ought and innovation.

The juxtaposition is striking: the annual Gospel reading for Ash Wednesday speaks out again
st a public display of piety in the only worship service of the church year from which worship
ers are sent with the visible evidence of church attendance in the form of cross-
shaped smudges of ash on their foreheads.

However, Jesus' words are not focused on this outward juxtaposition but on inward motivati
on. For each example of pious practice Jesus names, he centers on the question of "why" not
"how." In the Creek, the repetition of the subordinating conjunction, hopos "in order that," i
n this passage in Matthew points our attention toward the purpose of these spiritual practice
s beyond their content or visibility. Jesus reminds his hearers that the life of faith is not abou
t how we pray, give alms, last, or otherwise live the life of faith--but why.

Why do we pray? Why do we fast? Why do we give alms? These pious actions and disciplines
are misguided if they are performed for the sake of others' perceptions and good judgment. J
esus knows that the good favor of our fellow human beings is a powerful motivator. Market a
dvertising consistently plays on our desire to be esteemed by others. Honor, admiration, and
respect from the human community are prized commodities. But the more we focus on the g
ood opinions of other human beings, the more we become distracted from God's intention fo
r us and for the community.

Jesus reminds us that spiritual disciplines like praying, fasting and giving to the poor are acti
vities that focus our attention on our relationship with God and the gifts of God's grace. Rath
er than seeing pious activities as a means to garner respect from others, Jesus reminds us tha
t we give alms as our participation in the mission of God in Jesus Christ and we boldly pray t
o call upon Gods grace for the world. Rather than fasting as an outward sign or storing wealt
h for earthly gain, Jesus calls us to fast as a means' of bodily focus on God and trust in heave
n's abundant treasures. These act

below by academic category.

The reception of the Gospel of Matthew was very successful in the early centuries, at least jud
ging from its popularity, its influence, and the variety of settings in which this text was read,
heard, and interpreted. It comes as no surprise that Matthew is the first Gospel of the New T
estament canon. further, the diverse interpretation of Matthew through the centuries up to o
ur own days certainly reminds us that we arc not objective readers, neither were those who w
ent before us. Studying reception history certainly helps us to put our own ideas about this G
ospel in perspective. (1) What seems to us to be obvious interpretations of almost any passag
e of the Gospel are often shown to be heavily dependent on our own modern worldview and c
ultural context when we become aware of how the same passages were interpreted in previou
s centuries. This reminds us of the fact that we always read from a certain place and that not
hing floats freely in time and space; we are anchored rather firmly in our own time. But, we
may add, so were the Gospel writers, and this opens up for us the possibility of attempting to
reach back in time to be enriched by their understandings of the Jesus event, even though ou
r historical tools are not sharp enough to provide one hundred percent certainty that we alwa
ys reach our goal in this regard. However willing we are--or are not--
to recognize our historical ability, it quickly becomes clear as we undertake such labor aimed
at first century understandings of the postmodern doctrine that, after its production, almost
anything can happen to a text, is easily confirmed.

How do we reach, then, probable readings that would reflect thinking around the Jesus event
that took place 2000 years ago? The principles for such study must be the same as for any hi
storical study of the understanding of the Gospel, including its reception in later history. We
would have to pay particular attention to the reflections of socio-
religious, economic, political and other aspects of society, which trickle through and manifest
themselves in the text. Such aspects must by definition he those of the original context, and,
if we are dealing with a text that came into being through a process over time, possibly earlie
r contexts which may have left marks in the text.

On Ash Wednesday, we wear an ashsmudged cross not simply as an outward mark to be seen
by others. Rather, the juxtaposition of the cross of mortal ash and ever-
lasting promise from baptism is an inward and outward sign of the paradoxical cross of life p
hysically present on our bodies made by