第十二卷 (1990-91年) MATTHEW'S COMMUNITY
by Herman Hendrickx, C. I. C.M.

MATTHEW'S COMMUNITY



1. Introduction

During his ministry, Jesus seems to have been the leader of a kind of rural and village-based sectarian faction of wandering charismatics.(1) However, within a few decades a gradual change took place. Those followers of Jesus who before had been mobile were becoming sedentary or house-based. A transition was being made from the rural and village culture of Palestine to Greco-Roman city culture, from an ethnically homogeneous constituency which was largely unlearned, relatively poor, and of low social status, to an ethnically heterogeneous one that included people more educated, more financially secure and successful, i.e., persons of higher status.

It is generally held that the Gospel attributed to Matthew was written around 80-90 A. D. for just such an audience living in an urban setting. Some scholars have located this urbanized community more exactly at Antioch in Syria. That Matthew's community, at least in comparison with Mark's, was more urbanized seems evident from an analysis of various words in the two gospels. While Mark used the word polis, "city", eight times and the word kome, "village", seven times, Matthew uses "village" only four times but "city" at least twenty-six time. Furthermore, Matthew often connected houses (oikoi) and city (polis) (Mt 10:14; 12:25; 17:24-25; 23:28; 26:18). Thus socio-historical data as well as text criticism point to Matthew's community as more urbanized. Consequently it can be called both a "household church" and a "city church."(2) 

Urbanization led to a degree of prosperity and it has been argued on various grounds that Matthew's audience was a generally prosperous community. Indeed, if we take, for example, the three terms "silver," "gold," and "talent," we discover that they occur in Matthew's gospel no fewer than twenty-eight times, compared with the single occurrence of the word "silver" in Mark and the four in Luke. 

While Matthew's house churches had a degree of material security, the historical reality of urbanization and increasing exploitation of the poor would have introduced deepening economic polarities, and possibly even conflicts. Yet the special Matthean material (M) contains very few sayings about wealth or problems connected with wealth. Where they are found, they do not reveal the kind of severity toward possessions that can be observed in the other gospels.(3) Where Matthew does make redactional comments about wealth, we can conclude:

An examination of Matthew's treatment of sayings about wealth shows that such changes as there are usually seem slight. On the other hand the tendency of the redaction seems clear. Matthew does not intensify the severity of the sayings about riches, but rather he makes such sayings somewhat less severe. This tendency may be related with the fact that the economic circumstances of Matthew's church seem to have been less harsh than those of the earlier Christian communities.(4)

Although the majority of its households were generally financially secure, Matthew's community also seems to have contained a significant group of poor. But rather than making a futile and misplaced call to his community to be poor, Matthew's gospel offered a challenge for it to be just toward the poor. Matthew's use of dikaios ("just") more than all other gospels combined, reinforces this conclusion (Mt 3:15; 5:6, 10, 20; 6:1, 33; 21:22). While Luke's has been called the gospel of the poor, Matthew's has often been called the gospel of justice.

Some features of Matthew's community are tolerably clear. He writes in Greek for a Greek-speaking church, probably in an eastern city; most scholars think this was the great metropolis of Antioch in Syria, sometime in the last quarter of the first century. There may have been many small household groups of Christians in Antioch at that time, however, and quite likely there was a certain diversity among them. Not all may have shared the history and perspectives that Matthew assumed.(5) 



  
1.Gerd Theissen, The First Followers of Jesus. A Sociological Analysis of the Earliest Christianity (London: SCM Press, 1978).

2.Michael H. Crosby, House of Disciples. Church, Economics and Justice in Matthew (Maryknoll, N. Y.: Orbis Books, 1988) 36-40.

3.But see Thomas E. Schmidt, Hostility to Wealth in the Synoptic Gospels (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987) 121-134.

4.David L. Mealand, Proerty and Expectation in the Gospels (London: S.P.C.K.,1980)16.

5.Wayne Meeks, The Moral World of the First Christians (Philadephia: Fortress Press, 1986) 137.

