The offerings of the wise men: the flight into Egypt: the massacre of the Innocents.
The Gentils come vnto Christ with their offerings, and that so openly, that the Iewes can not pretend ignorance. 1 The Iewes with Herode conspire against him. 13 He therevpon fleeth from them into Aegypt. 16 They afterward, seing their subteltie preuailed not, imagined to oppresse him by open persecution. 19 But they at length dyed, and he returneth to the land of Israel: al according to the Scriptures.
1When Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Juda, in the days of king Herod, behold, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem,Essendo adunque nato Gesù in Betlemme di Giuda, regnante il re Erode, ecco che i Magi arrivarono dall'oriente a Gerusalemme.WHEN IESVS therfore vvas borne in Bethlehem of Iuda in the dayes of Herod the King, behold, there came Sages from the East to Hierusalem,Cum ergo natus esset Jesus in Bethlehem Juda in diebus Herodis regis, ecce magi ab oriente venerunt Jerosolymam, 2Saying: Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the East, and are come to adore him.Dicendo: Dov' è il nato Re de' Giudei? imperocché abbiamo veduto la sua stella nell'oriente, e siamo venuti per adorarlo.saying, vvhere is he that is borne King of the Ievves? For vve haue seene his starre in the East, and are come to adore him.dicentes: Ubi est qui natus est rex Judæorum ? vidimus enim stellam ejus in oriente, et venimus adorare eum. 3And king Herod hearing this, was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.Sentite il re Erode tali cose si turbò, e con lui tutta Gerusalemme.And Herod the King hearing this, vvas troubled, & al Hierusalem vvith him.Audiens autem Herodes rex, turbatus est, et omnis Jerosolyma cum illo. 4And assembling together all the chief priests and the scribes of the people, he inquired of them where Christ should be born.E adunati tutti i principi de' sacerdoti, e gli scribi del popolo, domandò loro, dove fosse per nascere il Cristo.And assembling together al the high Priestes & the Scribes of the people, he inquired of them vvhere Christ should be borne.Et congregans omnes principes sacerdotum, et scribas populi, sciscitabatur ab eis ubi Christus nasceretur. 5But they said to him: In Bethlehem of Juda. For so it is written by the prophet:Essi gli risposero: in Betlemme di Giuda: imperocché così è stato scritto dal Profeta.But they sayd to him, In Bethlehē of Iuda. For so it is vvritten by the Prophet:At illi dixerunt: In Bethlehem Judæ: sic enim scriptum est per prophetam: 6And thou Bethlehem the land of Juda art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come forth the captain that shall rule my people Israel.E tu Betlemme, terra di Giuda, non se' la minima tra i cupi di Giuda: poiché da te uscirà il condottiere, che reggerà Israele mio popolo.And thou Bethlehem the land of Iuda, art not the least among the Princes of Iuda: for out of thee shal come forth the Capitaine that shal rule my people Israel.Et tu Bethlehem terra Juda, / nequaquam minima es / in principibus Juda: / ex te enim exiet dux, qui regat populum meum Israël.
7Then Herod, privately calling the wise men learned diligently of them the time of the star which appeared to them;Allora Erode, chiamati segretamente a se i Magi, minutamente s'informò da loro, in qual tempo fosse lor comparsa la stella.Then Herod secretly calling the Sages, learned diligently of them the time of the starre which appeared to them:Tunc Herodes clam vocatis magis diligenter didicit ab eis tempus stellæ, quæ apparuit eis: 8And sending them into Bethlehem, said: Go and diligently inquire after the child, and when you have found him, bring me word again, that I also may come and adore him.E mandandogli a Betlemme disse: Andate, e fate diligente ricerca di questo fanciullo: e quando l'abbiate trovato, fatemelo sapere, affinchè ancor io vada ad adorarlo.and sending them into Bethlehem, sayd, Goe, and inquire diligently of the childe: and when you shal finde him, make reporte to me, that I also may come and adore him.et mittens illos in Bethlehem, dixit: Ite, et interrogate diligenter de puero: et cum inveneritis, renuntiate mihi, ut et ego veniens adorem eum. 9Who having heard the king, went their way; and behold the star which they had seen in the East, went before them, until it came and stood over where the child was.Quegli, udite le parole del re, si partirono: ed ecco che la stella veduta da loro in oriente andava loro davanti, fintantoché arrivata sopra del luogo, ove stava il bambino, fermossi.Who hauing heard the king, went their way: and behold the starre which they had seen in the East, went before them, vntil it came & stoode ouer, where the childe was.Qui cum audissent regem, abierunt, et ecce stella, quam viderant in oriente, antecedebat eos, usque dum veniens staret supra, ubi erat puer. 10And seeing the star they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.E veduta la stella sì riempirono di sopra grande allegrezza.And seing the starre, they reioyced vvith exceding great ioy.Videntes autem stellam gavisi sunt gaudio magno valde. 11And entering into the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they adored him: and opening their treasures, they offered him gifts; gold, frankincense, and myrrh.Ed entrati nella casa trovarono il bambino con Maria sua madre: e prostratisi l'adorarono: e aperti i loro tesori gli offerirono i doni, oro, incenso, e mirra.And entring into the house, they found the childe vvith MARIE his mother, & falling dovvne adored him: and opening their treasures, they offered to him giftes: gold, frankincense, & myrrhe.Et intrantes domum, invenerunt puerum cum Maria matre ejus, et procidentes adoraverunt eum: et apertis thesauris suis obtulerunt ei munera, aurum, thus, et myrrham.
12And having received an answer in sleep that they should not return to Herod, they went back another way into their country.Ed essendo stati in sogno avvertiti di non ripassar da Erode, per altra strada se ne ritornarono al loro paese.And hauing receiued an ansvver in sleepe that they should not returne to Herod, they vvent backe an other vvay into their countrey.Et responso accepto in somnis ne redirent ad Herodem, per aliam viam reversi sunt in regionem suam. 13And after they were departed, behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph, saying: Arise, and take the child and his mother, and fly into Egypt: and be there until I shall tell thee. For it will come to pass that Herod will seek the child to destroy him.Partiti che furon essi l'Angelo del Signore apparve in sogno a Giuseppe, e gli disse: Levati, prendi il bambino, e la sua madre, e fuggì in Egitto e fermati colà, fintantoché io ti avviserò. Imperocché Erode cercherà del bambino per farlo morire.And after they vvere departed, behold an Angel of our Lord appeared in sleepe to Ioseph, saying: Arise, & take the childe & his mother, & flee into Aegypt: and be there vntil I shal tel the. For it vvil come to passe that Herod vvil seeke the childe to destroy him.Qui cum recessissent, ecce angelus Domini apparuit in somnis Joseph, dicens: Surge, et accipe puerum, et matrem ejus, et fuge in Ægyptum, et esto ibi usque dum dicam tibi. Futurum est enim ut Herodes quærat puerum ad perdendum eum. 14Who arose, and took the child and his mother by night, and retired into Egypt: and he was there until the death of Herod:Ed ei svegliatosi prese il bambino, e la madre di notte tempo, e si ritirò in Egitto.Who arose, & tooke the childe and his mother by night, and retyred into Aegypt: and he vvas there vntil the death of Herod:Qui consurgens accepit puerum et matrem ejus nocte, et secessit in Ægyptum: 15That it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: Out of Egypt have I called my son.E ivi si stette sino alla morte d'Erode, affinchè si adempisse, quanto era stato detto dal Signore pel Profeta, che dice: dall'Egitto ho chiamato il mio figlio.that it might be fulfilled vvhich vvas spoken of our Lord by the Prophet, saying, Out of Aegypt haue I called my sonne.et erat ibi usque ad obitum Herodis: ut adimpleretur quod dictum est a Domino per prophetam dicentem: Ex Ægypto vocavi filium meum. 16Then Herod perceiving that he was deluded by the wise men, was exceeding angry: and sending killed all the menchildren that were in Bethlehem, and in all the borders thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men.Allora Erode vedendosi burlato da' Magi s'adirò fortemente, e mandò ad uccidere tutti i fanciulli, che erano in Betlemme, e in tutti i suoi confini, dall'età di due anni in giù, secondo il tempo, che avea rilevato da' Magi.Then Herod perceauing that he vvas deluded by the Sages, Was exceding angrie: and sending murdered al the men children that vvere in Bethlehem, & in al the borders therof, from tvvo yere old & vnder, according to the time vvhich he had diligently sought out of the Sages.Tunc Herodes videns quoniam illusus esset a magis, iratus est valde, et mittens occidit omnes pueros, qui erant in Bethlehem, et in omnibus finibus ejus, a bimatu et infra secundum tempus, quod exquisierat a magis.
17Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremias the prophet, saying:Allora si adempì, quanto fu predetto dal profeta Geremia, che dice:Then was fulfilled that vvhich vvas spoken by Ieremie the Prophet saying,Tunc adimpletum est quod dictum est per Jeremiam prophetam dicentem: 18A voice in Rama was heard, lamentation and great mourning; Rachel bewailing her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.Una voce si è udita in Rama, gran pianti, e urli: Rachele piangente i suoi figli; né volle ammetter consolazione, perch'ei più non sono.A voice in Rama vvas heard, crying out & much vvayling: Rachel bevvayling her children, & vvould not be comforted, because they are not.Vox in Rama audita est / ploratus, et ululatus multus: / Rachel plorans filios suos, / et noluit consolari, quia non sunt. 19But when Herod was dead, behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph in Egypt,Morto Erode: ecco che l'Angelo del Signore apparve in sogno a Giuseppe in Egitto.But vvhen Herod vvas dead, behold an Angel of our Lord appeared in sleepe to Ioseph in Aegypt,Defuncto autem Herode, ecce angelus Domini apparuit in somnis Joseph in Ægypto, 20Saying: Arise, and take the child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel. For they are dead that sought the life of the child.E gli disse: Svegliati, prendi il fanciullo, e la madre di lui, e va' nella terra di Israele: imperocché sono morti coloro, che cercavano la vita del bambino.saying, Arise, and take the childe & his mother, & goe into the land of Israel. for they are dead that sought the life of the childe.dicens: Surge, et accipe puerum, et matrem ejus, et vade in terram Israël: defuncti sunt enim qui quærebant animam pueri. 21Who arose, and took the child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.Ed egli svegliatosi prese il bambino, e la madre, e andò nella terra d'Israele.who arose, & tooke the childe & his mother, and came into the land of Israel.Qui consurgens, accepit puerum, et matrem ejus, et venit in terram Israël. 22But hearing that Archelaus reigned in Judea in the room of Herod his father, he was afraid to go thither: and being warned in sleep retired into the quarters of Galilee.Ma avendo sentito, che Archelao regnava nella Giudea in luogo di Erode suo padre, temè d'andare colà: e avvertito in sogno si ritirò in Galilea.But hearing that Archelaus reigned in Ievvrie for Herod his father, he feared to goe thither: and being vvarned in sleepe retyred into the quarters of Galilee.Audiens autem quod Archelaus regnaret in Judæa pro Herode patre suo, timuit illo ire: et admonitus in somnis, secessit in partes Galilææ.
23And coming he dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was said by the prophets: That he shall be called a Nazarene.Dove giunto abitò nella città chiamata Nazaret: affinchè si adempisse quello, ch'era stato predetto da' profeti: Ei sarà chiamato Nazareno.And coming he dvvelt in a citie called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled vvhich vvas sayd by the Propheres: That he shal be called a Nazarite.Et veniens habitavit in civitate quæ vocatur Nazareth: ut adimpleretur quod dictum est per prophetas: Quoniam Nazaræus vocabitur.
2:1
Year of the World 4000, being four years before the common account called Anno Domini.[A.D., in the year of the Lord]
King Herod the Great, surnamed Ascalonite, was a foreigner, but a proselyte to the Jewish religion. St. Jerome.
This city is called Bethlehem of Juda, to distinguish it from another Bethlehem, which was situated in the division of the tribe of Zabulon. (Haydock) Wise men.[Ver. 1. Magi, oi Magoi.] Both the Latin and Greek text may signify wise philosophers and astronomers, which is the common exposition. The same word is also many times taken for a magician or soothsayer, as it is applied to Simon, (Acts 8:9,) and to Elymas, Acts xiii, ver. 6. and 8. Some ancient interpreters think these very men might have been magicians before their conversion. See Cornelius a Lapide, etc.
Witham
From the east. Some say from Arabia, others from Chaldea, others from Persia. Divers interpreters speak of them as if they had been kings, princes, or lords of some small territories. See Baron. an. 1:sect. 29. Tillemont, note 12. on Jesus Christ. The number of these wise men is uncertain. St. Leo, in his sermons on the Epiphany, speaks of them as if they had been three, perhaps on account of their three-fold offerings. What is mentioned in later writers as their names, is still of less authority, as Bollandus observed. There are also very different opinions as to the time that the star appeared to these wise men, whether before Christ's birth, or about the very time he was born, which seems more probable. The interpreters are again divided as to the year, and day of the year, when they arrived at Bethlehem, and adored the Saviour of the world. Some think not till two years after Christ's birth. See St. Epiphanius haer. xxx. num. 29. p. 134. And St. Jerome puts the massacre of the Holy Innocents about that time in his chronicle. But taking it for granted that the wise men came to Jerusalem and to Bethlehem the same year that Christ was born, it is not certain on what day of the year they adored him at Bethlehem. It is true the Latin Church, ever since the 4th or 5th age, has kept the feast of the Epiphany on the 6th day of January. But when it is said in that day's office, This day a star led the wise men to the manger, it may bear this sense only, this day we keep the remembrance of it; especially since we read in a sermon of St. Maximus (appointed to be read in the Roman Breviary on the 5th day within the octave of the Epiphany) these words: What happened on this day, he knows that wrought it; whatever it was, we cannot doubt it was done in favour of us. The wise men, by the 11th verse, found Jesus at Bethlehem, where his blessed mother was to remain forty days, till the time of her purification was expired. And it seems most probable that the wise men came to Bethlehem about that time, rather than within thirteen days after Christ's birth: for had they come so soon after Christ was born, and been directed to go, and make diligent inquiry at Bethlehem, which was not above five miles from Jerusalem, it can scarcely be imagined that so suspicious and jealous a prince as Herod was, would have waited almost a month for their return without searching for the new-born king. But it is likely, being again alarmed by what happened when Jesus was presented in the temple at his mother's purification, he thereupon gave those cruel and barbarous orders for the massacre of those innocent infants. (Witham)
2:2
Witham
We have seen his star. They knew it to be his star, either by some prophecy among them, or by divine revelation. This star was some lightsome body in the air, which at last seemed to point to them the very place where the world's Redeemer lay. We know not whether it guided them during the whole course of their journey form the East to Jerusalem. We read nothing more in the gospel, but that it appeared to them in the East, and that they saw it again, upon their leaving Jerusalem to go to Bethlehem. (Witham)
Haydock
The wise men, in the Syrian tongue maguscha, are supposed to have come from Stony Arabia, near the Euphrates. They might have preserved in this country the remembrance of the prophecy of Balaam, which had announced the coming of the Messias by the emblem of a star, (Numbers 24:17.) which was to arise from Jacob. The star which appeared then, was the symbol of the star which Balaam had predicted. (Haydock)
2:3
Haydock
Through fear of losing his kingdom, he being a foreigner, and had obtained the sovereignty by violence. But why was all Jerusalem to be alarmed at the news of a king so long and so ardently expected? 1. Because the people, well acquainted with the cruelty of Herod, feared a more galling slavery. 2. Through apprehension of riots, and of a revolution, which could not be effected without bloodshed, as the Romans had such strong hold. They had also been so worn down with perpetual wars, that the most miserable servitude, with peace, was to the Jews an object rather of envy than deprecation. (Haydock)
2:6
Witham
And thou Bethlehem, etc. This was a clear prophecy concerning the Messias, foretold by Micheas; (chap. 5:2,) yet the words which we read in the evangelist are not quite the same as we find in the prophet, either according to the Hebrew or to the Greek text of the Septuagint. The chief difference is, that in the prophet we read: And thou Bethlehem art little; but in the evangelist, thou art not the least. Some answer that the words of the prophet are to be expounded by way of an interrogation, art thou little? It is certain the following words, both in the prophet and in the gospel, out of thee shall come forth a leader or a captain, etc. shew that the meaning is, thou art not little. St. Jerome's observation seems to clear this point: he tells us, that the Jewish priests, who were consulted, gave Herod the sense, and not the very words of the prophet; and the evangelist, as an historian, relates to us the words of these priests to Herod, not the very words of the prophet. (Witham)
Haydock
The testimony of the chief priests proves that this text of Micheas was even then generally applied to the Messias, and that to Him alone it must be referred according to the letter. (Haydock)
2:11
And going into the house. Several of the Fathers in their homilies, represent the wise men adoring Jesus in the stable, and in the manger. yet others, with St. Chrysostom take notice, that before their arrival, Jesus might be removed into some little house in Bethlehem.
Prostrating themselves, or falling down, they adored him, not with a civil worship only, but enlightened by divine inspiration, they worshipped and adored him as their Saviour and their God.
Witham
Gold, frankincense, and myrrh.[Ver. 11. Aurum, etc. Pulcherrime, says St. Jerome on this place, Juvencus Munerum Sacramenta comprehendit, Thus, Aurum, Myrrham, Regique, Hominique, Deoque, Dona ferunt. See St. Ambrose in Luc. lib. II. ch. II.; St. Gregory hom. x. in Evang. etc.] Divers of the ancient Fathers take notice of the mystical signification of these offerings; that by gold was signified the tribute they paid to him, as to their king; by incense, that he was God; and by myrrh, (with which dead bodies used to be embalmed) that now he was also become a mortal man. See St. Ambrose lib. 2. in Luc. ch. II.; St. Gregory etc. (Witham)
Estius
The Church sings, "hodie stella Magos duxit ad praesepium," but it is not probable that the blessed Virgin should remain so long in the open stable, and the less so, because the multitude, who hindered Joseph from finding accommodations either among his relatives or in the public caravansaries, had returned to their own homes. (Estius)
St. Chrysostom
They adored Him. Therefore, in the eucharist also, Christ is to be adored. For it is of no consequence under what appearance he is pleased to give himself to us, whether that of a perfect man, a speechless child as here, or under the appearance of bread and wine, provided it is evident that he is there; for in whatever manner or place he appears, he is true God, and for that alone he is to be adored. Frivolous is the objection of certain sectarists, that Christ does not give himself to us in the blessed eucharist to be adored, but to be eaten. For Christ was not in Bethlehem, nor did he descend from heaven to be adored: He tells us in the xxth Matthew of Matthew, ver. 28, that the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister; yet he was adored on earth, even while he was in his mortal state, by the magi, by his disciples, by the blind man that was cured of his blindness, etc. etc. "Let us imitate the magi. Thou seest him not now in the crib, but on the altar; not a woman holding him, but the priest present, and the Holy Ghost poured out abundantly upon the sacrifice." (St. Chrysostom, hom. xxiv. in 1 Cor.; Hom. vii. de Sancto Philog.)
2:14
It is very probable that Joseph, with Jesus and his Mother, remained in some part of Egypt, where the Jews were settled, as at Alexandria. That many Jews dwelt in Egypt, particularly from the time of the prophet Jeremias, is evident from Josephus, and also from the first chapter of the second book of Machabees. Mention is also made of them in Acts 2:and Act. 4:under the name of Alexandrines.
2:15
Witham
Out of Egypt have I called my son.[Ver. 15. Ex Aegypto vocai filium meum. In the Septuagint ta tekna autou, filios ejus.] St. Jerome understands these words to be taken out of the prophet Osee, (Chap. 11:2.) and granted they might be literally spoken of the people Israel: yet as their captivity in Egypt was a figure of the slavery of sin, under which all mankind groaned, and as their delivery by Moses was a figure of man's redemption by our Saviour Christ, so these words in a mystical and spiritual sense apply to our Saviour, who in a more proper sense was the Son of God, than was the people of Israel. (Witham)
Bristow
The application of this passage of the prophet to Christ, whereas in the simple letter it might appear otherwise, teaches us how to interpret the Old Testament; and that the principal sense is of Christ and his Church. (Bristow)
2:16
Bristow
By this example, we learn how great credit we owe to the Church in canonizing saints, and celebrating their holydays: by whose only warrant, without any word of Scripture, these holy Innocents have been honoured as martyrs, and their holyday kept ever since the apostles' time, although they died not voluntarily, nor all, perhaps, circumcised, and some even children of pagans. (St. Augustine, ep. 28. Origen, hom. 3:in diversos.) (Bristow)
2:18
Witham
A voice was heard in Rama.[Ver. 18. Vox in Excelso audita est. Jeremias 31:15.] St. Jerome takes Rama, not for the name of any city, but for a high place, as appears by his Latin translation. (Jeremias 31:15.) But in all Greek copies here in St. Matthew, and in the Septuagint in Jeremias, we find the word itself Rama, so that it must signify a particular city. Rachel, who was buried at Bethlehem, is represented weeping (as it were in the person of those desolate mothers) the murder, and loss of so many children: and Rama being a city not far from Bethlehem, in the tribe of Benjamin, built on a high place, it is said that the cries and lamentations of these children, and their mothers, reached even to Rama. Cornelius a Lapide on Jeremias xxxi. thinks that these words were not only applied by the evangelist in a figurative sense, but that the prophet in the literal sense foretold these lamentations. (Witham)
2:23
He shall be called a Nazarite, or a Nazarene.[Ver. 23. Nazaraeus, nazoraios. St. Chrysostom, hom. IX. in Matt. p. 66. Ed. Latinae, Multa ex Propheticis periere monumenta.
