MARY AND ELIZABETH (LUKE 1:39-45)

 

                Scenes in a Life: Panel B (mixed media, 2006)

Mary visited her relative Elizabeth and stayed with her during the last 6 months of her pregnancy. “During the nine months of Elizabeth's pregnancy, Luke's narrative subverts the patriarchal status quo of her household by silencing the man and giving initiative to speak and act exclusively to the two women, Elizabeth and Mary, and the unborn John.” (S. Young)

Luke 1:39

The first controversy concerns the location of the place where Elizabeth was living at the time. According to Pliny (Natural History 5.14), the Greek word oreine ['hill country'] refers to the area around Jerusalem. “A literary tradition that can be traced back to the sixth century identifies the birthplace with En Kerem (Arabic ain Karim), seven kilometers west of Jerusalem. Remains of two fourth-century churches indicates, however, that the tradition stretches back to a still earlier time.” (Reisner)

However, Geldenhuys says, “Attempts to ascertain precisely which village in Judaea is meant have thus far been unsuccessful. The manner of expression indicates that it was an unimportant place.”

Luke 1:40-41

In these verses we have the reunion of Mary with Elizabeth at which time even John in Elizabeth's womb appears to recognize the presence of Jesus in Mary's.

“The movement of the fetus finds its precedent in Gen. 25:22-28, although it is doubtful that the struggle between Jacob and Esau is in view here. More relevant is the reference to the expressions of eschatological joy in Mal. 4:2.” (Pao and Schnabel)

“Although it is said that an emotional experience of the mother can cause a movement of the foetus, it is more likely that a miraculous expression of the emotion of the unborn child is meant than Elizabeth simply saw her own joy reflected in the unconscious movement of her child.” (Marshall)

Some have quoted v. 41 in order to argue against terminating an unborn baby's life since it appears that a fetus, at least one six months old, is capable of being moved by the Holy Spirit. Even if that is a valid argument, it says nothing regarding the earlier stages of pregnancy.

Soards suggests that “Elizabeth's being 'filled with the Holy Spirit' may also acknowledge the presence and power of the Holy Spirit at work in relation to the unborn John 'in her womb.'”

Geldenhuys points out that “Elizabeth shows no sign of jealousy. In humility of heart she utters her amazement that she is so privileged as to be visited by the mother of her Lord.” I find this completely amazing since parents of young children seem to often vie with one another in defending the superiority of their own children.

The application for us by this example, according to Geldenhuys, is “He who elevates himself is constantly engaged in wrecking his own life. But he who is sincerely humble finds richness of life and happiness.”

Marshall notes: “In later life John apparently did not know Jesus very closely (Jn. 1:31; Lk. 7:19). This is in harmony with this passage, where nothing is said about the two boys subsequently coming into contact with each other.”

Luke 1:41b-45

Craddock: “Elizabeth eulogizes both Mary and her child. She blesses Mary on two grounds: she has been chosen to be mother of the Lord, and she has believed the word of God.”

Luke 1:42

Pao and Schnabel quote 2 Baruch 54:11 [an intertestamental Jewish writing] as another work “drawing on the same tradition in their descriptions of the mighty acts of God.”

And Marshall explains that “the participle is being used in a comparative or superlative sense: “You are the most blessed among women.”

“Elizabeth greets the mother of my Lord with clear spiritual insight and complete lack of any jealousy – a trait that foreshadows her son (Jn 3:30).” (Porter) Pao and Schnabel explain, “The expression 'my Lord' (tou kyriou mou) echoes the language of Ps 110:1 and therefore points to the messianic status of Jesus.”

Luke 1:43

Fitzmyer brings up an interesting aspect to this verse: “Some commentators have noted the similarity of this question to either 2 Sam 6:9 ('How can the ark of the Lord come to me?') or 2 Sam 24:21 ('Why has my lord, the king, come to his servant?'). For E. Burrows...and R. Laurentin..., Elizabeth's question compares Mary with the ark of the covenant. This link is supposed to be confirmed in 1:56, where Mary is said to remain three months with Elizabeth, just as the ark stayed three months with Obededom. But this is subtle.” Subtle or not, I still find the possibility fascinating.

Luke 1:44-45

“The hoti ['for'] clause may express the reason why Mary is blessed – because what she believed will certainty come true; or it may give the content of what she believed. The analogy of Acts 27:25 favors the second interpretation.., which surely includes the former.”

Conclusion

Young says, “The narrative makes it clear that Jesus is primary [and John is secondary] by such devices as devoting twice as much space to Jesus as to John, the two prophetic responses to Jesus versus one to John, and the focus of attention on Mary when the two stories converge in Luke 1:39-56. The purpose of the parallelism, however, is not primarily to highlight Jesus' superiority over John, but rather to show how the two figures together serve to fulfill the divine plan.”