2. Concrete Situation

The concrete situation addressed by Matthew's Gospel can be described as follows:

First, Matthew wrote for a group of predominantly but not exclusively Jewish Christians.

Secondly, his work can be dated about fifteen years after the Jewish war which ended with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple.

Thirdly, he and his community were situated in a place where recent developments within Judaism, especially the growth of Jamnia Pharisaism, largely determined the religious environment.

Fourthly, the evangelist faced confusion, tension, conflict, and the destructive influence of false prophets within the community.

To substantiate these statements, we must look at the Gospel of Matthew itself. How does it mirror and hence reveal this situation?

Matthean scholars broadly agree that the Christians in Matthew's community were largely, but not exclusively, converts from Judaism. They argue from the obvious "Jewishness" of the first gospel. The Matthean Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of David, promised in the Old Testament, and eagerly awaited by the Jews. Furthermore, Matthew rooted Jesus' origin and his ministry of teaching, preaching, and healing in the Jewish past through several explicit quotations, of the Old Testament and even more indirect allusions. He is also more concerned than the other evangelists with the Christian attitude toward the religious institutions of Judaism, especially the law and the cult. Consequently, the Christians for whom Matthew wrote his Gospel must have had the religious and cultural background necessary to understand his portrayal of Jesus and the disciples. They must have, for example, been familiar with the Old Testament and the practices of Jewish piety. In a word, they must have been to a large extent converts from Judaism.

Even though the Jewish War (A. D. 66-70) and the destruction of the Temple (A. D. 70) did not profoundly influence Christianity as a whole, these events did in fact have a profound impact on Matthew and his community. Matthew directly refers to these events in Mt 22:7: "The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. " Again, in his indictment of the scribes and Pharisees: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem ... your house is forsaken and desolate" (Mt 23:37-38). Other indications also reveal Matthew's concern with the city of Jerusalem (Mt 16:21; 21:10-11; 27:53; 28:11). All these data suggest that the Gospel was written at a time when the events of the Jewish War, especially the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, had already caused Matthew's largely Jewish Christian community to reflect on their identity.(6)

Central to the Matthean Community's struggle to understand themselves as Christians in a changing world was the question of how they should relate to recent developments within Judaism, especially the emergence of Jamnia Pharisaism. At Jamnia the Pharisees assumed exclusive power after discrediting the Sadducees and containing the traditionally powerful priesthood. They transferred a part of the Temple ritual to the synagogue, and linked the synagogue service to that of the now defunct Temple. They concentrated on the problem of the canon of Scripture and instituted the Rabbinate as the authoritative interpreter of the law. They also consciously confronted Christianity.

Such dramatic changes in Judaism profoundly disturbed the Matthean community. Their self-understanding had been rooted in Jewish tradition. But now they were forced to question their relation to Judaism and even their own identity. Matthew wrote his Gospel in large part to awaken in them a new self-understanding in the light of recent circumstances. He wrote in dialogue with the recent developments in Jamnia, to show his community what it meant to be Christians in the changing milieu of postwar Judaism.

Within the community confusion and doubt prevailed; for what the Matthean Jesus predicts as future events describes the present experience of Matthew's community: "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation, and put you to death; and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake. And then many will fall away, and betray one another, and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because wickedness is multiplied, most people's love will grow cold. But he who endures to the end will be saved" (Mt 24:9-13). Matthew and his community, then, had to confront important issues: persecution from non-Jewish sources, scandal caused by mutual betrayal, hatred between members, the divisive influence of false prophets, and widespread wickedness causing love itself to grow cold.

In dialogue with Jamnia Pharisaism and in response to these tensions within his community, Matthew retold and translated the story of Jesus. He so selected, arranged and composed his material that his readers might find and recognize themselves in the narrative. He created a distinctive portrait of Jesus, his followers, and his opponents. Members of the community could identify with the disciples and see the opponents as surrogates for the sages at Jamnia. Matthew could address them through the words and actions of Jesus.