Witham
St. Hieron. [St. Jerome] in Matt. pluraliter Prophetas vocans, ostendit se non verba de Scripturis sumpsisse, sed sensum: Nazaraeus Sanctus interpretatur, Sanctum autem Dominum futurum, omnis Scriptura commemorat. Possumus et aliter dicere, quod etiam iisdem verbis juxta Hebraicam veritatem in Isaia Scriptum sit. ch. XI. ver. 1. Exiet Virgo de radice Jesse, et Nazaraeus de radice ejus conscendet.] Jesus was called a Nazarite, from the place where he was bred up in Galilee; and the Christians by the Jews were sometimes called Nazarenes, from Jesus of Nazareth. The evangelist would shew that this name, which the Jews through contempt gave to Christ and his disciples, had an honourable signification: and that this title was given in the predictions of the prophets to the Messias. But where, or in what prophet? For we find not the words exactly in any of the prophets. To this St. Chrysostom answers, that St. Matthew took it from some prophetical writings that have been lost. St. Jerome gives two other answers: first, that the word Nazarene, from the Hebrew Nezer, signifies separated, and distinguished from others by virtue and sanctity: and so some that were particularly consecrated, and devoted to the service of God, were called Nazareans, as Joseph, (Deuteronomy 33:16.) Sampson, (Judges 16:17.) etc. Thus a Nazarene signifies one that is holy: and all the prophets, says St. Jerome, foretold that Christ should be holy. Therefore also it was that St. Matthew did not cite any one prophet, but the prophets in general. The second answer is, that a Nazarean (if derived from the Hebrew Netser) signifies a flower, or bud; and so in the prophet Isaias (Isaias 11:1.) it is foretold of the Messias, that a flower shall ascend from the root of David. (Witham)
Haydock
The reason why Jesus is called of Nazareth, and not of Bethlehem, is, because he was educated there, and was generally supposed to have been born there. Hence he was called the Galilean; and the people argued from that circumstance, that he was not the Messias, nor even a prophet, saying, Can the Christ come from Galilee? Search the Scriptures, and see that out of Galilee a prophet riseth not. (John 7:52.) Again, in Nazareth the word was made flesh, though in Bethlehem he was produced to the world; and our Lord gives himself the same title, when he addressed Saul. I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. (Acts 22.) He remained at Nazareth till he was about 30 years of age. (Haydock)
2:1
1. Behold.] Our Lordes apparition or Epiphanie to these Sages being Gentils, their Pilgrimage to him, and in them the first homage of Gentilitie done vnto him the twelfth day after his Natiuitie: and therfore is Twelfth day highly celebrated in the Catholike Churche for ioy of the calling of vs Gentils. His baptisme also and first miracle are celebrated on the same day.
Concordance Luc. 2, 7.
The holy feast of the Epiphanie called Twelfth-day the 6 of Ianuarie. vpon which day this is the Gospel.
2:2
2. Starre.] Christs Natiuitie depended not vpon this starre, as the Priscillianists falsely surmised: but the starre vpon his Natiuitie, for the seruice wherof it was created, Grego. Ho. 10.
2. Come to adore.] This coming so far of deuotion to visite and adore Christ in the place of his birth, Pilgrimage. was proprely a Pilgrimage to his person: and warranteth the faithful in the like kind of external worship done to holy persons, places, and things.
2:4
4. Inquired of them.] The high Priests were rightly consulted in quaestion of their law and religion, and be they neuer so il, are often forced to say the truth by priuilege of their vnction: as here and after, they did concerning the true Messias.
2:6
Concordance Mich. 5, 2.
2:11
11. Adored him] This body (saith S. Chrysostom.) the Sages adored in the cribbe. Let vs at the least imitate them: thou seest him not now in the cribbe, Adoratiō of the •. Sacrament. but on the altar: not a woman holding him, but the Priest present, and the Holy Ghost powred out aboundantly vpon the sacrifice. Ho. 24. in 1. Cor. Ho. 7. in Mt. Ho. de sancto Philogonio.
11. Treasures.] These treasures are as it were the first fruites of those riches and gifts, Psal. 71. which (according to the Prophecies of Dauid and Esay) Gentilitie should offer to Christ and his Churche, Esa. 60. and now haue offered, specially from the time of Constantine the Great. As also these three Sages, being principal men of their Countrie, represent the whole state of Princes, kings, and Emperours, Chrys. that were (according to the said Prophecies) to beleeue in Christ, to humble them selues to his crosse, Theophyl. to foster, enriche, adorne and defend his Church. Wherevpon it is also a very conuenient and agreable tradition of antiquitie, The three kings. and a receiued opinion among the faithful, Cic. de Diuinat. not lacking testimonies of ancient writers, and much for the honour of our Sauiour, that these three also were kings: Pli⸢e⸣. li. 20. to Witte, either according to the state of those Countries, where the Princes were Magi, Esther 1, 1•. 14. and Magi the greatest, about the Prince: or as we read in the Scriptures, of Melchisedec king of Salem, and many other kings that dwelt within a small compasse: or as Iobes three freendes are called kings. Tob. 2. These are commonly called the three kings of Colen, because their bodies are there, Amb. 1. translated thither from the East Countrie: their names are said to haue been Gaspar, Off. c. 1•. Melchior, Baltasar.
11. Gifts.] These Sages were three, and their gifts three, and eche one offered euerie of the three, to expresse our faith of the Trinitie. The Gold, to signifie that he was a King: the frankincense, that he was God: the myrrhe, that he was to be buried as man. Aug. ser. i. de Epiph.
Concordance Psa. 71, 10.
2:13
In the liturgy The Gospel of Childermas day.
2:15
15. Out of Aegypt.] This place of the Prophete (and the like in the new Testament) here applied to Christ, wheras in the letter it might seeme otherwise, reacheth vs how to interprete the old Testament, and that the principal sense is of Christ and his Churche.
Concordance Os. 11, •.
2:16
16. Murdered.] By this example we learne how great credite we owe to the Churche in Canonizing Saints, and celebrating their holy daies: by whose only warrant, Canonizing of Saincts. without any word of Scripture, these holy Innocents haue been honoured for Martyrs, and their holy day kept euer since the Apostles time, although they died not voluntarily, nor al perhaps circuncised, and some the children of Pagans. Aug. ep. ••. Orig. ho. 1. in diuersos.
The Martyrdō of the holy Innocents, Whose holy day is kept the 28 of Decembre.
2:18
Concordance Iere. 31, 15.
2:19
In the liturgy The Gospel on Twelfth eue.
2:1
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… We have seen his star in the east, and have [3] come to worship him. And Herod the king heard, and he was troubled, and all [4] Jerusalem with him. And he gathered all the chief priests and the scribes of the [5] people, and asked them in what place the Messiah should be born. They said, In Bethlehem of Judæa: thus it is written in the prophet,
Tertullian † AD 220 An Answer to the Jews 9
… Keep to the limit of (the infant’s) age , and inquire into the sense of the prediction; nay, rather, repay to truth what you are unwilling to credit her with, and the prophecy becomes intelligible by the relation of its fulfilment. Let those Eastern magi be believed, dowering with gold and incense the infancy of Christ as a king;
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Flesh of Christ 2
… “Away,” says he, “with that eternal plaguey taxing of Cæsar, and the scanty inn, and the squalid swaddling-clothes, and the hard stable. We do not care a jot for that multitude of the heavenly host which praised their Lord at night. Let the shepherds take better care of their flock, and let the wise men spare their legs so long a journey;
St Hippolytus † AD 235 The Refutation of All Heresies 7.15
… And that each thing, says (Basilides), has its own particular times, the Saviour is a sufficient (witness ) when He observes, “Mine hour is not yet come.” And the Magi (afford similar testimony) when they gaze wistfully upon the (Saviour’s) star.
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 2.13
… “And when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judah, in the days of Herod the king, behold, Magi came from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is He that is born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the east, and we have come with gifts to worship Him.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 2.30
… He hath wrought salvation in the midst of the earth.” Also in the Gospel according to Matthew: “And when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judah in the days of Herod the king, behold, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem, saying, Where is He who is born King of the Jews? for we have seen His star in the east, and have come to worship Him.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.5
… That narrative he constructs as follows, in immediate connection with what he has already offered: Behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is He that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen His star in the east, and are come to worship Him. Now, when Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled.
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 33
Although I know, dearly-beloved, that you are fully aware of the purpose of to-day’s festival, and that the words of the Gospel
2:2
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[1, 2] And after that, the Magi came from the east to Jerusalem,
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.9.2
… whose star also Balaam thus prophesied: “There shall come a star out of Jacob, and a leader shall rise in Israel.” But Matthew says that the Magi, coming from the east, exclaimed “For we have seen His star in the east, and are come to worship Him;”
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 1.8.1
… for they earnestly desired to worship the infant as God,
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 12.9
… rain , because of His heavenly nature, and into a fleece, because of His humanity. For rain, coming down into a fleece, comes down noiselessly: so that the Magi, not knowing the mystery of the Nativity, say, Where is He that is born King of the Jews
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 3
2. I do not think that I need spend much time in endeavoring to persuade you that we are Christian men; and if Christians, by virtue of the name, belonging to Christ. Upon the forehead we bear His sign; and we do not blush because of it, if we also bear it in the heart. His sign is His humility. By a star the Magi knew Him;
John Cassian † AD 435 The Seven Books of John Cassian on the Incarnation of the Lord, Against Nestorius 2.4
… Thus by using the right word, and one exactly suitable, he shows the light of this new grace almost as if he pointed to it with his finger. For that is most properly said to appear , which is shown by sudden light manifesting it. Just as we read in the gospel that the star appeared to the wise men in the East:
2:3
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[1, 2] And after that, the Magi came from the east to Jerusalem, and said, Where is the King of the Jews which was born? We have seen his star in the east, and have [3] come to worship him.
St Ephrem the Syrian † AD 373 Ephraim Syrus: Three Homilies 1.22
… But since our Lord was teaching humility to all men, He showed that His treasury was free from every form of pride. But this was for our sakes, that He might teach us, that whatever treasuries pride enters into, it is by boastfulness that it gains access to them. On this account let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth .
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.11
… Afterwards, when the things which had been done and said in the temple were made quite public, Herod perceived that he had been mocked; and then, in his desire to get at the death of Christ, he slew the multitude of children, as Matthew records.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 115.2
… hear, all ye kingdoms of the earth: I interfere not with your government in this world, “My kingdom is not of this world.” Cherish ye not the utterly vain terror that threw Herod the elder into consternation when the birth of Christ was announced, and led him to the murder of so many infants in the hope of including Christ in the fatal number,
2:4
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[1, 2] And after that, the Magi came from the east to Jerusalem, and said, Where is the King of the Jews which was born? We have seen his star in the east, and have [3] come to worship him. And Herod the king heard, and he was troubled, and all [4] Jerusalem with him.
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 12.9
… rain , because of His heavenly nature, and into a fleece, because of His humanity. For rain, coming down into a fleece, comes down noiselessly: so that the Magi, not knowing the mystery of the Nativity, say, Where is He that is born King of the Jews ? and Herod being troubled inquired concerning Him who was born, and said, Where is the Christ to be born
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 50
“But when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is.” (
2:5
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… We have seen his star in the east, and have [3] come to worship him. And Herod the king heard, and he was troubled, and all [4] Jerusalem with him. And he gathered all the chief priests and the scribes of the [5] people, and asked them in what place the Messiah should be born.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 20
… Wherefore also Christ saith, “Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile.” So that there is such a person as a false Israelite; but this is not such an one; for his judgment, Christ saith, is impartial, he speaks nothing from favor, or from ill-feeling. Yet the Jews, when they were asked where Christ should be born, replied, “In Bethlehem” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 57.8
… for thus it is written by the prophet; And thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah art not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of thee shall come a governour that shall rule my people Israel.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 1
Orth. —So again the divine apostle, reminding us of the blessing of Judah, and pointing out how it received its fulfilment exclaims “For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah.” So too the Prophet Micah and the evangelist
2:6
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus i.51
… “And thou Bethlehem, house of Ephrata, art not the least among the thousands of Judah: for out of thee shall He come forth unto Me who is to be Ruler in Israel; and His goings forth have been of old, from everlasting.”
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 11.20
… who began not His being when He was born in Bethlehem, but Before All Ages . For hear the Prophet Micah saying, And thou, Bethlehem, house of Ephrata, art little to be among the thousands of Judah. Out of thee shall come forth unto Me a Ruler, who shall feed My people Israel: and His goings forth are from the beginning, from days of eternity
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 20
… This belief at least prevailed among the Jews, and the Prophet had proclaimed it of old, saying, “And thou, Bethlehem, art by no means the least among the princes of Judah, for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall feed My people Israel.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 108.10
… and with a mixture of tears and joy she cried: ‘Hail Bethlehem, house of bread, wherein was born that Bread that came down from heaven. Hail Ephratah, land of fruitfulness and of fertility, whose fruit is the Lord Himself. Concerning thee has Micah prophesied of old, “Thou Bethlehem Ephratah art not
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 31.2
… For when the Magi, on the appearing of a star, sought Him out to worship Him, they came to Herod and told him what they sought and what they meant: and he, having called together those who had knowledge of the law, inquired of them where Christ should be born: they told him, “In Bethlehem of Judah,” and also brought forward the prophetic testimony.
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 1
… What is extraordinary is that he says that the open enemies of the truth plainly told Herod that the Christ is born in Bethlehem, for it is written, he says, “And thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah art not the least among the Princes of Judah for out of thee shall come a Governor who shall rule my people Israel.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyprus 152
… Thus through Micah God says “Thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah art not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of thee shall come a governor that shall rule my people Israel, whose goings forth have been as of old from everlasting.”
2:7
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… And they entered the house and beheld the child with Mary his mother, and fell down worshipping him, and opened their saddle-bags and offered to him offerings, gold and [12] myrrh and frankincense. And they saw in a dream that they should not return to Herod, and they travelled by another way in going to their country.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 7
3. “Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, inquired of them diligently what time the star appeared:”
2:8
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[7] Then Herod called the Magi secretly, and inquired of them the time at which [8] the star appeared to them.
2:9
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[7] Then Herod called the Magi secretly, and inquired of them the time at which [8] the star appeared to them. And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said unto them, Go and search about the child diligently; and when ye have found him, come and [9] make known to me, that I also may go and worship him.
St Hippolytus † AD 235 The Discourse on the Holy Theophany 3
… I am the sheep, and not the shepherd; I am a man, and not God. By my birth I loosed the barrenness of my mother; I did not make virginity barren. I was brought up from beneath; I did not come down from above. I bound the tongue of my father; I did not unfold divine grace. I was known by my mother, and I was not announced by a star.
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 2.24
… This is why the angels glorified first the heavenly, then the earthly, why the shepherds saw the glory over the Lamb and the Shepherd, why the star led the Magi to worship and offer gifts,
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 40
… It was Light that carried up Elias in the car of fire, and yet did not burn him as it carried him. It was Light that shone round the Shepherds when the Eternal Light was mingled with the temporal. It was Light that was the beauty of the Star that went before to Bethlehem to guide the Wise Men’s way,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 7
“And, lo! the star, which they saw in the east, went before them.”
2:10
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… and when ye have found him, come and [9] make known to me, that I also may go and worship him. And they, when they [Arabic, p. 11] heard the king, departed; and lo, the star which they had seen in the east went before them, until it came and stood above the place where the child [10, 11] was.
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 34
Led then, dearly beloved, into Bethlehem by obeying the guidance of the star, the wise men “rejoiced with very great joy,” as the evangelist has told us: “and entering the house, found the child with Mary, His mother; and falling down they worshipped Him; and opening their treasures they presented to Him gifts, gold, frankincense and myrrh
2:11
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… And they, when they [Arabic, p. 11] heard the king, departed; and lo, the star which they had seen in the east went before them, until it came and stood above the place where the child [10, 11] was. And when they beheld the star, they rejoiced with very great joy.
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Flesh of Christ 2
… We do not care a jot for that multitude of the heavenly host which praised their Lord at night. Let the shepherds take better care of their flock, and let the wise men spare their legs so long a journey; let them keep their gold to themselves.
St Peter of Alexandria † AD 311 The Canonical Epistle, with the Commentaries of Theodore Balsamon and John Zonaras 13
… whence they were no longer willing to return to the Assyrian king, being forbidden to do so by Providence. For “being warned of God in a dream,” he says, “that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Widows 5
30. Happy is she who out of her treasure brings forth the perfect image of the King. Your treasure is wisdom, your treasure is chastity and righteousness, your treasure is a good understanding, such as was that treasure from which the Magi, when they worshipped the Lord, brought forth gold, frankincense, and myrrh;
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 8
“And when they were come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 29.3
… If they had so much regard for the authority of the evangelist as to oblige them to admit that Christ suffered, at least in appearance, it is the same authority which testifies to His birth. Two evangelists, indeed, give the story of the birth; but in all we read of Jesus having a mother.
2:12
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… And when they beheld the star, they rejoiced with very great joy. And they entered the house and beheld the child with Mary his mother, and fell down worshipping him, and opened their saddle-bags and offered to him offerings, gold and [12] myrrh and frankincense.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 8
“And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return unto Herod, they departed into their own country another way.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 4.12
… which are not able to nourish the wings of virtues so as to fly upwards, but rather to heap up the weight of vices so as to press downwards; since the soul will fall down the more heavily, the more it seems to itself to have been carried upwards. Accordingly, as the Magi did when warned of God,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.5
… for we have seen His star in the east, and are come to worship Him. Now, when Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled. And in this manner the account goes on, down to the passage where of these magi it is written that, “being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret 1.3
… all things were created by Him and for Him: and He is before all things ’ Since the hypothesis implied in the phrase ‘out of the non-existent’ is manifestly impious, it follows that the Father is always Father. And He is Father from the continual presence of the Son, on account of whom He is called
2:13
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… And Herod then, when he saw that he was mocked of the Magi, was very angry, and sent and killed all the male children which were in Bethlehem and all its borders, from two years old and under, according to the time [17] which he had inquired from the Magi. Then was fulfilled the saying in Jeremiah the prophet, which said,
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus i.66
… for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost;” and on the second, “Arise, and take the young Child, and His mother, and flee into Egypt; and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 44
… For there, Moses after his birth was placed by his mother in an ark, and exposed beside the banks of the river; here, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His birth by Mary His mother, was sent off in flight into Egypt through the instrumentality of an angel.
St Peter of Alexandria † AD 311 The Canonical Epistle, with the Commentaries of Theodore Balsamon and John Zonaras 13
… And when Herod had sought for him, and found him not, he examined the keepers, and commanded that they should be put to death,” on account of whom no blame is attributed to Peter; for it was in their power, when they saw what was done, to escape, just as also all the infants in Bethlehem,
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Defence of His Flight. (Apologia de Fuga.) 12
… Thus at the very first, as soon as He became man, when He was a little child, He Himself by His Angel commanded Joseph, ‘Arise, and take the young Child and His Mother, and flee into Egypt; for Herod will seek the young Child’s life
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 10.10
… When He was about to be born of a Virgin, Gabriel was then His servant, having received His service as a peculiar dignity. When He was about to go into Egypt, that He might overthrow the gods of Egypt made with hands , again an Angel appeareth to Joseph in a dream
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 34
… and which is also enriched by Christ my Lord, Who once was a fugitive into Egypt, and now is supplied by Egypt; the first, when He fled from Herod’s massacre of the children;
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 38
XVIII. One thing connected with the Birth of Christ I would have you hate…the murder of the infants by Herod. Or rather you must venerate this too, the Sacrifice of the same age as Christ, slain before the Offering of the New Victim. If He flees into Egypt,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 8
2. “And when they were departed, behold, an angel appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and flee into Egypt.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 57.7
… Again the same evangelist writes that at the warning of an angel Joseph took the young child and his mother and went into Egypt and remained there till the death of Herod; “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.5
… And she, coming in that instant, gave thanks also unto the Lord, and spake of Him to all them that looked for the redemption of Jerusalem. And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, behold,
Socrates Scholasticus † AD 440 The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus 3.8
… For thus it became him, by hungering and thirsting and suffering other afflictions, to demonstrate that he was indeed made man. For at the very commencement, as soon as he was born, he gave this direction by an angel to Joseph: ‘Arise and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, for Herod will seek the infant’s life.’
