The Gospel for tomorrow [Feast of the Purification] states:
as it is written in the law of the Lord, Luke 2:23
Does this mean only if the first child is male [opens the womb] or does it mean the first male to be born whether or not there were previous female children?
I think it means the latter, but the phrasing seems to imply the former. [Maybe an awkward translation].
The Gospel for tomorrow [Feast of the Purification] states:
as it is written in the law of the Lord, Luke 2:23
Does this mean only if the first child is male [opens the womb] or does it mean the first male to be born whether or not there were previous female children?
I think it means the latter, but the phrasing seems to imply the former. [Maybe an awkward translation].
In the Ronald Knox, he translates it:
“It is written in God’s law, that whatever male offspring opens the womb is to be reckoned sacred to the Lord.”
I looked at textus Sainaiticus, to double check your bracketed question; and the earliest Greek texts have (literal):
… γε-γραπ-ται εν νομω κυ* οτι παν αρϲεν διανοιγων μητραν αγιον τω κω*
… written in to-law of-Lord that all strong-male passing-through womb/canal holy to-the Lord.
- Note for those checking the words: The word for Lord (kuriou) is commonly abbreviated in the Early Greek manuscripts, and I have not fully translated the grammar, but only the words in a very literal manner.
So: The word in Greek that you need to focus on to answer your question is αρϲεν (‘arsen’). It’s a slightly less used word for male, but it emphasizes masculinity and potency – for example it’s used in Genesis 2:27, and Luke 10:6 ; to represent the direct creation of man as
male and female, and in Genesis it is them
together who are the image of God. The passage in Luke 2:23, however, does not have the word for female – but rather, refers explicitly only to the male and his origin from a female, by juxtaposition of the word for womb/opening.
There’s a few issues to be aware of when reading the passage; The Law being referred to is Leviticus 12:1-8 and talks about issues of blood loss and the woman’s ‘fault’ I suppose, for there being blood loss; but traditionally, Catholics do not believe Jesus “opened” the womb in a bloody manner, so that Mary retained her virginity even in child birth.
Luke, notice, in 2:21, talks about the first time Jesus was cut – and blood loss presumably inflicted – in the circumcision. It is precisely here, when his cutting is first mentioned, that he is given the name Jesus/Yeshua which literally means “God saves”.
Part of Luke’s purpose appears to be to draw the learned reader who understands that Jesus’ blood brings about our salvation – to consider why Mary and Joseph didn’t offer two separate sacrifices – one for the ransoming back of the firstborn Jesus; and a second for Mary’s purification from bloodloss during birth. Again, it’s a pious tradition that there was no bloodloss prior to the circumcision; and the tradition is held especially in the East;
Jesus’ birth is seen as a miracle of God’s choice that exempted her from suffering the pangs the first time he was born and that punishment which was given to Eve; eg: a literal interpretation of Psalm 70/71:6 where God chose to be at his own son’s sinless birth and draw his own (sinless) son forth from the womb directly without reference to the punishment he gave Eve on account of sin. ( But which we, as images of Christ in his mystical body – the church – still suffer. Cf: the woman of revelation crying out in travail.)
There’s a second issue to consider, and that is why did Moses choose to implement this law in the first place?
For the Law of Moses doesn’t refer the circumcision only to Abraham, and the promise given for circumcised children inheriting God’s blessing – but to another event; the Exodus, when all the firstborn
males (not women) of the Egyptians were slain because the Egyptians were putting to death the firstborn
male children of the Hebrews; So, you need to consider also the political reasons that Pharaoh tried to remove only the men – and leave marriageable women with only Egyptian husbands.
There was no sacrifice required for firstborn children, male or female, and cleansing of the mothers before the Exodus event although the ransoming of the firstborn was foreshadowed with Isaac and Abraham before the Egypt event; eg: sacrifice wasn’t required of all Hebrews until Egypt tried male genocide and God intervened to save them as a people.
