| |
|
|
|
RETURN TO HOME PAGE |
| |
ELIZABETH
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
THE STORY OF ELIZABETH
Elizabeth is Eli-sheba. It means
either ‘God’s promise’, or ‘my God is bountiful/generous’.
Mary means ‘wise woman’ or ‘lady’. It is a Greek
form of the Hebrew Miriam or Mariamme, and was the most popular
woman's name at the time of Jesus.
John means ‘God has been gracious’.
Zechariah means 'God has remembered'.
What the story is about:
Elizabeth, kinswoman of Mary of Nazareth, had given up hoping for a child.
She was past menopause, and her husband was elderly. Yet she conceived, and
became the mother of the man called John the Baptist. Events in her life echo
several similar stories in the Old Testament, where God's power is shown through
a woman. The evangelist Luke also used Elizabeth's story to mirror events
surrounding the birth of Jesus - both have an Annunciation by the angel Gabriel
and songs that praise God.
The story of Elizabeth
contains three episodes:
1 Elizabeth becomes pregnant, Luke 1:5-25.
Elizabeth and her husband Zechariah are introduced as a childless couple who are
advanced in age and have given up any expectation of having a child. But
contrary to expectation, Zechariah has a vision and is struck dumb, and
Elizabeth becomes pregnant.
2
Mary visits her kinswoman Elizabeth, Luke 1:57-66.
Now expecting her first child, Elizabeth is visited by her young kinswoman Mary
of Nazareth, who is also pregnant. At their meeting, each recognizes that they
and their children will be an extraordinary part of God's plan for
humanity
3 Elizabeth gives birth to
John, Luke 1:67-80.
Elizabeth's son John is born, circumcised, and named. Zechariah regains his
speech and hearing.
|
|
|
ON THIS PAGE:
What the story
is about:
Elizabeth
becomes pregnant
Mary visits her
kinswoman Elizabeth
Elizabeth gives
birth to John
Summary
Historical
Background to the story
Attitudes to
Women at that time
Activities and
Focus Questions |
| |
ELIZABETH BECOMES PREGNANT
Luke
1:5-25
First, Luke
outlined Elizabeth’s family background. She was descended from a long line of priests – Luke
established this fact right at
the beginning of his gospel, because he wanted to counter the slanders that were
being bandied around about Jesus’ legitimacy. Luke wanted to say, loud and
clear, that John and Jesus both came from a respectable, well-connected family,
so he began by pointing out that not just one but both John’s parents came
from a priestly family, and that Elizabeth’s father was a priest – this is
what is meant by ‘daughter of Aaron’. Her husband Zechariah was a member of
the priestly order of Abijah.
Despite
her impeccable family background, Elizabeth was barren. Normally, childlessness
was not just a misfortune, it was a disgrace (see Genesis 16:4, 11; 29:32;
30:1, 1 Samuel 1:5-6, 11, 2:5, 7-8). But in Elizabeth’s case this could
hardly
be so, since her reputation showed she was blameless. Instead,
there had to be some other reason. Perhaps, like Sarah (Genesis 18:11) and
Hannah (1 Samuel 1-2) she remained barren because God had a greater
plan for her. Her barren state would heighten the sense that her impending
pregnancy was a miracle.
Having
established the credentials of the elderly couple, Luke now set the scene
for the first dramatic event. Zechariah’s priestly section was taking its turn to offer
sacrifice at the Temple in Jerusalem - though the Jewish people were under
Roman occupation, they enjoyed a high degree of religious
freedom. Temple worship was sanctioned, as long as it did not hide or
encourage sedition. Zechariah had been chosen by lot to enter the
sanctuary of the Temple and offer incense as part of the daily worship at
the Temple – only the single priest who had been chosen by random lot,
and therefore by God’s hand, could enter the sanctuary. It was a pivotal
moment for him, since the large number of priests, about 8,000 at that
time, meant that any one priest could only expect to offer sacrifice once
or twice in his lifetime. Now it was Zechariah’s moment.
|
|
|
|
| |
A
model of Herod's Temple. Zechariah offered sacrifice inside the doors of
the main building, though not of course in the inner room called the Holy
of Holies

|
|
|
|
| |
At
about 3pm on this particular day he stepped forward into the sanctuary to
offer incense. The people waited outside, as did the other priests. At
that moment, an angel appeared at the right side of the altar in front of
Zechariah – in a throne room, a favored courtier or family member took
the position at the right side of the throne, and this was where the angel
now stood.
