Vol. 27, No. 1 |
Spring (April-June) 2003 |
Matthew and Empire: Initial Explorations
by Warren Carter
Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press, 2001
249 pages, paper.
Reviewed by Reta Halteman Finger
In the last issue I reviewed two
books from a post-colonial perspective, one of them being Musa
W. Dube's Postcolonial Feminist Interpretation of the Bible.
In it she indicts the Gospel of Matthew for taking a colonialist
attitude, thus setting western Christianity on an imperialist
journey that would eventually engulf her own African continent.
Dube strongly critiques Matthew for not resisting Rome's imperial
occupation of Palestine, and even skewers Matthew's Jesus for
treating the Canaanite woman as a social inferior. In the review,
I referred to Warren Carter's book, Matthew and Empire,
which I knew took a different position, though I had not yet read
it. (Warren Carter is Professor of New Testament at Saint Paul
School of Theology and author of Matthew and the Margins: A
Socio-Political and Religious Reading.)
Dube's book and the course I taught on the
Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) this spring made
reading Carter's book irresistible. It has also strengthened my
conviction that Jesus was a highly political figure who presented
an alternate view of how society should be constructed.
The dominant view of Matthew's Gospel holds
that it says little about Roman imperialism. Instead it focuses on
the deepening conflict between two Jewish groups -- the Pharisees
and the "Jews-for-Jesus" who both struggle for dominance
during the 80s of the first century. This is the sort of conflict
Dube recognizes as one of the effects of colonization -- setting
different groups of colonized people against each other so they
don't unite to resist their common oppressor. Certainly Matthew's
view of the Pharisees is extremely negative, and it is where we
get our assumptions that to be a Pharisee automatically makes one
a pompous hypocrite. Matthew, who almost certainly used Mark's
Gospel, cleverly edits various Markan texts to make the Pharisees
look even worse. And his relentless attack on them in chapter 23
matches any mudslinging campaign commercial today.
But Carter insists that this Gospel must also
be seen in the context of a world dominated by the Roman Empire.
The reason we do not readily see this in Matthew is not only
because much is implied from the historical context, but also
because we forget that in the ancient world religion was never
viewed as separate from political structures, economics, or social
organization. Carter's thesis is clear from his first paragraph.
He writes:
I will argue that Matthew's Gospel contests
and resists the Roman Empire's claims to sovereignty over the
world. It sustains an alternative community of disciples of Jesus
in anticipation of the coming triumph of God's Empire over all
things, including the destruction of Rome's empire. That is to
say, the Gospel resists Rome with a social challenge in
offering a vastly different vision and experience of human
community, and with a theological challenge in asserting
that the world belongs to God not Rome, and that God's purposes
run through Israel and Jesus, not Rome (1).
Thus, in Matthew's opening chapter with its
Davidic genealogy, he never mentions Rome. Rather, God is at work
in Israel's history, not Rome's. This directly challenges the poet
Virgil's glorified history of Rome in his Aenead, which
shows how the gods have favored the Romans as the mightiest and
wisest people on earth.
Carter first describes the nature of Roman
imperialism, particularly as it would have existed in Syrian
Antioch, where many scholars think Matthew's Gospel was written.
Besides an unimaginable life of overcrowded city streets,
crumbling tenements, filth, disease, and endless threats of
plague, drought, and war, conquered peoples in the ancient world
were further subjected to the ubiquitous presence of thousands of
Roman soldiers whom they were heavily taxed to support.
Psychologically, Jews from Palestine and Syria would have been
constantly reminded of their inferiority and subjection to the
Romans, especially since they had been so devastated by the Roman
victory over their people in the Jewish War of 70 CE. In this
culture, the elite and educated wealthy despised the lower classes
(who subsidized them) as ignorant, worthless, and undeserving of a
better life.
Matthew's Gospel is a response to this
exclusivist, fragmented, and uncaring climate. The message of
Jesus is "inclusive, egalitarian, merciful"(51). Other
scholars have previously noted this, but Carter grounds this
social alternative in a theological claim that the world belongs
not to Jupiter and Rome but to the God of Israel as presented
through his agent, Jesus. Substitute Matthew's "kingdom of
heaven" for "empire of God" (which means the same
thing), and you have a direct and sustained challenge to Rome's
sovereignty.
