The Theological Purpose of the Parables: Matthew v. Mark
Today I am introducing the distinctive features of Matthew’s Gospel in my course on Jesus and the Gospels. When discussing Mark’s approach to parables last week (especially the reveal/conceal – insider/outsider dichotomy) I attempted to show how this works in concert with Mark’s secrecy motif. I contend that the cryptic statement about the parables concealing Jesus’ message from the masses (Mark 4:11-12) is directly related to the theme of secrecy and the clear indications that all attempts to “conceal” or ”keep secret” Jesus’ identity fail. The more he attempts to conceal his works and identity, the more his reputation spreads publicly. The “oustiders” who do not hear the message plainly taught often perceive him correctly (see the Syro-Phoenician woman as an example; 7:24-30) while the ultimate insiders–the Twelve–continually fail to understand.
While Matthew retains much of Mark’s actual content (see Matthew 13:1-23), his focus is obviously quite different. Matthew is not, it seems to me, advancing any sort of secrecy motif. Instead, he is concerned with connecting his parables to explicit teaching about the “Kingdom of Heaven.” In his commentary on Matthew, R.T. France connects this unit thematically to questions about the rejection of Jesus’ teaching on the kindgom of heaven in chs. 11-12. He writes:
If the message is good, and it is being presented by someone whom the reader has by now learned to recognize as God’s Messiah, why is it not being welcomed and acted on by all those who hear? Surely the very phrase ‘the kingdom of heaven’ predisposes the reader to expect a triumphant proclamation and response. How can God’s kingship be resisted by his own people? The parables [in Matthew 13] provide a variety of models for understanding this conundrum, by highlighting sometimes the varied nature of the hearers (vv. 3-9), sometimes the unexpected nature of the message (vv. 31-33, 44-45), and sometimes the division which is an empirical reality of human society in relation to God (vv. 24-30, 47-50) (France, The Gospel of Matthew, 499).
Chris,
I didn’t realize you were such a prolific author! How do you find the time???
We spent a delightful Friday night and Saturday with your mom and Bob. Would love to see you and your beautiful family! (I saw the picture at Linda’s.)
Love,
Aunt Connie
Chris, as I was reading this, I wondered if anyone had done anything on a possible link between the ‘messianic secret’ in Mark and the ‘secret sayings’ that are presented in Thomas? Did you see anything in your work for ‘What are they saying?’
Judy, I can’t say that I came across anything on a possible link between the two. In fact, the idea never even occurred to me until just now. Maybe there’s an article in there for you somewhere?
Hey Chris,
Thanks for the post! Given your model for reading the secrecy motif in Mark how do you account for the Gerasene Demoniac and the επιμυθια appended to the parable of the Wicked Tenants?
Hauge
Matthew,
In my reading, the Gerasene Demoniac is an “outsider” who correctly perceives who Jesus is. This would be fairly consistent with what I wrote. I’m not sure if you are referring to the fact that Jesus does not silence the man, but allows him to speak(?). Perhaps you could explain in a little more detail. As for the parable of the wicked tenants, I don’t find this problematic because the Passion week is already under way. Mark’s Jesus has pronounced the temple “fruitless” in the fig tree-temple-fig tree intercalation. The secrecy motif is no longer functioning at this point. Jesus is no longer seeking to keep his identity a secret. During the passion week, he is now open about his identity and mission (as evidenced by the temple cleansing which becomes the impetus for his death). Does that make sense?