Today the Church celebrates the feast of St. Matthew, author of the First Gospel. In the New Testament, he has two names, Levi and Matthew. It was not uncommon for Jews of the first century to have two names: one, the original one, used among family and friends; the other, used especially in business affairs with Gentiles. Apart from his profession as a tax-collector, little else is known about our saint of the day, not even where he went to evangelize nor how he died – although numerous legends abound. Some sources say he went to Parthia and Persia, or Ethiopia.
Being a tax-collector (publicanus, in Latin) among the Jews put one in a class with prostitutes because the publican not only had sold out to the hated Romans by doing their dirty work but, in most instances, levied a higher tax than required, so as to skim off the top for himself. As a humorous aside, some of you may recall that we Catholic school kids called the public school kids “publicans”! At any rate, that is the historical context for understanding and appreciating the call of Matthew (immortalized in art by Caravaggio and venerated in the Church of San Luigi dei Francesi in Rome).
As Matthew experiences the tender mercy of Christ, he responds with joy and enthusiasm, throwing a celebratory banquet. Bede the Venerable (the English church historian of the seventh century) explains this response in his commentary on this passage:
This conversion of one tax collector gave many men, those from his own profession and other sinners, an example of repentance and pardon. Notice also the happy and true anticipation of his future status as apostle and teacher of the nations. No sooner was he converted than Matthew drew after him a whole crowd of sinners along the same road to salvation. He took up his appointed duties while still taking his first steps in the faith, and from that hour he fulfilled his obligation and thus grew in merit. To see a deeper understanding of the great celebration Matthew held at his house, we must realise that he not only gave a banquet for the Lord at his earthly residence, but far more pleasing was the banquet set in his own heart which he provided through faith and love.
The evangelists are traditionally recognized according to their symbolic representations as the four living creatures found in Revelation 4:7; Matthew is depicted as a winged man.
For a few minutes, let’s rehearse the more salient points of the First Gospel.
While many scholars hold that Mark’s was the first Gospel written, probably about thirty-five years after the Resurrection of Jesus, a more ancient opinion—and one regaining respectability and currency—is that an Aramaic version of Matthew’s Gospel was first, having been committed to writing within a decade of the Lord’s Death and Resurrection. The Church Father Papias tells us, from his vantage-point of the first century, that “Matthew wrote down the sayings [of Jesus] in the Hebrew language.” In all likelihood, he meant “Aramaic,” rather than Hebrew (since Aramaic was the spoken tongue at that time). Intelligent conjecture suggests that the Aramaic text identified by Papias provided the base-line for the canonical Greek text we know as the First Gospel.
Matthew directed his message to Jewish converts or potential converts and so stressed the fact that conversion to Jesus does not mean entrance into a new religion but rather the only logical perfection of Judaism. The frequency of citations from the Old Testament is a constant reminder of this, as Matthew uses the Scriptures to show how Jesus is truly the long-awaited Messiah. The picture of Jesus we get from Matthew is a thoroughly Jewish one: In addition to quoting the Old Testament prophets extensively, he is familiar with Jewish customs and parallels the experience of Israel in many ways, especially as we see Jesus in the flight into Egypt and His temptations. The Jesus of Matthew is a real “son of David,” as Matthew’s genealogy is at pains to stress. Jesus promulgates His New Law, like Moses, from a mountain (5:1ff). And so, Matthew presents Jesus teaching His New Law (the Gospel) to the New Israel (the Church); in Him, the Old Law attains perfection and reaches its fulfillment.
An important theme in this Gospel is the Kingdom of Heaven. Mark and Luke refer to it as the Kingdom of God, but Matthew’s wording points to the same reality. (Matthew substitutes “Heaven” for “God” because of the Jewish tendency to avoid using the name of God.) The Kingdom is inaugurated with the preaching of Jesus, and His signs of healing give credibility to His claim that the reign of God has begun. However, this Kingdom of Heaven is not yet here in full force; it is the task of the Church to hasten its coming (Mt 16:16ff) and to pray for its arrival in power and glory (6:10). The thirteenth chapter of Matthew is devoted to a description of the characteristics of the Kingdom through the use of the famous parables of the seed, the weeds and the wheat, the mustard seed, the hidden treasure, the net. Thus, Matthew presents his audience with the twofold aspect of the mystery: Jesus has established the Kingdom of Heaven, but its full realization is contingent upon the Church’s work to “make disciples of all nations” (28:19). Matthew sets the Church’s agenda for all ages.
All of the Gospels were written as documents of faith. Each Gospel-writer wanted to put his readers into contact with Jesus, so that they might attain salvation. The Gospels inform us of the works of Christ and His preaching. His life makes demands on our lives. If we respond with faith, then the saying of the Risen Lord to Thomas was said with us in mind: “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (Jn 20:29).
Between now and the feast of St. Luke on October 18, why not commit to read a chapter a day of St. Matthew’s Gospel? Then you can pick up with the Third Gospel. Tomorrow evening, I would like to present you with some Catholic principles of Bible reading and interpretation.
Today we thank God for the “good news” given us by St. Matthew, especially the good news that a sinner can, by God’s grace, become a saint. If Jesus can rehabilitate a tax-collector, he can do the same with you and me.
St. Matthew, pray for us, that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
(Editor’s note: This homily was given on September 21, 2020, the feast of St. Matthew, at the Church of the Holy Innocents, New York City, and originally posted at CWR on the same day.)
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
St.Mathew , ? one who owned the most wealth and as a tax collector , likely had the heart of the ‘ prowling lion ‘ ..to have come across The Lion of Judah , to have
become the hand of The Spirit ..
to help deliver persons and nations owning enormous sums in debt ..
