A Story That Needs Retelling
Jan 8th | The Reverend Kevin Scott Fleming | Matthew 2:1-12
Here we are, celebrating the Epiphany of the Lord – albeit two days late. Epiphany was really on Friday – the 12th day of Christmas. But, if you’re anything like the people in our neighborhood, the trees are down and packed away, the lights are wound up and stashed for another year, and all the whoopla of Christmas has given over to other enterprises, which for many of us, involves a football game they’ll be having in Indianapolis in a few weeks. However, Epiphany is important – and it’s a day we would do well to mark (even if somewhat belatedly).
We’ll get to the reason Epiphany is important in a few moments.
But, first, we have to figure out what we know and really don’t know about this story. So, as we begin, we’ll “deconstruct” the story we think we know and then go looking for the story we may have been meant to learn.
Let’s begin with what the story from Matthew doesn’t say.
The first thing we need to remind ourselves is that Matthew’s story is not an addition to Luke’s account of Jesus’ birth. In fact, what Matthew has to say about the actual birth of Jesus seems to stand in stark contrast to what Luke has to say. For Matthew, the angel appears to Joseph, not Mary. They seem to live in Bethlehem, not Nazareth. There were no angels singing in the night to shepherds abiding in the field with their flocks. Matthew’s gospel is unique and must be seen in its own light.
Which takes us to the major players in the story. “The primary actors in the story are the nameless strangers from the East and Herod the King.” [i] Let’s begin with the strangers from the East.
First of all, let’s get it clear – the Scriptures talk about “wise men” or “magi.” With all due respect to John Henry Hopkins, the author and composer of our opening hymn, the visitors are not “kings.” Nor does Matthew tell us exactly how many there were. As Presbyterians – people of a proper and frugal nature – we assume that since there are three gifts there were three visitors. But, let’s be clear: the Bible doesn’t tell us how many visitors there were.
And while we’re at it, let’s also note that the Bible does not tell us their names. Tradition has assigned them the monikers of Caspar, Melchior, and Balthazar, but we have no such information in the pages of Scripture. Some have even gone so far as to say that the three represented the three great races of humankind – the descendants of Ham, Shem, and Japheth. I’ve read the story in Matthew a few dozen times and I can tell you with certainty that those identifications appear nowhere in Scripture.
Matthew refers to the visitors as magoi, a word that is translated in the later New Testament as magician. But, magoi could also refer to the Magians, a priestly group from Persia, quite possibly Zoroastrians. However, most contemporary scholars seem to favor a third possibility – that the visitors were astrologers – students of the stars. After all, it is a star that attracts their attention in the first place.
Speaking of stars, the subject of the Christmas star has received no small amount of attention. Some propose that it was Haley’s Comet, which appears in 12 B.C.E. Others suggest a congruence of several stars that gave the appearance of one enormous and dazzling star. And any conversation of a star that moves and guides wanderers to a particular place can get a group of modern-day astrologers in wild conversation. Suffice it to say, that in Matthew’s world and time, any idea of the science of astrology was in its infancy. They did not understand the workings of the universe as we do today. For them, the earth was still the center of the universe and everything revolved around it. So, let’s simply say that we may never have a natural explanation for the star. But, that’s okay, because Matthew is most likely talking about a supernatural phenomenon, harking back to ancient prophets, such as the one found in Numbers, which says, “A star shall come forth out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel.” (Num. 24:17) For Matthew, whatever else the star may have been, it was first and foremost a way to identify Mary’s baby as the Messiah for whom the people had longed.
And we should say a word about the gifts that were offered to the infant Jesus. Much has been made of the “symbolic” nature of the gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Again, John Henry Hopkins, the author and composer of “We Three Kings,” gives meanings to the gifts that appear nowhere in Scripture. Gold represented the monarchy. Frankincense was used in the Temple’s inner-most sanctuary and nowhere else. Myrrh was used in the anointing of the High Priest and in the burial practices of the Israelites. Matthew doesn’t say anything about why these particular gifts are offered and we can only assume that Matthew thought these were the kinds of gifts that were due a king.
So, when we get all of that out of the way, what we are left with is a group of visitors from outside Israel asking the titular king of Israel – Herod – for information about the birth of a new king. And that’s where the story takes us now.
