²⁴ When Joseph awoke, he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took his wife into his home. ²⁵ He had no relations with her until she bore a son,  and he named him Jesus. 

All Christian denominations adhere to the Virgin Birth of Jesus; it is essential orthodoxy. The controversy about the perpetual virginity of Mary arises out of later interpretations of “until” in v. 25.  Some argue that afterwards normal marital relations existed. In the English use of “until” something is negated up to a point in time, occurrence after that time is normally assumed. However, the expression (heōs hou) and its Semitic counterpart have no such assumption. In any case, the immediate Matthean context should be taken as silent on any future implication given Matthew’s stress on Mary’s virginity so that the Isaian prophecy is fulfilled.

The Virgin Birth was universally held in the earliest Church and confessed in The Apostles’ Creed and The Nicene Creed (325 A.D.) and its expansion at Constantinople (381 A.D.). These creeds enshrine the doctrine, showing it was not under dispute at the time but affirmed as essential to Christian faith — particularly as a testimony to Christ’s true humanity and divine origin. To be clear, The Nicene Creed says: 

“He was incarnate and was made man.” The phrase “born of the Virgin Mary” appears in the expanded Creed of Constantinople. The council was not addressing the Virgin Birth itself but the Arian heresy, which denied the full divinity of the Son. 

Joseph’s plans are interrupted in vv.20–23 by the appearance of a messenger from God in a dream — a device familiar from the Old Testament account of the birth of Samson (Judges 13). The first words uttered are “do not be afraid to take Mary your wife into your home.” The angel gives an explanation for Mary’s pregnancy, announcing the divine plan is already in motion. The angel also informs Joseph of his part in the divine plan: “you are to name him Jesus.” As explained above, this simple directive makes clear to Joseph that he is to claim Jesus as his own. As the legal son of Joseph, Jesus will be a “Son of David” (v. 20). 

In first-century Judaism the Hebrew name Joshua (Greek Iesous) meaning “Yahweh helps” was interpreted as “Yahweh saves.” The language reminds us of similar revelations in the Old Testament (Gen. 16:11; 17:19; etc.), as well as of Isaiah 7:14, soon to be quoted. Names, especially divinely revealed names, are full of meaning, and this is often revealed by a word-play which need not always correspond to the actual etymology of the name. In the case of Jesus (the Greek form of Joshua or Jeshua, a common name) both the sound (cf. Heb. yôšî’a, ‘he will save’) and the probable etymology contribute to the explanation for he will save his people from their sins (v.20).

²² All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ²³ “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,” which means “God is with us.” 

That Jesus was conceived by a virgin mother without the agency of Joseph is clearly stated throughout this section, and is the basis for the introduction of the quotation in vv. 22–23. 

²² All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ²³ “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,” which means “God is with us.”

In the text this not so much argued or even described, but assumed as a known fact. There may be an element of apologetic in Matthew’s stress on Joseph’s surprise, his abstention from intercourse, the angel’s explanation of Jesus’ divine origin, and the scriptural grounds for a virgin birth, due perhaps to an early form of the later Jewish charge that Jesus’ birth was illegitimate (see Brown, pp. 534–542). But the account reads primarily as if designed for a Christian readership, who wanted to know more precisely how Mary’s marriage to Joseph related to the miraculous conception of Jesus, and Christians who would find the same delight that Matthew himself found in tracing in this the detailed fulfillment of prophecy.

The suggestion that the virgin birth tradition is an imaginative creation by Matthew or his predecessors on the basis of Isaiah 7:14 is precluded not only by this assumption of it as a known fact in Matthew’s narrative, but also by its appearance in a completely different form in Luke 1:26–56; 2:5. Further, vv. 22–23, where Isaiah 7:14 is introduced, are clearly an explanatory addition to the narrative, which would flow smoothly from v. 21 to v. 24 without these verses, and not the inspiration for it. Suggestions that the tradition derives from pagan stories of gods having intercourse with women ignore both the quite different tone of such stories, and the impossibility of their being accepted in a Palestinian Jewish setting; yet the Gospel accounts are both intensely Jewish in their contents and expression.

