(6) Another writer says beautifully : ' Seeing Mary sigh for three days for her Divine Son, I see again humanity during the 3000 years of paganism, wandering in search of God.'
t So RV with KB, etc. , but cf. AV and AVm. The Vulgate has the more easy redeinptimem Israel ; Amiatinus : Eierusalem, and so Peshitta.
was suitable to it. The mode of higher religious teaching among the Jews seems to have been neither didactic nor catechetical, but by mutual interrogation between the teacher and the scholar. Hence tlie freedom used by the disciples and others in questioning their Teacher. Christ answered some questions and put others, no doubt with all marks of respect to those who ' sat in Moses' seat ' (Mt 23=).
What led to Christ's desire to interview the Rabbis at all, and what was the subject of His questions? We can understand His intense in- terest in the recently celebrated Feast, its history and its meaning. Or, building on His previous knowledge of the Law and the Prophets, and on the current Messianic hopes, He might desire to learn from the Rabbis about the Messiah and the Messianic kingdom. Questions such as those dis- cussed in Mt 2^- \ Mk 9", Jn 7^^ would be raised and would interest Him. Lk OQ-^- =«-'', Mk 10= give us other authentic instances of the points dis- cussed by the Jewish teachers of that age. It has, moreover, been suggested that on the journey up to Jerusalem, Mary for the first time told Him the story of His birth, of the messages of the angels, of the Magi, of Simeon, of Anna, of the flight into Egypt, and of the dreams of Joseph. It would be an overpowering revelation, for which, liowever, as an exceptional, though true child. He would be ready.
We are in the realm of pure conjecture, but certainly it might be God's way of revealing to the Divine Child a part of the truth about that Child's nature and mission. That to Him, as to the Church, to the world, and to each of us, the truth should come ' by divers portions and in divers manners' (He I') is a conceivable, and perhaps the most probable theory. And such a revelation, falling on an unusually gifted soul (Lk 2*), on a soul infinitely more receptive, because of its sinlessness (Wis T--- -^ etc.), than any other soul could be, would quicken into energy His whole life. If this were so, we have an ade- quate exposition of our Lord's desires, an adequate explanation of His action.
'All that heard him were amazed (AV astonished) at his understanding and his answers ' (Lk 2'"). As, later on, 'never man so spake' (Jn 7^'), so now, never child so spake. Yet as in the later case there was nothing contrary to true manhood, so now we ought not to think of anything contrary to true boyhood. It is worth noting that while AV has 'astonished' for the feeling of the by- standers (2" i^laravTo) and 'amazed' for that of Joseph and Mary (2^* il,tw\a.yT)aav), RV simply reverses the terms. The former word is often rendered 'beside himself,' 'beside themselves,' but it is difficult to express in English the difference between the two verbs.* See artt. Amazement, Astonishment.
In spite of the assembly of ' grave and reverend signiors,' Mary's feelings were at once vented in audible address (elire) to her Son : ' Child ! why hast thou thus dealt with us 1 Behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing ! ' Her trouble overpowered her amazement. No doubt they were proud of Him in their hearts, but Mary thought it necessary mildly to chide Him for having caused them so much anxiety. We say 'chide' as the nearest expression of our thought, but few parents in the East or anywhere else would speak of what
• For liiirTivm, cf. Mt 1223, Mk 212 321 542 661, Lk 866 2422, Ac 27. 12 89- 11. 13 921 1015 1216, 2 Co 513 ; and for U-rXiiirtM, Mt V28 1354 19=5 2223, Mk 122 62 737 1026 1118, Lk 432 943, Ac 1312. The context sometimes offers no reason for the choice of one word rather than the other. The latter one may be the weaker of the two ; in Mt 1925, Mk 1026 737 it needs an adverb to strengthen it. Etymological arguments cannot be pressed vvith regard to the popular Greek of the 1st century.
228
BOYHOOD OF JESUS
BOYHOOD OF JESUS
they deemed to be a child's error so courteously and with such an absence of 'temper.' We notice that it was Mary who spoke, and this may possibly be urged as a point in favour of the orthodox view of the 'Virgin Birth.' If Joseph had been the natural father of Christ, he would have spoken to a son of that age, at least in addition to the mother. His silence seems to us to balance such expressions as 'thy father and I,' or 'his parents.'* Mary joined Joseph with herself not only in her account of the continuous careful seeking (ef>;- ToC/ifi-), but also in her sorrow, t
We now come to our Lord's reply, which is a veritable crux interpret urn. There is no variant in the Greek (Tt in i^tiTeiri /ie; oi)/c pSeire Sn iv rots toC irarpis iiov Set eTval /if ;). Nor is there any doubt that the words were a reminder (with a slight touch of rebuke) that Joseph was not His father (cf . 6 Tarrip <rouKdyi!i, '2*^}, and that in any case the claims of His Divine Fatlier were paramount. The principal in- terpretations of if Tois ToD Trarpis fiov are : {a) ' in my Father's house' ; (6) 'about my Father's business' ; (f) 'among my Father's servants and friends' ; {d) combinations of (a) or (b) implying an intended vagueness. The Vulg. is in hu qiicepatris inci sunt ; the Pesh. supports (re) ' in my Father's house,' having - ' *^j Zu_2j [But does not beth support (c) as