5.

The Church: Extension of the Meek "Son–Servant" in this World

Reaching to the end of this study based on a central fulfilment quotation in the Gospel of
Matthew, we need to take a position on the intention of the author. The different Gospel writers
have addressed particular situations and issues. The Matthean Gospel also formed part of an early
Christian community and Matthew wrote his Gospel with his congregation and its issues in mind.
The use of the term “evkklhsi,a” Church forms a distinctive feature of Matthew’s Gospel. This term
must have had a distinctive meaning for Matthew and for his readers at the time he used it in his
Gospel. Matthew quotes Isaiah’s first ‘Servant Song’ to present ‘his’ Jesus as the meek ‘Son–
Servant’, who announces and brings forth Justice/Judgment to the e;qnh nations, with e;leoj mercy,
in a context of conflict, rejection and in the crucial moment of decision to kill him when he
withdraws from there. On the first level Matthew tells the story of Jesus’ fate in Israel. Jesus was
rejected and executed in Israel while He pronounced judgment on Israel’s leaders and its people
and commissioned his disciples to preach to the Gentiles. On the second level he tells the story of
the community’s commitment to Jesus which resulted in their separation from the synagogue.

Through the presentation of his Jesus as a meek "Son–Servant" amidst the controversies on
the observance and interpretation of the Law and conflict with the Pharisees, Matthew makes a call
to his community to become identified in the person of Jesus, and follow his mode of action to
continue his mission. The Church is thus a continuation of the meek “Son–Servant” in its ‘identity’,
in its ‘mode of action’ and in its ‘mission’.

5.1.1 The Church “Son–Servant” in Its Identity

Through the fulfilment quotation of the first ‘Servant Song’ (12, 18 – 21), the Matthean
community recognizes her identity and her mission of announcing God to the world. Claude Tassin
states “Matthew proposes his Church that she renew her reading of the poem of the Servant: the
prophesy targets Jesus, who carries a message destined to all; this prophesy also aims at the

1
Servant-Israel, provided that the latter defines its identity by its adherence to Jesus the Servant. All
the drama of the following chapters is profiled in this interpretation, as well as that of every Church
which is truly ‘a handmaid’ only to the extent of identifying herself with her Lord”. Israel fails in her
vocation by rejecting her Messiah. And the Church was elected to fulfil the destiny and vocation of
Israel. The “evkklhsi,a” is a continuation of Israel, a ‘New Israel’ destined to take over the destiny and
vocation of Israel by fulfilling the will of God.

Through the teaching of Jesus, Matthew invites his community to follow the attitude of
‘Son–Servant’. For him, becoming a ‘disciple’ is to ‘learn from the school’ of the Teacher, who is
Jesus (Mt 11, 29). The demand “ma,qete avpV evmou/” resounds throughout the Gospel, by underlining
the character of “servant,” which is well stated in his Gospel: “But the greatest among you shall be
your servant” (23, 11). Here Jesus challenges the use of the titles “rabbi”, “father”, and “master”
(23, 7 –10), and prefers the role of “διάκονος” servant for his disciples. The only legitimate role in
the Matthean community is that of "servant" (23, 11)1. Jesus enunciates these concepts of service
and Kenosis in a context where he criticizes the Scribes and Pharisees. The speech against the
Pharisees is the opportunity to insert the logia on relations between members of the community
and those who exercise responsibility in Matthew.

This theme is particularly clear in the pericope of the sons of Zebedee Mt 20, 26 – 27: “the
Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20,
28; Mk 10, 45). In this passage, by relating the terms “me,gaj gene,sqai” to be great with “dia,konoj”
servant (20, 26), “i=nai prw/toj” to be first with “dou/loj” slave (20, 27), and finally identifying it in the
person of Jesus as “ouvk h=lqen diakonhqh/nai avlla. diakonh/sai” who came not to be served but to
serve2, Matthew identifies his community in ‘his’ Jesus as Servant. Matthew redefines the term
“evxousi,a” authority given to his disciples in Mt 10, 1. The “evxousi,a” authority is given to his disciples
in Mt 10, 1ff for the purpose of continuing the different activities which manifested the ‘Messianic

1
Meier observes that Matthew is not simply engaging in polemics against Jews. These statements are
presumably aimed at possible abuses within the Church: the Jewish leaders wish to be known and greeted as
rabbi, teacher, and master. Matthew sees the danger of introducing such practices into his church.
2
This theme of ‘Servant’ is well highlighted in the great judgment scene in the final section of the eschatological
discourse (25, 31 – 46). The occurrence of the phrase “ouv dihkonh,same,n soi” not serve unto you(25, 44), recalls
the necessity of identifying with the meek “Son-Servant” and summarizes the climax of the judgment scene,
calling everyone to follow this ‘servant-model’.

2
concern’ of Jesus3. Thus it is to continue the “evxousi,a” authority given by Jesus in a ‘Servant model’
proposed in Mt 20, 26 – 28, following the model set by Jesus. Community instruction4 of Mt 23, 8 –
12 appears to be an application made by the ‘Matthean community’ of Jesus’ words: “It must not be
this way among you” (Mt 20, 26a). This concerns not only those who hold political power (20, 25),
but also those who imitate them, men dominating by virtue of their religious power (23, 2 – 7). In
the passage 23, 2 – 7, Jesus criticizes Scribes and Pharisees for their love of prestige and position.
Such dangers also threaten the ‘Matthean community’, and the ‘Matthean Jesus’ thus warns his
community against superiority and elitism. In the Church, therefore, the great is the one who is a
servant and renounces himself (Kenosis = avgaphto,j), and in giving his life in radical fidelity to the
teaching of Jesus. Moreover, Matthew takes care to reject any claim to exercise authority in the
Church in the form of domination of one over others. Therefore any ecclesial function is a service
referring to Jesus, the meek “Son–Servant”. The demeanour of the disciples is to be characterized
above all by the virtues of service and humility. And they must learn that true greatness consists in
service and in self–humbling, which is clearly the path to exaltation in the eschaton. Thus identifying
herself with pai/j “Son–Servant”, the Church will be able to understand what identity that it must
be.

