INFANCY OF JESUS. - I. THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY OF JESUS
The first two chapters of Matthew and Luke constitute the canonical Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus, to be contrasted with the apocryphal works of the same name (v.).
The authenticity and especially the historicity of these chapters are disputed by various rationalistic currents, particularly because of the miracles contained in them.
The authenticity, however, is not in doubt, since the chapters are found in all Greek manuscripts and all versions. Only Marcion, for his heretical purposes, excised them from the single Gospel (Luke) that he accepted. Even non-Catholic critics note Matthean stylistic traits in Mt. 1-2 (J. C. Hawkins, F. C. Burkitt) and Lucan stylistic traits in Lc. 1-2 (A. Harnack; cf. L. Fonck [V. BIBLICA.], p. 294).
The genuine origin of the Gospel of the Infancy is confirmed by the fact that even in these two chapters the Evangelists have in view the purposes of their respective Gospels. Matthew, who wishes to prove through prophecies the messianic character of Jesus, demonstrates in chapter 1 that he descends from Abraham and David and that he was born of a virgin, as Isaiah foretold (7:14). In chapter 2, through the account of the Magi, he proves that the birth in Bethlehem had been prophesied by Micah (5:2), that the flight into Egypt conforms to Hosea (11:1), that the slaughter of the innocents is foretold by Jeremiah (31:15), and that the settling in Nazareth was foreshadowed by the prophets.
Luke, who in the prologue declares that he has drawn his information from those who “have seen from the beginning” (from the Virgin? cf. 2:19, 51) and who wishes to write “in order,” goes back to the origins, recounting in chapter 1 the Annunciation to Zechariah and to the Virgin, her visit to Elizabeth, Magnificat (v.) Benedictus (v.). Following his method of elimination (cf. 3:20), he anticipates the rest of the story of the Baptist (1:80), returning in chapter 2 to narrate the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, the circumcision, the Presentation in the Temple, and the return to Nazareth. He concludes with the episode of the twelve-year-old Jesus in the Temple.
The historicity of these events is confirmed by the agreement of Matthew and Luke on essential points: the conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit in a virgin named Mary, the wife of Joseph, a descendant of David; the birth in Bethlehem at the time of Herod. Even St. Paul (Rom. 1:2-3) knows that Jesus is a descendant of David according to his human nature (flesh) and the Son of God according to his divine nature (spirit of sanctification), and that the Son of God “was born of a woman” (Gal. 4:4).
The episodes narrated by Matthew and Luke can easily be reconciled if we admit that the anxiety of St. Joseph (Mt. 2:18-25) took place after the Virgin’s return from the house of Elizabeth (Lk. 1:50) and that the return to Nazareth after the Presentation in the Temple, of which Lk. 2:39 speaks, may have been either a provisional return of the Holy Family to collect their belongings in order to settle in Bethlehem (where they are found by the Magi), or the definitive return, which coincides with the return from Egypt to Nazareth, of which Mt. 2:23 speaks.
The presence of miracles in these accounts does not pose a difficulty for those who admit that God can perform them for higher purposes. The comparison with the apocryphal works argues in favor of the sober historicity of Matthew and Luke.
This historicity is also confirmed by its agreement with the historical, political, and religious circumstances of Palestine at the time of Herod. The words of the angel Gabriel, of Zechariah, and of Simeon reflect pre-Christian Jewish customs. The canticles Magnificat, Benedictus, and Nunc dimittis, which are martial in rhythm, correspond to the norms of biblical Hebrew poetry. The silence of Mark, John, Paul, and Peter regarding the details of the mysteries of the hidden life (which illustrate the twofold nature of Christ, also accepted by them) is explained by considering the purposes of their writings, which aimed to establish proofs based on public facts (v. GESÙ CRISTO; LUCA; MATTEO).
Pietro De Ambroggi
II. APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS OF THE INFANCY OF JESUS
A special group of apocryphal Gospels (v.) deals with the Infancy of Jesus and the earlier life of the Virgin Mary and Joseph. Generally they are not heretical in character, but intend to fill the gaps in the canonical Gospels and to satisfy, with fanciful narratives that sometimes grew up around authentic traditions, the credulous curiosity of the faithful.
Because of their popular character, which sometimes becomes legendary, they enjoyed favor among the people, first in the East from the 2nd century, then in the West, where they were more cautiously received. Despite the designation “apocryphal” attributed to them by Innocent I in 405 (Denz.-U., 96), they left traces thirty years later in Rome in the mosaics of St. Mary Major, commissioned by Sixtus III. Gregory of Tours (d. 594) and the Pseudo-Chrysostom (c. 600) quote from them. Their influence on medieval art is illustrated by D. Rops, I Vangeli della Vergine (Italian ed. edited by P. De Ambroggi, Torino 1949).
Pietro De Ambroggi