LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Brock University

94 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XV
understanding, this view might find a wide amount of agreement in many
Lutheran circles.
Scaer does not have that critical mindset which distrusts the evidence
given, and he is therefore content to take the Gospel’s message at face value
and then speak insightful conclusions in light of what today’s scholarship
knows of that time and situation. Especially enjoyable was his discussion on
the inspiration of Matthew, obviously something you do not see too often in
a commentary with such serious scholarship. Scaer’s wealth of knowledge in
many areas of theology makes this book one which often crosses the line
between exegetical and dogmatic, a goal which Scaer specifically wishes to
accomplish: “[T]his book intends to be biblical in approach and theological
in outcome ….” (p. 8). It was also nice to see the frequent Scriptural
references throughout the work, although this author did not have the time to
check them. The book is detailed enough to be a commentary on many texts,
but yet it is broad enough to help the pastor gain a fresh and enlivening
perspective on many of the tasks of the ministry, especially those of
preaching and reading the Gospel text. Liturgical, historical, and uniquely
Lutheran issues are all interwoven within this work. Many of these issues
would be helpful reading for any year of the lectionary series. Scaer often
makes an issue of an early dating for the Gospel, but even more important is
his theme of Jesus as teacher. “For the evangelist, Jesus was the catechist”
(p. 213; see also p. 336). This is a good reminder for the pastor that his task
is to get out of the way and let the Lord do His task, a thing which He is
much better at than any pastor. Properly used, the book will greatly benefit
both the pastor and the people in the pews.
+ + +
The following criticisms, therefore, should be considered minor when
taking into account the new standard which this book sets. If the following
two writings would have been engaged within the work, several more wellbalanced
discussions could have been made: The writings of Papias, Bishop
of Hierapolis, 1 and the work of Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1-7: A Continental
Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1989). These additions
would have been helpful; but, again, the typical pastor can survive, even
thrive, without them. The primary complaint is that the work suffers for lack
of both Scriptural and topical indices. These would have been helpful for
that extra-busy and easily forgetful pastor to find the places where the
coming sermon text was mentioned.
1 Papias is discussed on pp. 7-17 in vol. 1 of W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison’s A Critical
and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 3 vols. (Edinburgh:
T&T Clark Limited, 1988-1997); this commentary is a monumental work by all accounts and
thankfully Scaer engages it frequently.