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 2
Orth. —Yet after the conception He was an unborn babe in the womb; after His birth. He was a babe and was called a babe, and was worshipped by shepherds, and in like manner became a boy, and was so called by the angel.
2:14
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[13] And when they had departed, the angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph, and said unto him, Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I speak to thee; for Herod is determined to seek the child [14] to slay him.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.36
… So it was not because the Saviour was unable to protect His disciples that He told them, "When ye are persecuted in one city, flee to another." And He Himself set the example. For though He had the power of laying down His own life, and did not lay it down till He chose to do so, still when an infant He fled to Egypt, carried by His parents;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 83.7
… or, “Follow us into Judæa,” as though they would go first; but as though they would send Him before them. He wished that they should go before; He avoided this snare, impressing His infirmity as Man, hiding the Divinity; this He avoided, as when He fled into Egypt.
2:15
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[13] And when they had departed, the angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph, and said unto him, Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I speak to thee; for Herod is determined to seek the child [14] to slay him. And Joseph arose and took the child and his mother in the night, and [15] fled into Egypt,
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.9.2
2. Then again Matthew, when speaking of the angel, says, “The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in sleep.” Of what Lord he does himself interpret: “That it may be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, Out of Egypt have I called my son.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 13
… ii. 18; Jer. xxxi. 15 ); and again, when He comes up out of Egypt, they mention Hosea, saying, “Out of Egypt have I called My Son” (
St Jerome † AD 420 Jerome's Apology for Himself Against the Books of Rufinus 2.25
… But I was encouraged above all by the authoritative publications of the Evangelists and Apostles, in which we read much taken from the Old Testament which is not found in our manuscripts. For example, ‘Out of Egypt have I called my Son’ (
2:16
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… for Herod is determined to seek the child [14] to slay him. And Joseph arose and took the child and his mother in the night, and [15] fled into Egypt, and remained in it until the time of the death of Herod: that that might be fulfilled which was said by the Lord in the prophet, which said, From [16] Egypt did I call my son.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.16.4
… He, since He was Himself an infant, so arranging it that human infants should be martyrs, slain, according to the Scriptures, for the sake of Christ, who was born in Bethlehem of Judah, in the city of David.
Tertullian † AD 220 A Treatise on the Soul 19
… for Christ, by “accepting praise out of the mouth of babes and sucklings,” has declared that neither childhood nor infancy is without sensibility, —the former of which states, when meeting Him with approving shouts, proved its ability to offer Him testimony; while the other, by being slaughtered, for His sake of course, knew what violence meant.
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Flesh of Christ 2
… We do not care a jot for that multitude of the heavenly host which praised their Lord at night. Let the shepherds take better care of their flock, and let the wise men spare their legs so long a journey; let them keep their gold to themselves. Let Herod, too, mend his manners, so that Jeremy may not glory over him.
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 44
… There, before the sight of Moses, all the first-born of the Egyptians perished on account of the treachery of Pharaoh; and here, at the time of the birth of Jesus, every male among the Jews suddenly perished by reason of the treachery of Herod.
St Peter of Alexandria † AD 311 The Canonical Epistle, with the Commentaries of Theodore Balsamon and John Zonaras 13
… they departed into their own country another way.” Hence the bloodthirsty “Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth,” he says, “and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coast thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time that he had diligently inquired of the wise men.”
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 38
XVIII. One thing connected with the Birth of Christ I would have you hate…the murder of the infants by Herod.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Duties of the Clergy 1.41
213. What shall I say of those two-year-old children of Bethlehem,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 27
… For the thing that most annoyed him was the being mocked; just as in the case of his grandfather when he was deceived by the wise men, that was what made him (feel) cut to the heart—the being (eluded and) made ridiculous. “And having put them to the question,” it says, “he ordered them to be led away to execution.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 25.3
… But with respect to the birth of my soul, mine is as yet the age of those infants who, being sacrificed by the death-blows which were aimed at Christ, preceded with blood worthy of such honour the offering of the Lamb, and were the harbingers of the passion of the Lord.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.62
… accordingly, when actions of this kind are narrated, without being expressly condemned, it is intended not that we should praise them, but that we should pass judgment on them ourselves. Every one execrates the cruelty of Herod in the Gospel, when, in his uneasiness on hearing of the birth of Christ, he commanded the slaughter of so many infants.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Answer to the Letters of Petilian, the Donatist 2.93
… And to teach you shortly the truth of what I say, A king persecuted the brethren of the Maccabees. A king also condemned the three children to the sanctifying flames, being ignorant what he did, seeing that he himself was fighting against God. A king sought the life of the infant Saviour.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 48.5
… Kings behoved to fear lest they should lose the kingdom, lest the kingdom be taken from them. As wretched Herod feared, and for the Child slew the children.
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 16
… another, when without loss of her virgin purity the Boy was born and shown to the shepherds by the exulting joy of the heavenly attendants: another, when the Babe was circumcised: another, when the victim required by the Law is offered for him: another, when the three wise men attracted by the brightness of the new star
2:17
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… And Herod then, when he saw that he was mocked of the Magi, was very angry, and sent and killed all the male children which were in Bethlehem and all its borders, from two years old and under, according to the time [17] which he had inquired from the Magi.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 9
4. “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.”
2:18
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 13
… i. 22; Isa. vii. 14 ); and when He is plotted against and sought for everywhere so diligently, that even tender infancy is slaughtered by Herod, they bring in Jeremy, saying, “In Ramah was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children” (
2:19
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… But when he heard that Archelaus had become king over Judæa instead of Herod his father, he feared to go thither; and he saw in a dream that he should [23] go into the land of Galilee, and that he should abide in a city called Nazareth: that the saying in the prophet might be fulfilled, that he should be called a Nazarene.
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 1.8.17
17. After this an angel appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt and commanded him to go to Judea with the child and its mother, revealing to him that those who had sought the life of the child were dead.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 9
5. “But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.9
… whereas it would rather appear that the reason for their going into Galilee was, as Luke has not failed to indicate, the consideration that their city was Nazareth of Galilee? Well, but we must observe, that when the angel said to Joseph in his dreams in Egypt, “Arise, and take the young child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel,”
2:20
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[19] But when Herod the king died, the angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to [20] Joseph in Egypt,
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 The Epistles of Cyprian 68.10
… But it is no wonder, since his brethren said of Joseph, “Behold, this dreamer cometh; come now therefore, let us slay him.”
Aphrahat † AD 346 Aphrahat: Select Demonstrations 21.10
… and at the birth of Jesus the children of Bethlehem and in its borders were slain. To Moses God said:— The men are dead who were seeking thy life ; and to Joseph the angel said in Egypt:— Arise, take up the child, and go into the land of Israel, for they are dead who were seeking the life of the child to take it away .
St Hilary of Poitiers † AD 367 De Trinitate or On the Trinity 10.57
… We confess without hesitation, that Christ is God the Word: but on the other hand, we know that the Son of Man was composed of a soul and a body: compare the angel’s words to Joseph, Arise and take the child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel; for they are dead who sought the soul of the child
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 2.13
… and this He sanctifies by union with Himself for this end, that so the lump may be holy along with the first-fruits. Wherefore also the Angel, when informing Joseph of the destruction of the enemies of the Lord, said, “They are dead which sought the young Child’s life
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 44
… as in the Gospel it is said of the death of Herod, “for they are dead which sought the young child’s life,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 109.19
… It is not then one Judas, but many, of whom it is said, “This is the work of them that slander me before the Lord.” Although indeed the plural number might have been put for the singular; even as, when Herod died, it was said by the Angel, “They are dead which sought the young Child’s life.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyprus 152
… No man taketh it from me.” And the angel said to Joseph, “Take the young child and His mother and go into the land of Israel; for they are dead which sought the young child’s soul (life A.V.)”
2:21
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[19] But when Herod the king died, the angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to [20] Joseph in Egypt, and said unto him, Rise and take the child and his mother, and [Arabic, p. 12] go into the land of Israel; for they have died who sought the child’s life. [21]
2:22
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
[19] But when Herod the king died, the angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to [20] Joseph in Egypt, and said unto him, Rise and take the child and his mother, and [Arabic, p. 12] go into the land of Israel; for they have died who sought the child’s life. [21] And Joseph rose and took the child and his mother, and came to the land [22] of Israel.
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 1.8.17
… To this the evangelist adds, “But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in the room of his father Herod he was afraid to go thither; notwithstanding being warned of God in a dream he turned aside into the parts of Galilee.”
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 1.9.1
1. The historian already mentioned agrees with the evangelist in regard to the fact that Archelaus
2:23
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 3
… 12] go into the land of Israel; for they have died who sought the child’s life. [21] And Joseph rose and took the child and his mother, and came to the land [22] of Israel. But when he heard that Archelaus had become king over Judæa instead of Herod his father, he feared to go thither; and he saw in a dream that he should [23] go into the land of Galilee,
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 10.16
… and coming into His own country He taught them in their synagogue.” And Mark says, “And He came into His own country and His disciples follow Him.” We must therefore inquire whether, by the expression, “His own country,” is meant Nazareth or Bethlehem,—Nazareth, because of the saying, “He shall be called a Nazarene,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 9
6. We see here the cause why the angel also, putting them at ease for the future, restores them to their home. And not even this simply, but he adds to it a prophecy, “That it might be fulfilled,” saith he, “which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 7
Where are these words written? Why, it is said to have been “written,” then also, when it is set down, not in words, but in actual events, as in the historical books
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 57.7
… If any man offend not in word the same is a perfect man and able also to bridle the whole body.” Once more it is written in the pages of the same evangelist, “And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 31.2
… but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.” As to how this opinion among the Jews arose, that “when Christ comes, no man knoweth whence He is” (for it did not arise without reason), if we consider the Scriptures, we find, brethren, that the Holy Scriptures have declared of Christ that “He shall be called a Nazarene.”
2:1
St Augustine † AD 430 non occ.
After the miraculous Virgin-birth, a God-man having by Divine power proceeded from a virgin womb; in the obscure shelter of such a cradle, a narrow stall, wherein lay Infinite Majesty in a body more narrow, a God was suckled and suffered the wrapping of vile rags—amidst all this, on a sudden a new star shone in the sky upon the earth, and driving away the darkness of the world, changed night into day; that the day-star should not be hidden by the night. Hence it is that the Evangelist says, Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem.
Remigius † AD 908
In the beginning of this passage of the Gospel he puts three several things; the person, When Jesus was born, the place, in Bethlehem of Judæa, and the time, in the days of Herod the king. These three circumstances verify his words.
St Jerome † AD 420
We think the Evangelist first wrote, as we read in the Hebrew, ‘Judah,’ not ‘Judæa.’ For in what other country is there a Bethlehem, that this needs to be distinguished as in ‘Judæa?’ But ‘Judah’ is written, because there is another Bethlehem in Galilee.
The Gloss ord. Josh. 19:15.
There are two Bethlehems; one in the tribe of Zabulon, the other in the tribe of Judah, which was before called Ephrata.
St Augustine † AD 430 De Cons. Evang. 2. 15.
Concerning the place, Bethlehem, Matthew and Luke agree; but the cause and manner of their being there, Luke relates, Matthew omits. Luke again omits the account of the Magi, which Matthew gives.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Let us see to what serves this designation of time. In the days of Herod the king. It shews the fulfilment of Daniel’s prophecy, wherein he spake that Christ should be born after seventy weeks of years. For from the time of the prophecy to the reign of Herod, the years of seventy weeks were accomplished. Or again, as long as Judæa was ruled by Jewish princes, though sinners, so long prophets were sent for its amendment; but now, whereas God’s law was held under the power of an unrighteous king, and the righteousness of God enslaved by the Roman rule, Christ is born; the more desperate sickness required the better physician.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
Otherwise, he mentions the foreign king to shew the fulfilment of the prophecy. The Sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come. (Gen. 49:10.)
St Ambrose † AD 397 in Luc. iii. 41.
It is said, that some Idumæan robbers coming to Ascalon, brought with them among other prisoners Antipatera. He was instructed in the law and customs of the Jews, and acquired the friendship of Hyrcanus, king of Judæa, who sent him as his deputy to Pompey. He succeeded so well in the object of his mission, that he laid claim to a share of the throne. He was put to death, but his son Herod was under Antony appointed king of Judæa, by a decree of the Senate; so it is clear that Herod sought the throne of Judæa without any connection or claim of birth.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
Herod the king, mentioning his dignity, because there was another Herod who put John to death.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
When He was born … behold wise men, that is, immediately on His birth, shewing that a great God existed in a little one of man.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
The Magi are men who enquire into the nature of things philosophically, but common speech uses Magi for wizards. In their own country, however, they are held in other repute, being the philosophers of the Chaldæans, in whose lore kings and princes of that nation are taught, and by which themselves knew the birth of the Lord.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 202.
What were these Magi but the first fruits of the Gentiles? Israelitish shepherds, gentile Magians, one from far, the other from near, hastened to the one Corner-stone.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 200.
Jesus then was manifested neither to the learned nor the righteous; for ignorance belonged to the shepherds, impiety to the idolatrous Magi. Yet does that Corner-stone attract them both to Itself, seeing He came to choose the foolish things of this world to confound the wise, and not to call the righteous, but sinners; that nothing great should exalt himself, none weak should despair.
The Gloss
These Magi were kings, and though their gifts were three, it is not to be thence inferred that themselves were only three in number, but in them was prefigured the coming to the faith of the nations sprung from the three sons of Noah. Or, the princes were only three, but each brought a large company with him. They came not after a year’s end, for He would then have been found in Egypt, not in the manger, but on the thirteenth day. To shew whence they came it is said, from the East.
Remigius † AD 908
It should be known, that opinions vary respecting the Magi. Some say they were Chaldæans, who are known to have worshipped a star as God; thus their fictitious Deity shewed them the way to the true God. Others think that they were Persians; others again, that they came from the utmost ends of the earth. Another and more probable opinion is, that they were descendants of Balaam, who having his prophecy, There shall rise a Star out of Jacob, (Numb. 24:17.) as soon as they saw the star, would know that a King was born.
St Jerome † AD 420
They knew that such a star would rise by the prophecy of Balaam, whose successors they were. But whether they were Chaldæans, or Persians, or came from the utmost ends of the earth, how in so short a space of time could they arrive at Jerusalem?
Remigius † AD 908
Some used to answer, ‘No marvel if that boy who was then born could draw them so speedily, though it were from the ends of the earth.’
The Gloss
Or, they had dromedaries and Arabian horses, whose great swiftness brought them to Bethlehem in thirteen days.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or, they had set out two years before the Saviour’s birth, and though they travelled all that time, neither meat nor drink failed in their scrips.
Remigius † AD 908
Or, if they were the descendants of Balaam, their kings are not far distant from the land of promise, and might easily come to Jerusalem in that so short time. But why does he write from the East? Because surely they came from a country eastward of Judæa. But there is also great beauty in this, They came out of the East, seeing all who come to the Lord, come from Him and through Him; as it is said in Zechariah, Behold the Man whose name is the East. (Zech. 6:12.)
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or, whence the day springs, thence came the first-fruits of the faith; for faith is the light of the soul. Therefore they came from the East, but to Jerusalem.
Remigius † AD 908
Yet was not the Lord born there; thus they knew the time but not the place of His birth. Jerusalem being the royal city, they believed that such a child could not be born in any other. Or it was to fulfil that Scripture, The Law shall go out of Sion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. (Isa. 2:3.) And there Christ was first preached. Or it was to condemn the backwardness of the Jews.
Pseudo-Augustine Append. Serm. 132.
Many kings of Judæa had been born and died before, yet had Magi ever sought out any of them for adoration? No, for they had not been taught that any of these spoke from heaven. To no ordinary King of Judæa had these men, aliens from the land of Judæa, ever thought such honour due. But they had been taught that this Child was one, in worshipping whom they would certainly secure that salvation which is of God. Neither His age was such as attracts men’s flattery; His limbs not robed in purple, His brow not crowned with a diamond, no pompous train, no awful army, no glorious fame of battles, attracted these men to Him from the remotest countries, with such earnestness of supplication. There lay in a manger a Boy, newly born, of infantine size, of pitiable poverty. But in that small Infant lay hid something great, which these men, the first-fruits of the Gentiles, had learned not of earth but of heaven; as it follows, We have seen His star in the east. They announce the vision and ask, they believe and enquire, as signifying those who walk by faith and desire sight.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 in Evang. i. 10. n. 4.
It should be known that the Priscillianists, heretics who believe every man to be born under the aspect of some planet, cite this text in support of their error; the new star which appeared at the Lord’s birth they consider to have been his fate.
St Augustine † AD 430 vid. contr. Faust. ii. 1.
And, according, to Faustus this introduction of the account of the star would lead us rather to call this part of the history, ‘The Nativity,’ than ‘The Gospel.’
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Sup. 2.
But far be it from the hearts of the faithful to call any thing, ‘fate.’
St Augustine † AD 430 de Civ. Dei, v. 1.
For by the word ‘fate,’ in common acceptation, is meant the disposition of the stars at the moment of a person’s birth or conception; to which some assign a power independent of the will of God. These must be kept at a distance from the ears of all who desire to be worshippers of Gods of any sort. But others think the stars have this virtue committed to them by the great God; wherein they greatly wrong the skies, in that they impute to their splendent host the decreeing of crimes, such as should any earthly people decree, their city should in the judgment of mankind deserve to be utterly destroyed.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
If then any should become an adulterer or homicide through means of the planets, how great is the evil and wickedness of those stars, or rather of Him who made them? For as God knows things to come, and what evils are to spring from those stars; if He would not hinder it, He is not good; if He would but could not, He is weak. Again, if it be of the star that we are either good or bad, we have neither merit nor demerit, as being involuntary agents; and why should I be punished for sin which I have done not wilfully, but by necessity? The very commands of God against sin, and exhortations to righteousness, overthrow such folly. For where a man has not power to do, or where he has not power to forbear, who would command him either to do or to forbear?
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395
How vain moreover is prayer for those who live by fate; Divine Providence is banished from the world together with piety, and man is made the mere instrument of the sidereal motions. For these they say move to action, not only the bodily members, but the thoughts of the mind. In a word, they who teach this, take away all that is in us, and the very nature of a contingency; which is nothing less than to overturn all things. For where will there be free will? but that which is in us must be free.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Civ. Dei, v. 6.
It cannot be said to be utterly absurd to suppose that sidereal afflatus should influence the state of the body, when we see that it is by the approach and departure of the sun that the seasons of the year are varied, and that many things, as shells and the wonderful tides of the Ocean, increase or decrease as the moon waxes or wanes. But not so, to say that the dispositions of the mind are subject to sidereal impulse. Do they say that the stars rather foreshew than effect these results? how then do they explain, that in the life of twins, in their actions, their successes, professions, honours, and all other circumstances of life, there will often be so great diversity, that men of different countries are often more alike in their lives than twins, between whose birth there was only a moment’s, and between whose conception in the womb there was not a moment’s, interval. And the small interval between their births is not enough to account for the great difference between their fates. Some give the name of fate not only to the constitution of the stars, but to all series of causes, at the same time subjecting all to the will and power of God. This sort of subjection of human affairs and fate is a confusion of language which should be corrected, for fate is strictly the constitution of the stars. The will of God we do not call ‘fate,’ unless indeed we will derive the word from ‘speaking;’ as in the Psalms, God hath spoken once, twice have I heard the same. (Ps. 62:11.) There is then no need of much contention about what is merely a verbal controversy.
St Augustine † AD 430 cont. Faust. ii. 5.
But if we will not subject the nativity of any man to the influence of the stars, in order that we may vindicate the freedom of the will from any chain of necessity; how much less must we suppose sidereal influences to have ruled at His temporal birth, who is eternal Creator and Lord of the universe? The star which the Magi saw, at Christ s birth according to the flesh, did not rule His fate, but ministered as a testimony to Him. Further, this was not of the number of those stars, which from the beginning of the creation observe their paths of motion according to the law of their Maker; but a star that first appeared at the birth, ministering to the Magi who sought Christ, by going before them till it brought them to the place where the infant God the Word was. According to some astrologers such is the connexion of human fate with the stars, that on the birth of some men stars have been known to leave their courses, and go directly to the new-born. The fortune indeed of him that is born they suppose to be bound up with the course of the stars, not that the course of the stars is changed after the day of any man’s birth. If then this star were of the number of those that fulfil their courses in the heavens, how could it determine what Christ should do, when it was commanded at His birth only to leave its own course? If, as is more probable, it was first created at His birth, Christ was not therefore born because it arose, but the reverse; so that if we must have fate connected with the stars, this star did not rule Christ’s fate, but Christ the stars.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
The object of astrology is not to learn from the stars the fact of one’s birth; but from the hour of their nativity to forecast the fate of those that are born. But these men knew not the time of the nativity to have forecast the future from it, but the converse.
