7/26/2019 Eusebius and Ephrem on Luke 1.36 - Handout

1/2

Ephrem, Commentary on the GospelI.25-26[text: Leloir 1963, pp.24-26; trans: McCarthy 1993, pp.53-55]

25.The Lord will give him the throne of David(Luke 1:32). This [recalls the prophecy],The sceptre willnot depart until he comes(Gen 49:10). When the archangel instructed her that all things are easy for God

to accomplish, since, in the case ofElizabeth, your kinswoman( !"#$%& & & &'!($)& & &*+&, ) (Luke 1:36), [God] hasalso given her conception in her old age, Mary replied,If it is thus for her, behold I am the servant of God; letit be to me as you have said(Luke 1:38). From what the angel said to Mary, namely,Elizabeth your kinswoman(Luke 1:36), it could be supposed that Mary was from the house of Levi; nevertheless up to this, theprophecy was established within the framework ( - %&&& &&&./ 0&&& &&&1 ) of the husbands. The family of David

continued as far as Joseph who had espoused her, and [the birth of] her child was [reckoned]through the framework of the men, for the sake of the family of David. It is in Christ that the seed

and family [of David] are brought to completion. Scripture is silent ( 2&&3*+&&*4&&1 ) [about Marys ge-

nealogy] since it is the generations of men that it numbers and reckons. If Scripture had been accus-

tomed ( 5 6&& &&7 ) to indicate the family [line] through the mothers, it would be in order for one to seek

the family of Mary. But, lest [the words],Elizabeth, your kinswoman, were to show that Mary was also

from the house of Levi, take note that [the evangelist] has said [elsewhere], concerning Joseph andMary, thatThey were both of the house of David( 89:&;$ 4& &?@*

7/26/2019 Eusebius and Ephrem on Luke 1.36 - Handout

2/2

In doing so, they were also establishing Marys descent from David, giving an indication ofthe brides ancestry by means of the bridegrooms. This is because the law of Moses lays down thatone may not take a bride from any other than ones own tribe and speci!c kinship-group, in order toavoid one tribes inheritance shifting to another. Thus the husbands family registration suf!ced toshow the wifes as well, as a law-abiding man would not have taken a wife from any other groupthan, !rstly, his own paternal tribe, which in this case was Judah, and, secondly, from the same peo-ple and kinship-group, which in this case was that of David - those being the laws provisions.Therefore, when Joseph is shown to be a member of the tribe of Judah and the inheritance and kin-ship-group of David, of course it follows that Mary must be seen as from the same ones as well!

11. Do not be surprised, however, at Marys being called a kinswoman (9322$/;&) of Eliza-beths when Mary is a member of the tribe of Judah, while Elizabeth is a Levite. The explanation isthat the Jewish race as a whole shares a single descent, and all the tribes are interrelated. Hence, thedivine apostle calls all Jews his kinsmen (For the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen in the !esh, the Israelites, I wouldhave called down a curse on myself(Rom 9:3-4)), although his actual kinsmen were only those of the tribeof Benjamin. Paul, then, called all Israelites in general his brothers and kinsmen; and that is the sensein which the angel, to Mary, called Elizabeth her kinswoman, because of their both being Israelites.

There was another way, too, in which it was reasonable for Mary to be called a kinswoman

of Elizabeths: that is because of where she lived, in the territory of Judah, which was Marys place oforigin. Luke tells us:In these days Mary arose and hastened to make her way to the hill country, to a town of Judah. Sheentered Zechariahs house and greeted Elizabeth(Luke 1:39-40)...

It would also, plausibly be because of their similarity of character, which was the reason whythey had both been found worthy to be part of the saving dispensation: one became the mother ofthe Saviour, the other of the Saviours forerunner, and both shared one and the same Holy Spirit.Thus is was in relation to God, above all, that they shared a kinship.

12. According to the divine apostle the man is the womans head(1 Cor 11:3), and under thelaw of Mosesthe two shall become one !esh(Gen 2:24), ... Thus, once Mary has been linked to Joseph, shemay justi!ably claim to share his descent, especially as she has been shown to belong, not just to the

same tribe as his, but to the same people and kinship-group as well. Quite apart from that, in his di-vine message to her, Gabriel has included among his prophecies the words:and God will grant him thethrone of his father, David(Luke 1:32), making it clear that David was the forebear of the One who is tobe her son. What else, logically, could the angel have meant by saying this to the Virgin, but an ac-knowledgement that she was descended from David? ... It is thus with good reason that Luke says:Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to be registered in a town of David called Bethlehem, because hewas from the house and kinship-group of David, along with his duly-betrothed bride Mary, who was pregnant(Luke 2:4-5).Now that we have the proofs of such an interpretation of the wording from what has been saidabove, we shall read this sentence as meaning unambiguously, not that Mary had gone with him tobe registered separately, but that she, along with Joseph, was of the house and kinship-group ofDavid.

Eusebius, To Stephanus, suppl.8[text: PG 22.965; trans: Pearse 2010, pp.144-45]

[quoting theLetter to Aristidesby Julius Africanus, dealing with the differing genealogies of Matthewand Luke]:

Let us therefore not descend to such pettiness in our theology as to try to establish the kinship andpriesthood of Jesus merely by the alternation of the names. After all, the priestly tribe of Levi was

linked together with the royal tribe of Judah by Aarons marriage to Naassons sister Elizabeth (cf.

Exod 6:23); and again, Eleazar married Phatiels daughter, and had children by her (cf. Exod 6:25).

m.r.crawford@durham.ac.uk30 January 2015