Genealogies from the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke
Commentary from: Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: New Testament
St. Matthew’s Gospel:
· 1:1 book of the genealogy: A title for the following ancestry (1:2-16) and the entire Gospel. The opening words recall the Greek OT in Gen 2:4 and 5:1. Christ: A title (Gk. Christos) meaning the “Anointed One” is the Greek rendering of the OT word for “Messiah”. According to Luke 4:18-19, Jesus is anointed by the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 10:36-38). It is this title for Jesus that Matthew elucidates throughout his Gospel. See word study: Christ at Mk 14 (CCC 436)
· 1:2-17 The Abrahamic and Davidic Ancestry of Jesus establishes his credentials to be the royal Messiah of Israel (1:1, 16). God long ago promised that “kings” would stem from Abraham’s line (Gen 17:6) and later swore a covenant oath that David would always have a dynastic heir (2 Sam 7:16; Ps 89:3-4). Note that Matthew’s genealogy reaches back to Abraham, the forefather of Israel, whereas Luke’s genealogy of Jesus stretches back to Adam, the father of all nations (Lk 3:23-38). This difference is heightened by numerous discrepancies between the two genealogies, especially in the generations spanning from David to Jesus. More than a dozen solutions have been proposed to harmonize them. At the very least, it should be recognized that gaps are a common feature in genealogical registries from antiquity. There are also many examples in Scripture of one person having more than one name—a fact that must be considered when attempting to identify the ancestors of Jesus (e.g., Solomon/Jedidiah, 2 Sam 12:24-25). For the possibility that Matthew give Jesus’ paternal genealogy (Joseph’s ancestry) and Luke his Maternal genealogy Mary’s ancestry), see note on Lk 2:23-38.
· 1:3-6 The inclusion of women (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and the wife of Uriah) in a Jewish genealogy is unusual, but not unprecedented (1 Chron 1:32, 39, 50; 2:4). All are Gentiles (Canaanite, Canaanite, Moabite, and Hittite, respectively), and three (all but Ruth) are associated with sexual immorality (Gen 28:12-26; Josh 2:1; 2 Sam 11:2-5). These irregularities may reflect an apologetic strategy. (1) Gentile blood within Jesus’ lineage anticipates the international scope of the gospel for men and women of “all nations” (28:9). (2) Matthew defuses Jewish accusations that the women in Jesus’ genealogy undermine his messianic credentials. By listing the immoral women in the generations before Solomon, Matthew implies that if these women did not disqualify Solomon as the royal son of David, then neither do they disqualify Jesus, who assumes the same title as the Messiah (1:1). Indeed, Solomon’s birth through the immorally arranged marriage of David and Uriah’s wife (2 Sam 11) stands in vivid contrast to Mary’s virginal conception of Jesus by the Spirit (1:18).
· 1:16 the husband of: The final link in the genealogy breaks with the preceding pattern. Joseph is not called the father of Jesus but only the spouse of Mary. This prepares for the virginal conception of Jesus in 1:18-25. Joseph is, however, the legal foster-father of Jesus and exercises his paternal duty by naming the Child (1:25) and protecting the Holy Family (2:13-22). Following Jewish custom, Jesus received full hereditary rights through Joseph, even though he was adopted (CCC437, 496). In Catholic tradition, the fatherhood of Joseph is also held to be spiritual and real, albeit virginal, just as the Fatherhood of God is spiritual and non-physical.
· 1:17 fourteen generations: Matthew divides the genealogy into three units of 14. It is not exhaustive, since several OT names are omitted, and the divisions cover unequal periods of time. Matthew stresses the number 14 to show Jesus as the new Davidic king: (1) David and Jesus are the only names listed with their respective titles (king, 1:6; Christ, 1:16); (2) David is the 14th name in the list; (3) the numerical value of David’s name (three consonants) in Hebrew equals 14 (D = 4 + V = 6 + D = 4) The 42 generations from Abraham to Jesus correspond to the 42 encampments of Israel during its wilderness journey to the Promised Land (cf. Num 33 1:1-49). These generations bring us to the Messiah, through whom we arrive at the land of promise in heaven (St. Jerome, Letters 78). Deportation to Babylon: The Exile of the Jews starting in 586 B.C. under the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar. After that time, Israel’s Davidic kingdom collapsed, and no legitimate heir assumed David’s throne. Jesus comes as the awaited Messiah-king (21:4-5; Jn 1:49) to fulfill God’s covenant oath to perfect and establish the Davidic dynasty for all time (cf. Ps 132:11-12; Lk 1:32-33).
St. Luke’s Gospel:
· 3:23-38: There are several differences between the genealogies of Jesus in Luke (3:23-38) and Matthew (Mt 1:2-16) that make it difficult to reconcile them in every detail. Two considerations should be noted to put their differences in perspective. (1) Matthew traces Jesus’ lineage forward from Abraham, the forefather of Israel (Mt 1:2), while Luke traces his ancestry backward to Adam, the father of humanity (3:38). Thus, while Matthew is stressing the kingship of Jesus over Israel, Luke is stressing his qualifications to be the Savior of mankind as a whole. (2) The two genealogies are substantially the same from Abraham to David, but diverge significantly in the generations that span from David to Jesus. It is quite possible that Matthew records the ancestry of Jesus’s legal father, Joseph, and Luke records that of his biological mother, Mary. In this case, Matthew gives us the dynastic line that passes from David to Joseph through King Solomon (Mt 1:6), and Luke gives us the Davidic line more generally as it passes from David to Mary through Nathan (3:31). As with his infancy Narratives, Luke may have obtained information about Jesus’ family traditions from Mary herself. See note on Lk 2:19 and Mt 1:2-17)
· 2:19: Mary…in her heart: Mary contemplates Jesus’ birth and childhood, not from a distance, but as a participant in the mystery (1:35, 43; 2:51). Luke’s insight suggests that Mary is either the direct or the indirect source of his information, since she alone could relate these hidden details of the story.