The Gloss interlin.
‘His star,’ i. e. the star He created for a witness of Himself.
The Gloss ord.
To the Shepherds, Angels, and the Magians, a star points out Christ; to both speaks the tongue of Heaven, since the tongue of the Prophets was mute. The Angels dwell in the heavens, the stars adorn it, to both therefore the heavens declare the glory of God.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. in Ev. Lib. i. Hom. 10.
To the Jews who used their reason, a rational creature, i. e. an Angel, ought to preach. But the Gentiles who knew not to use their reason are brought to the knowledge of the Lord, not by words, but by signs; to the one prophecy, as to the faithful; to the other signs, as to the unbelievers. One and the same Christ is preached, when of perfect age, by Apostles; when an infant, and not yet able to speak, is announced by a star to the Gentiles; for so the order of reason required; speaking preachers proclaimed a speaking Lord, mute signs proclaimed a mute infant.
St Leo the Great † AD 461 Serm. xxxiii. 2.
Christ Himself, the expectation of the nations, that innumerable posterity once promised to the most blessed patriarch Abraham, but to be born not after the flesh, but by the Spirit; therefore likened to the stars for multitude, that from the father of all nations, not an earthly but an heavenly progeny might be looked for. Thus the heirs of that promised posterity, marked out in the stars, are roused to the faith by the rise of a new star, and where the heavens had been at first called in to witness, the aid of Heaven is continued.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
This was manifestly not one of the common stars of Heaven. First, because none of the stars moves in this way, from east to south, and such is the situation of Palestine with respect to Persia. Secondly, from the time of its appearance, not in the night only, but during the day. Thirdly, from its being visible and then again invisible; when they entered Jerusalem it hid itself, and then appeared again when they left Herod. Further, it had no stated motion, but when the Magi were to go on, it went before them; when to stop, it stopped like the pillar of cloud in the desert. Fourthly, it signified the Virgin’s delivery, not by being fixed aloft, but by descending to earth, shewing herein like an invisible virtue formed into the visible appearance of a star.
Remigius † AD 908
Some affirm this star to have been the Holy Spirit; He who descended on the baptized Lord as a dove, appearing to the Magi as a star. Others say it was an Angel, the same who appeared to the shepherds.
The Gloss ord.
In the east. It seems doubtful whether this refers to the place of the star, or of those that saw it; it might have risen in the east, and gone before them to Jerusalem.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 374. 1.
Will you ask, from whom had they learned that such an appearance as a star was to signify the birth of Christ? I answer from Angels, by the warning of some revelation. Do you ask, was it from good or ill Angels? Truly even wicked spirits, namely the dæmons, confessed Christ to be the Son of God. But why should they not have heard it from good Angels, since in this their adoration of Christ their salvation was sought, not their wickedness condemned? The Angels might say to them, ‘The Star which ye have seen is the Christ. Go ye, worship Him, where He is now born, and see how great is He that is born.’
St Leo the Great † AD 461 Serm. xxxiv. 3.
Besides that star thus seen with the bodily eye, a yet brighter ray of truth pierced their hearts; they were enlightened by the illumination of the true faith.
Pseudo-Augustine Hill. Quæst. V. and N. Test. q. 63.
They might think that a king of Judæa was born, since the birth of temporal princes is sometimes attended by a star. These Chaldean Magi inspected the stars, not with malevolence, but with the true desire of knowledge; following, it may be supposed, the tradition from Balaam; so that when they saw this new and singular star, they understood it to be that of which Balaam had prophesied, as marking the birth of a King of Judæa.
St Leo the Great † AD 461 ubi sup.
What they knew and believed might have been sufficient for themselves, that they needed not to seek to see with the bodily eye, what they saw so clearly with the spiritual. But their earnestness and perseverance to see the Babe was for our profit. It profited us that Thomas, after the Lord’s resurrection, touched and felt the marks of his wounds, and so for our profit the Magians’ eyes looked on the Lord in His cradle.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Were they then ignorant that Herod reigned in Jerusalem? Or that it is a capital treason to proclaim another King while one yet lives? But while they thought on the King to come, they feared not the king that was; while as yet they had not seen Christ, they were ready to die for Him. O blessed Magi! who before the face of a most cruel king, and before having beheld Christ, were made His confessors.
The Latin text
Augustinus in Serm. 5 de Epiph
Post miraculum virginei partus quo uterus divino numine plenus, salvo pudoris signo, Deum hominem profudit, inter obscuras cubiculi latebras et praesepis angustias, in quibus infinita maiestas membris contractioribus stabulabat, dum pendet ad ubera et vilium patitur Deus involumenta pannorum, repente novum de caelo sidus terris effulsit, et, totius mundi dissipata caligine, noctem convertit in diem ne dies celaretur in nocte; unde Evangelista dicit cum ergo natus esset Iesus in Bethlehem
et cetera. Remigius
In principio autem huius evangelicae lectionis tria ponit: personam, cum dicitur cum natus esset Iesus; locum, cum ait in Bethlehem Iudae; tempus, cum addit in diebus Herodis regis. Et haec tria ad confirmationem narrandae rei ponuntur
Hieronymus in Matth
Putamus autem ab Evangelista primum editum, sicut in Hebraico legimus, Iudae, non Iudaeae. Quae est enim aliarum gentium Bethlehem, ut ad distinctionem eius hic Iudaeae poneretur? Iudae autem idcirco scribitur, quia et aliam Bethlehem in Iudaea legimus in libro Iesu filii Nave
Glossa
Duae enim Bethlehem sunt: alia quae est in terra Zabulon, altera quae in terra Iuda, quae prius vocata est Ephrata
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
De civitate autem Bethlehem Matthaeus Lucasque consentiunt. Sed quomodo et qua causa ad eam venerint Ioseph et Maria, Lucas exponit, Matthaeus praetermittit. E contra de magis ab oriente venientibus Lucas tacet, Matthaeus dicit
Chrysostomus super Matthaeum
Sed videamus quid ad utilitatem respiciat quod Evangelista tempus designat quo Christus nascitur, dicens in diebus Herodis regis, quod dicit ut prophetiam Danielis impletam demonstraret, quae post LXX septimanas annorum Christum nasciturum esse praedicit. Nam ex illo tempore usque ad regnum Herodis LXX septimanarum anni sunt consummati; vel ideo quia quamdiu Iudaica gens sub Iudaicis regibus, quamvis peccatoribus, tenebatur, prophetae mittebantur ad remedium eius; nunc autem quando lex Dei sub potestate regis iniqui tenebatur et iustitia Dei sub dominatione Romana premebatur, nascitur Christus, quia magna et desperabilis infirmitas medicum artificiosiorem quaerebat
Rabanus Maurus
Vel ideo regis alienigenae mentionem fecit, ut impleretur prophetia quae dixit: non auferetur sceptrum de Iuda nec dux de femore eius, donec veniat qui mittendus est
Ambrosius super Lucam
Fertur autem quod Idumaei latrones Ascalonem ingressi, Antipatrum inter alios adduxerunt captivum. Is igitur imbutus mysteriis Iudaeorum, Hircano Iudaeae regi amicitia copulatur, quem pro se ad Pompeium Hircanus direxit; et quia legationis fructu potitus est, per eam gratiam partem regni affectavit. Occiso autem Antipatro, filius eius Herodes sub Antonio senatus consulto Iudaeis regnare praeceptus est; in quo claret Herodem nulla affinitate gentis Iudaeorum regnum quaesisse
Chrysostomus in Matth
Dicitur autem Herodis regis, dignitatem addens, quia et alius fuit Herodes qui Ioannem interfecit
Chrysostomus super Matth
Dum ergo hoc tempore natus esset, ecce magi veniunt, hoc est confestim ut natus est, magnum Deum ostendentes in parvulo homine
Rabanus Maurus
Magi vero sunt qui de singulis rebus philosophantur; sed sermo communis magos pro maleficis accepit; qui aliter tamen habentur apud gentem suam, eo quod sint philosophi Chaldaeorum, et ab huius artis scientia reges quoque et principes eiusdem gentis omnia sapiunt, et ipsi primum ortum domini intellexerunt
Augustinus in Serm. 4 de Epiph
Isti autem magi quid fuerunt nisi primitiae gentium? Israelitae pastores, magi gentiles; illi prope, isti longe, utrique tamen ad angularem lapidem cucurrerunt. Manifestatus est ergo Iesus non doctis nec iustis; praevalet namque imperitia in rusticitate pastorum, et impietas in sacrilegiis magorum. Utrosque sibi lapis ille angularis attribuit, quippe qui venerit stulta eligere ut confunderet sapientes, et non vocare iustos, sed peccatores, ut nullus magnus superbiret, nullus infirmus desperaret
Glossa
Hi autem magi reges fuerunt, qui etsi tria munera obtulisse dicuntur, non ideo non plures quam tres fuisse probantur, sed ut per eos gentes, quae ex tribus filiis Noe natae sunt, venturae ad fidem praefigurarentur. Vel tot fuerunt principes, qui plures duxerunt in comitatu suo. Venerunt autem non post annum, quia tunc inveniretur in Aegypto, non in praesepio, sed tertiadecima die. Ad ostendendum autem unde venirent, dicitur ab oriente
Remigius
Sciendum est autem quia varia est de magis opinio. Quidam enim dicunt eos fuisse Chaldaeos; Chaldaei enim stellam pro Deo colebant, et idcirco dixerunt quod nuncupativus eorum Deus ostenderit Deum verum natum. Alii vero dicunt Persas eos fuisse. Nonnulli dicunt illos de ultimis finibus terrae fuisse. Alii vero dicunt illos fuisse nepotes Balaam, quod magis est credendum; Balaam enim inter cetera quae prophetavit dixit: orietur stella ex Iacob. Illi vero habentes hanc prophetiam, mox ut viderunt stellam novam, intellexerunt regem natum, et venerunt
Hieronymus in Matth
Et sic hanc stellam futuram vaticinio Balaam noverant, cuius erant successores. Sed quaerendum est: si Chaldaei vel Persae aut de ultimis finibus terrae fuerunt, quomodo in tam brevi spatio Hierosolymam venire potuerunt?
Remigius
Sed sciendum est quod aliqui solent dicere quod puer qui tunc natus est, in tam brevi spatio temporis de ultimis finibus terrae ad se perducere potuit
Glossa
Vel non mirandum est eos in tredecim diebus venisse in Bethlehem, cum equos Arabicos et dromedarios haberent, qui scilicet sunt veloces ad iter
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel per biennium ante Christi nativitatem profecti sunt, et stella eos praecedebat, et neque esca neque potus defecit in peris eorum
Remigius
Vel si fuerunt successores Balaam, reges isti non longe distant a terra promissionis; idcirco in tam brevi spatio temporis Ierusalem venire potuerunt. Sed tunc quaerendum est quare Evangelista dicat eos ab oriente venisse. Quod ideo est, quia ab illa regione venerunt quae in Orientali parte Iudaeis posita est. Pulchre autem ipsi ab oriente venisse dicuntur, quia omnes qui ad dominum veniunt, ab ipso et per ipsum veniunt; ipse est oriens, secundum illud: ecce vir, oriens nomen eius
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel ab oriente venerunt. Unde dies nascitur, inde initium fidei processit, quia fides lumen est animarum. Ab oriente ergo venerunt, sed Hierosolymam
Remigius
Quamvis dominus ibi natus non esset quia licet agnoscerent nativitatis tempus, locum tamen non cognoverunt. Ierusalem enim regia civitas est, et crediderunt quod talis puer non nisi in urbe regia nasci debuisset. Sive ideo venerunt ut adimpleretur quod scriptum est: de Sion exibit lex, et verbum domini de Ierusalem, quia ibi primo annuntiatus est Christus; sive ut studio magorum damnaretur pigritia Iudaeorum. Venerunt ergo Hierosolymam, dicentes: ubi est qui natus est rex Iudaeorum?
Augustinus in Serm. 2 de Epiph
Cum autem multi nati atque defuncti essent reges Iudaeorum, numquid quemquam eorum adorandum magi quaesierunt? Non, quia nec quemquam eorum de caelo loquentem didicerunt. Non itaque regi Iudaeorum, quales esse illic solebant, hunc tam magnum honorem longinqui alienigenae ab eodem regno prorsus extranei a se deberi arbitrantur. Sed talem natum esse didicerant, in quo adorando se salutem, quae secundum Deum est, consecuturos minime dubitarent; neque enim aetas erat saltem cui adulatio humana serviret, non de membris purpura, non in capite diadema fulgebat, non pompa famulantium, non terror exercitus, non gloriosa fama praeliorum hos ad eum viros ex remotis terris cum tanto voto supplicationis attraxerunt. Iacebat in praesepio puer, ortu recens, exiguus corpore, contemptibilis paupertate. Sed magnum aliquid latebat in parvo, quod illi homines primitiae gentium, non terra portante, sed caelo narrante didicerant; unde sequitur vidimus enim stellam eius in oriente. Annuntiant et interrogant, credunt et quaerunt, tamquam significantes eos qui ambulant per fidem et desiderant speciem
Chrysostomus in Matth
Sciendum autem, quod Priscillianistae haeretici, qui nasci unumquemque hominem sub constitutionibus stellarum putant, hoc in adiutorium sui erroris assumunt, quod nova stella exiit, cum dominus in carne apparuit, cuius fuisse fatum eamdem quae apparuit stellam putant
Augustinus contra Faustum
Et secundum Faustum hic stella inducitur, quae confirmat Genesim, ut recte genesidium hoc magis nuncupari possit quam Evangelium
Gregorius in Evang
Sed absit a fidelium cordibus ut esse quid fatum dicant
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
Nam homines quando fatum audiunt, usitata loquendi consuetudine non intelligunt nisi vim positionis siderum, qualis est quando quis nascitur sive concipitur; quod aliqui alienant a Dei voluntate. Et hi ab auribus omnium repellendi sunt, qui qualiumcumque deorum volunt esse cultores. Aliqui vero stellas hanc putant habere potestatem traditam sibi a summa Dei potestate: qui magnam caelo faciunt iniuriam, in cuius velut splendidissima curia opinantur scelera facienda decerni; qualia si aliqua terrena civitas decrevisset, genere humano decernente fuerat evertenda
Chrysostomus super Matth
Si ergo aliquis adulter et homicida fiat per stellam, magna est iniquitas illarum stellarum, magis illius qui creavit stellas; nam cum sit praescius futurorum Deus, ex quo tanta iniquitas futura per stellas, si voluit ei dare, non est bonus; si noluit ei dare, et non potuit, impotens est. Si etiam stellae est quod aut mali sumus aut boni, ergo nec bonum nostrum laudandum est, nec malum vituperandum, quia nec in nobis est voluntarius actus; ut quid enim mali mei poenam suscipiam, quod non voluntate, sed necessitate commisi? Ipsa denique mandata Dei ne peccent homines, aut hortamenta ut faciant bonum, hanc insipientiam destruunt. Quis enim iubet aliquem ne faciat malum quod non potest declinare, aut faciat bonum ad quod non potest pervenire?
Gregorius Nyssenus Philos
Insipientes vero sunt orationes omnibus secundum fatum existentibus; exulat autem et providentia Dei cum pietate, cum his et homo organum solum invenitur superni circularis motus; ab hoc enim moveri ad operationes aiunt non solum partes corporis, sed animae excogitationes; et universaliter qui hoc dicunt, quae in nobis sunt, et contingentis naturam destruunt; et ita nihil aliud est hoc quam omnia evertere. Ubi etiam de reliquo erit liberum arbitrium? Liberum enim oportet esse quod est in nobis
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
Non usquequaque autem absurde dici potest, ad solas corporum differentias afflatus quosdam valere sidereos, sicut solaribus accessibus et decessibus videmus anni tempora variari, et lunaribus incrementis atque decrementis augeri et minui quaedam genera rerum, sicut conchas et mirabiles aestus Oceani; non autem animi voluntates positionibus siderum subdi. Quod si dicantur stellae significare ista potius quam facere, quid est quod nunquam dicere potuerunt cur in vita geminorum, in actionibus, in eventibus, professionibus, actibus, honoribus, ceterisque rebus ad humanam vitam pertinentibus, atque in ipsa morte plerumque sit tanta diversitas, ut similiores sint multi extranei quam ipsi inter se gemini, per exiguum temporis intervallum in nascendo separati, in conceptu autem per concubitum uno etiam momento seminati? Quod ergo conantur efficere de intervallo exigui temporis quod ipsi inter se gemini dum nascerentur habuerunt, non tantum valet quanta invenitur in geminorum voluntatibus, actibus, moribus casibusque diversitas. Quidam vero non astrorum constitutionem, sed omnium connexionem seriemque causarum, quam Dei summi tribuunt voluntati et potestati, fati nomine appellant. Si quis ergo res humanas fato tribuit quia ipsam Dei voluntatem vel potestatem fati nomine appellat, sententiam teneat, linguam corrigat, quoniam fati nomen solet a loquentibus poni in siderum constitutione. Unde voluntatem Dei fati vocabulo non nuncupamus, nisi forte ut fatum a fando, idest a loquendo, dictum intelligamus. Scriptum est enim: semel locutus est Deus: duo haec audivi. Unde non est multum cum eis de verbi controversia laborandum atque certandum
Augustinus contra Faustum
Si autem sub fato stellarum nullius hominis Genesim ponimus ut liberum arbitrium voluntatis ab omni necessitatis vinculo vindicemus, quanto minus illius temporalem generationem sub astrorum conditionem credimus factam, qui est universorum aeternus creator et dominus? Itaque illa stella quam viderunt magi, Christo secundum carnem nato, non ad decretum dominabatur, sed ad testimonium famulabatur. Proinde non ex illis erat stellis quae ab initio creaturae itinerum suorum ordinem sub creatoris lege custodiunt, sed novo virginis partu novum sidus apparuit, quod ministerium officii sui etiam ipsis magis quaerentibus Christum, cum ante faciem praeiret, exhibuit, donec eos usque ad ipsum locum ubi Deus verbum infans erat, praeeundo perduceret. Quidam autem astrologi ita constituerunt nascentium hominum fata sub stellis, ut aliquam stellarum, homine aliquo nato, circuitus sui ordinem reliquisse, et ad eum qui natus est, perrexisse asseverent. Sortem quippe nascentis astrorum ordini colligari arbitrantur, non astrorum ordinem ad hominis nati diem posse mutari. Quapropter si stella illa ex his erat quae in caelo peragunt ordines suos quomodo poterat discernere quid Christus acturus erat, quae nato Christo iussa est relinquere quod agebat? Si autem, ut probabilius creditur, ad demonstrandum Christum, quae non erat, exorta est; non ideo Christus natus quia illa extitit, sed illa extitit quia Christus natus est; unde si dici oporteret, non stellam Christo, sed Christum stellae, fatum fuisse diceremus: ipse quippe illi, non illa huic nascendi attulit causam
Chrysostomus super Matth
Non est hoc etiam astronomiae opus a stellis scire eos qui nascuntur, sed ab hora nativitatis futura praedicere; hi autem tempus nativitatis non cognoverunt, ut hinc sumentes initium a stellarum motu futura cognoscerent, sed e converso. Dicunt ergo vidimus stellam eius
Glossa
Idest propriam, quia hanc creavit ad ostensionem sui
Augustinus in Serm. 2 de Epiph
Pastoribus Angeli, magis stella Christum demonstrat: utrisque loquitur lingua caelorum, quia lingua cessaverat prophetarum. Caelos Angeli habitant, et sidera exornant: utrisque ergo caeli enarrant gloriam Dei
Gregorius in Evang
Et rationabiliter Iudaeis, tamquam ratione utentibus, rationale animal, idest Angelus, praedicare debuit. Gentiles vero, quia ratione uti nesciebant, ad cognoscendum dominum non per vocem, sed per signa perducuntur, quia et illis prophetiae tamquam fidelibus, et istis signa tamquam infidelibus data sunt. Eisdem autem gentibus Christum, cum perfectae esset aetatis, apostoli praedicant, eumque parvulum et necdum per humanitatis officium loquentem stella gentibus denuntiat: quia nimirum rationis ordo poscebat ut loquentem iam dominum loquentes nobis praedicatores, et necdum loquentem elementa muta praedicarent
Leo Papa in Serm. 3 de Epiph
Ipse etiam Christus expectatio gentium, de quibus quondam beatissimo patri Abrahae innumerabilis fuit promissa successio, non carnis semine, sed fidei fecunditate generanda; et ideo stellarum multitudini comparata, ut ab omnium gentium patre, non terrena, sed caelestis progenies speraretur. Ad credendum ergo promissae posteritatis heredes in sideribus designati, ortu novi sideris excitantur, ut in quo caelum est adhibitum in testimonium, caeli famuletur obsequium
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quoniam autem non caelestium una stellarum haec fuit, manifestum est; nulla enim alia stellarum hac via procedit; haec enim ab oriente in meridiem ferebatur, ita enim Palaestina ad Persidem iacet. Secundo autem a tempore quo videbatur: non enim in nocte apparuit tantum, sed in media die; quod non est virtutis stellae, sed nec etiam lunae. Tertio, ab eo quod apparebat et occultabatur rursus: cum enim intraverunt Hierosolymam, occultavit seipsam; deinde ubi Herodem reliquerunt, seipsam monstravit. Neque etiam proprium quemdam gressum habebat, sed cum oportebat ire magos, ibat: quando autem stare oportebat, stabat, sicut et de columna nubis erat in deserto. Quarto, quia non sursum manens partum virginis ostendebat, sed deorsum descendens hoc faciebat; quod non est stellae motus, sed virtutis cuiusdam rationalis; unde videtur haec stella virtutis invisibilis fuisse in talem apparentiam formata
Remigius
Nonnulli dicunt hanc stellam fuisse spiritum sanctum, ut ipse qui postea super baptizatum dominum descendit in specie columbae, in specie stellae apparuerit magis. Alii dicunt fuisse Angelum ut ipse qui apparuit pastoribus, apparuerit etiam magis
Glossa
Sequitur etiam in oriente. Utrum stella in oriente orta sit, an ipsi ibi positi natam et occidentem viderint, ambiguum est: potuit enim nasci in oriente et eos in Ierusalem perducere
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Sed dicturus es: a quibus audierunt quod talis, scilicet stella, Christum natum significaret? Profecto ab Angelis aliqua monitione revelationis. Quaeris fortassis: ab Angelis bonis an malis? Christum quidem et Angeli mali, hoc est Daemones, filium Dei esse confessi sunt. Sed cur non et a bonis hoc audierunt quando in Christo adorando salus eorum iam quaerebatur, non iniquitas damnabatur? Potuerunt ergo illis et Angeli dicere: stella quam vidistis, Christus est. Ite, adorate illum ubi natus est, et simul iudicate qualis quantusque natus sit
Leo Papa in Serm. 4 de Epiph
Vel praeter illam stellae speciem quae corporeum incitavit obtutum, fulgentior veritatis radius eorum corda perdocuit; et hoc quidem ad illuminationem fidei pertinebat
Augustinus de quaest. Nov. et Vet. Testam
Vel Iudaeorum natum regem intellexerunt, cum stella indice temporalis rex soleat designari. Hi enim magi Chaldaei non malevolentia astrorum cursum, sed rerum curiositate speculabantur. Sicut enim datur intelligi, traditionem Balaam sequebantur, qui dixit: orietur stella ex Iacob. Unde videntes stellam extra ordinem mundi hanc intellexerunt quam Balaam futuram indicem regis Iudaeorum prophetaverat
Leo Papa in Serm. 4 de Epiph
Potuerunt autem illis credita et intellecta sufficere, ut corporali intuitu non inquirerent quod plenissimo visu mentis inspexerant; sed diligentia sagacis officii ad videndum usque puerum perseverans nostri temporis hominibus serviebat, ut sicut omnibus nobis profuit quod post resurrectionem domini vestigia vulnerum eius Thomae apostoli exploravit manus, ita ad nostram utilitatem proficeret quod infantiam ipsius magorum probavit aspectus; unde dicunt venimus adorare eum
Chrysostomus super Matth
Sed numquid nesciebant quia in Ierusalem regnabat Herodes? Numquid non intelligebant quia quicumque, rege vivente, alterum regem pronuntiat aut adorat, punitur in sanguine? Sed dum considerabant regem futurum non timebant praesentem; adhuc non viderant Christum, et iam parati erant mori pro eo. O beati magi, qui ante conspectum crudelissimi regis, priusquam Christum cognoscerent, Christi facti sunt confessores
2:3
St Augustine † AD 430 non occ.