  
6.Eugene A. LaVerdiere and William G. Thompson, "New Testament Communities in Transition: A Study of Matthew and Luke", Theological Studies 37 (1976) 571-572.

3. Four Concerns

Matthew stressed four themes:

First, and above all, he presented his community with a new understanding of their mission. They had been sent to "the lost sheep of Israel." But now they should devote themselves to the wider Gentile mission.(7)

Secondly, to carry out that mission, he urged them no longer to understand themselves as a sectarian group within Judaism. Recent developments indicated that they should accept their separation from Jamnia Pharisaism and claim an independent identity with roots in Jesus Christ and through him in their Jewish past.(8)

Thirdly, Matthew urged reconciliation, forgiveness, and mutual love within the community; for the Gentile mission would never succeed unless the community learned how to manage the confusion, tension and conflict that divided them one from another.(9)

Finally, as motivation for the Gentile mission, Matthew assured his community that, when the Son of Man comes, he would judge not only them but also the Gentiles to whom they were sent.(10)

4. New Understanding of Mission

During his ministry, Jesus stated explicitly: "My mission is only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mt 15:24). He sent his disciples on mission with the same directive (Mt 10:5b). The vision seemed clear: Jesus came to work for the salvation of Israel. This does not mean that Jesus had no contact with the Gentiles. The Gentile Magi recognized him at his birth (Mt 2:1-12), and the faith of the Gentiles had, at times, amazed even Jesus (Mt 8:10; 15:28). During his preaching, moreover, Jesus had hinted that changes would come. The parables of the two sons, the wicked tenants, and the marriage feast (Mt 21:28-22:14) had all focused on the infidelity of the Jews and the passing of salvation to others (Mt 21:34).

By the time Matthew wrote, the mission to the Gentiles had become a major issue of Church policy. When describing the end of the world, only Matthew's Jesus states explicitly that "this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world as a witness to all the nations. Only after that will the end come" (Mt 24:14). Matthew calls his Church to an extended mission, reminding them that the end will not come until the mission to the Gentiles is accomplished. Although limited to Israel during the life of Jesus, Christian mission in the post-Easter period is a broad, all-embracing commitment to all nations of the world. The risen Christ, endowed with full authority, commands and missions his followers to make disciples of the whole world (Mt 28:19). Exegetes have long recognized that the final commission "to make disciples of all nations" (Mt 28:16-20) dominates Matthew's historical and theological perspective.

As Matthew's community struggles with its own sense of identity and purpose, Matthew unites them in a common sense of ministry to the world. His call and vision imply a new sense of Church, and energize his followers to corporate action.

As Matthew's community began to consolidate and expand, it became profoundly aware of its own authority, and struggled to identify structures through which that authority could be channeled.

Composed of several groups, each with its own value system, Matthew's community needed him to call them all to a spirit of reconciliation and a sense of communion.

As a reaction to outside pressures and persecution, the faith of many weakened. The Church needed to be called back to an appreciation of the centrality of Jesus and the need for a living, fruitful faith in him.

Finally, in the changing world of the post-Easter Church, the loss of a sense of purpose and direction needed to be challenged. Matthew focused his community's commitment, launching out to a visionary mission of world conversion.(11)

5. A Community in Transition

The Gentile mission could never be successful if the Matthean community did not learn to manage their internal confusion, tension, conflict, and the divisive influence of false prophets. Hence, the Matthean Jesus invites his disciples, and at the same time the evangelist invites his community, to deepen their faith. Jesus calls them "men of little faith" (Mt 6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20).

The episodes in which the need for greater faith is most strikingly taught are the calming of the storm at sea (Mt 8:18-27) and the walking on the water (Mt 14:22-33). Prior to the first storm, the Matthean Jesus commands the crowd around him to go over to the other side of the lake, but only the disciples will follow him into the boat. Who are these disciples, and how are they different from the rest of the crowd? Matthew identifies them as those who are ready to share all that is implied in the fact that their master has no place to lay his head, and to put familial piety in second place when it conflicts with their commitment to follow Jesus (Mt 8:18-22). With the meaning of their action understood, the disciples follow Jesus into the boat. A storm rises, but Jesus is asleep. The disciples awaken him with an appeal for help: "Save, Lord; we are perishing." Jesus responds with the question, "Why are you afraid, 0 men of little faith?" (Mt 8:26). The disciples' inadequate faith refers to their lack of confidence in Jesus' power over the storm. But Matthew's readers, swamped by waves of opposition and conflict and with some beginning to lose heart, would easily identify with the disciples. Matthew calls for a deeper faith in Jesus' power over the evil symbolized by the storm at sea.