An
angel? What exactly did that mean? Biblical writers gave no specific
meaning, but they used this word to
show that a human being had received a message from God. What they meant by the word ‘angel’ is an open question. In our skeptical,
must-have-proof world we would probably say the same thing in a
different way: that a deep conviction of purpose settled on the person
involved, guiding them towards a particular course of action.
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
| |
Henry Tanner, The Annunciation.
The artist envisages an angel as
concentrated light and energy
|
|
|
|
| |
The
angel spoke. It reassured the terrified Zechariah, telling him not to be
afraid.
Then
it gave him momentous news: his wife Elizabeth would conceive and
have a son. Since the hand of God is clearly evident in what is happening,
the listener/reader knows that this will be no ordinary child. The angel
was specific. The child would have four characteristics:
he would be great in the sight of God
he would drink no wine and thus live the ascetic life of a Nazarene, setting
him apart from ordinary people
he would be filled with the Spirit from his conception
he would prepare for the Messiah and thus be a catalyst between Israel and
God.
Despite the extraordinary
circumstances, Zechariah quibbled. He expressed doubts that this could
happen. He discreetly implied that he was no longer capable of sexual
intercourse, and that his wife had ceased menstruating. There was genuine
confusion on his part here, but there was also the sense that he was
objecting, as he asked for a sign – just as Abraham did (Genesis 15:8),
and Gideon (Judges 6:36-40) and Hezekiah (2 Kings 20:8-11).
The angel responded by naming
itself – ‘I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God’ – only the
highest officials in an oriental royal court could stand in the presence
of their king. Protocol demanded that most people bow low, or prostrate
themselves, so Gabriel was letting Zechariah he had committed an offense in
not believing what the angel said.
As
punishment for his lèse-majesté Zechariah was reduced to silence, probably
becoming both deaf and mute. In one way it was a reassuring miracle, but in
another it was quite obviously a punishment, one that would last until the
birth of the child set him free.
When
Zechariah came out of the Temple he was unable to speak. Clearly something
momentous had happened. The priests and people interpreted his silence as
proof that he had had some profound religious experience, possibly a
vision, but Zechariah could tell them of his experience. Frustrated by
his inability to speak, he tried to explain by signing. This had limited
success. He finished out his allotted time of office, then headed for home.
Zechariah
had doubted but Elizabeth had not, and so now she, not her unfortunate
husband, moved into the spotlight, favored above her husband. Home at
last, Zechariah found comfort in the arms of Elizabeth. One thing led to
another, and she became pregnant – to her surprise and the amazement of
her family and friends.
When
she realized she was pregnant, she went into seclusion. This meant she did
not leave her house for any reason, nor receive any visitors. She
stayed like this, leading a calm and quiet life, until her pregnancy
became
physically obvious to all who saw her.
|
|
|
|
| |
Jacopo Pontormo, The
Visitation
|
|
|
|
| |

|
|
|
|
| |
MARY VISITS HER KINSWOMAN ELIZABETH
Luke
1:57-66
Meanwhile, in Galilee to the north, Elizabeth's young kinswoman, Mary of
Nazareth, had become pregnant. The anguish this unexplained pregnancy
caused and the effect it had on her family is underplayed in the gospels,
not really mentioned at all, but it must have had a terrifying effect on
this conservative rural community.
Mary
had been betrothed to Joseph with a formal witnessed agreement, legally
binding, between the families of the young people, and a bride price paid
to Mary’s family. It was expected that the formal marriage would take
place about a year later, when Mary would be taken home to Joseph's family
to live. Since later on in the story Mary returned to her home,
not Joseph’s, we can assume that Mary and Joseph were not married at
this particular time.
|
|
|
|
| |
Robert Annin Bell,
Mary and Elizabeth
|
|
|
|
| |
Accustomed
as we are to benign images of the Annunciation, and of Mary and Joseph
with the baby Jesus, we tend to blot out the reality of the situation: a
young girl was pregnant, her fiancé knew he was not the father, yet the
bride price had been paid. In a Middle Eastern rural community at the
time, this sort of situation could easily result in an honor killing of
the young girl by her fiancé's family. What few commentators seem to
realize is that Mary's visit to Elizabeth, about a hundred miles away in
Judea, may have been a desperate attempt by her family to save her from
this fate, to get her out of the way until some solution had been worked
out.