The story that Matthew tells is really a story of the inevitable conflict between the Messiah of God and the rulers of the earth. Matthew understands fully that the birth of the Promised One of God is going to upset the power structures of earth. All we need to do is read Herod’s response to the inquiry of the Magi: “Go and search diligently for the child; and when you have found him, bring me word so that I may also go and pay him homage.” (Matthew 2:8) It doesn’t take a trained investigator to smell something fishy in that request. Luckily, the ever-busy angels of the birth stories make one more stop and appear to the magi in a dream and warn them of Herod’s deceit and they return to their homeland by another way.
But, knowing the story of Jesus as we do, we know that Jesus’ way challenged and challenges the ways of the world. The birth of Jesus – and his epiphany – his showing forth – his manifestation of God to the world – reminds us that we are faced with an ultimate choice. We can live life the way the world commends life to us. Or we can live life the way Jesus commends life to us. And no matter which way we choose, we are bound to experience the conflict between the way of God and the way that is not of God. It comes in little ways and it comes in big ways. The way Jesus advocates is the way of justice, peace, acceptance, mercy, compassion, and grace. The way of the world is unfairness, conflict, rejection, self-interest, indifference, and cruelty.
And that choice is being held up to us in the opening chapters of Matthew’s gospel. The way that would be pioneered by this infant in a manger is a way that is fraught with conflict and struggles. To live as Jesus models life is to find ourselves at odds with all kinds of people: family members, friends, colleagues, governmental candidates, and those who would be our leaders. Whoever presents the Christian life as simple, or easy, is not telling the truth. The Christian life is hard work from beginning to end and every stop in between. That’s what Matthew makes clear from the get go.
The other message inherent in Matthew’s text is one that we hold up every Epiphany. The visitors were not from Israel – they were from far beyond Israel. The traditional interpretation tells us that these strangers from outside Israel were welcomed at the manger and recognized Jesus for who he was. That means that, many years later, Jesus is there for all the people of the world and not just Israel. For those from beyond the history and geography of Israel, for those not of the lineage of Abraham and Sarah, for all people everywhere – the good news is that Jesus has come – God is with us.
And we would do well to remember that, too. Too often, we think that God cares only for those like us. But God cares for all – for all are in God. Our age-old tendency of dividing the world into “us” and “them” categories, no longer works. The simple truth is that Jesus came to show all people – Jew and Gentile, Christian and Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu, Catholic and Protestant, believer and doubter, the seeker and the disinterested – Jesus came to show the love of God to all.
And that is the dual meaning of Epiphany. Epiphany first asks us to choose whom we will serve – God or lesser leaders. Epiphany asks us what we see when we look at the infant Jesus. Do we see a cute, little baby? Or do we see the one who will lead us into the fullness of the life God created us to enjoy? Will we live as God calls us to live? Or will we follow inferior voices?
And the Epiphany asks us to share the good news with everyone. The Jesus story is not one we can keep for ourselves. The Jesus story is not like the ornaments and decorations that we haul out for a few weeks and then pack away for eleven months. The Jesus story is all about living the life God created us to live – every day of every year, ‘til all our years are gone.
Our executive presbyter, Susan McGhee, sent an Epiphany greeting to the Presbytery this past Thursday night. Luckily, it provides the perfect ending to the sermon I was looking for – so I owe Susan one. Susan sent a poem from Howard Thurman, a twentieth century preacher, theologian and mystic. Thurman writes:
When the song of the angels is stilled
When the star in the sky is gone
When the kings and princes are home
When the shepherds are back with their flock
The work of Christmas begins:
To find the lost
To heal the broken
To feed the hungry
To release the prisoner
To rebuild the nations
To bring peace among brothers and sisters
To make music in the heart.
Wow.
I tell you plainly, my sisters and brothers, if the world is to learn of the love of God – the eternal source of all caring and compassion – it will be only as you and I make that love known. As we manifest God – and we reveal God – as we demonstrate and model God to the world – we will make music in the heart and the brightness of the age of peace and love will dawn and never die.
That’s a story that needs retelling. And, even more, that is a story that needs re-enacting. For now and evermore. Amen.
[i] Douglas R. Al. Hare, Matthew, Interpretation Bible Commentary, p. 13
Comments:
Login to post comments