Visitation of Mary

The Visitation (Luke 1:39–45)

Edwin Philip Rodrigues, SJ

Introduction: Biblical exegesis is an ancient discipline having a tradition of about 2000 years. What can I, an amateur contribute to this sacred discipline? I don’t know whether I can enrich this sacrosanct tradition; but I do know that this tradition will surely enrich me. With this humbling premise, I enter into my first systematic attempt of Biblical Hermeneutics.

My Way of Proceeding: Being a beginner, I will try to follow the nine steps provided in the course material as faithfully as I can. However, since after examining the original Greek text, I found that there is no textual critical apparatus presented for the selected passage, i.e. Luke 1:39–45, that step is not necessary. Also, not being proficient in Greek, I will not translate the text myself, but will accept the NRSV translation as authoritative. As for the step of looking for the best academic studies on the text, I have referred to a few books and journal articles and used the insights of the scholars all through my assignment. So for my presentation, I will concentrate only on the remaining steps.

Determine the Delimitation of the Text

The Visitation pericope (Luke 1:39–56) includes Mary’s visit to Elizabeth and her hymn of praise, i.e. Magnificate. I wish to concentrate only on the first half of the pericope, leaving aside the Mary’s magnificent song of praise. This pericope (more precisely a part of the pericope) appears in the Infancy Narrative of Luke. The scene is preceded by two annunciations of conceptions; it is followed by two stories of birth and circumcision; but it fits into neither side of these duplicate patterns.[1] The change in characters (angel Gabriel to Elizabeth), change in place (Nazareth to Judean town) and change in theme (Annunciation to Visitation) indicate the delimitation of the pericope.

Exploring the sitz im leben

The scholars are greatly divided about the location of Luke’s community. According to Mark Powell, “The location of Luke’s community cannot be determined, for even in ancient times the traditions varied greatly (references are found to Achaia, Boeotia, and Rome. Modern interpreters have suggested Caesarea, Asia Minor, or the Decapolis.) The only consensus seems to be that it was not written in Palestine.”[2] Raymond Brown states, “rather than thinking of Luke’s intended audience as a single house-church or even as living in one city, perhaps we should think of Christians of the same background spread over a large region.”[3]

In his book What are They Saying about Luke? Powell devotes an entire chapter dealing with “The Concerns of Luke’s Community.” There he presents what scholars think to be the important issues that faced Luke’s Church deriving from clues within his writings like the problem of the historical delay of Parousia, false teaching in the Church (esp. the heresies associated with Gnosticism), tribulations and persecutions, the relation of Gentile Christianity to Judaism.[4]

            From these observations, we can say that Lucan community is a diverse, spread out gentile community facing diverse issues. It can also be said that scholars identify the principal concerns of Luke-Acts as falling within the realms of eschatology and ecclesiology of “reconstituted Israel”. Luke’s theology is not abstract, but eminently practical. He develops theology in response to the needs and challenges of his concrete sitz im leben.

Examine the literary context of the text

The present pericope is situated in Luke’s beautiful narrative of the Saviour’s birth. Unlike Mark, Matthew and Luke make use of Infancy narratives to enhance their theology. In retro-projective development of the Gospels, Soteriology (what the Saviour has done for us in his Paschal Mystery) ignited the interest of the evangelists in Ontology (what the Saviour is in himself in his birth, life and ministry).

The present pericope fits well with the entire narrative theology of Luke. Mark Coleridge in his The Birth of the Lukan Narrative claims that the first two chapters of the Third Gospel set the Lucan narrative in motion and lay the ground for all that follows. He also claims that the questions concerning the shape of the divine visitation and the recognition of it are central to the narrative of Luke-Acts. [5] Thus, Mary’s visit to Elizabeth in Judean hill country becomes proleptic of Jesus’ visitation (or journey) to Jerusalem (9:51–19:27). Although Elizabeth and the child in her womb recognized the Lord’s visitation, Jerusalem did not (19:44).

The literary context becomes amply clear when we examine the structure of Lucan Infancy Narrative[6]:

I.                   The angelic Announcement of the Births (1:5–56)

1.      About John (1:5–25)  2. About Jesus (1:26–38)

3. Complementary Episode: The Visitation (1: 39–45)

Canticle: Magnificate (1:46–55)

Refrain: Mary “returned” to her home (1:56)

II.                The Birth, Circumcision, and Manifestation of the Children (1:57–2:52)

4. The birth of John (1:57–58)      5. The Birth of Jesus (2:1–20)

6. The circumcision and Manifestation of John (1:59–80)

7. The circumcision and Manifestation of Jesus (2:21–40)

8. Complementary episode: The finding in the Temple (2:41–52)

As seen above, the Visitation pericope appears in the first of Luke’s two carefully and artistically devised diptychs as a complementary episode. This is the point of intersection. This event marks the intertwining of the destinies of the two heroes of Luke’s Infancy gospel and makes yet more explicit the subordination of John to Jesus.[7]

