The geneology of Christ
(Matt. 1:2-17 Luke 3:23-38) 1 THE book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham: 2 Abraham begot Isaac. And Isaac begot Jacob. And Jacob begot Judas and his brethren. 3 And Judas begot Phares and Zara of Thamar. And Phares begot Esron. And Esron begot Aram. 4 And Aram begot Aminadab. And Aminadab begot Naasson. And Naasson begot Salmon. 5 And Salmon begot Booz of Rahab. And Booz begot Obed of Ruth. And Obed begot Jesse.
From David to Jechonias 6 And Jesse begot David the king. And David the king begot Solomon, of her that had been the wife of Urias. 7 And Solomon begot Roboam. And Roboam begot Abia. And Abia begot Asa. 8 And Asa begot Josaphat. And Josaphat begot Joram. And Joram begot Ozias. 9 And Ozias begot Joatham. And Joatham begot Achaz. And Achaz begot Ezechias. 10 And Ezechias begot Manasses. And Manesses begot Amon. And Amon begot Josias. 11 And Josias begot Jechonias and his brethren in the transmigration of Babylon.
From Jechonias to Jesus 12 And after the transmigration of Babylon, Jechonias begot Salathiel. And Salathiel begot Zorobabel. 13 And Zorobabel begot Abiud. And Abiud begot Eliacim. And Eliacim begot Azor. 14 And Azor begot Sadoc. And Sadoc begot Achim. And Achim begot Eliud. 15 And Eliud begot Eleazar. And Eleazar begot Mathan. And Mathan begot Jacob. 16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Forty-two generations from Abraham to Christ 17 So all the generations, from Abraham to David, are fourteen generations. And from David to the transmigration of Babylon, are fourteen generations: and from the transmigration of Babylon to Christ are fourteen generations.
The virgin birth
(Matt 1:18-25 Luke 2:1-7) 18 Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Spirit. 19 Whereupon Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing publicly to expose her, was minded to put her away privately. 20 But while he thought on these things, behold the angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she shall bring forth a son: and you shall call his name JESUS. For he shall save his people from their sins. 22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: 23 Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. 24 And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took to him his wife. 25 And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
Commentary on Matthew 1
1:1 Book here is the same as catalogue, or enumeration, or description, or writing. (Cornelius a Lapide) Generation, he says in the singular number, though there be many here given in succession, as it is for the sake of the one generation of Christ that the rest are here introduced. (Glossa Ordinaria) Why did he place David before Abraham? He did so because to the Jews David had greater renown, both because he was more recent than Abraham and because he was more illustrious on account of his kingdom. For of the kings, David was the first to please God, and he received the promise from God that the Christ would arise from his seed. (Theophylact)
1:2-17 St. Matthew studiously traces the genealogy of Christ to Abraham through a successive series of forty-two, with the view of convincing the Jews that He was their true Messiah, whom they should, therefore, honor and worship. In St. Luke, whose
Gospel was written for the use of the Gentiles, our Lord’s pedigree is traced up to Adam, the father of the whole human race. The Gospel of St. Matthew being written for the Jews, the genealogy commences with Abraham, whom the Jews called their father. (Bishop John McEvilly)
1:3-6 It should be noted, that none of the holy women are taken into the Saviour’s genealogy, but rather such as Scripture has condemned, that He who came for sinners being born of sinners might so put away the sins of all; thus Ruth the Moabitess follows among the rest. (St. Jerome)
1:16 Matthew mentions Jacob, as the father of Joseph; Luke mentions Heli. Both would seem to give the genealogy of Joseph; but as this could not by any means regard natural descent; hence, various interpretations are advanced to reconcile their apparent discrepancy. There are two leading interpretations, considered the most probable. According to the first, St. Matthew gives the natural genealogy of St. Joseph ; St. Luke, that of the Blessed Virgin. In this interpretation, when St. Luke speaks of Joseph as the son of Heli, he means the son in-law, married to the Blessed Virgin, the daughter of Heli, who must, therefore, be identified with Joachim, whom tradition represents as the father of the Blessed Virgin. This would easily account for the difference of numbers of generations in both. This interpretation, however, has against it, its novelty ; it was unknown until the fifteenth century, and whatever may be said in regard to a few of the Fathers cited in favor of it (St. lrenaeus, Origen, Tertullian, and St. Athanasius), it cannot be questioned that the weight of authority is in favor of the leading interpretation to be referred to, in the second place.
