Mt. 8:5-13 has a parallel in Luke 7:1-10, which derives from a common or similar "Q" tradition.   A significant difference between the Matthean and Lukan texts is Matthew's use of the Greek word, pais, meaning ‘son’, ‘serving boy’ or ‘servant’, compared to Luke's use of doulos, meaning ‘slave’, to refer to the centurion's serving boy.¹ Pais, is the derivative noun in, paidika, used to refer to the beloved youth in pederastic relationships.  Hence the interpretation that the centurion’s serving boy is his catamite slave, the "beloved youth" in a pederastic relationship, here euphemistically called his ‘son’.  Significantly, Luke’s version of the story makes specific reference to the centurion's affection for the boy (Luke 7:2b), something that the Matthean text does not require, for that understanding is already carried in the use of the word pais.  Matthew uses the same word elsewhere in the Gospel, at Matthew 12:18, to carry the double nuance of ‘servant’ and ‘son’, and that is consistent with the interpretation given here. Luz identifies this word as one of the redactive, key words in Matthew.²

The use of pais, meaning ‘son’, is found in other literature of the period.³  By using common Greek usage of the time and Luke's text to inform the Matthean text, we may take the word pais to imply that the boy is the centurion's catamite slave or serving boy.  The text allows the assumption of a pederastic relationship between the Centurion and the boy.  Thus the person making an approach to Jesus is a rank outsider, a Gentile and keeper of a relationship proscribed by Levitical Law.

Further, the translation, son, is reinforced by the rhetorical use of the word in the passage, where the pais, who is understood as the paidika or beloved "son" of the centurion, is paralysed and contrasts rhetorically to the unfaithful "sons of the kingdom," who are God's "beloved ones," but whose lack of faith is also a form of paralysis- an inability to act as "true sons".   Thus the word pais, provides the key to interpreting the text.

Using pais, in a series of catchwords, Matthew works a literary device in which the paralysed son of the centurion, prefigures the distressed sons of the kingdom in verse 12, by constructive use of the words ‘son’, ‘slave’, ‘sons of the kingdom’ and ‘son’, to form a chiasmus that contrasts the centurion's paralysed son with the actively, obedient servant and the faithless ones. The rhetorical use of pais, the son who is really not a son and who is paralysed, alternating with the word, doulos, the servant who is faithfully obedient but is not called a son, sets the interpretation of the sons of the kingdom, who are true sons but of too little faith to be obedient servants of the kingdom.  Their little faith is to be understood as a type of paralysis.  The curing of the Centurion's son, through the faith of another, hints at the possibility of a similar cure for the sons of the kingdom.

In this way the story is a marvellous scandal.  The marvel is not that the Centurion, in great faith, has approached Jesus on behalf of his son, his serving boy.  Rather, it is his faith, which is pronounced greater than the faith of the sons of the kingdom, but who do not faithfully respond to the Son of God, that exposes their little faith as shamefully scandalous.  As Theissen comments:

"Taking up the positive example of this one Gentile, it promises the Gentiles entry into the kingdom of God and it threatens the "heirs of the kingdom" with exclusion.  In this way Matthew's Gospel warns both Jews and Christians, who are also "children of the kingdom" (Mt 13:38) and whose entry into the rule of God is uncertain (Mt 7:21-23)." ⁴

In the curing of the paralytic son, Matthew points beyond Jesus and his own disrupted ministry among the Jews of Capernaum, to the kingdom coming into active force among other Jews and people of faith.  Matthew also points beyond his own community, the followers of Jesus who are similarly constrained in their mission among the other Jews, to the possibility of a mission to the Gentiles.  The interpretation is ambiguous, for the shaming may be intended to effect a change of faith on two fronts, Jewish and Gentile.

The story of Jesus healing the centurion’s boy dates from traditions as early as 40CE.  It comes from the Q source, in which positive descriptions of Gentiles are part of an important argument for a Gentile mission.⁵   Matthew has reworked the Q material so that it conveys more than a miracle story affirming Jesus' authority as being greater than military or state conferred power.   For the story also delivers a reproach, least some people apply barriers of distinction to limit participation according to restrictive practices under-pinned by Levitical Law. 