Leaving
Galilee and traveling south, Mary duly arrived at Elizabeth's house in
Judea after a journey of about three or four days. At first glance, this
might seem like a commonplace event as two kinswomen, both pregnant, meet
each other. But Luke was making oblique references to Old Testament
precedents, alerting the reader to a deeper meaning in Elizabeth's story:
read
1 Samuel 1:1-2, Judges 13:2, about a couple like Elizabeth and Zechariah,
unable to have children, and Genesis 18:11 which describes an elderly
couple who thought they would never have a child.
|
|
|
|
| |
The
two pregnant women met, and at that moment Elizabeth's unborn baby
responded by suddenly moving and kicking in her womb. Twenty-eight
weeks, the end of a woman's second trimester, is the normal time to
expect an unborn baby to kick in the womb, and this may well have been the
first time Elizabeth's unborn baby moved - an exciting moment for any
mother. She took this sudden movement, at this particular meeting, as a
sign.
In
a moment of penetrating spiritual clarity, Elizabeth
recognized she was being visited by the mother
of the expected Messiah. She pronounced a blessing on the younger woman:
'Blessed
are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And why has
this happened to me, that the mother of my Lord comes to me? For as soon
as I heard the sound of your greeting, the child in my womb leaped for
joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of
what was spoken to her by the Lord.' |
|
|
|
| |
Mary
responded with the words of the song called the Magnificat. Scholars now
guardedly say this was a hymn sung by the early Christians in their
liturgies, implying that it may have had a composition date later than the
moment of meeting between the two mothers. They also imply that an
illiterate peasant girl from Galilee would not have had the ability to
compose such a hymn.
But
there is no reason to think that Mary could not have been capable of
composing it herself. The Magnificat is closely based on the Song of
Hannah in 2 Samuel 2:1-10, and Mary knew this Song well. She certainly
would have learned it by heart, since women at the time had a rich oral
tradition, all of it memorized, and she would have seen the Song of Hannah
as appropriate, since Elizabeth's pregnancy so late in life mirrored the
pregnancy of Hannah. Adapting passages from the Jewish Scriptures to suit
current situations was a familiar part of the oral tradition, and Mary and
her female relatives would have been familiar with the technique. True,
there is some evidence it was adapted along the way before Luke translated
it into Greek, but Mary is certainly the source of this glorious song.
It
is not clear from the text whether Elizabeth had the help of her young
kinswoman when she gave birth to her baby. Commonsense and the lapse of
time would suggest she did. Elizabeth would certainly have been surrounded
by loving, concerned relatives and friends, especially since her advanced
age must have made it a difficult birth. (See the link to Childbearing, Major
Events for information on birth practices at this time.)
|
|
|
|
| |
Domenico Ghirlandaio,
The Visitation
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
ELIZABETH
GIVES BIRTH TO JOHN
Luke
1:67-80
Elizabeth had a son, and all her friends and relatives were
overjoyed for her. She seems to have recovered well from the birth itself,
because eight days afterwards she was up and around, ready to attend the
circumcision of her son.
A
baby was usually named on the day of his circumcision, and a common
practice at this time was to name a first son after his grandfather. In
this case however, Elizabeth's extended family seemed to have decided that
the baby would be called Zechariah, after his stricken father. But
Elizabeth stepped forward and briskly contradicted them. Her son's name
was to be 'John', she said. Everyone disagreed with her, pointing out that
there was no family precedent for the name 'John', but Elizabeth stood her
ground. She insisted so fiercely that, exasperated, the family members
turned to Zechariah for support. Since he could not speak, he asked for a
writing tablet - a small wooden tile with a wax surface. With a stylus he
scratched a single sentence: 'His name is John'.
Immediately,
to the amazement of the onlookers, he regained the use of his speech and
hearing. A skeptic no more, his first words were in praise of God. The
sound of his voice silenced even the most talkative of his neighbors. They
were awed and not a little frightened by what they were witnessing. Like
neighbors everywhere, they could not wait to pass on the story of what had
happened, and discuss its meaning. The son of Elizabeth and Zechariah must
certainly be destined for greatness - 'the hand of God was with him', and
he would be different and unique. Now the name 'John' seemed appropriate,
since without any family precedent, it gave him an identity of his own
that had nothing to do with the past.
Their
assumption was cemented by the words Zechariah now spoke. This little
child would one day be a prophet of the Most High, he said, preparing the
way for the Messiah.