The two previous posts did a “deep dive” into the first reading for the 4th Sunday of Advent (Isaiah 7:10-14) – “the Lord himself will give you this sign: the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall name him Emmanuel” –  as a means to provide the Old Testament background for Matthew’s use of the quote as fulfillment. Keep in mind that our passage follows immediately upon Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus (1:1-17) – which notably says in v.9,  “Jotham the father of Ahaz, Ahaz the father of Hezekiah.” Our gospel and Matthew’s genealogy are intentionally connected by Matthew.  Our translation in Mt 1:1 is  “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.”  A more literal translation would be, “A book of the genesis of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham.” 

Matthew could have used other words for “genealogy” or “birth,” but he used this word, which is also the Greek title of the first book of scriptures. Similar wording is in the LXX at Gn 2:4 “This is the book of the genesis of heaven and earth;” and in 5:1 “This is the book of the genesis of human beings. In the day God made Adam, according to the image of God he made him.” Matthew intended a connection between these two sections of chapter 1 and with the first book of scriptures. This is a new beginning, a new creation.

In the previous post we spent a good deal of time introducing King Ahaz – he was not the best of kings. That was being nice. He was awful. He was judged to be comparable in wickedness to all the wretched kings of Judah and Israel.  In this context it is easy to see why the prophet Isaiah views Ahaz as one who lacks faith and trust in God, and in this way the king becomes a symbol of the people of God, who in the face of the Assyrian threats are becoming a people who also lack faith and trust in God.  The king and the people depended upon the legacy of the Davidic dynasty as the sign of their “covenant” with God. Their ideology professed a sublime confidence God would protect his chosen king and city…no matter what. This can be seen in  Psalm 46:1–4:

God is our refuge and our strength,
an ever-present help in distress.
Therefore we fear not, though the earth be shaken
and mountains plunge into the depths of the sea . . . .
The Lord of hosts is with us;
our stronghold is the God of Jacob.

Such a profession is easily made when there is no immediate danger. Faced with an actual invasion, however, “the heart of the king and the heart of the people trembled, as the trees of the forest tremble in the wind” (Isa 7:2).  

Our gospel is the traditional reading for the 4^th Sunday of Advent (year A) and thus, in addition to its biblical context, this reading also carries a seasonal meaning.

A Seasonal Context: The Fourth Sunday of Advent always tells part of the story that just precedes the birth of Christ. These familiar episodes set the stage for one of the Bible’s best-known passages, the story of Christmas. This reading, as well as the gospels for the 4^th Sunday in Advent in the other years, aligns well with the readings of the seven days of Advent that immediately precede Christmas.  Not only do the readings for the daily Masses just before Christmas include the beginnings of the Gospel infancy narratives (Matthew 1 on Dec. 17-18; Luke 1 on Dec. 19-24), but we again get to hear the traditional “O Antiphons,” at Mass.

Most familiar these days from the popular hymn, “O Come, O Come, Emmanuel,” the “O Antiphons” are more than a thousand years old.  Curiously, the first verse of the familiar hymn is actually the last of the traditional “O Antiphons” while the other verses of the hymn (in the order printed in most hymnals) correspond to the Antiphons for Dec. 17 to 22:

Dec. 17: O Sapientia / O Wisdom from Evening Prayer 
Verse 2: O Come, Thou Wisdom, from on high from the popular hymn

Dec. 18: O Adonai / O Sacred Lord of ancient Israel
Verse 3: O Come, O Come, Thou Lord of might

Dec. 19: O Radix Jesse / O Flower of Jesse’s stem
Verse 4: O Come, Thou Rod of Jesse’s stem

Dec. 20: O Clavis David / O Key of David
Verse 5: O Come, Thou Key of David, come

Dec. 21: O Oriens / O Radiant Dawn
Verse 6: O Come, Thou Dayspring from on high

Dec. 22: O Rex Gentium / O King of all the nations
Verse 7: O Come, Desire of nations…

Dec. 23: O Emmanuel / O Emmanuel
Verse 1: O Come, O Come, Emmanuel

The gospel readings for the 4^th Sunday, the gospels for those weekday readings, and the “O Antiphons” all begin to answer the question of Advent: who is coming? Our gospel reading for the 4^th Sunday of Advent (Year A) provides it contribution to the larger answer: Jesus Christ (v.18), son of Mary (v.18), adopted son of Joseph (v20), son of David (v.20), named Jesus (v.21), the one who will save his people from their sins (v.21), and Emmanuel…God with us (v.22).