In the second interpretation, it is maintained that in both Matthew and Luke we have the genealogy of St. Joseph as, indeed, the words of the text itself expressly state in the former, his natural; in the latter, his legal genealogy. This legal relationship arose under the Levirate law, resulting from a peculiar enactment of the law of Moses in Deut. 25:5; When brethren dwell together and one of them dies without children . . . his brother shall take her and raise up seed to his brother: and the first son he shall have of her, he shall call by his name, that his name be not abolished out of Israel; The application of this law to the case of Joseph is founded on the authority of Julius
Africanus, who lived in the third century, and says he had it from the relations of our Lord himself. His statement is this : Estha, the mother of Heli and Jacob, was married successively to Mathan and Melchi ; of the former, she begat Jacob ; of the
latter, Heli. Jacob and Heli were, therefore, uterine brothers, having the same mother, but not the same father (Eusebius Hist. Eccles. Bk 7). Now, Heli having died childless, Jacob married his widow, and had for issue, Joseph, who was the natural son of Jacob, but the legal son of Heli. (Bishop John McEvilly)
1:17 fourteen generations: If we begin by counting Abraham, and end with Christ, we have but 41 generations; hence, apparently, a name must be repeated or supplied to make up the three fourteens, or 42. By putting David at the end of the first series and beginning of the second, we shall have: Abraham, 1 David, 14; David, 1 Josias 14; Jechonias, 1 Christ, 14. The repetition of David's name is suggested by the Evangelist himself; From Abraham to David. From David to the transmigration; making David the head of the second fourteen, and therefore to be counted as much as Abraham is of the first. There were in reality more than three fourteens, but for some mysterious reason of his own, St. Matthew, who omitted some generations (see v. 8), wishes to divide the entire into three fourteens, according to the catalogue of names expressed by himself. (Bishop John McEvilly) For the generations, exactly numbered, are only thirteen in the first group of fourteen, as you will see if you count the recurrence of the word “begat;” which word is repeated thirteen times; because in it alone Abraham is reckoned the first, and David the last generation. But in the second group of fourteen, David, the first in it, is not reckoned; nor yet in the third, Jeconias the first name; because those persons have been already named and enumerated as the last in the second and third groups of fourteen. Therefore, in the third group of fourteen, one generation must be added—namely, Jehoiakim begat Jehoiachin—in order that it may consist of fourteen generations; that is to say, of fourteen persons begetting and begotten, as I have already said. All the generations then are precisely forty-one; but the persons begetting and begotten are forty-two, because the generation of the first—namely, Abraham—is not reckoned here, but is presupposed as being known from the Book of Genesis. (Cornelius a Lapide)
1:18 espoused: is generally understood by the Fathers to |
mean married, delivered over as wife to a husband, and not merely engaged. He is called her husband in vv. 16-19, and she his wife in v. 20. The Greek word bears the signification of being married in Luke 2:5. (Bishop John McEvilly) before they came together: Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children. For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection….. Secondly, this error is an insult to the Holy Ghost, whose "shrine" was the virginal womb, wherein He had formed the flesh of Christ: wherefore it was unbecoming that it should be desecrated by intercourse with man. Thirdly, this is derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God's Mother: for thus she would seem to be most ungrateful, were she not content with such a Son; and were she, of her own accord, by carnal intercourse to forfeit that virginity which had been miraculously preserved in her. Fourthly, it would be tantamount to an imputation of extreme presumption in Joseph, to assume that he attempted to violate her whom by the angel's revelation he knew to have conceived by the Holy Spirit. We must therefore simply assert that the Mother of God, as she was a virgin in conceiving Him and a virgin in giving Him birth, did she remain a virgin ever afterwards. As Jerome says (Contra