In his article ‘A Conflict Between Brothers: Observations on the Hypokritai in Matthew’, Jürgen Zangenberg investigates Matthew’s use of the Greek term hypokritès. What does the term mean? At what group does it aim? What does that say about the struggles of the Matthean community? [1]
Until the present day a Pharisee is, according to common usage, someone who is a sanctimonious, self-righteous or hypocritical person. But what has this proverbial usage of the word Pharisee to do with the Jewish sect with that name around the beginning of the Common Era? Between the historical Pharisees and the modern connotations of their name stands the Christian perception of the Pharisees. For ages, many Christians have eagerly used or misused their authoritative and holy texts, especially the New Testament, to bolster anti-Judaism. Holy texts are supposed to contain eternal truths, answers on all questions. So, if Jesus in the New Testament vituperates the Pharisees, one could read it as the Lord’s condemnation of the Pharisees, and in them, of all the Jews.
However, after the Enlightenment and the development of Biblical Studies in the 19th century a lot has changed. Holy texts aren’t taken any more at face value as true, but our understanding is set under criticism and our eyes are open to the gap between ‘then’ and ‘now’. In this context, which is the context of the present day, it is no longer possible to transfer a supposed condemnation of the Pharisees and the Jews in texts from the 1st century to Jews in our time. Moreover, one has to question our understanding of the relevant texts, for instance Mt. 23. What does the text actually say?
In his article ‘A Conflict Between Brothers: Observations on the Hypokritai in Matthew’, Jürgen Zangenberg investigates Matthew’s use of the term hypokritès against the background of twenty years of research on the identity and context of Matthew’s communities. Zangenberg uses, generally speaking, two complementary approaches. First the Matthew community is analysed with the help of sociological observations. The second approach is exegetical and tries to understand Matthew’s use of the term hypokritès in its literary context, but also in the historical context of the community of Matthew and its struggles.
Hypokritaí are according to semantic investigations not simply ‘actors’ or ‘pretenders’, but ‘evil persons’. In the context of Matthew hypokritaí might be rendered as “stubborn adversaries” or “false teachers”. These adversaries of the Matthean community are not far away, but are their former brothers and sisters. In a situation of group conflict and group formation people react with many emotions that express themselves in often violent and exaggerated language. In the case of Matthew, this means not that his community has separated from Judaism. The term hypokritaí functions in the competition between “fraternal twins” who all seek self-legitimation and self-definition after the catastrophal events of 70 CE, when the Jewish temple was destroyed by the Romans. Matthew and his community struggle to maintain that they have the right interpretation of the Jewish law and they want to live by it every day.
Another aspect of the situation of the gospel of Matthew is that it deals with liminality. If the group wants to survive, the new group cannot afford to keep internal conflicts going on for very long and has to shape a new identity. So there is pressure on insecure insiders to do away their hesitations. But the liminal process of Matthew’s community is already so far that a clearer identity has been developed. The term hypokritaí plays an important role in dealing practically with separation and reconstruction, creating an ingroup and a stubborn outgroup.
The term hypokritaí is a favourite word of Matthew. Zangenberg substantiates the sociological observations of the community of Matthew with a detailed exegetical analysis of the relevant passages. Matthew 23, where the Pharisees and scribes repeatedly are addressed as hypokritaí, has to be seen in the context of an on-going conflict where elements of continuity exist side by side with those of direct confrontation, active competition and fundamental conflict. Against the background of the shared Bible and common religious concerns, a fundamental conflict is being fought about the foundations of the true People of God. Matthew does not expect a reconciliation between his group and the opponents, but postpones it to the final judgement.
So, the term hypokritès, with which Matthew can address his adversaries as false teachers, gives Matthew a welcome tool to cope with the complicated situation of a community caught between asserting a new identity and retaining elements of the old, in competition and conflict with the former parent group. The often violent language demonstrates that we are dealing with a conflict among brothers who battle for control over their once common ground of Jewish-biblical traditions and lifestyle. In the situation of Matthew, the brothers are definitively torn apart and are losing their mutual respect and contact.
So, the anti-Jewish rhetoric in Matthew has to be interpreted in the light of the problems of his own community and his concerns for an independent and exclusive place within Judaism. Matthew’s language only makes sense if we recognize how deeply contextual it is. And we can only recognize that, if sound exegetical work has been done on these texts and the results are in one way or another communicated to church and society.
Note
[1] This post was originally a ‘response’ in a session about presenting scholarly work to students not familiar with the field in order to discuss about scientific method. The full reference of the article is:
Jürgen Zangenberg, ‘A Conflict Between Brothers. Observations on the Hypokritai in Matthew’, in: Zuleika Rodgers, Margaret Daly-Denton & Anne Fitzpatrick-McKinley (eds.), A Wandering Galilean. Essays in Honour of Seán Freyne (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 132; Leiden [etc.]: Brill, 2009), pp. 561-587.