5.2 The Church Meek “Son–Servant” in Its Mode of Action

Matthew encourages his community to follow Jesus who is non–violent and meek in his
mode of action. In the face of the violence of the Pharisees (the decision to destroy Jesus), Jesus
withdraws (a meek and non–violent reaction). Jesus is disconcerting by his meekness and his non–
violence against the powerful of the time. This notion of meekness and non–violence are well
emphasized in this fulfilment quotation (12, 19 – 90). Jesus is presented as meek 11, 29 only by
Matthew, in order to set a model before his community and he introduces an invitation expressed
by Jesus himself: “Come to me… Take my ‘yoke’…Learn from me…, because I am “prau<j” meek. And

3
the subject “evxousi,a” authority in the Gospel of Matthew: commenting on Mt 10, 7 – 8; 20, 25 – 28 and 28, 19,
he states “Authority is meant for service of the Kingdom of God or the Messianic mission inaugurated by Jesus.
And it has to be manifested, rather, actualized and fructified in that service… thus Jesus sets his very life as the
model of servant-hood. Evidently authority for Jesus is not for ruling over others, but serving others and the only
way to greatness is through serving”.
4
The exhortation to service and humility has occurred already but separately: for 23, 11, cf. 20, 26 – 27; for 23,
12, cf. 18, 4. Here Matthew brings them together to underline this attitude which Jesus requires of his disciples,
in contrast to Scribes and Pharisees.

3
this invitation of Jesus is followed by the two controversy stories whose main thrust seems to be the
interpretation of the Law in a new dimension. We can identify two main noteworthy points of the
Matthean redaction in these controversy stories – one omission and one addition – compared with
the Markan narrative: Matthew omits the violent reaction of anger narrated by Mark 5, just before
the healing of the man with the withered hand, in order not to contradict the meekness of Jesus
and by the addition of Hos 6, 6 to conclude the first controversy story, Matthew highlights Jesus’
meekness.

For Matthew, the ethics of mercy seems to be a symbol of identity of his community. We
find the noun e;leoj mercy three times in the Gospel of Matthew 9, 13; 12, 7 and 23, 23 6, each time
in a context of conflict and controversy with the Pharisees. And it is remarkable to note that these
three occurrences of the noun e;leoj mercy are missing from all three other Gospels, which urges us
to identify this quality as essential ethics to be followed in the Matthean community.

The first occurrence takes places around the call of Matthew and in the following passage of
‘table fellowship’ with tax collectors and sinners in chapter 9, 9 – 13. In Mt 9, 9 Jesus calls Matthew7
away from the tax booth with the words, “Follow me”. The name Matthew is obviously important
for this Gospel, and by giving importance to his attribute as “telw,nhj” tax collector. Matthean Jesus’
concern towards “tax collectors and sinners” is introduced as a theme in the call of Matthew and
well narrated in the following passage. Matthew accepted the call of Jesus and participates at a
dinner at home with tax collectors and sinners8. Some Pharisees, apparently witnessing the
gathering, ask the disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” The
teacher himself answers the question that was directed to his disciples. In Matthew, Jesus’ answer

5
In Mk 3, 5 we read, “looking around at them with anger” metV ovrgh/j, which is absent from the reaction of
‘Matthean Jesus’.
6
Along with the noun, we find the use of the verb έλεέω several times, especially in the healing narratives
7
For Mark 2, 14 we read, “Leui.n to.n tou/ ~Alfai,ou” Levi the son of Alpheus, and in Luke has simply “Leui.n”
Levi (5, 27), and in Matthew we find the name “Matqai/on” Matthew : D. A. Hagner states somes suggestions
from the scholars concerning the change of the name Levi to Matthew: “Pesch argues that for the evangelist this
call of the disciple must be the call of one of the twelve, and thus the evangelist picks a name from the list
available to him (e.g. in Mk 3, 14 – 19).
8
While the Lukan parallel makes it clear that Levi is the host of the party which immediately follows his call,
Mark and Matthew offer a more ambiguous account of where the party takes place. Jews were not allowed to sit
at the same table with tax collectors and Gentiles by the rule of tithing and purity (Gal 2, 11 – 15). “To share a
meal was a sign of intimacy, and Jesus’ notorious willingness thus to identify himself with the undesirable is a
prominent feature of the Gospel Portrait”.

4
has three parts. First, he speaks a proverb: “The well have no need of a physician”. Then, acting as
the Pharisees’ teacher, he points them back to the scriptures, suggesting that they “go and learn
what this means, Ί desire mercy and not sacrifice”. Finally, he describes his own mission by saying, “I
have come to call not the righteous but sinners” (Matt 9, 13). Mark and Luke include the first and
third parts of Jesus’ response. Matthew alone gives Jesus' citation of the verse from Hosea.

Here it is remarkable to see the problem of ‘table fellowship’ narrated in Galatians 2, 11 –15.
The narration of this passage starts with a positive tone with table fellowship enjoyed by the Jews
and Gentiles, and with Peter and Paul taking part in the occasion. All of a sudden, the arrival of
James’ messengers seems to have pressurized Peter and Jewish Christians in Antioch with the result
that the table fellowship became disrupted. Gal 2, 13 reads “And with him (Cephas), the rest of the
Jews acted insincerely, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their insincerity”. And Paul
criticizes Peter severely grieving over the division caused by Peter and the Jewish group in the table
fellowship. Here in the Matthean context, the subject seems to be the same. Matthean Jesus orders
thus his disciples to reflect and integrate the lesson of Hos 6, 6.

