“Hidden Life” Tales
The purpose of “hidden life” stories – not only of Jesus, but of other great men in history – is to illustrate how the seeds of the adult’s success are to be found in the child. A familiar example to Americans is the story of George Washington, originated by Parson Weems, in which the young George admits to his father that he cut down the cherry tree:“I cannot tell a lie.” The tales of Jesus’ hidden life illustrate how, even as a child, he came to reveal his true nature in his own words and actions, unlike in the infancy narratives where the revelation had to happen through an intermediary.
The best-known of the hidden life stories of Jesus is the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. It recounts anecdotes of the boy Jesus from age 5 to age 12. The anecdotes of the very young Jesus portray him as a brat using his powers in a punitive fashion to blind or maim those that annoy him, but as he ages he begins healing and raising people from the dead. He also performs miracles that help his own family such as stretching a beam of wood to fit a bed Joseph was building. Interwoven through these miracles are attempts by various teachers to instruct the young Jesus, resulting in Jesus doing the teaching. The last anecdote in the apocryphal gospel is based on Luke’s account of finding of Jesus in the Temple (Lk 2:41-52).
“You are
going to be so grounded when we get home.”
Jesus Found in the Temple by James Tissot (1836-1902)
|
Some scholars believe that the miracle of turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11) is another example of a hidden life story that found its way into a canonical gospel. This is the only miracle story in the NT that involves the mother of Jesus. In a hypothetical “hidden life” anecdote, Mary would have asked Jesus to supply wine and he would have given instructions on what to do, just as he instructed Joseph on how to address the problem of the short beam in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. If such is the case, John thoroughly rewrote the material to change the hidden life “gift miracle” anecdote into a “sign” of Jesus’ glory (“sign” and “work” being John’s preferred designations instead of “miracle”).
Luke’s Gospel version 2.0
Many biblical scholars believe that Luke originally intended to end his infancy narrative with the return of the Holy Family to Nazareth after fulfilling their duties in the Temple (Lk 2:39-40). Luke employs the literary device of an inclusio by beginning the infancy narrative in the Temple and ending it in the Temple. Similarly with his characters, Luke began with the elderly couple of Zechariah and Elizabeth and brought it full circle with the elderly couple of Simeon and Anna. He parallels the announcement, birth and prophecy of the future career of John the Baptist with the announcement, birth and prophecy of the future career of Jesus. Vv. 39-40 wrap up the infancy narrative and prepare the reader for the adult Jesus presenting himself to John for baptism.
That nice symmetry is broken with the insertion of the story of finding the boy Jesus in the Temple. This passage also introduces some inconsistencies with what went before (more on that later). It does not assume the reader is familiar with anything that happened previously in Luke’s gospel, and in fact is more intelligible if one reads it as an independent story. Yet, it has Lucan language throughout, so if the story was part of the tradition that Luke received, he reworked the material to fit it into his gospel, reprising the transitional verses about Mary keeping the events in her heart (compare Lk 2:51c with 2:19) and Jesus growing in wisdom (compare Lk 2:52 with 2:40).
In My Father’s House
The story itself is straightforward. Being an observant Jewish family, Mary and Joseph traveled to Jerusalem every year to celebrate Passover. When Jesus was twelve, unbeknownst to his parents he stayed behind in Jerusalem. Thinking he was with relatives or friends, they went a day’s journey from Jerusalem before realizing he was not with the traveling party. Returning to Jerusalem, they found him three days later (presumably, one day out, one day back, one day searching) in the Temple precincts, sitting with the “teachers” – not “scribes” or “lawyers” – listening and asking questions.
Luke says simply, “And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers” (2:47 NRSV). The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, however, gilds the lily somewhat in its version: “And those listening to him were amazed how he questioned the elders and explained the main points of the law and the riddles and the parables of the prophets.” In the apocryphal gospel, Jesus can’t simply listen and ask questions, he has to explicate the law and prophets.
Now comes the climax of the story. Mary chides Jesus for causing them worry and Jesus responds that it is only natural he should be in his Father’s house. Luke says that his parents did not understand what he said to them (2:50). Given that earlier in the gospel Gabriel explicitly tells Mary that Jesus “will be called Son of God” (1:35), why would his parents not understand when he says he says the Temple is his Father’s house? It doesn’t make sense in the context of Luke’s gospel where we have already been told the messianic secret, but does make sense if this was once an independent story meant to introduce the gospel message that Jesus is the son of God.
Having introduced this self-revelation on Jesus’ part, Luke now has a problem. It was well-established in the gospels that no one knew Jesus’ true identity during his ministry. Even his disciples did not really understand it until after his resurrection. But if Jesus knew who he was even as a boy, why did no one know who he was as an adult? Luke’s solution is to make this a one-off event and send him back to Nazareth with his parents where he would be obedient to them (2:51). He’s the mild-mannered Clark Kent growing up in Smallville, hiding from the world the secret that he is really Superman.
No comments:
Post a Comment