Juraj Feník - Róbert Lapko, «Annunciations to Mary in Luke 1–2», Vol. 96 (2015) 498-524
In addition to the scene conventionally known as "the Annunciation" (Luke 1,26-38), three other texts in the infancy narrative qualify to be classed as such. This article proposes an understanding of 2,8-20; 2,22- 35; 2,41-52 as annunciation pericopes by highlighting the fact that other characters, namely, the shepherds, Simeon, and Jesus function as messengers communicating to Mary further information about her son. It identifies the messenger, the act of speaking, the message, and the reference to Jesus' mother in each of the four scenes. Luke's infancy narrative, so the argument runs, contains four annunciation scenes in which a progressive revelation about Jesus addressed to his mother takes place.
02_Feník Lapko_498-524_498-524 10/12/15 10:15 Pagina 516
516 JURAJ FENÍK – RÓBERT LAPKO 516
Jesus. Taken this way, this part of the announcement seems conso-
nant with its continuation expressed in the second eivj clause that
speaks of a verbal opposition to Jesus: eivj shmei/on avntilego,menon.
Simeon identifies Jesus as a sign that will be spoken against. The
syntactical partnership of the two eivj clauses allows the assumption
of a rough thematic overlap between them: those who will contra-
dict Jesus may be sensed to be included among those who fall. In
describing Jesus as shmei/on avntilego,menon, Simeon foretells the
acts of verbal opposition to Jesus and thus rejection. The divine
passive kei/tai is taken to indicate the divinely appointed necessity
of the fall and the rise, and of the verbal opposition mentioned sub-
sequently. In identifying Jesus as one destined to cause not only the
rise but also the fall of many in Israel, coupled as they are with the
statement on contradiction, Simeon’s words represent a drastic de-
parture from the previous annunciations. Neither the angel in 1,26-38
nor the shepherds in 2,15-20 indicated any sign of complication, let
alone rejection or contravention, while announcing about the child.
With the arrival of Simeon, to use Fitzmyer’s words, “[t]he rejection
of Jesus by his own people is already announced in the infancy nar-
rative; and the chord now struck will be orchestrated in many ways
in the Gospel proper [...]” 34.
In addition to announcing to Mary the facts hitherto unknown
about her son, Simeon turns the spotlight on her also, as the words
kai. sou/ de. auvth/j th.n yuch.n dieleu,setai r`omfai,a most emphatically
convey. The statement concerning Jesus’ mother in 2,35a (beginning
with kai. sou/ de,) brings Mary’s future into direct linkage with the
sentence delineating Jesus’ destiny in 2,34 (opened with ou-toj) 35.
The Gospel of Luke (SP 3; Collegeville, MN 1991) 55-57; H. KLEIN, Das Lu-
kasevangelium (KEK; Göttingen: 2006) 148-149; P. MAREČEK, “Simeonova
slova v Lk 2,35a”, Studia Theologica 4 (2013) 1-13, here 8-9; R. MEYNET, Il
Vangelo secondo Luca. Analisi retorica (Roma 1994) 109; NOLLAND, Luke,
121; A. PLUMMER, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel ac-
cording to S. Luke (ICC; Edinburgh 51922) 70; ROSSÉ, Il Vangelo di Luca,
101; G. SANTI, Luca (Roma 1999) 107; J. SCHMID, Das Evangelium nach
Lukas (RNT 3; Regensburg 1955) 77-78; SCHÜRMANN, Das Lukasevangelium,
127-128; M. WOLTER, Das Lukasevangelium (HNT 5; Tübingen 2008) 142.
34
FITZMYER, Luke, 422-423.
35
J. WINANDY, “La prophétie de Syméon (Lc, II, 34-35)”, RB 72 (1965),
321-351, here 325, affirms: “[…] le cas de Marie est assimilé à celui de son
Fils […]”.
FOLLOW US