The Matthean addition of verse 9, 13 noticed by introducing Hos 6, 6 with a Matthean

preferable verb “ma,qete” learn, which has the same root as “maqhth,j” disciple or learner. It seems to
be a precondition from ‘Matthean Jesus’, to learn “e;leoj qe,lw kai. ouv qusi,an”, to be a disciple or to
be included in his community. It is a call to reflection, for Matthean Jesus is pointing not to the
surface meaning of the text of Hos 6, 69, but to Hosea’s underlying concern, the danger of religion
which is completely external, in which ritual demands have taken the place of mercy. “Jesus’ table
fellowship to which they object is in fact the supreme fulfilment of God’s desire, while their
censorious indifference is a rebirth of the superficial religion which Hosea deplored”.

Since this verse of Hos 6, 6 is obviously important to Matthew and his community, it is
quoted again in the context of the Sabbath controversies to emphasize mercy. In the context of Mt
12, 18 – 21, Jesus describes himself as meek (11, 29) and in the following passage (12, 1 – 8) Jesus
declares mercy as more important than law and tradition (Sabbath): e;leoj qe,lw kai. ouv qusi,an I

9
Richard France observes that the validity of the sacrifice is not the point of discussion here or indeed anywhere
in Jesus’ teachings

5
desire mercy, and not sacrifice Hos 6, 610. And he puts into practice this meekness of mercy, by
performing a healing, seemingly surpassing the rules of Sabbath (12, 9 – 13). Moreover, he
continues his work of mercy for those who followed him, kai. evqera,peusen auvtou.j pa,ntaj And he
healed them all 12, 15. Further, his works of mercy are well illustrated in 12, 20: “He will not break a
bruised reed or extinguish a smouldering wick”. Jesus emphasizes the value of mercy as a sign of his
meekness and Matthew calls upon his community to practice this value.

And here it is remarkable to add a note on Mt 12, 6, which falls in the immediate context of
the fulfilment quotation under study: le,gw de. u`mi/n o[ti tou/ i`erou/ mei/zo,n evstin w–deÅ something
greater than the temple is here. In the context of 12, 6, what is greater than the temple? As an
answer to this question, the majority points towards Jesus. But the scholars are divided in their
interpretation of this passage. Luz, pointing to the tightness of the Matthean argumentation, and
the use of the neuter comparative of the adjective me,gaj, concludes that it is the e;leoj mercy of the
Hosean citation to which “the greater” in v. 6 refers. And he argues that v. 6 is a Matthean redaction
which reoccurs in Mt 12, 41 and 42 kai. ivdou. plei/on VIwna/ (Solomw/noj) w–deÅ Here the neuter plei/on
has a Christological reference. A subtle nuance occurs with the use of the neuter adjective. The
neuter mei/zo,n emphasizes the quality11 rather than the person. Thus, the neuter adjective mei/zo,n is
very much related to the quality of e;leoj mercy, which points ultimately towards a Christological
reference.

As a reflection to his mercy, Jesus heals the man with the withered hand, though the
attitude of the Pharisees was contrary. Further Jesus reveals his meekness through his action in
favour of the crowds who followed him: “he healed them all”. Healing the crowds demonstrated
understanding, mercy and compassion on Jesus’s part, which are some of the qualities of the heart
filled with meekness.

10
Several scholars have worked on this subject of the use of Hos 6, 6 in the Gospel of Matthew: The citation is
unique to Matthew among the parallel Synoptic narratives and the quotation is introduced twice in different
episodes, but both in the midst of dispute with Pharisees by Jesus in person.
11
Robert Gundry remarks “The neuter gender of mei/zo,n stresses the quality of superior greatness rather than
Jesus’ personal identity”.

6
 The third occurrence of the noun e;leoj mercy is in Mt 23, 23, which occurs in the context of
the fourth woe declared by Jesus against the Pharisees for their preoccupation with minutiae and
resultant neglect of things that really mattered. When we treated Mt 23, 23 earlier, we noticed that
“th.n kri,sin (justice) kai. to. e;leoj (mercy) kai. th.n pi,stin (faithfulness)”, are essential qualities
absent from the preoccupation of the Pharisees. These three matters are at the heart of the Old
Testament12, and their close affinity to the love commandment, as the summary of the Law is well
presented by Matthew in 22, 37 – 40. Therefore we read in 23, 23: tau/ta these things, the
important matters of the Law, which they ought to have attended to, Jesus insists by adding the
term kavkei/na mh. avfie,nai without neglecting others. Here it is interesting to note that Matthew
uses the terms “th.n kri,sin” (justice) 12, 18 and 20 and “to. e;leoj” (mercy) 12, 7 in and around the
context of the fulfilment quotation 12, 18 – 21.

The theme of mercy runs throughout the Gospel of Matthew. Five of the seven uses of the
verb έλεέω in Matthew's Gospel occur in the context of healing stories. Mercy is what people ask
for from Jesus before they receive healing: “Son of David, have mercy...” (9, 27; 15, 22; 17, 15; 20,
30 and 31). Here it is noticeable that Matthew adds a request for mercy to the story of the woman
who requests healing for her daughter (Matt 15, 22 //Mark 7, 24ff.) and the man who requests
healing for his son (Matt 17, 15 // Mark 9, 14ff. // Luke 9, 37ff.). The verb έλεέω is associated with
the title “Son of David”, obviously an Old Testament title referring to the importance of the e;leoj
(mercy) for the people of Israel. From the Matthean addition of the formula “Son of David, have
mercy...” to the healing passages of Mt 15, 22 and 17, 15 we can assume the importance of this
‘matter’ in the Matthean community.