This
scene is the last we see of Elizabeth. By the standards of the time, she
was already elderly, and she may not have lived to see her son grow to
manhood. It has often been suggested that John, described as living in the
wilderness (Luke 1:80), may have been a member of the Essenes at Qumran.
This group was known to adopt young children and look after them, hoping
they would become permanent members of their community. If Elizabeth and
Zechariah were both dead the Essenes may have done just this for John. If
so they were disappointed, since John broke away to forge his ministry in
the desert, preparing the way of the Lord.
|
|
|
|
| |
Dennis Creffield, Visitation |
|
|
|
| |
Summary
At
a time when most of us are settling down to a quiet old age, Elizabeth's
life took an unexpected turn. She became pregnant, and bore the son she
had always hoped for. It was an unlikely birth, and she gave her son an
unfamiliar name. This, and the sudden affliction and recovery of her
husband Zechariah caused consternation
among Elizabeth's neighbors who discussed, no doubt at some length, the
meaning of these events. What would Elizabeth's child become? Certainly
something special, something out of the ordinary - a child with a great
destiny. Like her kinswoman Mary of Nazareth, Elizabeth must have pondered
all this in her heart.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
THE
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO THE STORY
Though he lived centuries before Christ, Alexander the Great (356-323 BC)
influenced the Jewish world in which Elizabeth lived. Alexander was
not merely a military conqueror, but a visionary with an ambition to
spread Greek culture throughout the world.
There was much that was refined and intelligent in Hellenistic (that is,
Greek) culture, and many Jews were tempted to adopt it. But as they did,
they found that their own culture and identity were threatened. For this
reason, Greek culture was resisted by many Jews and its influence was
uneven.
For example, Nazareth where Jesus
grew up was a conservative town that clung to traditional Jewish culture.
But only a few miles away the town of Sepphoris showed strong Greek
influence, with a Graeco-Roman theatre capable of seating 5000 people. So
it is difficult to generalize about the impact of Greek culture.
Nevertheless, its influence was pervasive, and eventually altered European
thought and culture.
|
|
|
|
| |

An aerial view of the ruins of
Sepphoris, and a colonnaded street there that Jesus and Joseph may have
helped to build
|
|
|
|
| |
In 63BC the Roman general Pompey occupied Jerusalem. From that time until after the time of Jesus, Palestine was governed as a vassal state by the Romans. The ruler of Palestine from
37-4BC was Herod the Great, who was a great builder, founding among other things the seaport of Caesarea and the fortress of Masada. He rebuilt the Temple (the present-day Wailing Wall in Jerusalem dates from this time). He also helped to finance the Olympic games in Greece!
In 4BC Herod was succeeded in Judea by his son Archeleus, who mismanaged state affairs so badly that he was removed from office by the Romans, and replaced by an official called a procurator, who supervised the troops, gathered taxes, and administered criminal justice.
During these later years, most of Palestine was undergoing a serious economic recession. Despite the fertility of the land, there was unemployment and poverty throughout the country. The great building programs of Herod the Great had come to an end, throwing thousands of tradesmen out of work. Without a modern social security system to fall back on, the families of these unemployed men were in a serious situation.
The gospels show evidence of social dislocation and political unrest. Jesus’ arrest, trial and execution took place in a climate of political instability and economic uncertainty.
|
|
|
|
| |
ATTITUDES
TO WOMEN AT THAT TIME
Gospel stories are often discussed as if they happened in isolation,
outside the real world. But in fact they occurred within a historical
context, against a cultural background quite different to our own. Knowing
about the world of the gospel gives the reader a better understanding of
the stories.
Greek philosophy was greatly admired at the time of Jesus, and it had a profound impact on the way that people saw their
world. One of the greatest philosophers, Plato, proposed the theory of
dualism, suggesting that everything in the cosmos had an equal and
opposite other. This theory had a profound impact on the way that women
were viewed, and it was not to women's advantage. 'Woman' was placed in a
category containing elements that were viewed as negative:
Man -
Woman
Civilization -
Nature
Reason/logic - Emotion
Good -
Evil
Light -
Darkness
Keep in mind that
Civilization was the ideal; Nature was mistrusted
and potentially dangerous
Logic and reason were admired, and emotion was to
be subordinated.
Goodness was always preferable to evil.