As the Magi seek a Redeemer, so Herod fears a successor.
The Gloss ord.
The King, he is called, though in comparison with him whom they are seeking he is an alien and a foreigner.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Herod was troubled when he heard that a King was born of Jewish lineage, lest, himself being an Idumæan, the kingdom should return again to native princes, and himself be expelled, and his seed after him. Great station is ever obnoxious to great fears, as the boughs of trees planted in high ground move when never so little wind blows, so high men are troubled with little rumours; while the lowly, like trees in the valley, remain at peace.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 200. 2.
If His birth as an infant makes proud kings tremble, what will His tribunal as a Judge do? Let princes fear Him sitting at the right hand of His Father, whom this impious king feared while He hanged yet on His mother’s breast.
St Leo the Great † AD 461 ubi sup.
Thou art troubled, Herod, without cause. Thy nature cannot contain Christ, nor is the Lord of the world content with the narrow bounds of thy dominion. He, whom thou wouldest not should reign in Judæa, reigns every where.
The Gloss ord.
Perhaps he was troubled not on his own account, but for fear of the displeasure of the Romans. They would not allow the title of King or of God to any without their permission.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. in Evang. i. 10.
At the birth of a King of Heaven, a king of earth is troubled; surely, earthly greatness is confounded, when heavenly greatness shews itself.
St Leo the Great † AD 461 Serm. xxxvi. 2.
Herod represents the Devil; who as he then instigated him, so now he unweariedly imitates him. For he is grieved by the calling of the Gentiles, and by the daily ruin of his power.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Both have their own causes of jealousy, both fear a successor in their kingdom; Herod an earthly successor, the Devil a spiritual. Even Jerusalem is troubled, which should have rejoiced at that news, when a Jewish King was said to be risen up. But they were troubled, for the wicked cannot rejoice at the coming of the good. Or perhaps it was in fear that Herod should wreak his wrath against a Jewish King on his race.
The Gloss ord.
Jerusalem was troubled with him, as willing to favour him whom it feared; the vulgar always pay undue honour to one who tyrannizes over it. Observe the diligence of his enquiry. If he should find him, he would do to him as he shewed afterwards his disposition; if he should not, he would at least be excused to the Romans.
Remigius † AD 908
They are called Scribes, not from the employment of writing, but from the interpretation of the Scriptures, for they were doctors of the law. Observe, he does not enquire where Christ is born, but where He should be born; the subtle purpose of this was to see if they would shew pleasure at the birth of their King. He calls Him Christ, because he knew that the King of the Jews was anointed.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Why does Herod make this enquiry, seeing he believed not the Scriptures? Or if he did believe, how could he hope to be able to kill Him whom the Scriptures declared should be King? The Devil instigated him, who believed that Scripture lies not; such is the faith of devils, who are not permitted to have perfect belief, even of that which they do believe. That they do believe, it is the force of truth constrains them; that they do not believe, it is that they are blinded by the enemy. If they had perfect faith, they would live as about to depart from this world soon, not as to possess it for ever.
St Leo the Great † AD 461 Serm. xxxi. 2.
The Magi, judging as men, sought in the royal city for Him, whom they had been told was born a King. But He who took the form of a servant, and came not to judge but to be judged, chose Bethlehem for His birth, Jerusalem for His death.
Theodotus Serm. 1. ap. Conc. Eph.
Had He chosen the mighty city of Rome, it might have been thought that this change of the world had been wrought by the might of her citizens; had He been the son of the emperor, his power might have aided Him. But what was His choice? All that was mean, all that was in low esteem, that in this transformation of the world, divinity might at once be recognized. Therefore He chose a poor woman for His mother, a poor country for His native country; He has no money, and this stable is His cradle.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. in. Evang. viii. 1.
Rightly is He born in Bethlehem, which signifies the house of bread, who said, am the living bread, who came down from heaven.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
When they should have kept secret the mystery of the King appointed of God, especially before a foreign king, straightway they became not preachers of the word of God, but revealers of His mystery. And they not only display the mystery, but cite the passage of the prophet, viz. Micah.
The Gloss ord.
He quotes this prophecy as they quote who give the sense and not the words.
St Jerome † AD 420 Epist. 57.
The Jews are here blamed for ignorance; for whereas the prophecy says, Thou Bethlehem Ephrata; they said, ‘Bethlehem in the land of Judah.’
Pseudo-Chrysostom
By cutting short the prophecy, they became the cause of the murder of the Innocents. For the prophecy proceeds, From thee shall go forth a King who shall feed My people Israel, and His day shall be from everlasting. Had they cited the whole prophecy, Herod would not have raged so madly, considering that it could not be an earthly King whose days were spoken of as from everlasting.
St Jerome † AD 420 in Mich. v. 2.
The following is the sense of the prophecy. Thou, Bethlehem, of the land of Judah, or Ephrata, (which is added to distinguish it from another Bethlehem in Galilee,) though thou art a small village among the thousand cities of Judah, yet out of thee shall be born Christ, who shall be the Ruler of Israel, who according to the flesh is of the seed of David, but was born of Me before the worlds; and therefore it is written, His goings forth are of old. In the beginning was the Word.
The Gloss non occ.
This latter half of the prophecy the Jews dropped; and other parts they altered, either through ignorance, (as was said above,) or for perspicuity, that Herod who was a foreigner might better understand the prophecy; thus for Ephrata, they said, land of Judah; and for little among the thousands of Judah, which expresses its smallness contrasted with the multitude of the people, they said, not the least among the princes, willing to shew the high dignity that would come from the birth of the Prince. As if they had said, Thou art great among cities from which princes have come.
Remigius † AD 908
Or the sense is; though little among cities that have dominion, yet art thou not the least, for out of thee shall come the Ruler, who shall rule My people Israel; this Ruler is Christ, who rules and guides His faithful people.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
Observe the exactness of the prophecy; it is not He shall be in Bethlehem, but shall come out of Bethlehem; shewing that He should be only born there. What reason is there for applying this to Zorobabel, as some do? For his goings forth were not from everlasting; nor did he go forth from Bethlehem, but was born in Babylonia. The expression, art not the least, is a further proof, for none but Christ could make the town where He was born illustrious. And after that birth, there came men from the utmost ends of the earth to see the stable and manger. He calls Him not ‘the Son of God,’ but (he Ruler who shall govern My people Israel; for thus He ought to condescend at the first, that they should not be scandalized, but should preach such things as more pertained to salvation, that they might be gained. Who shall rule My people Israel, is said mystically, for those of the Jews who believed; for if Christ ruled not all the Jews, theirs is the blame. Meanwhile he is silent respecting the Gentiles, that the Jews might not be scandalized. Mark this wonderful ordinance; Jews and Magi mutually instruct each other; the Jews learn of the Magi that a star had proclaimed Christ in the east, the Magi from the Jews that the Prophets had spoken of Him of old. Thus confirmed by a twofold testimony, they would look with more ardent faith for One whom the brightness of the star and the voice of the Prophets equally proclaimed.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 374. 2. 373. 4.
The star that guided the Magi to the spot where was the Infant God with His Virgin Mother, might have conducted them straight to the town; but it vanished, and shewed not itself again to them till the Jews themselves had told them the place where Christ should be born; Bethlehem of Judæa. Like in this to those who built the ark for Noah, providing others with a refuge, themselves perished in the flood; or like to the stones by the road that shew the miles, but themselves are not able to move. The enquirers heard and departed; the teachers spake and remained still. Even now the Jews shew us something similar; for some Pagans, when clear passages of Scripture are shewn them, which prophesy of Christ, suspecting them to be forged by the Christians, have recourse to Jewish copies. Thus they leave the Jews to read unprofitably, and go on themselves to believe faithfully.
The Latin text
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Sicut magi desiderant redemptorem, ita Herodes timet successorem; unde sequitur audiens autem Herodes rex, turbatus est
Glossa
Rex dicitur ut ex collatione eius qui quaeritur, hic intelligatur extraneus
Chrysostomus super Matth
Et ideo turbatur audiens regem natum Iudaeis ex genere Iudaeorum, cum esset ipse genere Idumaeus, ne regno revoluto iterum ad Iudaeos, ipse a Iudaeis expelleretur, et semen eius post ipsum praecideretur a regno: semper enim grandis potestas maiori timori subiecta est; sicut enim rami arborum in excelso positarum, etiam si levis aura flaverit, moventur, sic et sublimes homines etiam levis nuntii fama conturbat; humiles autem, sicut in convalle, plerumque in tranquillitate consistunt
Augustinus in Serm. 2 de Epiph
Quid autem erit tribunal iudicantis, quando superbos reges timere faciebat nativitas infantis? Pertimeant reges ad patris dexteram iam sedentem, quem rex impius timuit adhuc matris ubera lambentem
Leo Papa in Serm. 4 de Epiph
Superfluo tamen, Herodes, timore turbaris: non capit Christum regio tua, nec mundi dominus potestatis tuae coepit esse contentus angustiis. Quem in Iudaea regnare non vis, ubique regnat
Glossa
Vel non solum propter se timuit, sed propter iram Romanorum; decreverant enim Romani ne quis rex vel Deus sine eorum consilio diceretur
Gregorius in Evang
Caeli autem rege nato, rex terrae turbatus est, quia nimirum terrena altitudo confunditur cum celsitudo caelestis aperitur
Leo Papa in Serm. 6 de Epiph
Herodes etiam Diaboli personam gerit, cuius sicut tunc fuit incentor, ita nunc quoque est indefessus imitator. Cruciatur enim vocatione gentium, et quotidiana potestatis suae destructione torquetur
Chrysostomus super Matth
Uterque ergo zelo proprio turbatur, et sui regni successorem timebat: Herodes terrenum, Diabolus autem caelestem. Ecce autem et Iudaicus populus turbatur, qui magis de auditu isto gaudere debuerat quia rex Iudaeus surgere dicebatur. Sed turbabantur quia de adventu iusti non poterant gaudere iniqui. Aut certe turbantur ne forte iratus Iudaico regi genus eius vexaret; unde sequitur et omnis Hierosolyma cum illo
Glossa
Volens illi favere quem timebat; populus enim plus iusto eis favet quos crudeles sustinet. Sequitur et congregans omnes principes sacerdotum et Scribas populi. Ubi nota diligentiam inquirentis, ut si invenerit, faciat quod postea se velle ostendit; sin autem, excusatus sit Romanis
Remigius
Scribae autem dicti sunt, non tantum ab officio scribendi, sed potius ab interpretatione Scripturarum; erant enim legis doctores. Sequitur sciscitabatur ab eis ubi Christus nasceretur. Hic attendendum est, quia non dixit: ubi Christus natus est, sed ubi nasceretur. Callide enim interrogavit eos, ut posset agnoscere si de rege nato laetarentur. Christum autem vocat, quia noverat inungi regem Iudaeorum
Chrysostomus super Matth
Ut quid autem interrogat Herodes, qui non credebat Scripturis? Aut si credebat, quomodo sperabat posse interficere illum quem regem futurum esse dicebant? Sed Diabolus instigabat, qui credebat quod Scripturae non mentiuntur. Sic sunt omnes peccatores, qui hoc ipsum quod credunt, perfecte credere non permittuntur; quod enim credunt, veritatis est virtus, quae non potest esse occulta; quod autem non credunt, excaecatio est inimici. Si enim perfecte crederent, sic viverent quasi post modicum transituri de hoc mundo, non quasi in aeternum mansuri. Sequitur at illi dixerunt: in Bethlehem Iudae
Leo Papa in Serm. 1 de Epiph
Magi quidem humano sensu significatum sibi regis ortum existimaverunt in civitate regia esse quaerendum. Sed qui servi susceperat formam, et non iudicare venerat, sed iudicari, Bethlehem praeelegit nativitati, Hierosolymam passioni
Theodorus in Serm. Conc. Ephes
Si enim maximam Romam elegisset civitatem, potentia civium mutationem orbis terrarum factam putarent; si filius fuisset imperatoris, potestati utilitatem adscriberent. Sed quid fecit? Omnia egena et vilia elegit, ut divinitas cognosceretur orbem transformasse terrarum. Propterea pauperculam elegit matrem, pauperiorem patriam, egenus fit pecuniis, et hoc tibi exponit praesepe
Gregorius in Evang
Bene etiam in Bethlehem nascitur: Bethlehem quippe domus panis interpretatur: ipse namque est qui ait: ego sum panis vivus, qui de caelo descendi
Chrysostomus super Matth
Cum autem debuissent celare mysterium regis praefiniti a Deo, maxime in conspectu alienigenae regis, facti sunt non praedicatores operum Dei, sed proditores mysteriorum eius; et non solum manifestant mysterium, sed etiam propheticum protulerunt exemplum; unde subiungunt sic enim scriptum est per prophetam, scilicet Michaeam: et tu Bethlehem terra Iuda
Glossa
Hoc sic ponit ut ab eis dictum est, qui etsi non verba, veritatem sensus quodammodo ponunt
Hieronymus de optimo interpretandi genere
Unde hic reprehenduntur Iudaei de ignorantia, quoniam prophetia dicit: tu Bethlehem Ephrata, illi dixerunt tu Bethlehem terra Iuda
Chrysostomus super Matth
Sed adhuc ipsam prophetiam praecidentes, interficiendorum parvulorum facti sunt causa: sic enim scriptum erat: ex te exiet rex, qui pascet populum meum Israel, et dies eius a diebus saeculi. Si ergo integram prophetiam protulissent, considerans Herodes quia non erat rex terrenus cuius dies a diebus saeculi erant, in tantum furorem non exarsisset
Hieronymus super Matthaeum, et super Michaeam
Est autem sensus prophetiae talis: tu Bethlehem terra Iuda vel Ephrata (quod ideo dicitur, quia est alia Bethlehem in Galgalis sita), quamvis parvus vicus sis inter millia civitatum Iuda, tamen ex te nascetur Christus, qui erit dominator Israel, qui secundum carnem de David est, de me tamen natus est ante saecula; et ideo dicitur: egressus eius ab initio a diebus aeternitatis quia in principio verbum erat apud Deum. Sed hoc ultimum, ut dictum est, Iudaei tacuerunt, alia vero mutaverunt, vel propter ignorantiam, ut dictum est, vel ad maiorem manifestationem, ut Herodi alienigenae intellectum prophetiae aperirent; unde pro eo quod propheta dixit Ephrata, quod erat nomen antiquum et forte Herodi ignotum, dixerunt terra Iuda; pro eo autem quod propheta dixerat: minima es in milibus Iuda, volens ostendere parvitatem eius quantum ad populi multitudinem, dixerunt nequaquam minima es in principibus Iuda, volentes ostendere magnitudinem dignitatis provenientem ex dignitate principis nascituri quasi dicerent: magna es inter civitates ex quibus principes prodierunt
Remigius
Vel talis est sensus: quamvis minima videaris inter urbes principatum habentes, tamen non es minima, quia ex te exiet dux qui regat populum meum Israel. Dux autem iste Christus est, qui populum fidelem regit et gubernat
Chrysostomus in Matth
Intende autem certitudinem prophetiae; non enim dixit quod in Bethlehem erit, sed quod de Bethlehem exiet, ostendens quod ibi solum nasceretur. Quomodo autem habet rationem de Zorobabel haec dicta esse ut quidam dicunt? Non enim exitus eius fuit a principio ex diebus saeculi, neque etiam ex Bethlehem exivit, cum non in Iudaea, sed in Babylonia natus sit. Est etiam ad hoc, testimonium quod dicit: nequaquam minima es, quia ex te exiet: nullus enim alius illustrem fecit villam in qua nasceretur quam Christus. Post nativitatem enim a finibus orbis terrarum veniunt visuri praesepe et tugurii locum. Non autem dixit: ex te exiet filius Dei, sed dux qui pascet populum meum Israel: oportebat enim in principio condescendere ut non scandalizarentur, et quae ad salutem hominum pertinebant praedicare, ut magis inducerentur. Mystice autem dicit qui regat populum meum Israel. Israel enim hic dicit eos qui crediderunt ex Iudaeis; si autem non omnes Christus rexit, eorum est accusatio. De gentibus autem interim tacuit ne scandalizaret Iudaeos. Vide autem mirabilem dispensationem: Iudaei enim et magi simul se invicem docent: Iudaei a magis audiunt quod Christum in orientis regione stella praedicabat, et magi a Iudaeis quod prophetae antiquitus eum nuntiaverunt; ut geminato testimonio confirmati, ardentiori fide expeterent quem et stellae claritas et prophetiae manifestabat auctoritas
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Poterat enim stella quae magos perduxit ad locum ubi erat cum matre virgine Deus infans, ad ipsam eos perducere civitatem; sed tamen subtraxit se, nec eis prorsus apparuit, donec de civitate in qua Christus nasceretur et ipsi Iudaei dicerent in Bethlehem Iuda: similes facti fabris arcae Noe, qui aliis ubi evaderent, praestiterunt, et ipsi diluvio perierunt; similes lapidibus milliariis viam ostenderunt, nec ipsi ambulare potuerunt. Audierunt et abierunt inquisitores, dixerunt et remanserunt doctores. Nunc quoque Iudaei simile aliquid nobis exhibere non desinunt: nonnulli enim Paganorum, quando eis de Scripturis testimonia clare proferimus, ut noverunt Christum ante prophetatum, suspecti ne forte a Christianis ista conficta sint, malunt credere codicibus Iudaeorum; et sicut tunc magi fecerunt, Iudaeos dimittunt inaniter lectitare, ipsi pergunt fideliter adorare
2:7
Pseudo-Chrysostom
As soon as Herod had heard the answer, though doubly authenticated, both by the authority of the Priests, and the passage from the Prophets, he yet turned not to worship the King that was to be born, but sought how he might put Him to death by subtilty. He saw that the Magi were neither to be won by flattery, nor awed by threats, nor bribed by gifts, to consent to this murder; he sought therefore to deceive them; he privily called the wise men; that the Jews, whom he suspected, might not know of it. For he thought they would incline the rather to a King of theirown nation.