Helvid. i): "Although this particle 'before' often indicates a subsequent event, yet we must observe that it not infrequently points merely to some thing previously in the mind: nor is there need that what was in the mind take place eventually, since something may occur to prevent its happening. Thus if a man say: 'Before I dined in the port, I set sail,' we do not understand him to have dined in port after he set sail: but that his mind was set on dining in port." In like manner the evangelist says: "Before they came together" Mary "was found with child, of the Holy Spirit," not that they came together afterwards: but that, when it seemed that they would come together, this was forestalled through her conceiving by the Holy Spirit, the result being that afterwards they did not come together. (St. Thomas Aquinas Sum Theo 3.28.3) of the Holy Spirit: Not as though Christ were framed of the substance of the Holy Spirit, as is the case with other offspring, nor of the Holy Spirit as a father; because Christ, quà man, was not like to the Holy Spirit, who in His nature is God; but of the Holy Spirit as an agent and artificer. (Cornelius a Lapide)
1:19 The law decreed that the adulteress be pilloried, that is, exposed and punished publicly. How, then, was Joseph righteous since he intended to cover up her sin and thus to transgress the law? The answer is, first, that he was righteous for intending to do this very thing. He did not wish to be harsh, but in his great goodness took compassion on her, showing himself to be above the law, and already living in a manner superior to the decrees of the law. Secondly, since he himself knew that she had conceived of the Holy Spirit, he did not wish to pillory and abuse her who had conceived not by adultery but of the Holy Spirit. Behold what the evangelist says: "She was found to be with child." Found by whom? By Joseph; that is, he discerned that she had conceived of the Holy Spirit. Therefore he "was minded to divorce her secretly," for he no longer dared to take as a wife her who had been deemed worthy of such grace. (Theophylact)
1:20 But while he thought on these things: He had evidently not resolved upon them. For this was his first thought, and, as it were, the first motive of his mind. (Cornelius a Lapide) sleep: Both a good and a bad angel by their own natural power can move the human imagination. (St. Thomas Aquinas Sum Theo 1.11.3)
1:21 Jesus is a Hebrew word, meaning Savior. He points to the etymology of the name, saying, “For He shall save His people from this sins.” (St. Jerome)
1:22-23 St. Matthew quotes Isaiah 7:14. Virgin: Indeed the Hebrew word signifying “Virgin” (Bethula) is not used in this place, but instead the word, ‘Halma,’ which except the LXX all render ‘girl.’ But the word, ‘Halma,’ has a twofold meaning; it signifies both ‘girl,’ and ‘hidden;’ therefore ‘Halma’ denotes not only ‘maiden’ or ‘virgin,’ but ‘hidden,’ ‘secret;’ that is, one never exposed to the gaze of men, but kept under close custody by her parents. (St. Jerome) Emmanuel: How was it then, one may say, that His name was not called Emmanuel, but Jesus Christ? Because he said not, you shall call, but they shall call, that is, the multitude, and the issue of events. For here he puts the event as a name: and this is customary in Scripture, to substitute the events that take place for names. Therefore, to say, they shall call Him Emmanuel, means nothing else than that they shall see God among men. For He has indeed always been among men, but never so manifestly. (St. John Chrysostom)
1:25 That is, he never came together with her at all. "Until" here does not mean that before the birth he did not know her and afterwards he did, but that he absolutely never knew her. Scripture employs this expression. For example, the raven "returned not unto the ark until the water had dried off from the earth" (Gen 8:7). But neither did it return after the water had dried off. Again, "I am with you until the end of the world" (Gen 28:20). So after the end He will no longer be with the saints? But how can that be? For at that time more than ever will He be with them. So must you understand here "until she brought forth’’ to mean, neither before the birth nor after the birth did he know her. How could he have touched the Holy Virgin having once understood the ineffable birth giving? (Theophylact) Also see note 1:18. |
Catechism Cross-references
1:16 437; 1:18-25 497; 1:20 333, 437, 486, 497; 1:21 430, 437, 452, 1507, 1846, 2666, 2812; 1:23 497, 744
|