So Little Of Mary In Matthews Gospel

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jaguar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
None of the gospels are exactly alike. Everyone tells a story from their own prespective…
 
Yes. And Matthew’s focus was Christ and Christ only…as it should be.
 
I think Jesus makes His Mother so humble that nothing much written about Her; however, the Holy Spirit has been reveiling to the Church and the Saints Her great role.

I recently read the book “Mother Teresa: In the Shadow of Our Lady”. It is a great book.
 
I would say it was because of the audience that the writers of the Gospels were writing to.

Matthew was writing to the Jews, so his focus would be the Old Testament fulfillment of Jesus as the Messiah.

Luke was writing to a Greek audience,so he would include a wider range of information for his audience, since they probably wouldn’t have been so concerned about Jesus fulling the Old Testament prophesies. Also women played a more prominent role in Greek society than in Jewish society, this could be one reason why the focus on Mary.
 
Mark I think, was said to be the one who stressed Jesus’ royalty- Matthew his Love/forgiveness: Human side-…
John and Luke also have a deeper signifigant meaning or punchline in their emphasis of Jesus to us. I read this a week ago by a catholic bible scholar but I forget how he classifyed the gospels into the categories and what they were. Somehow, I just recall Royalty with Mark- and I think- Love with matthew but maybe a catholic bible student could clarify.
 
juliasmith said:
Yes. And Matthew’s focus was Christ and Christ only…as it should be.
Click to expand...
Julia,
Whilst I understand that you probably dont mean to be mean, that is how you come across in this post.
you are right that Matthew’s Gospel focuses on Jesus, and seeing Jesus the the one who fulfils the OT promises, and rightly known as the Gospel of the “fulfilment quotations” It is known as the Gospel of the “fulfilment Quotations” because Matthew more than any of the other Gospels refers to OT scriptures.
Matthew’s Gospel is different from the other synoptics and John because Matthew’s intention and agenda are declared right from the very beginning. Indeed from the start, Matthew’s Jesus is the promised Messiah, who has been sent by God to the people of Israel. He is the “savior” the “Emmanuel” who takes away the Sin of the people (1:21). He is the new Moses extraordinaire who is not only given the Law but whose interpretation of the law brings it to its fullness. Matthew’s Jesus is the fulfillment of all Old Testament prophecies and being so, Matthew sets him out with the weight of his genealogy going back to the patriarchs, behind Him. The reason for this is that Matthew wants to assure his readers and hearers that Jesus’ roots can be traced right back into the very heart of Israel. Jesus is the new Moses. He is the new David He is the new Abraham.
With this agenda in mind and the community he belonged to (Jewish) then it becomes easy to see why Matthew writes as he does.
. He refers to the Old Testament and quotes from this quite liberally (43 times) and prolifically. Indeed 11 of the quotations are introduced using the special formula ‘This happened that the saying of the Lord by the prophet might be fulfilled.’
Matthews intent was to show the community he was catechizing that Jesus fulfilled everything promised in the Law and prophets.
GraceAngel.
 
Grace_Angel said:
Julia,
Whilst I understand that you probably dont mean to be mean, that is how you come across in this post.
you are right that Matthew’s Gospel focuses on Jesus, and seeing Jesus the the one who fulfils the OT promises, and rightly known as the Gospel of the “fulfilment quotations” It is known as the Gospel of the “fulfilment Quotations” because Matthew more than any of the other Gospels refers to OT scriptures.
Matthew’s Gospel is different from the other synoptics and John because Matthew’s intention and agenda are declared right from the very beginning. Indeed from the start, Matthew’s Jesus is the promised Messiah, who has been sent by God to the people of Israel. He is the “savior” the “Emmanuel” who takes away the Sin of the people (1:21). He is the new Moses extraordinaire who is not only given the Law but whose interpretation of the law brings it to its fullness. Matthew’s Jesus is the fulfillment of all Old Testament prophecies and being so, Matthew sets him out with the weight of his genealogy going back to the patriarchs, behind Him. The reason for this is that Matthew wants to assure his readers and hearers that Jesus’ roots can be traced right back into the very heart of Israel. Jesus is the new Moses. He is the new David He is the new Abraham.
With this agenda in mind and the community he belonged to (Jewish) then it becomes easy to see why Matthew writes as he does.
. He refers to the Old Testament and quotes from this quite liberally (43 times) and prolifically. Indeed 11 of the quotations are introduced using the special formula ‘This happened that the saying of the Lord by the prophet might be fulfilled.’
Matthews intent was to show the community he was catechizing that Jesus fulfilled everything promised in the Law and prophets.
GraceAngel.
Click to expand...
As I am certain that you did not intend to come across as condescending, did you? You read an awfully deep intention into a very short answer given. Perhaps the meaness is something you see in yourself, for it certainly was not my intention. I fail to see where and how you interpret ‘meaness’ in that particular post. Instead of the very interesting bible lesson you gave, I am NOW much more interested in how you arrived at your judgment of my simple post.
 