5.3 The Church “Son-Servant”in Her Universal Mission

By this fulfilment quotation of the first Isaian “Servant Song”, the Matthean community
recognizes its mission of revealing God to the world. The double mention of the e;qnh
nations/Gentiles (12, 18 and 21) shows interest in the universalism of the Gospel of Matthew. A
double movement can be traced in this Gospel: particularism and universalism. The Evangelist
recalls that the Messiah, son of David, firstly, is the Shepherd of his people. He emphasized the
12
Is 1, 17; Jer 22, 3; Hos 6, 6; Zech 7, 9 – 10; Mic 6, 8; Hab 2, 4.

7
limited nature of the mission, which is not intended to the Gentiles or Samaritans, but to “the lost
sheep of the House of Israel” (Mt 10, 5 – 6). This expression is repeated in Mt 15, 24, where Jesus
seems to exclude the claim that he came also for the Gentiles. However, alongside this strong
particularism, there is also a strong claim for a universalism. Matthew witnesses a crisis due to the
failure of the Jewish mission on the one hand and the success of a Gentile mission as anti–climax.
He repeats that the Gentiles will take over the heritage/patrimony forsaken by the Jews.

In comparison with other gospels, the terms e;qnoj and e;qnh occur in Matthew more than
any other Gospel. The singular e;qnoj occurs three times in Matthew (21, 43 and in 24, 7 two
times), while the plural e;qnh is present twelve times (4, 15; 6, 22; 10, 5; 10, 18; 12, 18; 12, 21; 20,
19; 20, 25; 24, 9; 24, 14; 25, 32; 28, 19). Whereas in Mark e;qnoj occurs twice (13, 8 twice) and e;qnh
four times (10, 33; 10, 42;11, 17; 13, 10). In Luke e;qnoj occurs four times (7, 5; 21, 10 two times)
and e;qnh occurs nine times (2, 32; 12, 30; 18, 32; 21, 24; 21, 25; 24, 4). Another noteworthy point is
that the presence of these terms in Matthew without having Synoptic parallels, confirms Matthew’s
interest in the mission to the nations/Gentiles (4, 15; 10, 5; 10, 18; 12, 18; 12, 21; 21, 43; 24, 9; 25,
32; 28, 19). And the expression “pa,nta ta. e;qnh” all Nations, is first used in Matthew (24, 9; 24, 14;
25, 32; 28, 19). These are the passages which have no Synoptic parallels.

We have already noticed that Matthew’s Gospel commences by implying the idea of
universalism through presenting Jesus as the Son of Abraham (1, 1). We can also notice the
inclusion of four Gentile women in the middle of the genealogy (1, 3; 1, 5ab; 1, 6b). Further the
story of magi from the east is found only in Matthew, which evidently reveals the Matthean Gentile
interest. The child Jesus, on the one hand is persecuted by the King Herod, along with the priests
and the Scribes, and on the other hand, worshipped as Messiah by the representatives of the
Gentile Nations (Mt 2, 1 – 12). In the public ministry moreover Matthean Jesus encounters the
centurion (8, 5 – 13) and the Canaanite woman (15, 21 – 28), representatives of the Gentiles, and
appreciates their ‘great faith’.

When we analyzed the verse 12, 21, we noticed the editorial changes of Matthew: he chose
o;noma name in the place of hr'AT Law and e;qnh nations/Gentiles in the place of ~yYIai coastlands of
the Masoretic Text. It is the name, and not the Law, which will become the source of hope for the
8
nations. Here we find a theology of universalism, emphasizing the theme of ‘replacement’. In verse
18, we also reported an editorial originality of Matthew: the use of the verb “avpagge,llw” to
announce. This fulfilment quotation produces a ‘topsy–turvy’ effect on the rejection of Israel, by
commencing a fresh announcement to the nations/Gentiles. Finally this Gospel ends with the
universal mission to all nations in Mt 28, 19.

Since this passage Mt 28, 16 – 20, the finale of the Matthean Gospel, which presents the
commissioning of the universal mission, is found only in Matthew, an obvious Matthean intent can
be deduced. Mt 28, 16 – 20 is a well–defined text. Verse 16 starts as a new unit by the change of
topography, “eivj th.n Galilai,an eivj to. o;roj” to Galilee to the mountain. The importance and intent
of this topographical reference is well underlined by the following clause in verse 16, “ou– evta,xato
auvtoi/j o` VIhsou/j” which Jesus himself designated for them auvtoi/j. Here Matthew invites his reader
to read together 26, 3213; 28, 7; and 28, 10 in order to understand his special intention. Hence the
disciples going to Galilee as they were directed, is a realization of the words of the angel and of
Jesus. Galilee is a central topological symbol to which universalism is particularly well ascribed.
Galilee is the place of withdrawal and refuge for the child Jesus (Mt 2, 22). This withdrawal to
Galilee as divinely instructed has no parallel in Mark. In Mt 4, 12 – 16, Matthew narrates in Jesus’
public ministry, Galilee as the place of Jesus’ withdrawal and of the beginning of his ministry.
Matthew highlights a new direction (Galilee of the nations) for the ministry of Jesus beyond Jewish
borders.

