declared ritually pure by a priest) by means of the sacrifice of two birds.

Luke 22:22-38  -  Jesus is Presented in the Temple

22 When the days of purification, as in the Law of Moses, were completed,
they brought him up to Jerusalem
to be presented to the Lord,
23 because, as it is laid down in the Law of the Lord,
‘every male offspring that opens the womb of the mother
shall be regarded as holy to the Lord’,
24 and to give in sacrifice, as stated in the Law of the Lord,
‘a pair of  turtledoves or two young doves’.

In the continuation of Luke’s story, the climax of the Gospel would be the violent killing of Jesus in Jerusalem, by decision of the high priestly caste - a death that came to be understood within the Christian community in terms of sacrifice. The infancy narrative foreshadowed the future fulfilment.

Luke then proceeded beautifully to express the recognition and acceptance of their Messiah by the faithful remnant of Israel, of whom Simeon and Anna stood as representatives. 

25 In Jerusalem there was a man named Simeon.  
He was a just and devout man,
living in expectation of the comforting of Israel,
and the Holy Spirit was over him.
26 It had been made known to him by the Holy Spirit
that he would not see death
before he saw the Lord’s Anointed One.
27 Led by the Spirit, he came into the temple.  
As the parents were presenting the child Jesus
and fulfilling in his regard the customary law,
28 he took him in his arms and praised God, saying,
29 “Now you may let your servant go free and at peace, O Lord,
according to your assurance,
30 because my eyes have seen your salvation
31 which you have prepared for all people to see,
32 a light of revelation for Gentile nations,
and the glory of your people Israel.”

Luke used the address of Simeon to express clearly for the first time the fact that the effect of the mission of Jesus would extend beyond Israel and embrace all peoples, the Gentiles

33 His father and mother wondered at these words about him, 

Somewhat inconsistently in the light of the previous angelic announcement made to Mary when she conceived Jesus, Luke observed that both Mary and Joseph wondered at what Simeon had to say. Even his broadminded reference to the salvation of Gentiles was fully in line with much prophetic tradition, against the background of which Mary presumably pondered on all that had happened to date.

34 and Simeon blessed them
and said to Mary, his mother,
“This child is destined for the falling and rising of many in Israel,
and a sign that will be contested – 
35 and a sword will pierce your own soul –
so that the thoughts of many hearts will be disclosed.”

Due to the extension of salvation beyond Israel, Simeon foresaw the opposition that Jesus would encounter from many in Israel who were jealous for their own prerogatives, and who wished to reserve salvation for themselves. Yet, despite rejection by the many, Luke insisted that Jesus’ action, rather than undermining Israel’s choice by God, would highlight to the true glory of Israel.

36 And there was Anna, a prophetess,
daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser.  
She was advanced in age,
having lived with her husband for seven years from when she was a girl,
37 and now was a widow, eighty-four years old.  
She did not leave the temple,
but worshipped God fasting and praying night and day.
38 At that moment she came by
and, praising God, she spoke of him
to all who were awaiting the redemption of Jerusalem.

Luke’s inclusion of the witness of Anna, a woman, was not typical of the patriarchal society of the time, but was a deliberate gesture of gender inclusion that would be repeated consistently in his account of the public ministry of Jesus.

As representative of authentic Israel, Anna was still faithful to the temple, which was obviously the centre of her faith life. Fasting and praying were very much part of Jewish religious life, particularly within the Pharisee sect.

As symbol of faithful Israel, she also looked forward to something better than what she currently experienced. In her, Luke noted the dissatisfaction present in the hearts of the faithful ones of Israel and their hope for redemption.

Their hope was, indeed, soon to be fulfilled, and through the child about whom she spoke.


The Sword that Pierced Mary’s Heart

How Much did Mary Know? Luke gave no further detail about the nature or the cause of Mary’s future suffering. Later Christian piety has supplied the details. If it is true, as it seems, that the Infancy Narratives are not necessarily factual accounts but essentially Luke’s own powerful and beautifully imaginative construction, then it is highly likely that Mary in fact had little idea of who her son really was and what he was sent to do. Presuming the truth at least of the virginal conception, she may well have known his specialness, but little more, if anything, about him.

Pope John Paul II, in his encyclical letter, “Redemptoris Mater”, had written of Mary: 

 “... it is not difficult to see in that beginning a particular heaviness of heart, linked with a sort of ‘night of faith’ – to use the words of St John of the Cross – a sort of ‘veil’ through which one has to draw near to the Invisible One and to live in intimacy with the mystery...”. (Para 17)

Jesus’ behaviour for most of his life may have aroused little notice. He seems not to have stood out from his relatives or neighbours. He apparently accepted the traditional role expected of him in a highly “honour” controlled Galilean village, without conspicuously stepping out of line.

Opposition. Then suddenly, in response to the stirring of John the Baptist in the Judean desert, he would leave home and behave in ways totally inconsistent with his previous lifestyle. Luke would refer to the violent rejection he encountered from his own villagers at the start of his mission (4.29). Mary would probably have heard of the growing opposition he aroused among people around the Lake of Galilee. Luke would recount how, during his ministry, along with his brothers, she came “looking for him”. 

Luke would make no reference to her presence at his crucifixion.

Like everyone else, Mary had to wrestle with the question: Who was this Jesus? How seriously could one take his claims and his message?  Hers was the same struggle of faith encountered by every disciple.


 

Nurtured in Obscurity

Luke 2:39-40  -  Return to Nazareth

39 When they had finished everything required by the Law, they went back to Galilee to their own town Nazareth.
40 The child grew and became strong and full of wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him.

With this brief comment, Luke continued to build his image of Jesus. As the hand of the Lord had been with the young John, so the favour of God graced the growing Jesus. Luke noted particularly his appropriate growth in wisdom, but had nothing else to add.

Next >> Luke 2:41-52