juliasmith said:
As I am certain that you did not intend to come across as condescending, did you? You read an awfully deep intention into a very short answer given. Perhaps the meaness is something you see in yourself, for it certainly was not my intention. I fail to see where and how you interpret ‘meaness’ in that particular post. Instead of the very interesting bible lesson you gave, I am NOW much more interested in how you arrived at your judgment of my simple post.
Click to expand...
I think the misconception came in your reply that Matthew’s Gospel was focused only on Christ, as it should be. This is a common response from our Christian brethren who think that Catholics spend entirely too much time on Mary.

So it may have been old scars that caused Grace Angel to think you were being mean-spirited.

“No harm, no foul” in my book!
 
Perhaps Mother Angelica was correct when she said that speaking the truth would get you called ‘mean-spirited’.

I did not even imply, nor directly say, that Catholics spend too much time on Mary.

So, that given, I’ll certainly agree ‘no harm, no foul’.
But, I do feel that people should actually assess what they read, before they respond, or become accusatory.

And I am definitely Catholic, and not protestant( I am now assuming here that you meant them as ‘our Christian brethren’ Please correct me if I am wrong.). And I feel more focus should be on Jesus and not necessarily on Mary, although I am very fond of Her. If that offends anyone, my apologies. I certainly would not want to force my personal opinion on anyone. If that makes me mean-spirited, well, so be it.

I am quite comfortable with that.
 
Matthew presents Joseph as the main character of the nativity and infancy narratives because Jesus is bound to Joseph’s lineage through Mary.

Likewise, Matthew’s writing style systematically highlights Joseph as a person receiving divine commandments from God through an angel in a dream and whose obedience results in the fulfillment of several promises and prophecies in the Old Testament.

Some scholars contend that Matthew might have attached more significance to Joseph’s role and responsibility in the nativity and infancy narrative primarily because he wanted to point out the similarities between Moses and Jesus’ childhood with regard to the notion of adoption.

It is also plausible to suppose that Matthew gives priority to the notion of fatherhood due to the divine promises given by God to the patriarchs (fathers). Thus, Joseph receives divine promises from God very much like Abraham and David and he becomes the father of Jesus’ genealogy.
 
juliasmith said:
Perhaps Mother Angelica was correct when she said that speaking the truth would get you called ‘mean-spirited’.

I did not even imply, nor directly say, that Catholics spend too much time on Mary.

So, that given, I’ll certainly agree ‘no harm, no foul’.
But, I do feel that people should actually assess what they read, before they respond, or become accusatory.

And I am definitely Catholic, and not protestant( I am now assuming here that you meant them as ‘our Christian brethren’ Please correct me if I am wrong.). And I feel more focus should be on Jesus and not necessarily on Mary, although I am very fond of Her. If that offends anyone, my apologies. I certainly would not want to force my personal opinion on anyone. If that makes me mean-spirited, well, so be it.

I am quite comfortable with that.
Click to expand...
Julia, I was pondering, not accusing.

So… no harm, no foul, eh? 😉

But I am perplexed by
And I feel more focus should be on Jesus and not necessarily on Mary,
Click to expand...
I mean, you can’t focus on Mary without focusing on Jesus. At least, when you do it correctly, you can’t focus on her without focusing on Him.

Otherwise, your statement would be like saying Catholics follow their Church and not Jesus. That’s impossible, in my view. You can’t follow the Church without following Christ.

But again, I’m just pondering.
 
juliasmith said:
As I am certain that you did not intend to come across as condescending, did you? You read an awfully deep intention into a very short answer given. Perhaps the meaness is something you see in yourself, for it certainly was not my intention. I fail to see where and how you interpret ‘meaness’ in that particular post. Instead of the very interesting bible lesson you gave, I am NOW much more interested in how you arrived at your judgment of my simple post.
Click to expand...
No I didnt intend to come across as condescending.
GraceAngel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top