Here in this this final commissioning, along with Matthew’s special concern for ta. e;qnh,
there occurs one unusual attribute “pa,nta” all. This expression pa,nta ta. e;qnh is also present in 24,
9; 24, 14 and 25, 32. With this attribute, the scholars are puzzled by a question: Does it denote the
Gentile nations without either excluding or including the Jews? Here a universal meaning is
suggested without exclusivism by considering the references in 24, 9; 24, 14 and 25, 32.
Furthermore, in the passage 18 – 20 we find the term pa/j four times (pa/sa evxousi,a 18b, pa,nta ta.
e;qnh 19a, pa,nta o[sa evneteila,mhn 20a, pa,saj ta.j h`me,raj 20b). According to Lodu Kose, the word pa/j

13
This designation of Galilee is a reminder of the prediction of Jesus in 26, 32 "After I have been raised, I will go
before you to Galilee”; and it is confirmed in 28, 7 “He is going before you into Galilee, there you will see Him;
behold, I have told you". Then the verse (28, 10) is presented as an order given to the angels. “Then Jesus said to
them, Do not be afraid; go and take word to My brethren to leave for Galilee, and there they shall see Me”.

9
renders the whole speech interrelated. The universal authority is the ground for the commissioning
and corresponds to a universal mission; the teaching is for all and the abiding presence lasts for all
time. Since universality is an overall idea, the universal meaning of the expression pa,nta ta. e;qnh
can be reasonably deduced. Further Meier’s observation is quite reasonable when he compares
Matthew’s intention using the singular e;qnoj in 21, 43 and designating the reality of Church by
recourse to the plural e;qnh in 28, 19. Both these instances are of Matthean creativity, hence absent
in other Gospels, pointing to the Matthean intent with regard to universal mission, including Jews.
Further, Daniel Ulrich bases his argument on another context and puts forward the same result in
favour of universalism. “The references to ‘the whole inhabited world’ (24, 14) and ‘the whole
world’ (26, 13) show that ‘all nations’ in 24, 14 and 28, 19 cannot simply mean people of various
nationalities living in or near the author's home city. The author apparently expected “this Gospel
[of the kingdom]” to be proclaimed to an ethnically diverse audience throughout the known world”.

John Meier14 compares this finale of Matthew, which is the unique post-resurrection
appearance of Jesus with those post-resurrection appearances in Luke. Luke narrates a series of
appearances to various disciples after the resurrection in Acts 1 throughout forty days and
culminating in the ascension, a sort of parousia written backward. Just as the Son of Man is to come
on a cloud with his angels, so Jesus goes away on a cloud and he will come again in the same way.
Jesus will send the Holy Spirit in the place of his absence to guide the Church. But Matthew has only
one appearance to the eleven disciples and there is no narration of the Ascension15. As a result
through 28, 16 – 20, Matthew points out that Jesus ‘comes to his Church, to remain with it until the
end’. Hence for Matthew, 28, 16 – 20 is not merely a resurrection appearance, but a ‘proleptic
parousia’. That means “the exalted Son of Man comes to his Church with cosmic power to
inaugurate his universal reign. His presence is with his Church always.

General conclusions:

14
John P. MEIER, The Vision of Matthew: Christ Church and Morality in the First Gospel, New
York/Ramsey/Toronto, Paulist Press, 1979, p. 37.
15
John P. MEIER, The Vision of Matthew: Christ Church and Morality in the First Gospel, New
York/Ramsey/Toronto, Paulist Press, 1979, p. 37.

10
 1. Matthew a “New Testament Isaiah”

We already saw that Is 42 was destined for a people who were in exile in Babylon,
who had lost their promised land, their temple was totally destroyed and was under the
unbearable ‘yoke of slavery’. When Matthew wrote his Gospel, the context of the Matthean
community was not so different from that of Isaiah: historically the Jerusalem temple was
already destroyed, and the community was under the ‘unbearable yoke’ of the Pharisees.
The persecution experienced by the community is well narrated just before this context in
chapter 10, 16 – 25. It is in this context that Isaiah foretold of a bright future with the coming
of the Messiah. God would not forget His covenant made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and
David. He would spare a remnant of the nation of Israel out of which would come the
Messiah and His new kingdom.

The context and role of ‘Matthean Jesus’ seems to be the same: to propose a ‘yoke’
which gives rest instead of an ‘unbearable yoke’ and to present his Jesus as the meek “Son–
Servant”. It is remarkable to note the occurrence of the word “i`ero,n” temple twice in the
context of this fulfilment quotation. And the second occurrence of this term is significantly
constructed by Matthew in 12, 6 “le,gw de. u`mi/n o[ti tou/ i`erou/ mei/zo,n evstin w–de” I tell you,
something greater than the temple is here. Since the temple is already destroyed, as in Isaiah
42, Matthew proposes a hope in Jesus, who is mei/zo,n greater than the temple. The presence
of these passages nowhere except in Matthew doubles its Matthean significance. And
Matthew presents his Jesus in line with Isaiah’s Messiah, who is the “Son of Abraham”,
“Son of David” who will found his new kingdom upon the “e;qnh” Nations.

11
 2. Matthew’s Gospel: A Jesus “prau<j” Forming an “evkklhsi,a” “prau<j”16

Matthean Messiah is not a wrathful Judge but a meek Servant. Jesus’ invitation to
‘take my yoke upon you’ (11, 28), is narrated in the context of the Sabbath controversies
where Pharisaic hostility is demonstrated. The Pharisees accused Jesus of permitting his
disciples, who were hungry, to pluck grain on the Sabbath. They also interrogated him if it is
permitted to heal a man on the Sabbath. Their attempt was to accuse him falsely and thus
to plot against Jesus. The messianic mission was not to the wise, but to the little ones and
needy. There is one noteworthy point in Matthew’s addition of the indefinite adjective
pa,ntaj along with evqera,peusen auvtou.j in 12, 15b: and He healed them ‘all’. The emphasis on
pa,ntaj seems to be intentional on the part of Matthew by his relating it with the quotation
from Isaiah in v. 20, Jesus turned no one away. It seems that Matthew does not carefully
distinguish between those who received healing and those who merely witnessed it, for the
entire crowd becomes, by virtue of their presence, sharers in the revelation of the identity of
the Servant. All power has been given to Him by the Father (12, 18), yet He Himself is meek
and humble. Of those who come to him he turns no one away.

