The Magnificat of Luke 1.47-55 is often read and heard during the season of Advent: in the Revised Common Lectionary, Mary’s song of praise is used on the Third Sunday of Advent in Year A and on the Fourth Sunday of Advent in Years B and C. Even with its significant association with the Advent season, when we look closely at what Luke has written, we encounter some underlying threads that invite attentive readings of this text in any season of the liturgical calendar. The opening verses of the Gospel of Luke introduce readers to an author who “after investigating everything carefully from the very first” decided to write out an account of it all (Luke 1.3, NRSV). Luke had done his homework, which is evident when we consider the scope of people, places, and circumstances recounted in the opening chapters of this gospel.
This is true too of the words of the Magnificat. Luke was not present to record the words of this song as Mary sang them, nor do we have any evidence of Luke getting the words of this song verbatim through a primary source or witness. Stephanie Buckhanon Crowder writes that
“Luke did not compose this song [the Magnificat]. It is a hymn of the ‘anawim, the ‘poor’ of the Lord, fashioned for God’s use. The ‘poor of the Lord’ was a designation for children, widows, foreigners, and others who were economically and socially impoverished. According to the hymn, the Lord uplifts the poor and lowly and brings down the rich and mighty.”(1)
David H. Stern invites us as readers to see that “Many lines are quoted exactly or approximately” from the Hebrew Bible before providing a verse-by-verse quotational or referential analysis of the text to show how each line is rooted in the Hebrew Bible.(2)
Let’s skip ahead a bit to Jesus’s first public proclamation in Luke 4.18-21. Jesus is here reading from the prophet Isaiah. It is significant that between Mary’s Magnificat and Jesus’s reading and teaching in the synagogue, each time Jesus has spoken has been a quotation of or reference to the Hebrew Bible: as an adolescent, Jesus responds to his mother by calling upon the ideas of Psalm 27.4-5 (Luke 2.49). In response to the devil during a period of temptation, Jesus responds each time by quoting from Deuteronomy (Luke 4.1-12). Luke alone of the gospel writers offers to us statements that Jesus grew in wisdom and stature (Luke 2.40, 52). Likewise, Luke alone of the canonical gospels offers readers some personal insight to Mary, who treasured and meditated on what was happening to her and her child (Luke 2.19, 51).
Something struck me recently as I was considering these scriptures. Who taught Jesus the Hebrew Bible? He certainly would have been exposed to it through the synagogue, and the liturgies of his people used in worship. Yet his primary instructors would have been his parents. In the middle of the Sh’ma (Deuteronomy 6.4-9), we read that adults are to “Recite them [the instructions of Deuteronomy 6.5 and the commandments] to your children and talk about them when you are at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you rise.” Jesus’s use of Scripture in response to temptation indicates a personal love for the word of God (c.f. Psalm 119.97-112), but this would have been learned by watching the faithful, disciplined examples of his parents and his culture even as they relied upon the scriptures written and preserved by the generations which preceded them.
Beyond learning spiritual disciplines from his parents and culture, Jesus would have learned the spirit of their doctrine as well. Let’s consider again Mary’s Magnificat in comparison with Jesus’s reading of the prophet Isaiah: both texts emphasize liberation. Jane Schaberg writes that
“Key themes for the Gospel that follows are introduced here, especially the proclamation of good news to the poor… Mary’s song is precious to women and other oppressed people for its vision of their concrete freedom from systemic injustice–from oppression by political rulers on their ‘thrones’ and by the arrogant and rich. In the transformed social order that is celebrated, food is provided for the hungry. The spiritual realm is understood as embedded in socioeconomic and political reality. Focus is on the might, holiness, and mercy of God…”(3)
The fact that this theme is voiced by two speakers (mother and son) in separate historical circumstances some 30 years apart only heightens the Luke-Acts presentation of Jesus as the one who liberates the oppressed. Between these two texts, Luke’s aforementioned presentations of both Mary’s contemplations and Jesus’s growth subtly emphasizes a familial, multigenerational, relational process of learning. Is it possible that Jesus learned about liberation – both theoretical and practical, gaining an appreciation for its nuances in his socio-historical context and developing his passion to work toward it – not just from his divinity but from his parents?
Assuming the truths of this, what are the lessons of this gospel for us today? What we believe and how we live it out will shape and influence the beliefs and practices of those who follow after us. Neither our theology nor the ways in which we live it out are formed in a vacuum: they are shaped by those with whom we have personal contact and by those throughout the ages with whom we have spiritual and intellectual contact. If we understand that God calls us to participate with Godself in an ongoing ministry of reconciliation in which God is making all things new (2 Corinthians 5.17-19), we not only commit ourselves to experiencing the liberation and fullness of life to which God invites all of creation but we also commit to sharing it with others and equipping the next generation to have an even fuller experience of these than we ourselves do today. We sow seeds – striving purposefully for reconciliation, liberation, and full inclusion today – that we may work for the harvest and see it increase manifold through those who will take up the mantle next. We rejoice when we see them continuing the work of liberation, expressing God’s hope for the world in new ways as they more deeply understand and expand further the theology and ministry which we passed onto them.
I wonder if this might have been what caused Mary to treasure these things in her heart. Mary – who was poor, who hoped for justice, who clung to the Hebrew Bible and the traditions of her people but who also saw that God was doing something bigger than she or her community hoped for – saw Jesus taking the next step, elevating everyone’s understanding of who God is and who God is inviting us to become. And I wonder, in light of this, what things are we treasuring in our own hearts. How are we passing on the theology and traditions which have come down to us and encouraging an expansive view of God that makes equal room for all God’s children as we work toward and hold out hope for even brighter days ahead?
—–––––––––––––––––
(1)Stephanie Buckhanon Crowder, “Luke,” in True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary, edited by Brian K. Blount (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), 161.
(2)David H. Stern, “Luke 1.46-55,” in Jewish New Testament Commentary (Clarksville, MD: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1992),105.
(3)Jane Schaberg, “Luke,” in Women’s Bible Commentary, expanded edition, edited by Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), 373.