Remigius † AD 908
Diligently enquired; craftily, for he feared they would not return to him, and then he should know how he should do to put the young Child to death.
Pseudo-Augustine Serm. in App. 131. 3.
The star had been seen, and with great wonder, nearly two years before. We are to understand that it was signified to them whose the star was, which was visible all that time till He, whom it signified, was born. Then as soon as Christ was made known to them they set out, and came and worshipped Him in thirteen days from the easta.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
Or, the star appeared to them long time before, because the journey would take up some time, and they were to stand before Him immediately on His birth, that seeing Him in swaddling clothes, He might seem the more wonderful.
The Gloss non occ.
According to others, the star was first seen on the day of the nativity, and having accomplished its end, ceased to be. Thus Fulgentius says, “The Boy at His birth created a new star.” (Serm. de Epiph.) Though they now knew both time and place, he still would not have them ignorant of the person of the Child, Go, he says, and enquire diligently of the young Child; a commission they would have executed even if he had not commanded it.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
Concerning the young Child, he says, not ‘of the King;’ he envics Him the regal title.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
To induce them to do this, he put on the colour of devotion, beneath which he whetted the sword, hiding the malice of his heart under colour of humility. Such is the manner of the malicious, when they would hurt any one in secret, they feign meekness and affection.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. in Ev. i. 10. 3.
He feigns a wish of worshipping Him only that he may discover Him, and put Him to death.
Remigius † AD 908
The Magi obeyed the King so far as to seek the Lord, but not to return to Herod. Like in this to good hearers; the good they hear from wicked preachers, that they do; but do not imitate their evil lives.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus super Matth
Postquam audivit Herodes responsum duplici modo credibile: primum quia a sacerdotibus fuerat dictum, deinde quia exemplo prophetico fuerat comprobatum, non tamen ad devotionem flectitur nascituri regis, sed ad malitiam interfectionis eius per dolum. Vidit enim quia non poterat magos nec blandimentis flectere nec minis terrere nec auro corrumpere, ut consentirent in interfectionem regis futuri; ideo illos decipere cogitavit; unde dicitur tunc Herodes clam vocatis magis. Occulte autem vocavit eos ut non viderent Iudaei quos habebat suspectos, ne forte quasi regem suae gentis amantes proderent consilium eius. Diligenter didicit ab eis tempus stellae
Remigius
Idcirco diligenter, quia callidus erat et timebat ne non reverterentur ad eum, ut tunc sciret quid ageret de puero occidendo
Augustinus in Serm. 7 de Epiph
Ferme autem biennio ante visa est stella mirantibus quid esset. Sed tunc intelligitur indicatum eis cuius esset stella quae iamdiu videbatur, quando natus est qui per illam significabatur. Sed postquam Christo nato revelatum est magis, venerunt ab oriente, et tertiadecima die adoraverunt eum, quem ante paucos dies natum fuisse didicerunt
Chrysostomus in Matth
Vel ante multum tempus haec stella apparuit, quoniam multum tempus in itinere erant magi consumpturi, ut confestim cum natus esset, Christo assisterent, eum in fasciis adorantes, ut mirabilior appareret
Glossa
Secundum alios vero a die nativitatis Christi creditur stella tantum apparuisse, et peracto officio, cum nova esset, desiit esse. Ait enim
Fulgentius
puer natus novam stellam fabricavit. Cognito autem loco et tempore, personam pueri vult non ignorare; unde dicit ite, et interrogate diligenter de puero. Illud praeceperat quod absque praecepto erant facturi
Chrysostomus in Matth
Non autem dicit interrogate de rege, sed de puero: ei enim etiam nomen potestatis inviderat
Chrysostomus super Matth
Ergo ut ad hoc eos induceret, devotionem promittebat, et per eam gladium acuebat et malitiam cordis sui humilitatis colore depingebat. Talis est consuetudo omnium malignorum: quando aliquem in occulto gravius laedere volunt, humilitatem illi et amicitias fingunt. Unde dicit et cum inveneritis, renuntiate mihi, ut et ego veniens adorem eum
Gregorius in Evang
Adorare eum se velle simulat, ut quasi hunc, si invenire possit, extinguat. Sequitur qui cum audissent regem, abierunt
Remigius
Audierunt magi Herodem ut quaererent dominum, sed non ut ad eum reverterentur. Significabant enim bonos auditores, qui bona quae audiunt a malis praedicatoribus faciunt; sed tamen opera illorum non imitantur
2:9
Pseudo-Chrysostom
This passage shews, that when the star had brought the Magi nearly to Jerusalem, it was hidden from them, and so they were compelled to ask in Jerusalem, where Christ should be born? and thus to manifest Him to them; on two accounts, first, to put to confusion the Jews, inasmuch as the Gentiles instructed only by sight of a star sought Christ through strange lands, while the Jews who had read the Prophets from their youth did not receive Him, though born in their country. Secondly, that the Priests, when asked where Christ should be born, might answer to their now condemnation, and while they instructed Herod, they were themselves ignorant of Him. The star went before them, to shew them the greatness of the King.
St Augustine † AD 430
To perform its due service to the Lord, it advanced slowly, leading them to the spot. It was ministering to Him, and not ruling His fate; its light shewed the suppliants and filled the inn, shed over the walls and roof that covered the birth; and thus it disappeared.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
What wonder that a divine star should minister to the Sun of righteousness about to rise. It stood over the Child’s head, as it were, saying, ‘This is He;’ proving by its place what it had no voice to utter.
The Gloss Anselm.
It is evident that the star must have been in the air, and close above the house where the Child was, else it would not have pointed out the exact house.
St Ambrose † AD 397 in Luc. ii. 45.
The star is the way, and the way is Christ; and according to the mystery of the incarnation, Christ is a star. He is a blazing and a morning-star. Thus where Herod is, the star is not seen; where Christ is, there it is again seen, and points out the way.
Remigius † AD 908
Or, the star figures the grace of God, and Herod the Devil. He, who by sin puts himself in the Devil’s power, loses that grace; but if he return by repentance, he soon finds that grace again which leaves him not till it have brought him to the young Child’s house, i. e. the Church.
The Gloss ord.
Or, the star is the illumination of faith, which leads him to the nearest aid; while they turn aside to the Jews, the Magi lose it; so those who seek counsel of the bad, lose the true light.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus super Matth
Ex hoc loco ostenditur, quia cum stella deduxisset magos prope Ierusalem, abscondita est ab eis, ut relicti a stella cogerentur in Ierusalem interrogare de Christo simul et manifestare propter duo: primo ad confusionem Iudaeorum, quia gentiles stellae tantummodo visione confirmati, Christum per alienas provincias requirebant, et Iudaei ab infantia prophetias legentes de Christo, et in suis finibus natum non susceperunt; demum ut interrogati sacerdotes unde nascitur Christus, ad praeiudicium suum responderent de Bethlehem, quia qui Herodem docuerant de Christo, ipsi ignorabant de illo; et ideo post interrogationem et responsionem habitam subditur et ecce stella quam viderant in oriente, antecedebat eos, ut considerantes obsequium stellae, regis intelligerent dignitatem
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Et ut Christo plenum redderet obsequium, temperavit gradum, donec magos perduceret ad puerum. Obsequium praebuit, non imperium adduxit: supplices ostendit, hospitium radiavit amplissimo lumine, et tecta nati perfudit, sicque discessit; unde sequitur usque dum veniens staret supra ubi erat puer
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quid autem mirum si soli iustitiae orituro stella ministrabat divina? Stetit enim supra caput pueri, quasi dicens: hic est; ut quia loquendo monstrare non poterat, stando demonstraret
Glossa
Hic autem apparet quod stella in aere posita erat, et domui in qua puer erat multum vicina; aliter enim domum non discrevisset
Ambrosius super Luc
Haec autem stella via est, et via Christus est, quia secundum incarnationis mysterium Christus est stella: ipse enim est stella splendida et matutina; unde ubi Herodes est, non videtur; ubi autem Christus, rursum videtur, et viam monstrat
Remigius
Vel stella significat gratiam Dei, Herodes Diabolum. Qui autem per peccatum se Diabolo subdit, mox gratiam perdit; quod si per poenitentiam recesserit, mox gratiam invenit, quae non dimittit donec perducat ad domum pueri, idest Ecclesiam
Glossa
Vel stella est illuminatio fidei, quae ad proximum ducit, quam dum divertunt ad Iudaeos, magi amittunt: quia dum a malis consilium quaerunt, veram illuminationem perdunt
2:10
The Gloss
This service of the star is followed by the rejoicing of the Magi.
Remigius † AD 908
And it was not enough to say, They rejoiced, but they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
They rejoiced, because their hopes were not falsified but confirmed, and because the toil of so great travel had not been undertaken in vain.
The Gloss ord.
He rejoices indeed who rejoices on God’s account, who is the true joy. With great joy, he says, for they had great cause.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
By the mystery of this star they understood that the dignity of the King then born exceeded the measure of all worldly kings.
Remigius † AD 908
He adds greatly, shewing that men rejoice more over what they have lost than over what they possess.
St Leo the Great † AD 461 Serm. in Epiph. s. 4. 3.
Though in stature a babe, needing the aid of others, unable to speak, and different in nothing from other infants, yet such faithful witnesses, shewing the unseen Divine Majesty which was in Him, ought to have proved most certainly that that was the Eternal Essence of the Son of God that had taken upon Him the true human nature.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Mary His mother, not crowned with a diadem or laying on a golden couch; but with barely one garment, not for ornament but for covering, and that such as the wife of a carpenter when abroad might have. Had they therefore come to seek an earthly king, they would have been more confounded than rejoiced, deeming their pains thrown away. But now they looked for a heavenly King; so that though they saw nought of regal state, that star’s witness sufficed them, and their eyes rejoiced to behold a despised Boy, the Spirit shewing Him to their hearts in all His wonderful power, they fell down and worshipped, seeing the man, they acknowledged the God.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
Joseph was absent by Divine command, that no wrong suspicions might occur to the Gentiles.
The Gloss Anselm.
In these offerings we observe their national customs, gold, frankincense, and various spices abounding among the Arabians; yet they intended thereby to signify something in mystery.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. in Evang. i. 106.
Gold, as to a King; frankincense, as sacrifice to God; myrrh, as embalming the body of the dead.
St Augustine † AD 430 non occ.
Gold, as paid to a mighty King; frankincense, as offered to God; myrrh, as to one who is to die for the sins of all.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
And though it were not then understood what these several gifts mystically signified, that is no difficulty; the same grace that instigated them to the deed, ordained the whole.
Remigius † AD 908
And it is to be known that each did not offer a different gift, but each one the three things, each one thus proclaiming the King, the God, and the man.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
Let Marcion and Paul of Samosata then blush, who will not see what the Magi saw, those progenitors of the Church adoring God in the flesh. That He was truly in the flesh, the swaddling clothes and the stall prove; yet that they worshipped Him not as mere man, but as God, the gifts prove which it was becoming to offer to a God. Let the Jews also be ashamed, seeing the Magi coming before them, and themselves not even earnest to tread in their path.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
Something further may yet be meant here. Wisdom is typified by gold; as Solomon saith in the Proverbs, A treasure to be desired is in the mouth of the wise. (Prov. 21:20.) By frankincense, which is burnt before God, the power of prayer is intended, as in the Psalms, Let my speech come before thee as incense. (Ps. 141:2.) In myrrh is figured mortification of the flesh. To a king at his birth we offer gold, if we shine in his sight with the light of wisdom; we offer frankincense, if we have power before God by the sweet savour of our prayers; we offer myrrh, when we mortify by abstinence the lusts of the flesh.
The Gloss Anselm.
The three men who offer, signify the nations who come from the three quarters of the earth. They open their treasures, i. e. manifest the faith of their hearts by confession. Rightly in the house, teaching that we should not vain-gloriously display the treasure of a good conscience. They bring three (vid. sup. note g, p. 18.) gifts, i. e. the faith in the Holy Trinity. Or opening the stores of Scripture, they offer its threefold sense, historical, moral, and allegorical; or Logic, Physic, and Ethics, making them all serve the faith.
The Latin text
Glossa
Postquam praemisit stellae obsequium, subiungit Evangelista magorum gaudium dicens videntes autem stellam, gavisi sunt gaudio magno valde
Remigius
Et sciendum quod non satis fuit dicere Evangelistae gavisi sunt, sed addidit gaudio magno et valde
Chrysostomus super Matth
Gavisi sunt quia spes eorum non erat decepta, sed amplius confirmata, quod tanti itineris non sine causa susceperunt laborem
Glossa
Gaudio gaudet qui propter Deum gaudet, qui est verum gaudium. Addidit autem et magno, quia de magno gaudebant
Chrysostomus super Matth
Per mysterium enim stellae intelligebant quoniam dignitas tunc nati regis excedebat mensuram omnium mundalium regum. Addidit etiam valde
Remigius
Quia voluit ostendere quod magis gaudent homines de rebus perditis quam semper possessis. Subditur autem et intrantes domum, invenerunt
Leo Papa in Serm. 4 de Epiph
Quantitate parvum, alienae opis indigum, fandi impotentem, et in nullo ab humanae infantiae generalitate discretum; quia sicut fidelia erant testimonia quae in eo maiestatem invisibilis divinitatis ostenderent, ita probatissimum debebat esse, sempiternam illam essentiam filii Dei veram suscepisse hominis naturam. Cum Maria matre eius
Chrysostomus super Matth
Non diademate coronata aut in lecto aureo recumbente, sed vix tunicam habente unam, non ad ornamentum corporis, sed ad tegumentum nuditatis, qualem habere potuit carpentarii uxor peregre constituta. Si ergo regem terrenum quaerentes venissent, magis fuissent confusi quam gavisi, quia tanti itineris laborem sine causa suscepissent. Nunc autem quia caelestem regem quaerebant, etsi nihil regale videbant, in eo tamen solius stellae testimonio contenti, gaudebant oculi eorum contemptibilem puerum aspicere, quia spiritus in corde eorum terribilem eum monstrabat; unde procidentes adoraverunt eum; vident enim hominem et agnoscunt Deum
Rabanus Maurus
Divino autem nutu factum est quod abierat Ioseph, ne aliqua malae suspicionis occasio daretur gentibus
Glossa
Qui licet morem suae gentis in donis offerendis sequantur Arabes enim auro, thure et diversis generibus aromatum abundant tamen aliquid mysterii muneribus demonstrare volebant; unde sequitur apertis thesauris, obtulerunt ei munera: aurum, thus et myrrham
Gregorius in Evang
Aurum quippe regi congruit, thus vero in Dei sacrificium ponebatur, myrrha autem mortuorum corpora condiuntur
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Aurum igitur solvitur quasi regi magno, thus immolatur ut Deo, myrrha praebetur quasi pro salute omnium morituro
Chrysostomus super Matth
Haec autem etsi tunc non intelligebantur secundum quale mysterium ista gerebant, vel quid significaret unumquodque munus, eorum nihil contrarium est: gratia enim quae illos haec omnia facere hortabatur, ipsa ordinaverat universa
Remigius
Et sciendum quod isti non singula obtulerunt, sed singuli tria; et singuli cum suis muneribus regem, Deum et hominem praedicaverunt
Chrysostomus super Matth
Erubescant ergo Marcion et Paulus Samosatenus, qui nolunt videre quae magi viderunt, qui Ecclesiae sunt progenitores, Deum in carne adorantes. Nam quod in carne vera sit, panni monstrant et praesepe; quoniam autem non ut purum hominem adorant, sed ut Deum, demonstrant dona quae Deo offerre decens erat. Confundantur et Iudaei videntes se praeventos a magis, et neque post illos venire studentes
Gregorius in Evang
Potest et in his aliud intelligi. Auro namque sapientia designatur, Salomone teste, qui ait: thesaurus desiderabilis requiescit in ore sapientis; thure, quod Deo incenditur, virtus orationis exprimitur, secundum illud: dirigatur oratio mea sicut incensum in conspectu tuo; per myrrham vero carnis mortificatio figuratur. Nato ergo regi aurum offerimus, si in conspectu eius sapientiae lumine splendemus; thus offerimus, si per orationum studia Deo redolere valeamus; myrrham offerimus, si carnis vitia per abstinentiam mortificamus
Glossa
Tres autem viri qui offerunt, significant gentes de tribus partibus mundi venientes. Thesauros aperiunt dum fidem cordis per confessionem ostendunt. Bene autem in domo docentes ne thesaurum bonae conscientiae iactando propalemus. Offerunt tria munera, hoc est fidem sanctae Trinitatis; vel apertis thesauris Scripturarum, historicum, moralem, et allegoricum sensum offerunt, vel logicam, physicam et Ethicam, dum illa fidei servire faciunt
2:12
St Augustine † AD 430 non occ.
The wicked Herod, now made cruel by fear, will needs do a deed of horror. But how could he ensnare him who had come to cut off all fraud? His fraud is escaped as it follows, And being warned.
St Jerome † AD 420
They had offered gifts to the Lord, and receive a warning corresponding to it. This warning (in the Greek ‘having received a response’) is given not by an Angel, but by the Lord Himself, to shew the high privilege granted to the merit of Joseph.
The Gloss ord.
This warning is given by the Lord Himself; it is none other that now teaches these Magi the way they should return, but He who said, I am the way. (John 14.) Not that the Infant actually speaks to them, that His divinity may not be revealed before the time, and His human nature may be thought real. But he says, having received an answer, for as Moses prayed silently, so they with pious spirit had asked what the Divine will bade. By another way, for they were not to be mixed up with the unbelieving Jews.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. viii.
See the faith of the Magi; they were not offended, nor said within themselves, What need now of flight? or of secret return, if this Boy be really some great one? Such is true faith; it asks not the reason of any command, but obeys.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Had the Magi sought Christ as an earthly King, they would have remained with Him when they had found Him; but they only worship, and go their way. After their return, they continued in the worship of God more stedfast than before, and taught many by their preaching. And when afterwards Thomas reached their country, they joined themselves to him, and were baptized, and did according to his preachingb.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. in Ev. i. 10. 7.
We may learn much from this return of the Magi another way. Our country is Paradise, to which, after we have come to the knowledge of Christ we are forbidden to return the way we came. We have left this country by pride, disobedience, following things of sight, tasting forbidden food; and we must return to it by repentance, obedience, by contemning things of sight, and overcoming carnal appetite.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
It was impossible that they, who left Herod to go to Christ, should return to Herod. They who have by sin left Christ and passed to the devil, often return to Christ; for the innocent, who knows not what is evil, is easily deceived, but having once tasted the evil he has taken up, and remembering the good he has left, he returns in penitence to God. He who has forsaken the devil and come to Christ, hardly returns to the devil; for rejoicing in the good he has found, and remembering the evil he has escaped, with difficulty returns to that evil.