Thus Jesus, the meek “Son–Servant” presents a God who is incarnate in this world, is
non-violent and compassionate, teaches a new ethic on the Mountain (Sermon on the
Mount), and practices these values in his life until the mountain of Calvary. He also invites
his disciples to practice this “superior justice” in their lives.

This way of Jesus that his disciples must follow, was often lost in Christianity.
Particularly in the Evangelization, Jesus was often presented as a winner. Very often this was
a reason for failure, leading to intolerance and making all possibilities of dialogue impossible.
Still, this is not the real image of Christ in the Gospel. According to Matthew, the real Jesus is
not triumphant but a meek “Son–Servant” living Kenosis unto the end.

16
The absolute importance of the principle of love for interpreting the Law is emphasized in many ways in
Matthew. The love command of Lev 19, 18 is quoted as much as three times in Matthew (5, 43; 19, 19; 22, 39).
It is also repeatedly articulated with the help of cognates expressing the concept of "mercy" such as e;leoj (9, 13;
12, 7; 23, 23), evle,hson (9, 27; 15, 22; 17, 15; 20, 30. 31) and splagcni,zomai (9, 36; 14, 14; 15, 32; 18, 27; 20,
34). Thus the emphasis on the love commandments, mercy, and justice serve both the community in its internal
orientation and in its contrast to other groups

12
 3. zugo,n mou: A Commitment to a Person

Take zugo,n mou upon you, is an invitation to follow a Person to do as he does and
perform deeds of compassion and justice. And his yoke is ‘easy’, because he himself is
merciful and meek inviting us to perform the ‘higher righteousness’ beyond the Pharisaic
interpretation of the Law, which is a zugo,n ‘unbearable’ to the ‘little ones’, and which does
not give any ‘rest’ to them. The character of the meek servant Jesus is very closely related to
a yoke which he brings. And this yoke is at once an offer of mercy and a demand to do the
same. For the Matthean community the Law is relevant and they are more concerned about
the weightier matters of the Law: justice, mercy, and faith. And therefore the Matthean
Jesus criticizes Pharisaic observance of the Law. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees,
hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier
provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should
have done without neglecting the others” (Mt 23, 23). And we can notice the citation from
Hos 6, 6 twice17 and both times it occurs in the context of controversy on the Law. In
contrast to the Pharisees, the demand deu/te pro,j me, ma,qete avpV evmou/ and a;rate to.n zugo,n
resounds throughout the Matthean Gospel, inviting a commitment to a person in Jesus.

4. Causal Relation of avnacwre,in to avpaggellei/n: Announcing the Justice to

the Nations

The conclusion of the parable of the vineyard in Mt 21, 43 echoes throughout the
entire Gospel. It reads, “On account of this I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken
from you and given to a nation who will produce its fruit”. It is clear from 21, 44 who is this
‘u`mi/n’ the grammatical object of le,gw in v. 43, showing that this parable is addressed to the
chief priests and the Pharisees. And with the introductory formula dia. tou/to (on account of
this), Matthew refers back to the whole of the parable to highlight the after effects. The
contrasting effects are made obvious by the terms avrqh,setai avfV u`mw/n shall be taken from
you and doqh,setai e;qnei given to a nation/Gentiles. Though the parable of the vineyard is

17
9, 13; 12, 7. And e;leoj is a frequently and enormously used word throughout all the Old Testament, showing
its priority in the Law.

13
present in all three Synoptics (Mt 21, 33 – 46; Mk 12, 1 – 12 and Lk 20, 9 –19), only Matthew
added this verse with his passage, showing clearly a Matthean intent.

And in Mt 15, 21 Jesus withdraws from there (from the Pharisees) going to the region
of Tyre and Sidon and healed the daughter of a Canaanite woman. Jesus retired to the
territory of the Gentiles. The same pattern is used in Mt 12, 15: Jesus withdrew from there
(there = their synagogue 12, 9), to announce justice/judgment to the nations/Gentiles. The
term avnacwre,w is interpreted as the retiring from confrontation to continue the deeds of
mercy to those who followed him (polloi,). The interpretation of Jesus’ ‘withdrawal’ as
deliberate avoidance of violence seems to be rendered by the participle gnou.j ‘knowing’ and
the adverb evkei/qen ‘from there’. However avnecw,rhsen, considering the Matthean intent is a
response to the question of fulfilment of the theme kai. kri,sin toi/j e;qnesin avpaggelei/ And
he will announce justice/judgment to the nation/Gentiles. Here we have to notice the
contrast between the Pharisees who plotted against Jesus and the polloi, who followed him.
And Jesus having withdrawn from there, extends his healing ministry to those who find in
him an object of faith.

5. The Law Sublimed in and through Justice and Mercy: A Paradigm of

Christological and Ecclesiological Ethics

The careful study of Mt 12, 18 – 21 allowed us to read more profoundly into the
understanding of the Gospel of Matthew. In no way, in the text presented in its entirety, it is
possible to separate the Christological content from its Ecclesiological intent. Matthew’s
theological concern supported by this fulfilment quotation preoccupies him with the
establishment of justice for a universal people of God. Jesus is perceived by Matthew as
performing such a task. This underlines the fact that the Ministry of Jesus is presented as the
fulfilment of this quotation. He is the servant of the Lord who will accomplish the program
outlined in the quotation. Justice lies at the centre of Matthew’s programme and we see in

14
his Gospel a link that is established between Christology and Ecclesiology in its ethical
dimension. Justice in 12, 20, has a future implication, while 12, 18 involving in the present,
becomes an integral part of the Ministry of Jesus.