To whom this reproach is addressed remains ambiguous.  It could be to the Jewish-Christians who are too timid to undertake a Gentile mission.  It could be a universal call to repentance, shaming Jewish Christians into action by the extreme example of an outsider's faith, or it could be a polemic against Jews who have not accepted Jesus as Messiah.  One thing is certain, it teaches that faith is the key to participation and not status.  In this, it speaks loudly to those among Christians in our time who construct barriers of distinction to proscribe the participation of gay and lesbian Christians within the church.  It shows a biblical tradition of inclusivity that runs contrary to that of the hard-line that would exclude or control participation by strict application of Levitical Law, from the Mosaic codes.

Regarding the eschatological gathering of peoples into the kingdom, Matthew 8:11-12, names the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and identifies Israel as the sons of the kingdom.  None of those figures has a connection with the Mosaic covenant, the temple or the priesthood.  It also states that many of those who eat with the patriarchs are not Jews (v.11).  This recalls imagery of Isaiah 60, in which the returning exiles are carried on the hips of Gentiles, who bring the dispersed Israelites with them, as a gift.  Similarly, in the vision of the prophet in Isaiah 56, foreigners and eunuchs, as outcasts, have a place in the restored nation. 

The words of Matthew's Jesus, in vv. 11-12, speak of such an in-gathering, whereby the faith of outcasts makes possible the in-coming of Israel and Gentiles into the kingdom.  Salvation is signified by being close to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, in faith and obedience, and that faith enables the crossing of boundaries so that Jewish-Gentile divisions are overcome.  This is radical inclusivity through faith, which Matthew places within the context of the eschatological banquet or festival of in-gathering, and against the belief that being a child of Abraham is a guarantee of salvation (Mt 3:9). This is a stinging reminder, or even a sharp rebuke, to those who construct limits.  For through faith those least expected are participants at the banquet.

Can we allow Matthew 8:11-12 to speak to us today, regarding the rejected ones of our time, who stand as outcasts under the new nomism of conservative, evangelical factions? 

End Notes
  1.  Luz, Matthew 1-7,  p82 - 83; Gundry, Matthew, p. 141; Kloppenborg, Q Parallels, p.48.
  The gender specific terms, son, boy, are used here, instead of the gender inclusive terms that are used in the NRSV, because the gender specific term, son, is relevant to the exegesis and development of this commentary.  Note: Kloppenborg, in Q Parallels, pp.48-51, also renders pais, as son and as serving boy, and assigns it to Q.  The rendering ‘slave’ has removed the ‘serving boy’ or catamite nuance from English versions.
  2.  Luz, Matthew 1-7. p.64.
  3.  As for example, in Appian, Iber. 27 §107, with reference to Scippio's groom; Plutarch, Alcibiades 4, 5, where it carries a pederastic nuance, Moralia 65c; and Josephus, Antiquities 18, 192, Vitae 223.
  4.  Theissen, The Gospels in Context, p.45.
  5.  Ibid. pp. 226-227.

References
Gundry, Robert H., Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution.  2nd Edition. (Eerdmanns, Grand Rapids. 1994.)

Kloppenborg, John S., Q Parallels.  (Polebridge Press, Sonoma, 1988)

Luz, U., Matthew 1-7: A Commentary. Translated by Wilhelm C. Linss. (Augsburg Press, Mineapolis, 1989.)

Nissinen, M., Homoeroticism in the Roman World: an Historical Perspective.  (Fortress press, Minneapolis, 1998)

Theissen, Gerd, The Gospels in Context: Social and Political History in the Synoptic Tradition.  (Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1991).

This work is used with permission of the author and is subject to copyright. It also appears in monograph in Welwood L. Anderson, OUTSIDE THE CITY GATE: A BIBLE STUDY. A Tehomot Publication, 2003. ©    Download the eight-part study.