The Latin text
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Herodes impius factus ex timore crudelis voluit desaevire. Sed quomodo poterat capere eum qui ipsas fraudes venerat amputare? Ut ergo eius fraus elideretur, sequitur et responso accepto
Hieronymus
Qui enim munera obtulerunt domino, consequenter responsum accipiunt. Responsum, quod Graece krematisthentes dicitur, non per Angelum fit, sed per ipsum dominum, ut meritorum Ioseph privilegium demonstretur
Glossa
Fit autem haec responsio per ipsum dominum quia nullus alius viam reversionis instituit nisi ille qui dicit: ego sum via. Non tamen loquitur puer ad eos ne divinitas ante tempus reveletur, et ut vera humanitas habeatur. Dicit autem et responso accepto; sicut enim Moyses tacitus clamat, sic isti pie affectu interrogabant quid divina iuberet voluntas. Dicit autem per aliam viam reversi sunt in regionem suam, quia infidelitati miscendi non erant Iudaeorum
Chrysostomus in Matth
Intuere autem magorum fidem, qualiter non scandalizati sunt in seipsis dicentes: si magnus est puer hic, quae necessitas fugae est et occultae recessionis? Hoc enim est verae fidei non quaerere causas eorum quae fieri praecipiuntur, sed suaderi solum ab eis
Chrysostomus super Matth
Si autem magi Christum quasi terrenum regem quaesissent, invenientes eum, apud ipsum mansissent; tunc autem adoraverunt et reversi sunt. Cum autem reversi fuissent, manserunt colentes Deum magis quam ante, et praedicantes multos erudierunt. Et denique cum Thomas ivisset ad provinciam illam, adiuncti sunt ei; et baptizati, facti sunt executores praedicationis ipsius
Gregorius in Evang
Magnum vero nobis aliquid magi innuunt, quod in regionem suam per aliam viam revertuntur. Regio quippe nostra Paradisus est, ad quem Iesu cognito redire per viam qua venimus prohibemur. A regione etenim nostra superbiendo, inobediendo, visibilia sequendo, cibum vetitum gustando discessimus; sed ad eam necesse est ut flendo, obediendo, visibilia contemnendo, atque appetitum carnis refrenando redeamus
Chrysostomus super Matth
Nec etiam erat possibile ut qui ab Herode ad Christum venissent, redirent ad Herodem: qui enim relicto Christo ad Diabolum transeunt per peccatum, frequenter per poenitentiam revertuntur ad Christum. Qui enim fuit in innocentia, dum nescit quid sit malum, facile decipitur; sed cum expertus fuerit malum quod invenit et recordatus bonum quod perdidit, compunctus redit ad Deum. Qui autem relicto Diabolo venit ad Christum, difficile redit ad Diabolum, quia dum gaudet in bonis quae invenit et recordatur mala quae evasit, difficile redit ad malum
2:13
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
Here Matthew omits the day of purification when the first-born must be presented in the Temple with a lamb, or a pair of turtle doves, or pigeons. Their fear of Herod did not make them bold to transgress the Law, that they should not present the Child in the temple. As soon then as the rumour concerning the Child begins to be spread abroad, the Angel is sent to bid Joseph carry Him into Egypt.
Remigius † AD 908
By this that the Angel appears always to Joseph in sleep, is mystically signified that they who rest from mundane cares and secular pursuits, deserve angelic visitations.
St Hilary † AD 367
The first time when he would teach Joseph that she was lawfully espoused, the Angel called the Virgin his espoused wife; but after the birth she is only spoken of as the Mother of Jesus. As wedlock was rightfully imputed to her in her virginity, so virginity is esteemed venerable in her as the mother of Jesus.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
He says not, ‘the Mother and her young Child,’ but, the young Child and His mother; for the Child was not born for the mother, but the mother prepared for the Child. How is this that the Son of God flies from the face of man? or who shall deliver from the enemy’s hand, if He Himself fears His enemies? First; He ought to observe, even in this, the law of that human nature which He took on Him; and human nature and infancy must flee before threatening power. Next, that Christians when persecution makes it necessary should not be ashamed to fly. But why into Egypt? The Lord, who keepeth not His anger for ever, remembered the woes He had brought upon Egypt, and therefore sent His Son thither, and gives it this sign of great reconciliation, that with this one remedy He might heal the ten plagues of Egypt, and the nation that had been the persecutor of this first-born people, might be the guardian of His first-born Son. As formerly they had cruelly tyrannized, now they might devoutly serve; nor go to the Red Sea to be drowned, but be called to the waters of baptism to receive life.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 218. App.
Hear the sacrament of a great mystery. Moses before had shut up the light of day from the traitors the Egyptians; Christ by going down thither brought back light to them that sate in darkness. He fled that he might enlighten them, not that he might escape his foes.
St Augustine † AD 430
The miserable tyrant supposed that by the Saviour’s coming he should be thrust from his royal throne. But it was not so; Christ came not to hurt others’ dignity, but to bestow His own on others.
St Hilary † AD 367
Egypt full of idols; for after this enquiry for Him among the Jews, Christ leaving Judæa goes to be cherished among nations given to the vainest superstitions.
St Jerome † AD 420
When he takes the Child and His mother to go into Egypt, it is in the night and darkness, when to return into Judæa, the Gospel speaks of no light, no darkness.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
The straitness of every persecution may be called night—the relief from it in like manner, day.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
For when the true light withdraws, they who hate the light are in darkness, when it returns they are again enlightened.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
See how immediately on His birth the tyrant is furious against Him, and the mother with her Child is driven into foreign lands. So should you in the beginning of your spiritual career seem to have tribulation, you need not to be discouraged, but bear all things manfully, having this example.
St Bede † AD 735 Hom. in. Nat. Innocent.
The flight into Egypt signifies that the elect are often by the wickedness of the bad driven from their homes, or sentenced to banishment. Thus He, who, we shall see below, gave the command to His own, When they shall persecute you in one city, flee ye to another, first practised what He enjoined, as a man flying before the face of man on earth. He whom but a little before a star had proclaimed to the Magi to be worshipped as from heaven.
Remigius † AD 908
Isaiah had foretold this flight into Egypt. Lo! the Lord shall ascend on a light cloud, and shall come into Egypt, and shall scatter the idols of Egypt. (Is. 19:1.) It is the practice of this Evangelist to confirm all he says; and that because he is writing to the Jews, therefore he adds, that it might be fulfilled, &c.
St Jerome † AD 420 Epist. 57.7.
This is not in the LXX; but in Osee according to the genuine Hebrew text we read; Israel is my child, and I have loved him, and, from Egypt have I called my Son; where the LXX render, Israel is my child, and I have loved him, and called my sons out of Egypt.
St Jerome † AD 420 In Osee 11:2.
The Evangelist cites this text, because it refers to Christ typically. For it is to be observed, that in this Prophet and in others, the coming of Christ and the call of the Gentiles are foreshewn in such a manner, that the thread of history is never broken.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
It is a law of prophecy, that in a thousand places many things are said of some and fulfilled of others. As it is said of Simeon and Levi, I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel; (Gen. 49:7.) which was fulfilled not in themselves, but in their descendants. So here Christ is by nature the Son of God, and so the prophecy is fulfilled in Him.
St Jerome † AD 420
Let those who deny the authenticity of the Hebrew copies, shew us this passage in the LXX, and when they have failed to find it, we will shew it them in the Hebrew. We may also explain it in another way, by considering it as quoted from Numbers, God brought him out of Egypt; his glory is as it were that of a unicorn. (Num. 23:22.)
Remigius † AD 908
In Joseph is figured the order of preachers, in Mary Holy Scripture; by the Child the knowledge of the Saviour; by the cruelty of Herod the persecution which the Church suffered in Jerusalem; by Joseph’s flight into Egypt the passing of the preachers to the unbelieving Gentiles, (for Egypt signifies darkness;) by the time that he abode in Egypt the space of time between the ascension of the Lord and the coming of Anti Christ; by Herod’s death the extinction of jealousy in the hearts of the Jews.
The Latin text
Rabanus Maurus
Hic praetermittit Matthaeus diem purificationis, in qua oportebat primogenitum offerri in templo, et agnum vel par turturum aut columbarum. Et quamvis timerent Herodem, tamen non sunt ausi transgredi legem, quin ad templum puerum deferrent. Cum itaque rumor de puero iam inciperet dilatari, mittitur Angelus qui in Aegyptum faciat puerum transportari; unde dicit Angelus domini apparuit in somnis Ioseph
Remigius
Per hoc quod semper Angelus Ioseph in somnis apparuisse dicitur, mystice designatur quia illi qui a curis terrenis et saecularibus negotiis quiescunt, perfrui angelica visione merentur. Dicit ergo ei: surge et accipe puerum et matrem eius
Hilarius in Matth
Cum desponsatam eam iusto significabat, coniugem nuncupavit; sed post partum mater tantum Iesu ostenditur, ut quemadmodum iusto Ioseph deputaretur Mariae in virginitate coniugium, ita venerabilis esse ostenderetur in Iesu matre virginitas
Chrysostomus super Matth
Non autem dicit: accipe matrem et puerum eius: sed e converso, quia non propter matrem puer natus est, sed propter puerum mater praeparata est. Sequitur et fuge in Aegyptum. Quomodo autem filius Dei ante hominem fugit, aut quis liberet de inimicis, si et ipse inimicos suos timet? Et primum quidem oportet ut regulam humanae naturae quam suscepit conservet et in hac parte, quia humanae naturae et puerilitati convenit fugere potestatem minantem; deinde ut ceteri Christiani, cum necessitas persecutionis advenerit, fugere non erubescant. Sed quare in Aegyptum? Recordatus est enim dominus, qui non in finem irascitur, quanta mala fecerit super Aegyptum; ideo mittit filium suum in eam et dat illi magnae reconciliationis signum, ut decem plagas Aegypti una medicina sanaret; ut populus qui ante fuerat persecutor populi primogeniti, custos fieret filii unigeniti; ut quia illi violenter dominati sunt, isti cum devotione servirent; ut iam non irent ad mare rubrum demergendi, sed vocarentur ad aquas Baptismatis vivificandi
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Audi etiam magni mysterii sacramentum. Moyses aliquando in Aegypto perfidis clauserat diem; illuc Christus adveniens sedentibus in tenebris reddidit lucem; fugit ut illuminaret, non fugit ut lateret. Sequitur et esto ibi usque dum dicam tibi; futurum est enim ut Herodes quaerat puerum ad perdendum eum. Putabat enim infelix tyrannus salvatoris adventu regali se solio detrudendum, sed non ita est: non ad hoc venerat Christus ut alienam gloriam invaderet, sed ut suam donaret. Sequitur qui consurgens, accepit puerum et matrem eius nocte et secessit in Aegyptum
Hilarius in Matth
Scilicet idolis plenam: iam enim post Iudaeorum insectationem Iudaeam relinquens, Christus ad gentes inanissimis religionibus deditas, colendus infertur
Hieronymus in Matth
Quando igitur tollit puerum et matrem eius ut in Aegyptum transeat, nocte tollit et in tenebris; quando vero revertitur in Iudaeam, nec nox nec tenebrae ponuntur in Evangelio
Chrysostomus super Matth
Omnis enim perfectionis angustia nox est, refrigerium autem dies
Rabanus Maurus
Vel quia luce vera recedente, lucis ipsius osores in tenebris remanserunt, ipsa vero redeunte illuminantur
Chrysostomus in Matth
Vide autem statim ipso nato tyrannum insanire, et quod mater cum puero ad extraneam effugatur regionem, ut si tu incipiens alicui spirituali rei deservire, videaris tribulari, non turberis, sed omnia viriliter feras, hoc habens exemplum
Beda
Quod enim dominus a parentibus sublatus est in Aegyptum, significat electos saepius malorum improbitate suis effugandos ex sedibus, vel etiam exilio damnandos. Si quidem ipse qui suis erat praecepturus: cum vos persecuti fuerint in una civitate, fugite in aliam, primus fecit quod praecepit, fugiendo hominem quasi homo in terra, quem stella magis paulo ante adorandum monstravit ex caelo
Remigius
Quod autem dominus in Aegyptum iturus esset praedixerat Isaias cum ait: ecce dominus ascendet super nubem levem et ingredietur Aegyptum et disperdet simulacra Aegypti. Consuetudo autem fuit istius Evangelistae omnia quae dixit confirmare, et hoc ideo, quia Iudaeis scribebat; ideoque subiungit ut adimpleretur quod dictum est a domino per prophetam dicentem: ex Aegypto vocavi filium meum
Hieronymus de optimo genere interpretandi
Hoc Lxx interpretes non habent; sed in Osee propheta iuxta Hebraicam scribitur veritatem: quia puer Israel est, et dilexi eum et ex Aegypto vocavi filium meum, pro quo Lxx transtulerunt: quia parvulus est Israel, et dilexi eum, ex Aegypto vocavi filium meum
Hieronymus super Osee
Hoc autem testimonio utitur Evangelista, quia haec typice referuntur ad Christum. Notandum enim, quod in hoc propheta et in aliis ita de adventu Christi et de vocatione gentium praenuntiatur, ut radix historiae non penitus deseratur
Chrysostomus in Matth
Est etiam prophetiae lex multa multoties dici de aliis, compleri autem in aliis; sicut de Simeone et levi dictum est: dividam eos in Iacob et dispergam in Israel; quod non in eis, sed in nepotibus completum est, quod et hic apparet. Christus enim natura Dei filius est, et sic in eo vere prophetia completur
Hieronymus
Possumus autem et hunc locum conciliare, et inducemus testimonium ex numeris: Deus ex Aegypto vocavit eum; gloria eius sicut Unicornis
Remigius
Per Ioseph autem designatur ordo praedicatorum, per Mariam sacra Scriptura, per puerum notitia salvatoris, per persecutionem Herodis persecutio quam passa est Ecclesia in Hierosolymis, per fugam Ioseph in Aegyptum transitus praedicatorum ad gentes infideles: Aegyptus enim tenebrae interpretatur; per tempus quo fuit in Aegypto spatium temporis ab ascensione domini usque ad adventum Antichristi; per obitum Herodis extinctio invidiae in cordibus Iudaeorum
2:16
Pseudo-Chrysostom
When the infant Jesus had subdued the Magi, not by the might of His flesh, but the grace of His Spirit, Herod was exceeding wrath, that they whom he sitting on his throne had no power to move, were obedient to an Infant lying in a manger. Then by their contempt of him the Magi gave further cause of wrath. For when kings’ wrath is stirred by fear for their crowns, it is a great and inextinguishable wrath. But what did he? He sent and slew all the children. As a wounded beast rends whatsoever meeteth it as if the cause of its smart, so he mocked by the Magi spent his fury on children. He said to himself in his fury, ‘Surely the Magi have found the Child whom they said should be King;’ for a king in fear for his crown fears all things, suspects all. Then he sent and slew all those infants, that he might secure one among so many.
St Augustine † AD 430 non occ.
And while he thus persecutes Christ, he furnished an army (of martyrs) clothed in white robes of the same age as the Lord.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 220. App.
Behold how this unrighteous enemy never could have so much profited these infants by his love, as he did by his hate; for as much as iniquity abounded against them, so much did the grace of blessing abound on them.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 373. 3.
O blessed infants! He only will doubt of your crown in this your passion for Christ, who doubts that the baptism of Christ has a benefit for infants. He who at His birth had Angels to proclaim Him, the heavens to testify, and Magi to worship Him, could surely have prevented that these should not have died for Him, had He not known that they died not in that death, but rather lived in higher bliss. Far be the thought, that Christ who came to set men free, did nothing to reward those who died in His behalf, when hanging on the cross He prayed for those who put Him to death.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
He is not satisfied with the massacre at Bethlehem, but extends it to the adjacent villages; sparing no age from the child of one night old, to that of two years.
St Augustine † AD 430 Serm. 132. App.
The Magi had seen this unknown star in the heavens, not a few days, but two years before, as they had informed Herod when he enquired. This caused him to fix two years old and under; as it follows, according to the time he had enquired of the Magi.
St Augustine † AD 430 Gloss. ord.
Or because he feared that the Child to whom even stars ministered, might transform His appearance to greater or under that of His own age, or might conceal all those of that age: hence it seems to be that he slew all from one day to two years old.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Cons. Ev. ii. 11.
Or, disturbed by pressure of still more imminent dangers, Herod’s thoughts are drawn to other thoughts than the slaughter of children, he might suppose that the Magi, unable to find Him whom they had supposed born, were ashamed to return to him. So the days of purification being accomplished, they might go up in safety to Jerusalem. And who does not see that that one day they may have escaped the attention of a King occupied with so many cares, and that afterwards when the things done in the Temple came to be spread abroad, then Herod discovered that he had been deceived by the Magi, and then sent and slew the children.
St Bede † AD 735 Hom. in Nat. Innocent.
In this death of the children the precious death of all Christ’s martyrs is figured; that they were infants signifies, that by the merit of humility alone can we come to the glory of martyrdom; that they were slain in Bethlehem and the coasts thereof, that the persecution shall be both in Jerusalem whence the Church originated, and throughout the world; in those of two years old are figured the perfect in doctrine and works; those under that age the neophytes; that they were slain while Christ escaped, signifies that the bodies of the martyrs may be destroyed by the wicked, but that Christ cannot be taken from them.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus super Matth
Postquam parvulus Iesus magos suo imperio subiugavit, non potestate corporis, sed gratia spiritus, irascebatur Herodes, quia quos ipse sedens in throno regni suadere non potuit, his Iesus parvulus placuit in praesepio iacens. Deinde contemnentes eum, magi addiderunt causas doloris; unde dicitur tunc Herodes videns quoniam illusus esset a magis, iratus est valde. Illa enim regum ira magna et inextinguibilis est quam regni zelus accendit. Sed quid fecit? Mittens occidit omnes pueros. Sicut enim bestia vulnerata, quicquid oculis eius occurrit, quasi auctorem sui vulneris dilaniat, sic et ille delusus a magis iram suam super parvulos diffundebat. Dicebat enim cogitans in furore: certe magi puerum invenerunt, quem regnaturum dicebant: nam rex regni zelo repletus, de his omnia timet, omnia suspicatur. Ideo ergo misit, et interfecit omnes parvulos, ut unum inveniret in omnibus
Augustinus in Serm. de Epiph
Et dum insequitur Christum, regi nostro coaevum procuravit exercitum stolis victricibus candidatum
Augustinus in Serm. 3 de Innocent
Ecce profanus hostis beatis parvulis nunquam tantum prodesse potuisset obsequio, quantum profuit odio: nam quantum contra eos iniquitas abundavit, tantum gratia benedictionis effulsit
Idem
O parvuli beati. Ille de vestra corona dubitabit in passione pro Christo qui etiam parvulis Baptismum prodesse non existimat Christi: nam qui natus habere potuit praedicatores Angelos, narratores caelos, adoratores magos, potuit et illis, ne pro eo sic morerentur, praestare, si sciret illa morte perituros, et non potius maiore felicitate victuros. Absit ut ad liberandos homines Christus veniens, de illorum praemio qui pro illo interficerentur, nihil egerit, qui pendens in ligno pro eis a quibus interficiebatur, oravit
Rabanus Maurus
Non est autem contentus vastatione Bethlehem, sed et adiacentia loca vastavit; nec ullam misericordiam aetatis habuit, a filio unius noctis usque ad filium duorum annorum, qui omnes occideret; unde subdit in Bethlehem et in omnibus finibus eius a bimatu et infra
Augustinus
In caelo enim viderant magi ignotissimam stellam non ante paucos dies, sed ante finem biennii, sicut inquirenti Herodi patefecerunt; unde a bimatu et infra occidit infantes; propter quod sequitur secundum tempus quod exquisierat a magis
Augustinus
Vel quia timebat ne puer cui sidera famulantur, speciem suam paulo super aetatem vel infra transformaret, vel aetatem sui temporis occultaret; ideo videtur pueros a bimatu usque ad pueros unius diei interfecisse
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Vel aliquorum magis propinquantium periculorum terroribus agitatus, Herodes ab illa cura, scilicet interficiendi pueros, mente abrepta, in aliis potius occupatur; vel potuit credere, magos fallaci stellae visione deceptos, posteaquam non invenerunt quem natum putaverant, erubuisse ad se redire; atque ita timore depulso, a persequendo puero quievit, et sic completis diebus purgationis, tute cum illo ascendere in templum potuerunt. Quis enim non videat unum illum diem regem multis occupatum latere potuisse? Deinde vulgatis rebus quae in templo dictae factaeque fuerant, Herodes sensit se a magis illusum; ac deinde, sicut hic dicitur, multos infantes occidit
Beda in Hom. in festo Innocent
In hac autem morte puerorum, omnium Christi martyrum pretiosa est mors designata: quod parvuli occisi sunt, significat per humilitatis meritum ad martyrii perveniendum gloriam; quod in Bethlehem et in omnibus finibus eius occisi sunt, ostendit in Iudaea, unde Ecclesiae coepit origo, et ubique per orbem persecutionem saevituram; quod bimi occisi sunt, doctrina et operatione perfectos indicat; qui vero infra, simplices; quod illi quidem occisi sunt, et Christus evasit, insinuat corpora martyrum ab impiis posse perimi, sed Christum ab eis non posse auferri
2:17
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. ix.