One cannot neglect the profound solidarity that, in the Gospel of Matthew, unites
Jesus with the little ones mikro,i (Mt 10, 42; 18, 6. 10; 25, 31 – 46). Jesus presents himself as
the small among the small. The long citation Is 42, 1 – 4 supports and gives all its significance
to the attitude and action of Jesus summarized in its context from Mt 11, 25 up to 12, 16. On
the one hand, the decision of Jesus to withdraw from there (v. 15) after having learned that
the Pharisees were conspiring against him (v. 14) highlights his attitude of meekness. On the
other hand, it is not only the attitude of Jesus to the Pharisees which reveals his meekness,
but also his action for the crowds, which is well summarized in v. 15b: “many crowds
followed him, and he healed them all”. And the thrust of two Sabbath controversies is to
reveal the meekness of Jesus: the concept of compassion is prevalent in his interpretation of
the law and in his healing on the Sabbath. Even when the Pharisees desired evil, Jesus
responded by showing his meekness. Interpretation of the law, healing on the day of
Sabbath, withdrawal before the violent decision of the Pharisees and healing of the crowds
in chapter 12 thus demonstrate Jesus’ understanding, mercy and compassion, which are
some of the attitudes of the heart arising from his meekness. It therefore appears also as
fulfilment (victory) of the good, to the people who suffer. The quotation of Isaiah, where the
Servant of God is presented as meek, gives therefore all its significance to Jesus’ attitude
towards the Pharisees conspirators and his action in favour of the crowds. The meekness of
the Servant of God confirms somehow that of Jesus which is, on the one hand, non–violent
resistance to evil, and on the other, manifestation of good towards the crowds in need.

Verse 20 presents the meekness of Jesus towards the small and the oppressed. The
metaphor of the Reed that he will not break, and that of the smouldering wick, that he will
not extinguish apply to a people deprived of force that refers in the context of Isaiah, to the
victims of Babylon. Repeated by Matthew in 12, 20, both images would fail to designate also
a people devoid of force that the Evangelist referred to in 12, 15 (And great crowds followed

15
him), or that composed of kopiw/ntej kai. pefortisme,noi, i.e. of those described as weary and
heavy–laden Mt 11, 28?

The motive of meekness towards the small and weary perceived in 11, 28 – 30, and
repeated in the quotation 12, 20, effectively emphasizes the central theme in (12, 1 – 16).
12, 1 – 13, which describes the observance of the Sabbath and the reaction of the Pharisees
which is depicted in 12, 14, confirms the reading of 11, 28 – 30 and 12, 17 – 21 together, and
informs the reader that these controversies are also designed to define the nature of the
Messianic yoke. This Matthean interest is established very firmly by the addition of a unique
element in 12, 5 – 8 to the Markan narrative of these Sabbath controversies. This addition is
used to render explicit that the Pharisees have wrongly condemned the innocent ouvk a'n
katedika,sate tou.j avnaiti,ouj (12, 7) through their misunderstanding and misinterpretation
of the Law. ‘The heavy yoke of the Pharisees’ is obvious in 12, 1 – 14; 15, 4 – 6. 14; 18, 23 –
35; 23, 4. The Pharisaic yoke contributes unnecessarily to increasing the burden of the
people. Thus in our context, the disciples and the crowd are representative of the
oppressed. The attitude of Matthew concerning the Ministry of Jesus, his teaching and his
acts, is based on the principles of mercy and justice. The preference of Jesus for the
marginalized is constantly present in this Gospel, in 3, 15; 5, 17 – 20; 9, 36; 21, 31 – 32; 22, 8
– 10.

In the immediate context of our passage, 12, 9 – 13, we see a man with a withered
hand. As we have remarked, the controversy is exploited by taking an example of legality in
saving an animal, in contrast to the healing of an individual on the Sabbath. This material,
unique to Matthew, helps us to discover the intent of the Evangelist. 12, 11 – 12, he includes
a mashal to illustrate the point of view of Jesus. The Pharisees are presented as giving more
value to a sheep than to a deformed person. If the law persists that we should wait for the
Sabbath to finish in order to heal a man, while the same tradition is concerned about an
animal fallen into a well, prompting the question of real ‘justice’. The healing of the man
with the withered hand by Jesus is primordial for his liberation from the ‘burden’ by an
unjust decision of the Pharisees. Thus, mercy and the contrast between justice and injustice,
as well as the correct interpretation of the law are integrated into these stories presented by

16
Matthew. These two events are condemned by the Pharisees. But Jesus having enabled the
disciples to eat in the fields and the healing of the man suggests that, in contrast to the
unfair prescriptions and traditions propagated by the Pharisees, the Jesus of Matthew
emphasizes justice and mercy.

6. Mt 12, 18 – 21: A Double Function of Analepsis and Prolepsis

Moreover, the quotation is inserted in a way to reinstate into the entire narrative of
the Matthean Gospel. Our study highlights that Matthew summarizes and anticipates the
theological content and the intrigue that presents the full story of his Gospel through the
fulfilment quotation of the meek "Son – Servant” (Mt 12, 18 –21). The quotation recalls the
prophecy of Isaiah and identifies Jesus with the announced “Son–Servant”. But it refers
more particularly to the whole of the Matthean story with a double function of analepsis
and prolepsis.