Following this overview, Carter discusses
Matthew's Christology -- how Jesus is shown as God's agent to
bring about God's alternative empire. Focusing on Matthew 1:21 --
"you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from
their sins" -- Carter asks, what sins? Those of us from
religious backgrounds assume these are the private, individual,
moral, and religious sins so often condemned from the pulpit. But
the previous genealogy from Abraham through David through the
Babylonian exile and beyond brings into view massive social sins
of "deception, xenophobia, abuse of power, adultery, and
murder" (79). King Herod's subsequent massacre of babies to
protect his own throne (2:1-18) follows the angelic announcement,
and by the time Jesus is fasting in the desert, Satan himself
asserts that he has control of all the world's kingdoms (4:1-11).
It is no accident that, after resisting Satan, Matthew's Jesus
announces the alternative: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven
has come near" (4:17).
Carter also refers to Matthew 26:28, where
Jesus shares the cup with his disciples, identifying it as
"the blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for
the forgiveness of sins." Again moving beyond the personal,
individual relationship with God, what should come to mind here is
the blood smeared on the doorposts of the houses of Hebrew slaves
in Egypt (Exodus 12:1-13). Jesus' blood is shed for communal
liberation. In addition, the term "forgiveness" harks
back to the year of Jubilee in Leviticus 25, and to Deuteronomy
15:1-3, 9 where the same noun refers to the forgiveness of debts
every seven years.
Jesus' death demonstrates the deep sinfulness
of the present structures of society, which killed him. His life
and his anticipated return are meant to bring about "nothing
other than the dismantling of the economic oppression, social
inequalities, and political exploitation that mark imperial
societies" (88).
Using this framework, Carter's last section
examines in minute detail several texts that demonstrate how the
gospel resists Roman imperialism and lifts up an alternative
community of disciples who look forward to the full establishment
of God's Empire. These texts are:
-
1:23 and 4:15-16 -- why quote
Isaiah?
-
11:28-30 -- take my yoke upon you, not
Rome's.
-
17:24-27 -- how paying the tax to Rome is
subversive.
-
27:11-26 -- Rome, through Pilate, condemns
Jesus to death
Yet throughout his book, Carter notes a major
irony characterizing Matthew's Gospel. In spite of presenting an
egalitarian community as a challenge to Rome's imperialism,
Matthew imitates the imperial worldview that it resists! Judgment
is a strong theme in Matthew, and God's violent revenge, not
reconciliation, is promised upon those who have operated outside
God's Empire. Moreover, the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20
uses imperialist assumptions in "making disciples of all
nations." And this is precisely the point of Musa Dube's
critique of Matthew as colonialist!
It is here that the reader must especially
recognize the huge gulf between the ancient world and ours.
Matthew has no other language to use but the language of
imperialism and colonialism, for the ideals and practice of
democracy simply did not exist in the public sphere. To me, this
problem is similar to the instructions given to slaves in several
New Testament letters telling them to submit to their owners,
rather than condemning the institution of slavery itself as
abusive and immoral. The NT writers could hardly envision a world
without slavery, and certainly had no power to change it on a
societal level. So also Matthew could not conceive of, for
example, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission established in
South Africa to deal redemptively with colonial oppressors, or the
nonviolent movements begun by Ghandi or Martin Luther King,
Jr.
Warren Carter's interpretation of Matthew's
vision of God's Empire is meticulously researched and powerfully
presented. Though he does underplay the religious conflict between
the Jesus-Jews and the Pharisees, he believes Matthew presents all
the religious leaders as the elite social class who are in league
with the Roman occupation.
This book can be extremely helpful to
Christian feminists who care both about properly interpreting the
Bible and who oppose all kinds of private and public oppression.
There are many parallels between the ancient Roman Empire and the
"American Empire" of the 21st century. Certainly the
billions spent on military defense (now more appropriately called
"offense"), the tax cuts which mostly favor the wealthy,
the increasing consolidation of media corporations which further
limit free speech, and the lack of funds for basic social services
on state and local levels all point to a growing imperialistic,
classist, hegemonic attitude within our nation. The alternative
which Jesus presents in Matthew's Gospel should ground us in our
struggle to bring about justice, peace, and reconciliation.
- Rita Halteman
Finger
Reviewer Reta
Halteman Finger has been a member of EEWC since 1978 and
presently serves on the Executive Council. She teaches New
Testament at Messiah College, Grantham, PA. For many years, she
served as editor of Daughters of Sarah magazine and is co-editor
(with Kari Sandhaas) of a compilation of articles from that
magazine under the title, The Wisdom
of Daughters: Two Decades of Christian Feminism (Innisfree
Press, 2001).
© 2003
Evangelical and Ecumenical Women's Caucus
|