CRITICAL REVIEW:
Stephen Barton's Discipleship and Family Ties in Mark and Matthew

Jennifer L. Hamden
February. 22, 2000

Barton seeks "to demonstrate and explain the importance of loyalty to God over kinship ties in the teaching about discipleship of Jesus in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew" (1). He identifies five aims to his study:

  1. to show that subordination of family and household ties spoken of in the gospels is not unprecedented
  2. to demonstrate that the implications of discipleship for family ties was a major concern in Matthew and Mark
  3. to show that the family-ties material provides a window onto the ethos of Marcan and Matthean Christianity,
  4. to qualify the trend in recent socio-historical study of early Christianity generally which has emphasized too strongly the indebtedness of early Christian social patterns to the household model
  5. to demonstrate a multi-disciplinary approach to gospels interpretation which makes possible a more holistic response to the texts

Barton wants to demonstrate how Christianity's demands upon the individual might seem harsh to 21st century Christians, but were part and parcel of religious practice in 1st century Palestine and the surrounding Mediterranean cultures. With this point in mind, Barton studies passages in Mark and Matthew that relate to kinship ties and/or household code to determine the effect of Christianity's call to discipleship (in particular) upon Jewish and Greco-Roman social relationships within the family. He cites historians such as Tacitus and Pliny in their responses to the Christian movement, pointing out that those responses relate to household code and kinship ties, important social aspects of the political state.

Other evidence that Barton utilizes, besides Mark and Matthew, are the Qumran documents, Q, Luke and Acts, and the Pauline letters, to demonstrate the Christian view on household code. This evidence is presented in parallel and cross-reference form throughout the book. Barton has selected certain passages in Mark and Matthew for their reference and/or relevance to finally relations. Then, using redaction criticism and socio-historical criticism, offers a contextual and social explanation and interpretation of the pericope and its importance in the Christian understanding of discipleship. Barton presents his evidence throughout the text in a very, detailed, systematic manner. A general introduction provides the reader with the initial context of the Gospels and historians' responses to the popularity of the Christian movement. Mark is then presented first, in textual order, one pericope at a time. Matthew is next presented, with its parallels to Mark listed as well. The pericope that Barton focuses upon include Mark 3.20-1, 31-5, 6.1-6a; Mark 10.28-31, Mark 13.9-13, and in Matthew, 4.18-22, 8.18-22, 10.16-23, 10.34-8, 12.46-50, 13.53-8, 19.10-12, and 19.27-30. Barton studies each pericope for its relevance to kinship ties and the household code, compares the passage's function within the Gospel to the function of its parallel in Mark and/or other NT texts, and how and why the evangelist changed the context or content of the episode to suit a particular purpose.

Barton is not the first to look at the dynamics of kinship and discipleship in the Gospels. He cites several prior works published about the subject, including Ernest Best's Following Jesus (Sheffield: JSOT, 1981), D. Senior's Invitation to Matthew (New York: Doubleday, 1977), and G. N. Stanton's article, "The Origin and Purpose of Matthew's Gospel" (ANRW 2.25.3, 1985). Barton wants to build upon their work, feeling that not enough attention has been paid to the impact of the Christian movement upon attitudes to family ties and natural kinship. He also seeks to update these authors' material by applying a multi-disciplinary interpretation reflecting current socio-historical research.

Barton's research reveals deeper nuances to the call to discipleship; it is not so much a call to abandon one's natural family as it is a call to join a spiritual family that transcends all other social relationships. Barton writes that "12:46-50 is interpreted plausibly as providing a foundation in the tradition of the sayings of Jesus for the development of a common identity constituted along the lines of a spiritual family" (184). Belonging to this family "becomes a matter of action rather than ascription .... That is the ideal basis for a community .... mak[ing] possible a diversity of roles and social patterns. It also makes innovation possible" (ibid.). Anyone who believed was considered a member, regardless of ethnicity, social status or gender.

Barton's study of Mark and Matthew with regard to discipleship and kinship in the social context of 1st century Palestine offers a new understanding of Jesus' call to discipleship: that it does not replace the earthly family, but transcends it. This alters the expectations of the Christian for the community: each context comes with its own roles and demands, but are exclusive. The church cannot give one what the natural family has to offer, and vice versa. It is also important to note that Barton compares Christian discipleship demands to those of philosophical schools of the time, to demonstrate that Jesus' statement in Matthew 12:50 is not as dismissive as it sounds, nor is it an unexpected demand for his audience to receive. Rather, Jesus' behavior exemplifies what is expected of Christians to participate fully in the Kingdom of God: understanding and respect of each other and those of other religious institutions as siblings, as family.