The quotation recalls the beginning of the Gospel with the genealogy of Jesus (Mt 1,
1 – 17) Annunciation to Joseph (1, 18 – 25) and the episode of Baptism (3, 13 – 17), which
unveil to the reader that Jesus is ui`ou/ Daui.d “Son of David” and ui`ou/ VAbraa,m “Son of
Abraham”. The passage of genealogy establishes that Jesus is the “Son of David” and the
“Son of Abraham”. The annunciation to Joseph echoes the birth of Isaac, pointing to the role
of the Holy Spirit in the birth of Jesus, preparing the reader to acknowledge the Divine
Sonship of Jesus. At the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry, in the Baptism episode, Matthew
seemed to redact his text in order to present his Jesus in line with the fulfilment quotation
12, 18 – 21. The Holy Spirit came upon him (Mt 3, 16) at his Baptism prior to the beginning of
his public ministry. The ‘Spirit’ that he received at Baptism led him to the desert to combat
the devil meet the opposition of the devil, where in a fight, he who is anointed by the Holy
Spirit won (Mt 4, 1 – 11). The Sermon on the Mount underlines the Beatitude on the meek18
and the practice of higher righteousness especially by giving importance to ‘mercy’. It seems
to be the basic instruction to the Matthean Community, as it goes in line with the

18
This as a Matthean originality and thus absent from other Gospels, indicates that the meekness is demanded of
the community to practice as an essential requirement.

17
presentation of Jesus a meek “Son–Servant”. The theme of “Gentile mission” which is one of
the central themes of our fulfilment quotation (12, 18. 21) is justified all throughout the
Matthean narration: the infancy story, especially the Magi’s Visit in 1, 1 – 2, 23, the summary
of Jesus’ inaugural preaching in 4, 12 – 17. Further this theme remerges in the encounter
with the Canaanite woman in 15, 21 – 28. It is again underlined allegorically in the parables
narrated in chapter 21, 28 – 43 and the centrality of this theme is further highlighted in the
Matthean Gospel, by placing the passage of the “Great commission” 28, 16 – 20 as the
climax of his Gospel.

Thus the themes of the universal mission and the refusal of Israel, which play a
central part in Matthean narration, are well identifiable in the fulfilment quotation (12, 18 –
21), which is redacted by Matthew and placed after events giving rise to the plot to destroy
Jesus by the Pharisees and the crowd’s reactions to follow him and Jesus’ withdrawal. Thus
Matthew clarifies the scope of the mission of the “Son–Servant” and how he will accomplish
it. In his discretion, the “Son–servant” will announce justice/judgment to the
nations/Gentiles. This fulfilment quotation, thus, draws together the entire Matthean
narration. It is therefore, not without reason, that Matthew inserted this quotation at this
precise point of his Jesus story: in the central position as a hinge text connecting it to the
beginning and to the end of his narration. Thus placed at this crucial moment, the text Is 42,
1 – 4 confirms and specifies: 1 – the identity of Jesus – pai/j that God has chosen “o]n h`|re,tisa
= Son of David = Solomon”, “o` avgaphto,j mou eivj o]n euvdo,khsen h` yuch, mou = God’s Isaac, in
the sense of Kenosis, fulfilling the will of God in his entire mission and anointed by the Holy
Spirit”. 2 – The mode of action of Jesus – “Son–Servant” meek “prau<j” who will not quarrel,
nor cry out; nor will anyone hear His voice in the streets and who will not break a bruised
reed or extinguish a smouldering wick. 3 – Jesus’ universal mission – he will announce
justice/judgment to the nations successfully. This fulfilment quotation thus has an
incomparable value, which summarizes and condenses, the whole Matthean account of
Jesus, thus merging into one passage, Matthean Christology and Ecclesiology.

7. Not only the Gospel, but the Entire Bible in Miniature

18
 This fulfilment quotation Mt 12, 18 – 21 is a sum and substance not only of the
Gospel history but of the entire salvation history narrated throughout the Bible. Starting
from my “Son–Servant”, Matthew invites the reader to go back to Abraham by redacting the
title “avgaphto,j” and recalls the Son of David ‘expectation’ of the Messiah with using the verb
“ai`reti,zw”, and fulfills the essential prophecy on the Messiah by the empowerment of the
Holy Spirit “qh,sw to. pneu/ma, mou evpV auvto,n”. The filial relation is well stressed in “pai/j” in
order to stress the incarnation and a mission of announcing to the Gentiles is underlined in
this fulfillment quotation. The life of the Church as compassionate Servant is well defined as
one who continues the vocation of Israel through the Nations/Gentiles because of Israel’s
infidelity and rejection. Finally the presence of Jesus unto the end (Emmanuel) amidst his
people (in the Church) unto the victory of justice/judgment is well elucidated by using the
phrase e[wj a'n evkba,lh| eivj ni/koj th.n kri,sin. Matthew well underlines this sustaining
presence of Jesus in His Church, by reworking the finale of his Gospel: in contrast to other
evangelists in Matthew there is no question of Jesus ascending at the end of the
Resurrection appearances. Rather, He remains with His Church.Thus by redacting these
special Matthean vocabularies Matthew has set the life of Jesus in a wider context stretching
from Abraham to the Parousia

In the theological model, all the models submerge and condense in this small
fulfilment quotation. a Trinitarian theology well explain the relation of the ‘Father Son and
Holy Spirit”, a high Christology of divine origin, obedience unto servant model and the
exaltation unto the ‘Son of God’, an ecclesiology and pneumatology which cannot be
separated from this Christology, a missiology, i.e. a program aimed at universal mission
basing on the Servant model and the call to discipleship and an eschatology: a divine
justice/judgment eivj ni/koj unto the victory unto the end, a presence eternal is promised.

19