When the lectionary gives you Matthew
Matthew is not my favorite Gospel. But where would we be without it?
For those who follow the Revised Common Lectionary, this is the year of Matthew's Gospel. It was the first Gospel I studied as a student preacher, when I was on pastoral internship. For the first time I paid attention all year, every single week. I noticed the words and the themes and the images that recurred in Matthew's Gospel: how often there were mountains, how much time Jesus spent teaching, what caused friction with the religious leaders.
Even so, I have to admit, Matthew is not my favorite Gospel. Is it even right to say we have favorites? Mark is the short and breathless gospel. Jesus is a man of action. He is always going somewhere, doing something, healing people, casting our demons. When I think of Mark, I think of the word "immediately." I also think of the words "Son of Man" and "Son of God." I think of Mark's abrupt beginning, without a story of Jesus' birth, and his abrupt ending, with a resurrection announcement but no appearance. Sometimes I think that Mark is my favorite Gospel.
Luke is the gospel of the poor, and women, and children. Luke includes people that other Gospel writers leave out. Luke remembers the prodigal son, the lost sheep, the poor man Lazarus, the widow of Nain. Instead of a sermon on the mount, Jesus preaches on the plain. Luke tells us of Mary and Elizabeth, and Mary sings about a God who lifts up the poor and brings down the mighty. Sometimes I think that Luke is my favorite Gospel.