Light, especially in the pre-industrial world,
was preferred to darkness.
|
|
|
|
| |
These
are examples only, but they show that Platonic dualism placed women in a
negative category. They were seen as closer to the natural/animal world
than men. By nature they were irrational and untrustworthy, and therefore
unfit to make their own decisions and govern their own lives. They had to
be looked after and controlled, never treated as equals.
This differed from the traditional Jewish way of looking at the world,
which saw all things in creation as integrated and complementary, rather
than as opposites of each other. An example of this is the creation story
of Eve, which relates that the first woman was created from a rib taken by
God from Adam's side, thereby suggesting that a man could never be fully
complete unless he was in partnership with a woman.
|
|
|
|
| |
'Sin', by Franz Stuck |
|
|
|
| |
Jewish and Jewish/Christian women
resisted the ideas of Platonic dualism, which patronized them and
diminished their status. While Christianity remained a Jewish sect, the
status of women within the Christian communities was high.
But as the ideas of Christianity
moved out into the Gentile, Hellenised world, the first Christians found
they had to use the Greek philosophical framework to explain their beliefs
and be accepted. So Jesus' original ideal of mutual respect between
the sexes was watered down and changed. Women found they were given roles
that were acceptable in the outside, Hellenistic culture. In doing so, the
Christian church stepped back from the radical ideals of the first
Jewish/Christians.
Women were still powerful in the
private sphere, but were shunted to the side in the public arena. This
shows up, for example, in 1st and 2nd century re-tellings of the biblical
stories. Where these stories had often had women as central characters,
they now focused on men and male activities.
|
|
|
|
| |
The ideal Roman matron |
|
|
|
| |
An example of this is the story of
Moses’ birth in Josephus’ Antiquities (Josephus was a Jewish
writer and historian of the 1st century BC).
In the original biblical telling of the story (in Exodus 1 and 2) the baby
Moses is saved by the two midwives, by his mother, by his sister, and by
Pharaoh’s daughter – all, obviously, women.
In
Josephus’ retelling of the story written in about 94AD, the focus is
largely on Moses’ father Amram. He performs many of the actions
previously attributed to the women. Female characters in the story are
changed. The mid-wives in Josephus’ retelling
are Egyptian, not Hebrew
are unnamed
are not present at Moses' birth
kill Hebrew babies, not save them.
The basic story of Moses’ birth remains the same, but the female
dimension has been lost.
There were reasons for the changes
Josephus made to the story. He was trying to counter the anti-Semitism
that existed in Rome at the time, so he wrote about Jewish women who
behaved like decent Roman matrons! This ideal of Roman womanhood had been
vigorously promoted in a ‘back to basics’ program by the emperor
Augustus and the Roman authorities.
The ideal Roman woman, they said, was a mother of many children, content
with her household duties. She kept to her traditional role, in the home,
and did not speak assertively to the men in her family. She did not enter
the public world.
For additional information on the
lives of women in the Bible, see the links to
FAMILY,
WORK, RELIGION
MAJOR
EVENTS - puberty, menstruation, marriage, childbirth, death and
burials
HOUSING
AND CLOTHING.
|
|
|
|
| |
Focus Questions for the gospel passages
1. What are the most interesting moments in the story? Why do these
particular moments appeal to me?
2. In the story, who speaks and who listens? Who acts? Who gets what they
want? If you were in the story, which person would you want to be friends
with? Which person would you want to avoid?
3. What is God's interaction with the main characters? What does this tell
you about the narrator's image of God? Do you agree with this image?
4. What is happening on either side of the story, in the chapters before
and after it? Does this help you understand what is happening?
5. The narrator/editor has chosen to tell some things and leave other
things out. What has been left out of the story that you would like to
know?
6. Are the characteristics and actions of the people in the story still
present in the world? How is the story relevant to modern life, especially
your own?
Investigative Reporting
Read 1 Luke:1-4. This seems to be a description of investigative
journalism.
Now imagine you are Luke, a journalist. Prepare a set of questions you
would like to ask each of the three main characters in the story:
Elizabeth, Zechariah, or Mary.
Then image you are one of these three, and give
the answers you think they would have given in an interview.
Comparing the Songs
Read the Song of Hannah (2
Samuel 2:1-10) several times, so that its rhythm and imagery become
familiar to you. Now read the Song of Elizabeth and the Magnificat (Luke
1:42-55), noting the similarities and differences. What significance for
Christians can be read into the points of difference?
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|