Matthew 9:18-35

The Kingdom Means Wholeness and Life

Matthew moved to his third cluster of three healing events.  The first two incidents would insist on the centrality of faith.  The third would occasion a refusal of faith.

Matthew 9:18-26     Faith - A Girl Raised to Life, a Woman Healed    

Once again, Matthew gave a sober rendering of Mark’s colourful account.  

In Mark's original account, the ruler was identified as a leader of the synagogue.  Matthew omitted that detail.  He had encountered real trouble with leaders of synagogues.  The ruler stated that his daughter had just died. (In Mark’s account, she was still about to expire.)  Though the ruler did not address Jesus as Lord, he showed a whole new level of faith.  He believed that Jesus could raise the dead.  He obviously assumed that Jesus would have no problem laying his hand on the girl’s corpse and, thereby, incurring ritual uncleanness.

Jesus was ready to respond.  Did such a hope continue within Matthew’s community? 

In his re-telling of the story, Matthew omitted Mark’s comment that Jesus did not know who had touched him.  For Matthew, Jesus knew.  He read the situation immediately and diagnosed the woman’s need for healing.  He commended her faith, that opened the way for his healing power.

Neither Jesus nor the woman (nor apparently the ruler) was concerned that her touching him made him ritually unclean.

Matthew was not concerned about many of the beautiful points contained in Mark’s account.  His focus seemed to have been clearly on the simple fact that Jesus raised the girl to life.  (The reason would become obvious later in the narrative where Matthew used it to illustrate Jesus’ fulfilling of prophecy [11.4-6]):

Nor did Matthew see the story as relating immediately to his own time or community. (No titles were applied to Jesus; and, though Jesus commented on the woman’s faith, he made no commendation of the ruler’s faith at all.)

Matthew 9:27-31     Faith – Jesus Heals Two Blind Persons

This story came from Matthew’s own private source.  It is not contained (directly) in either Mark’s or Luke’s Gospels.  As with the previous healing, the reason for its inclusion at this stage of the narrative will be made clear later [11:4-6]. 

The fact that there were two blind persons had no particular significance beyond illustrating Matthew’s liking for twos.  Despite their physical blindness, they had the inner vision to recognise Jesus as the one who was merciful, the Son of David, the anointed one, the embodiment of the truly just king. 

This time, the blind persons referred to Jesus as Lord.  Jesus’ capacity to heal spiritual blindness was needed constantly in Matthew’s community, and in the Church across the centuries.

Matthew noted both the “hands on” approach of Jesus, and his insistence on the importance of the faith of the two blind persons, which disposed them to benefit from his power.

Though the incident was not drawn from Mark’s Gospel, Matthew’s reference to Jesus’ request for privacy, and to the unwillingness of those he cured to honour his request, echoed a refrain constantly sounded by Mark.  In Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus’ insistence on silence may have reflected Matthew’s recognition of the importance of the teaching ministry, which, in turn, required adequate formation, before being safely undertaken.  The blind persons had had no such education.

Matthew 9:32-34     Jesus Heals a Deaf-Mute Demoniac – Faith Withheld by Pharisees 

This third of Jesus’ three healing incidents was drawn, like the previous one, from Matthew’s own source.

The translation says that the person was dumb.  The word, in fact, covers both deafness and dumbness; and the person would better be referred to as a deaf-mute.  The experience of deafness would better fit Matthew’s purpose in including the story at this stage [11:4-6]. 

Matthew associated the person’s silence with possession by a demon.  Apart from the exorcism of the two Gentile demoniacs, this would be the only other reference to a specific exorcism in Matthew’s Gospel – though he made generic references to exorcisms elsewhere in his narrative.

The crowds had not witnessed Jesus’ raising the ruler’s daughter to life.  Matthew included their exuberant response in this instance to contrast the malicious assessment of some Pharisees.  Scribes had earlier accused Jesus of blasphemy [9:3]; Pharisees had criticised his mixing with tax collectors [9:11].  This was the first time that anyone claimed that Jesus’ healing power came from demons.  It would be repeated in greater detail later in the Gospel [12:22-32].  Perhaps, it reflected criticism met by Matthew’s community.

Matthew 9:35     Summarising Jesus' Ministry

Matthew briefly reviewed Jesus’ ministry, indicated the scope of the mission, and recognised Jesus’ inability to have personal contact with all those who needed healing.

For Matthew, teaching was Jesus’ prime ministry.  His healing activity served to confirm and illustrate his message of the advent of the Kingdom.  He still taught in synagogues; but Matthew indicated the subsequent distancing between mainstream Judaism and the Christian community by referring to the synagogues as their synagogues.

Next >> Matthew 9:36-38