Interesting to read how there are Church Fathers who mention the use of Hebrew by the Apostles and very likely too , since same was the Liturgical tongue .
The almost extinct use of Hebrew , now being revived ( thank you Hebrew Catholics ) ? Lord thus desiring to help all who feel deprived about use of certain Church traditions in this area as well !
Having never heard about the Church Father mentioned in the article , hope to look up same too – thank you 🙂
Offering the Holy Spirit , the love and glory for His works – for every inspired Word – to help with deeper love for the scriptures too and all can do same in the Oneness in the Divine Will , regardless of the spoken tongue . 🙂
https://comedivinewill.wordpress.com/2012/05/23/expanded-rounds-of-the-soul-in-sanctification-3/
I have always been drawn to the Gospel According to Matthew. Matthew’s clarity, detail and prioritization are unmatched by the other Gospels. I quote the Book of Matthew often.
One question I have on Matthew’s Gospel, versus the other Gospel writers, is on Matthew 19:9 “(unless the marriage is unlawful)”. Is this added by Jesus, Matthew, or some Scribe further on down the line? I would think that, if Jesus had said it, it would not be in parenthesis. If Matthew felt that Jesus had said it, he would not have put it into parenthesis, nor would, I feel, that Matthew would be correcting Jesus.
It would seem to me that Bible readers would automatically understand that if a five year old pronounced his seven and eight year old brother and sister married, that all adult Bible readers would automatically understand that this is not what Jesus is talking about. To me it feels like the guilty conscience, annulment and remarried, Scribe may have added the content within these parenthesis.
What does everyone think?
Matthew 19:7
They said to him, “Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss [her]?” He said to them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”
I never thought of someone tampering with Holy Scripture, until reading Revelation 22:18.
Revelation 22:18
I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.
I don’t think it’s Matthew (or a subsequent editor) “correcting” Jesus but applying the Lord’s teaching to a broader environment — just as Mark expands on the saying in Matthew about a man divorcing his wife. Mark goes on to speak of a woman divorcing her husband (not possible in the Jewish environment but possible in that of Rome).
“Mark goes on to speak of a woman divorcing her husband (not possible in the Jewish environment but possible in that of Rome).”
Greetings Fr. Stravinskas,
In Roman Empire pagan marriages, what makes marriage binding and lawful in the eyes of Jesus?
God’s Creation Plan is for God to join man and woman together as one body. Does the Catholic Church believe that God has never joined man and woman together into one body before the Jewish and Catholic Churches were established? I would think that, regardless of religion or non-religion, God has united into, one flesh pairs, most all the people on earth throughout all the ages, as His Creation Plan requires, and as mankind desires.
“He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh.”
By Jesus, going all the way back to Creation, and simply stating ‘Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate’, He is taking both religion and the secular state out of the equation when it comes to who can dissolve marriages.
What do you think?
Genesis 2:22
This one shall be called ‘woman,’ for out of ‘her man’ this one has been taken.” That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body.
Matthew 19:4 The Question of Divorce.
Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?” He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.” They said to him, “Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss [her]?” He said to them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”
“What does everyone think?”
It is my understanding that the passage regarding unlawful marriages refer to those forbidden by Jewish law: such as brother/sister marriages, which were not unknown among the pagans at that time. I think first-cousin marriages were also forbidden, but not sure about that.
Fast forwarding:
“The Church eventually enforced marriage outside of one’s kinship group, partly as a practical guard against incest and the risk of genetic deformity. And the transformational explanation for marriage beyond the natural kinship group was to further the diffusion of the new Christian charity above any clan insularity of blood lines. In this feature Christianity is unlike the tribalism of Judaism. In the older system vengeance reprisals targeted outsiders and extended across generations, but with intermarriage this could no longer continue. Again, from the beginning and even in Celtic and German lands the Church held its members to indissolubility, and through the penalty of excommunication discouraged divorce. Remarriage following a separation was prohibited early on (Synod of Carthage, 407 A.D.), and marriage to the wife of a man still alive also merited excommunication (the Synod of Angers, 453 A.D.). Unlike Roman law the early Church recognized permanent concubinage across Roman class barriers as a real marriage because it included the commitment to lasting union”
(from Beaulieu, “A Generation Abandoned,” Hamilton Books, 2017).
I think I recall reading–and would like clarification–that in was in the 11th Century that the Church fully articulated that marriage is a sacrament. Cana, yes, but it took awhile to break old habits. Inculturation.
Thank you to the Rev.Father and all who pray for those who use this site , to have bit more Light about the personal Love in the Holy Spirit for each …
St.John sees the Son of Man with the two edged sword of The Spirit , to help remove all that obscures that Light ….St.Mathew too – could have foreseen many who would grow to have the Heart of the Jewish Mother in embracing her children and thier history as one’s own , for graces of same to touch every life -as being revealed to us more in these times including through the lives and writings of the powerful Sts and mystics of our times – St.Padre Pio – Feast Day tomorrow , his good friend
S.G Luisa of Divine Will -to help alleviate the fears of being ‘ rootless ‘ in seeing the flood waters of evils around us , in efforts to be backwardist to recreate the times past , instead in trusting Love in The Spirit to desire the graces to flood hearts and lives, even of all times with the help of the countless Sts , thus for the Reign of the Divine Will as the Triumph of The Heart of the (Jewish ) Queen !. 🙂 FIAT !
First-cousin are permitted by Halakha, as I was reminded, 95% in jest, every time I was introduced to a female cousin.
I’ve always preferred the term ‘tax-farmer’, as it distinguishes these individuals from the current run of tax functionaries—dislike the latter as one might, they are not the roving predators Matthew’s ilk tended to be.