Similarly, when Jesus walks through the storm to the disciples in the boat, he invites Peter to come to him on the water. Peter gets out of the boat, begins to walk toward Jesus, but becomes afraid and begins to sink. Jesus catches him with the words, "O man of little faith, why did you doubt?" (Mt 14:31). Once they are safe in the boat and the storm has ceased, the disciples worship Jesus: "Truly you are the Son of God" (Mt 14:33). Once again Matthew intends his community to see their situation mirrored in the storm at sea, and their fears and doubts expressed in Peter's hesitation. He invites them to join the disciples in their renewed faith in Jesus as the Son of God.

Also through Jesus' instructions to his disciples Matthew address the confusion and conflict that was dividing his community. The Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1-7:28) and the Communitarian Discourse(Mt 17:22-18:35) are the clearest examples. In the Sermon the disciples and the crowd are called "blessed" when they experience persecution and all kinds of evil (Mt 5:11-12). In the first antithesis they are warned against divisive anger and urged to reconciliation (Mt 5:21-26). In the fifth they are taught not to resist an evildoer (Mt 5:38-42). In the final antithesis Jesus instructs them to love their enemies (Mt 5:43-48). The need for mutual forgiveness is expressed as a petition in the Our Father (Mt 6:12) and elaborated at the end of the prayer (Mt 6:14-15). Finally, in the epilogue to the Sermon, Jesus warns against false prophets (Mt 7:15-20) and against those who would claim a place in the kingdom of heaven on the basis of mighty works in his name (Mt 7:21-23). Matthew's community could easily apply these instruction to their own confusion and conflicts and to the divisive influence of false prophets in their midst.

In the communitarian discourse in chapter 18, Matthew addresses the same issues, but against the background of Jesus' prediction of his own passion, death, and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23). His instructions concern attitudes and behaviour among the disciples. If they would enter and achieve greatness in the future kingdom of heaven, they must now humble themselves like the child in their midst (Mt 18:1-4). Under no circumstances are they to weaken the faith of a fellow disciple through scandalous behaviour (Mt 18:5-9). Instead, they should care for the one going astray and do everything possible to reconcile a brother or sister who has wandered into sin (Mt 18:10-20). Finally, they are to forgive personal offenses without limit (Mt 18:21-35). Once again through these instructions Matthew teaches his community how to cope with their internal situation.(12)

6. Final Judgment

Given his ideas about the Gentile Mission, it is not surprising that in the final sections of his eschatological discourse, Matthew has Jesus describe the judgment of the disciples and the Gentiles.

The Matthean Jesus exhorts his disciples to vigilance (Mt 24:36-25:30). He stresses the fact that, as the Son of Man, he will certainly come (Mt 24:37, 39, 43, 46; 25:6-7, 19), but also that his coming will be delayed (Mt 24:48; 25:5). Since the exact day and hour cannot be known, the disciples should watch and remain alert, like the faithful servant in his master's household or the virgins waiting for the bridegroom (Mt 24:36. 42, 44, 50; 25:13). When the Son of Man comes, however, the disciples will be divided one from another, like the men in the field or the women at the mill, like the faithfill from the wicked servants, like the wise from the foolish virgins, or like the servants to whom the talents had been entrusted (Mt 24:40-41, 45-49; 25:2-4, 16-18).