Identify the literary genre of the pericope and do the appropriate analysis

We cannot ascertain one particular genre for Luke’s Infancy narrative. I found the information given on the website of “the Oblates of St. Joseph” very appealing regarding the literary genre of Luke’s Infancy Narrative:

Luke 1-2 is really a mosaic of varied literary genres, including narratives recounting births, circumcisions, visitation, presentation, finding, refrains of growth, lyrical pieces, predictions and prophecies. The infancy is a transcendent manifestation in time of the eternal God. The genre is a transitional stage between the Old Testament and the mature manifestation of the Messiah, which defies labelling because of its uniqueness. It is the fruit of a long meditation in the community about who Jesus was from the beginning.[8]

Overall Luke’s and Matthew’s Infancy Narratives seem to be having Midrashic form. However, according to Marie E. Isaacs, “the aim of the evangelists is not to expound the OT but to tell a new story, the birth of Jesus, utilizing scripture as illustrative material where it suits their purpose. The text is not the OT, the text for the evangelists’ gospel is Christ.”[9]

In the selected pericope, we can identify the genre of a dramatic narrative, more midrashic (theological) than biographical (historical). However, we can’t entirely rule out the possibility of historicity because there is an hypothesized tradition that Luke received some of his insights and information from Mary the mother of Jesus.[10] Elements of prophesy are also found here in the form of Elizabeth’s prophetic utterances about Mary and her child.

Establish the message of the text for the original readers of the text

Luke, a literary genius has woven the whole of Infancy narrative very creatively in a step-parallelism to bring out the superiority of Jesus and his parents over John the Baptist and his parents and through that he wants to convey the supremacy of the new covenant over the old covenant. Let us see what Luke wants to communicate through the Visitation pericope.

The entire Visitation pericope exhibits the following structure: (i) Mary’s journey (vv 39–40a); (ii) her greeting and its effect (vv 40b–41); (iii) Elizabeth’s blessing of Mary and child (vv 42–45); (iv) Mary’s blessing of God (vv 46–55); (v) Mary’s return journey (v 56).[11] I will briefly explain the first three parts.

(i) Mary’s journey (vv 39–40a): Immediately after Angel’s announcement, Mary set out and went with haste to a Judean town in the hill country. The place is not named although tradition places Elizabeth and Zachariah’s home a short distance west of Jerusalem at Ain-Karim.[12] Coleridge tries to give various possible psychological reasons for Mary’s journey.[13] However, finally he makes a very important remark, “The question, then, is not why Mary goes, but why the narrator wants the two women to meet. Narrator strategy matters more than the psychology of the character.”[14] He comes to the conclusion that Mary freely decided to make the journey into the Judean hills. It was faith which made her undertake that journey.[15]

(ii) Mary’s greeting and its effect (vv 40b–41): Mary greets Elizabeth and Elizabeth hears her greeting. “Hearing” (ἀκοή) is a critical moment in the action of God’s word. God heard Zachariah’s request. Zachariah listened to the angel, as did Mary. In this case Elizabeth and her baby hear Mary’s greeting, and the one who is to be John, the prophet, leaps in the womb.[16] Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit (πνεύματος ἁγίου). Luke, the evangelist of the Holy Spirit sees the Spirit accompanying Jesus right from his conception.

(iii) Elizabeth’s blessing of Mary and the child (vv 42–45): Laurentin draws a comparison between the story of the transfer of the ark to Jerusalem and the account of the visit of Mary to Elizabeth. He directs our attention to David’s question (2 Sam 6:2–19), “how can the ark of the Lord come to me?” Just as David danced before the ark of the Lord, upon meeting Mary, Elizabeth’s unborn babe leaped (ἐσκίρτησεν) in her womb. From this Laurentin would see Mary as the type of the Shekinah-bearing ark.[17] Elizabeth recognizes the divine presence and blesses Mary and her child. She calls her “the mother of my lord” thus casting Mary in the role of a queen mother.[18] In v. 45, we have the first beatitude in the Gospel of Luke. The adjective is μακάρια. It is uttered over Mary, whose faith stands in contrast to Zechariah’s incredulity (1:20).[19] According to Elizabeth, Mary is blessed because she believed in God’s words. Thus, Mary becomes a perfect model of faith.

Reflect on its significance for us today

I find this passage very inspiring. It is a simple story of simple women which teaches us simple but very effective lesson for our lives. We have a lot to learn from Mary. This passage helps us to look at Mary differently. Mary can no longer be seen as a timid maiden of Nazareth. She takes a relatively long trip to her cousin pictures her as a strong woman taking full responsibility.[20] Mary is a symbol of the power of feminism in Luke’s gospel.   

While commenting on Mary’s visitation and Feminist Thought, Sr. Philomena highlights how liberation and feminist theologians see Mary: “They highlight Mary’s capacity to make independent decisions, her availability to nurture and care for life, her sensitivity to the needs of the neighbour, her solidarity with the women and oppressed, and particularly her openness to God’s plan with all richness of her womanhood.”[21]

The world is hungry for someone who cares; who really cares and takes trouble to go out of one’s comfort zone to visit others selflessly. I think that this passage challenges us to do precisely that.

Conclusion: Am I satisfied with this assignment? I don’t know. As Sr. Rekha says, “Biblical exegesis is a hard, boring task, but it is also highly rewarding.” One needs to spend long hours drilling through the text, listening to the text and getting inspiration from the labyrinth of scholarly research in order to come up with a practical hermeneutics for one’s concrete situation, here and now. It is a science and an art. It will take some time to master it. Here I begin with clumsy steps. I hope and pray that one day, I will make my little contribution and add my little drop in this vast ocean of biblical exegesis/hermeneutics.

I know God is merciful and gracious and he/she continues to delight our hearts and minds by his/her constant visitation. Elizabeth and John the Baptist recognized the visitation; Jerusalem failed to recognize it, what about us?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Doubleday, 1997.

----------------------- The Birth of the Messiah. New York: Doubleday, 1977.

Coleridge, Mark. The Birth of the Lukan Narrative. England: Sheffield Press, 1993.

D’Souza, Philomena.  “Re-imagining Mary for the women of our Times.” Dhyana, 8/2 (Oct 2008): 52-64.

Dronisch, Loretta. A Woman Reads the Gospel of Luke. Minnesota: Collegeville, 1966.

Farris, Stephen. The Hymns of Luke’s Infancy Narratives. England: Sheffield Press, 1985.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Gospel According to Luke I-IX. The Anchor Yale Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1982.

Harrington, Wilfred J. The Gospel According to St. Luke. London: Geofrey Chapman, 1968.

Isaacs, Marie E. “Mary in the Lucan Infancy Narrative.” Way Supplement, 25 (Summer 1975): 80-95.

Nolland, John. Luke 1:1-9:20. Word Biblical Commentary 35A. Dallas: Word, 1989.

Oblates of St. Joseph, “Joseph in the Gospel of Luke: The Structure, Genre and Purpose of Luke 1-2,” <http://www.osjoseph.org/stjoseph/scripture.php> (10 September 2012).

Powell, Mark Allan. What are They Saying about Luke? New York: Paulist Press, 1989.

---

[1] Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah (New York: Doubleday, 1977), 339.

[2] Mark Allan Powell, What are They Saying about Luke? (New York: Paulist Press, 1989), 42.

[3] Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 271.

[4] See Powell, What are They Saying about Luke? Third chapter, 42-59 and endnotes, 130-134.

[5] Mark Coleridge, The Birth of the Lukan Narrative (England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 22.

[6] Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke I-IX (AB; New York: Doubleday, 1982), 313-14.

[7] John Nolland, Luke 1:1-9:20 (WBC 35A; Dallas: World books, 1989), 62.

[8] Oblates of St. Joseph, “Joseph in the Gospel of Luke: The Structure, Genre and Purpose of Luke 1-2,” <http://www.osjoseph.org/stjoseph/scripture.php> (10 September 2012).

[9] Marie E. Isaacs, “Mary in the Lucan Infancy Narrative,” Way Supplement, 25 (Summer 1975): 83.

[10] Loretta Dronisch, A Woman Reads the Gospel of Luke (Minnesota: Collegeville, 1966), 14.

[11] Noland, Luke 1:1-9:20, 64.

[12] Dronisch,  A Woman Reads, 22.

[13] For the detailed discussion see Coleridge, The Birth, 77.

[14] Coleridge, The Birth, 77.

[15] Coleridge, The Birth, 77.

[16] Dronisch, A Woman Reads, 22.

[17] Isaacs, “Mary in the Lucan Infancy Narrative,” 95.

[18] Fitzmayer, The Gospel, 364.

[19] Fitzmayer, The Gospel, 365.

[20] Dronisch, A Woman Reads, 23.

[21] Philomena D’Souza, “Re-imagining Mary for the women of our Times,” Dhyana, 8/2 (Oct 2008): 57.