Matthew addressed Jesus' words to his community in the aftermath of the Jewish war to correct the false impression that the end had already arrived and to call them to constant vigilance and readiness. He also wanted to motivate them to carry out the mission to all nations. Merely belonging to the community would not guarantee entrance into the kingdom of heaven; for they will be judged on how well they used their different talents in the common task of "making disciples of all nations" (Mt 28:18). When Jesus returns he will not judge them according to their abilities but according to how well they carried out their tasks with love and respect for one another.

Jesus ends this final discourse by describing the judgment of the nations to whom he sends his followers (Mt 25:31-46). When he returns as the triumphant Son of Man, Jesus will separate the nations into sheep and goats. He will invite the sheep to possess the kingdom of heaven; he will condemn the goats. Both sheep and goats will be surprised. Then Jesus will explain the criterion for judgment: how well or ill the nations treated the least of his brethren. Jesus declares that he will reward or punish Jews and Gentiles according to whether or not they gave them food and drink, clothed and sheltered them, and visited them when sick or in prison. Without the nations knowing it, they encountered Jesus himself in these little ones because he sent them to announce the good news about God."



  
11.Leonard Doohan, Matthew. Spirituality for the 80's and 90's (Santa Fe, New Mexico: Bear & Company, 1985) 38-39.

7. Matthew's Community and Us

Matthew's community was not a group of withdrawn ascetics, but rather a community that had participated and was participating in significant historical events. Reactions to some of the major events, both religious and social, had divided Matthew's people into all shades of conservative and liberal. His community showed not only pluralism, but at times even contradictory positions on important issues. Matthew, while probably not agreeing with them, left the differences intact. He strove for reconciliation, renewal, and a corporate sense of mission.

Matthew's community lived at a turning point in Christianity, and had to make decisions which brought them hardship and social persecution. Our Christian communities of 1990 have many of these same characteristics. Matthew presents Jesus to us to calm the storms of our communities, reminding us that divisiveness is a sign of little faith. Christianity's place is still in the midst of world events: the tragedies, oppression, joys and hopes of humankind. There will always be differences among us, but if we are constantly committed to reconciliation, renewal, and a sense of mission, they can be at least controlled and managed. Like Matthew's community, we need maturity and objectivity to face our differences.(14)

Our problems and needs are not unlike those of Matthew's community, and his creative responses to their problems can still be valuable to us. All genuine Christian life must be rooted in the saving events of Jesus, and Matthew is diligent in identifying these sources and establishing them as the foundation for faith. But Christian life does not merely repeat a literalist and fundamentalist version of Jesus' life. Authentic Christian commitment requires a living and life-giving interpretation of those historical events in every generation and in every culture. Only such rooting and interpreting guarantee the genuineness of faith.(15)

Uncertain times can prompt us Christians to ask important questions about our faith and our place in the world: How are we to live as Christians? What are we to do? Where do we turn to find truth and meaning? What does following Jesus mean? What values do we want to foster in ourselves and others? How do we make right decisions and design concrete strategies for action which can create a better world for ourselves and the coming generations? Such questions troubled Matthew and his community. We also ask them today.

Confusion can move us, as it moved Matthew and his community, to reflect on our roots-the persons and experiences from which we have come as individuals and families, as Christian communities, and as a society. As we recall our heritage, we remember significant persons and we relive the events which have shaped our identity. We try to recapture the vision and recover the values of those who founded our communities. As we tap into our roots, we may gain new perspectives from which to view our present times.(16)

Matthew and his community worked with inherited traditions, attended to their present experience, and responded to their surrounding culture. We must do the same. Matthew's story is our inherited tradition. As we listen to it in personal or community settings, we also listen to our present experience and our contemporary culture. We, too, must let what we hear come together in reflection and prayer so that we can discover how God through Matthew's story might be enabling us to live as Christians in our uncertain times.(17)



  
12.LaVerdiere and Thompson, art. cit. 578-580.

13.William G. Thompson, Matthew's Story. God News For Uncertain Times (New York: Paulist Press, 1989) 127.

14.Doohan, op. cit. 49.

15.Ibidem 161.

16.Thompson, op. cit. 15-16.

17.Ibidem 53.