The Evangelist by this history of so bloody a massacre, having filled the reader with horror, now again sooths his feelings, shewing that these things were not done because God could not hinder, or knew not of them; but as the Prophet had foretold.
St Jerome † AD 420 In Hierem. 31:15.
This passage of Jeremiah has been quoted by Matthew neither according to the Hebrew nor the LXX version. This shews that the Evangelists and Apostles did not follow any one’s translation, but according to the Hebrew manner expressed in their own words what they had read in Hebrew.
St Jerome † AD 420
By Ramah we need not suppose that the town of that name near Gibeah is meant; but take it as signifying ‘high.’ A voice was heard ‘aloft,’ that is, spread far and wide.’
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or, it was heard on high, because uttered for the death of the innocent, according to that, The voice of the poor entereth into the heavens. (Ecclus. 35:21.) The ‘weeping’ means the cries of the children; ‘lamentation,’ refers to the mothers. In the infants themselves their death ends their cries, in the mothers it is continually renewed by the remembrance of their loss.
St Jerome † AD 420
Rachel’s son was Benjamin, in which tribe Bethlehem is not situated. How then does Rachel weep for the children of Judah as if they were her own? We answer briefly. She was buried near Bethlehem in Ephrata, and was regarded as the mother, because her body was there entertained. Or, as the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin were contiguous, and Herod’s command extended to the coasts of Bethlehem as well as to the town itself, we may suppose that many were slain in Benjamin.
Pseudo-Augustine Hil. Quæst. N. and V. Test. 9. 62.
Or, The sons of Benjamin, who were akin to Rachel, were formerly cut off by the other tribes, and so extinct both then and ever after. (see Judg. 20.) Then therefore Rachel began to mourn her sons, when she saw those of her sister cut off in such a cause, that they should be heirs of eternal life; for he who has experienced any misfortune, is made more sensible of his losses by the good fortune of a neighbour.
Remigius † AD 908
The sacred Evangelist adds, to shew the greatness of the mourning, that even the dead Rachel was roused to mourn her sons, and would not be comforted because they were not.
St Jerome † AD 420
This may be understood in two ways; either she thought them dead for all eternity, so that no consolation could comfort her; or, she desired not to receive any comfort for those who she knew had gone into life eternal.
St Hilary † AD 367
It could not be that they were not who seemed now dead, but by glorious martyrdom they were advanced to eternal life; and consolation is for those who have suffered loss, not for those who have reaped a gain. Rachel affords a type of the Church long barren now at length fruitful. She is heard weeping for her children, not because she mourned them dead, but because they were slaughtered by those whom she would have retained as her first-born sons.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
Or, The Church weeps the removal of the saints from this earth, but wishes not to be comforted as though they should return again to the struggles of life, for they are not to be recalled into life.
The Gloss ord.
She will not be comforted in this present life, for that they are not, but transfers all her hope and comfort to the life to come.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
Rachel is well set for a type of the Church, as the word signifies ‘a sheep’ or ‘seeing;’ (vid. note i, p. 19.) her whole thought being to fix her eye in contemplation of God; and she is the hundredth sheep that the shepherd layeth on his shoulder.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia Evangelista horrore implevit auditorem, crudelem occisionem narrans, rursus mitigationem apponit ostendens quod haec non facta sunt Deo nequeunte prohibere atque ignorante, sed per prophetam praedicente; unde dicit tunc impletum est
Hieronymus super Ierem
Hoc Ieremiae testimonium Matthaeus, non secundum Hebraicam veritatem nec iuxta Lxx protulit. Ex quo perspicuum est Evangelistas et apostolos non interpretationem alicuius secutos, sed tamquam Hebraeos, quod legebant Hebraice, suis sermonibus expressisse
Hieronymus in Matth
Quod autem dicitur in Rama, non putamus loci nomen esse, quod est iuxta Gabaa, sed Rama excelsum interpretatur; ut sit sensus: vox in excelso audita est, idest longe lateque dispersa
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel quoniam de morte innocentium mittebatur, ideo in excelso audiebatur, secundum illud: vox pauperis penetrat nubes. Quod autem dicit ploratus, fletum parvulorum ostendit; quod autem dicit ululatus, matrum significat lamentum. In parvulis autem mors faciebat finem doloris, in matribus autem semper per memoriam reparatur; et ideo dicit: ululatus multus; Rachel plorans filios suos
Hieronymus
De Rachel natus est Beniamin, in cuius tribu non est Bethlehem. Quaeritur ergo quomodo Rachel filios Iudae, idest filios Bethlehem, quasi suos ploret. Respondebimus breviter, quia sepulta sit iuxta Bethlehem in Ephrata, et ex corpusculi hospitio matris nomen accepit. Sive quoniam Iuda et Beniamin duae tribus iunctae erant, et Herodes praeceperat, non solum in Bethlehem interfici pueros, sed et in omnibus finibus eius; per occisionem Bethlehem intelligimus multos etiam de Beniamin fuisse caesos
Augustinus de quaest. Nov. et Vet. Testam
Vel quia filii Beniamin, qui ad Rachel pertinent, olim a reliquis tribubus extincti sunt, et in praesenti et in futuro erasi. Tunc ergo Rachel coepit filios suos plangere quando filios sororis suae in tali causa vidit occisos, ut aeternae vitae heredes existerent: cui enim aliquid adversum evenit, ex felicitate alterius infausta sua miserius luget
Remigius
Assumpsit autem sanctus Evangelista ad exaggerandam magnitudinem luctus, ut diceret etiam Rachelem mortuam plorasse filios suos et noluit consolari, quia non sunt
Hieronymus
Et hoc secundum duplicem intelligentiam: sive quod eos in aeternum mortuos existimaret, sive quod se consolari nollet de his quos scivit esse victuros; ut sit sensus: noluit consolari, de hoc quod non essent
Hilarius in Matth
Non enim non erant hi qui mortui putabantur: in aeternitatis enim profectum per martyrii gloriam efferebantur; consolatio autem rei amissae erat praestanda, non auctae. Rachel Ecclesiae typum praetulit diu sterilis, nunc fecundae. Huius ploratus ex filiis, non idcirco quia peremptos dolebat, auditur, sed quia ab his perimebatur quos primum genitos filios retinere voluisset
Rabanus Maurus
Vel significat Ecclesiam quidem plorare sanctorum de hoc saeculo ablationem, sed non ita velle se consolari, ut qui saeculum morte vicerunt, rursus ad saeculi certamina secum redeant toleranda, quia non sunt ultra revocandi in mundum
Glossa
Vel non vult consolari in praesenti, quia non sunt, sed omnem spem et consolationem ad aeternam transmittit vitam
Rabanus Maurus
Bene autem Rachel, quia ovis vel videns dicitur, Ecclesiam figurat, cuius tota intentio ut Deum contempletur, invigilat; et ipsa est ovis centesima quam pastor in humeris reportat
2:19
Eusebius † AD 339 Eccles. Hist. i. 8.
For the sacrilege which Herod had committed against the Saviour, and his wicked slaughter of the infants of the same age, the Divine vengeance hastened his end; and his body, as Josephus relates, was attacked by a strange disease; so that the prophets declared that they were not human ailments, but visitations of Divine vengeance. Filled with mad fury, he gives command to seize and imprison the heads and nobles out of all parts of Judæa; ordering that as soon as ever he should breathe his last, they should be all put to death, that so Judæa though unwillingly might mourn at his decease. Just before he died he murdered his son Antipater, (besides two boys put to death before, Alexander and Aristobulus.) Such was the end of Herod, noticed in those words of the Evangelist, when Herod was dead, and such the punishment inflicted.
St Jerome † AD 420
Many here err from ignorance of history, supposing the Herod who mocked our Lord on the day of His passion, and the Herod whose death is here related, were the same. But the Herod who was then made friends with Pilate was son of this Herod and brother to Archelaus; for Archelaus was banished to Lyons in Gaul, and his father Herod made king in his room, as we read in Josephus. PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS. (De Cæl. Hierarch. 4.) See how Jesus Himself, though far above all celestial beings, and coming unchanged to our nature, shunned not that ordinance of humanity which He had taken on Him, but was obedient to the dispositions of His Father made known by Angels. For even by Angels is declared to Joseph the retreat of the Son into Egypt, so ordained of the Father, and His return again to Judæa.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
See how Joseph was set for ministering to Mary; when she went into Egypt and returned, who would have fulfilled to her this so needful ministry, had she not been betrothed? For to outward view Mary nourished and Joseph defended the Child; but in truth the Child supported His mother and protected Joseph. Return into the land of Israel; for He went down into Egypt as a physician, not to abide there, but to succour it sick with error. But the reason of the return is given in the words, They are dead, &c.
St Jerome † AD 420
From this we see that not Herod only, but also the Priests and Scribes had sought the Lord’s death at that time.
Remigius † AD 908
But if they were many who sought his destruction, how came they all to have died in so short a time? As we have related above, all the great men among the Jews were slain at Herod’s death.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
And that is said to have been done by the counsel of God for their conspiring with Herod against the Lord; as it is said, Herod was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
Remigius † AD 908
Or the Evangelist uses a figure of speech, by which the plural is used for the singular. These words, the Child’s life, (or soul, i. e. the Apollinarians.) overthrow those heretics who taught that Christ did not take a soul, but had His Divinity in place of a soul.
St Bede † AD 735 Hom. in Nat. Innoc.
This slaughter of the infants for the Lord’s sake, the death of Herod soon after, and Joseph’s return with the Lord and his mother to the land of Israel, is a figure shewing that all the persecutions moved against the Church will be avenged by the death of the persecutor, peace restored to the Church, and the saints who had concealed themselves return to their own places. Or the return of Jesus to the land of Israel on the death of Herod shews, that, at the preaching of Enoch and Elijahc, the Jews, when the fire of modern jealousy shall be extinguished, shall receive the true faith.
The Latin text
Ex historia Eccles
Cum pro sacrilegio, quod Herodes in salvatorem commiserat et scelere quod in aequaevos eius peregerat, ultio eum divina perurgeret in mortem, corpus eius, ut Iosephus refert, morbus invasit diversus, ita ut diceretur a vatibus, non morbi corporis haec, sed divinae ultionis esse supplicia. Ipse autem furore iam plenus nobiliores et primarios ex omni Iudaea ad se colligi, et recludi iubet in carcere, mandans, statim ut spiritum exhalasset, omnes interfici ut eius obitum omnis Iudaea defleret invita. Paulo autem antequam novissimum spiritum redderet, Antipatrum filium suum iugulavit, post duos pueros ante necaverat, scilicet Alexandrum et Aristobulum. Talis igitur Herodis finis, qui digna supplicia scelere quod in Bethlehem erga parvulos gesserat, et pro insidiis salvatoris exactus est: ab Evangelista designatur cum dicit defuncto autem Herode
Hieronymus
Multi propter ignorantiam historiae labuntur in errorem, putantes eumdem esse Herodem a quo in passione dominus irridetur, et qui nunc mortuus esse refertur. Ergo Herodes ille, qui cum Pilato postea amicitias fecit, huius Herodis filius est, frater Archelai, quem Tiberius Caesar Lugdunum relegavit, fratremque eius Herodem successorem regni fecit. Primo ergo Herode defuncto, ecce apparuit Angelus domini in somnis Ioseph in Aegypto dicens: surge, et accipe puerum et matrem eius
Dionysius de caelesti hierarchia
Vide quoniam et ipse Iesus super caelestibus essentiis superexistens, ad id quod secundum nos est immutabiliter veniens, non refugit ad se ordinatam et assumptam humanam ordinationem, sed obediens subditur Dei patris per Angelos dispositionibus et per Angelos ipsos annuntiatur Ioseph a patre disposita filii ad Aegyptum recessio, et iterum ad Iudaeam ex Aegypto transductio
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vides enim quia Ioseph ad ministerium Mariae erat electus: eunte enim illa in Aegyptum et redeunte, quis ministerium ei tantae necessitatis impleret nisi desponsata fuisset? Nam prima quidem facie Maria puerum nutriebat et Ioseph conservabat; revera autem puer et matrem nutriebat et Ioseph tuebatur. Sequitur et vade in terram Israel: quasi medicus enim descendit in Aegyptum, ut visitaret eam languentem erroribus, non ut remaneret in ea. Ratio autem reversionis assignatur cum subditur defuncti sunt enim qui quaerebant animam pueri
Hieronymus
Ex hoc loco intelligimus non solum Herodem, sed etiam sacerdotes et Scribas eo tempore necem domini fuisse meditatos
Remigius
Sed si multi fuerunt, quomodo in tam brevi spatio extincti sunt? Quia, ut dictum est, Herode mortuo, occisi sunt omnes maiores qui in custodia tenebantur
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quod dicitur consilio factum esse, quia consenserunt Herodi, ut inquireret puerum et occideret, quia scriptum est: turbatus est Herodes, et omnis Hierosolyma cum illo
Remigius
Aut certe locutus est Evangelista per speciem tropi, quando multi ponuntur pro uno. In hoc autem quod dicit animam pueri, destruuntur haeretici qui dixerunt Christum non sumpsisse animam, sed loco animae habuisse divinitatem
Beda in Hom. de Innocent
Quod autem occisis pro domino pueris, Herodes non longe post obiit, et Ioseph dominum cum matre ad terram Israel reduxit, significat omnes persecutiones quae contra Ecclesiam erant movendae, persecutorum morte vindicandas, et pacem Ecclesiae denuo reddendam, et sanctos qui latuerant ad sua loca reversuros. Vel quod defuncto Herode, redit ad terram Israel Iesus, denuntiat quod Enoch et Elia praedicantibus, Iudaei, sopita modernae invidiae flamma, fidem veritatis accipient
2:21
The Gloss
Joseph was not disobedient to the angelic warning, but he arose, and took the young Child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. The Angel had not fixed the particular place, so that while Joseph hesitates, the Angel returns, and by the often visiting him confirms his obedience.
Josephus
Herod had nine wives, by seven of whom he had a numerous issue. By Josida, his first born Antipater—by Mariamine, Alexander and Aristobulus—by Mathuca, a Samaritan woman, Archelaus—by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, Herod, who was afterwards tetrarch, and Philip. The three first were put to death by Herod; and after his death, Archelaus seized the throne by occasion of his father’s will, and the question of the succession was carried before Augustus Cæsar. After some delay, he made a distribution of the whole of Herod’s dominions in accordance with the Senate’s advice. To Archelaus he assigned one half, consisting of Idumæa and Judæa, with the title of tetrarch, and a promise of that of king if he shewed himself deserving of it. The rest he divided into two tetrarchates, giving Galilee to Herod the tetrarch, Ituræa and Trachonitis to Philip. Thus Archelaus was after his father’s death a duarch, which kind of sovereignty is here called a kingdom.
St Augustine † AD 430 De Con. Evan. ii. 10.
Here it may be asked, How then could his parents go up every year of Christ’s childhood to Jerusalem, as Luke relates, if fear of Archelaus now prevented them from approaching it? This difficulty is easily solved. At the festival they might escape notice in the crowd, and by returning soon, where in ordinary times they might be afraid to live. So they neither became irreligious by neglecting the festival, nor notorious by dwelling continually in Jerusalem. Or it is open to us to understand Luke when he says, they went up every year, as speaking of a time when they had nothing to fear from Archelaus, who, as Josephus relates, reigned only nine years. There is yet a difficulty in what follows; Being warned in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee. If Joseph was afraid to go into Judæa because one of Herod’s sons, Archelaus, reigned there, how could he go into Galilee, where another of his sons Herod was tetrarch, as Luke tells us? As if the times of which Luke is speaking were times in which there was any longer need to fear for the Child, when even in Judæa things were so changed, that Archelaus no longer ruled there, but Pilate was governor.
The Gloss ord.
But then we might ask, why was he not afraid to go into Galilee, seeing Archelaus ruled there also? He could be better concealed in Nazareth than in Jerusalem, which was the capital of the kingdom, and where Archelaus was constantly resident.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
And when he had once left the country of His birth, all the occurrences passed out of mind; the rage of persecution had been spent in Bethlehem and its neighbourhood. By choosing Nazareth therefore, Joseph both avoided danger, and returned to his country.
St Augustine † AD 430 De Con. Evan. ii. 9.
This may perhaps occur to some, that Matthew says His parents went with the Child Jesus to Galilee because they feared Archelaus, when it should seem most probable that they chose Galilee because Nazareth was their own city, as Luke has not forgot to mention. We must understand, that when the Angel in the vision in Egypt said to Joseph, Go into the land of Israel, Joseph understood the command to be that he should go straight into Judæa, that being properly the land of Israel. But finding Archelaus ruling there, he would not court the danger, as the land of Israel might be interpreted to extend to Galilee, which was inhabited by children of Israel. Or we may suppose His parents supposed that Christ should dwell no where but in Jerusalem, where was the temple of the Lord, and would have gone thither had not the fear of Archelaus hindered them. And they had not been commanded from God to dwell positively in Judæa, or Jerusalem, so as that they should have despised the fear of Archelaus, but only in the land of Israel generally, which they might understand of Galilee.
St Hilary † AD 367
But the figurative interpretation holds good any way. Joseph represents the Apostles, to whom Christ is entrusted to be borne about. These, as though Herod were dead, that is, his people being destroyed in the Lord’s passion, are commanded to preach the Gospel to the Jews; they are sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But finding the seed of their hereditary unbelief still abiding, they fear and withdraw; admonished by a vision, to wit, seeing the Holy Ghost poured upon the Gentiles, they carry Christ to them.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
Or, we may apply it to the last times of the Jewish Church, when many Jews having turned to the preaching of Enoch and Elijah, the rest filled with the spirit of Antichrist shall fight against the faith. So that part of Judæa where Archelaus rules, signifies the followers of Antichrist; Nazareth of Galilee, whither Christ is conveyed, that part of the nation that shall embrace the faith. Galilee means ‘removal;’ Nazareth, ‘the flower of virtues;’ for the Church the more zealously she removes from the earthly to the heavenly, the more she abounds in the flower and fruit of virtues.
The Gloss
To this he adds the Prophet’s testimony, saying, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophets, &c.
St Jerome † AD 420
Had he meant to quote a particular text, he would not have written ‘Prophets,’ but ‘the Prophet.’ By thus using the plural he evidently does not take the words of any one passage in Scripture, but the sense of the whole. Nazarene is interpreted ‘Holyd,’ and that the Lord would be Holy, all Scripture testifies. Otherwise we may explain that it is found in Isaiah (c. 11:1.) rendered to the strict letter of the Hebrew. There shall come a Rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall grow out of His rootse.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
They might have read this in some Prophets who are not in our canon, as Nathan or Esdras. That there was some prophecy to this purport is clear from what Philip says to Nathanael. Him of whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth. (John 1:15.) Hence the Christians were at first called Nazarenes, at Antioch their name was changed to that of ‘Christians.’
St Augustine † AD 430 De Con. Evan. ii. 5.
The whole of this history, from the account of the Magi inclusively, Luke omits. Let it be here noticed once for all, that each of the Evangelists writes as if he were giving a full and complete history, which omits nothing; where he really passes over any thing, he continues his thread of history as if he had told all. Yet by a diligent comparison of their several narratives, we can be at no loss to know where to insert any particular that is mentioned by one and not by the other.
The Latin text
Glossa
Angelicae admonitioni Ioseph non inobediens fuit; unde sequitur qui consurgens, accepit puerum et matrem eius et venit in terram Israel. Non enim determinaverat Angelus in quo loco terrae Israel; ut dubitante Ioseph, iterum revertatur, et frequentiori visitatione Angeli certior redderetur; unde sequitur audiens autem quod Archelaus regnaret in Iudaea pro Herode patre suo, timuit illo ire
Iosephus Antiq. Iud. et de bello Iud
Habuit siquidem Herodes uxores novem, ex quarum septem numerosam suscepit sobolem: primogenitus eius Antipater ex Iosida, Alexander et Aristobulus ex Mariamne, Archelaus ex Mathaca Samaritide, Herodes Antipas, qui postea tetrarcha fuit, et Philippus, ex Cleopatra Hierosolymitide. Tribus igitur primis ab Herode interfectis, et post mortem eius occasione testamenti patris, Archelao gubernationem regni usurpante, et causa de successione regni ad Caesarem Augustum delata, tandem de consilio senatus omnem Herodis monarchiam distribuit: mediam partem, scilicet Idumaeam et Iudaeam, tradens Archelao sub nomine tetrarchiae, pollicitus se facturum eum regem, si se dignum praebuisset; mediam vero partem in duas secuit tetrarchias: cessitque Galilaea in partem Herodis tetrarchae, Ituraeae vero et Trachonitidis regio Philippo. Factus est ergo post Herodem defunctum Archelaus quasi diarchus, quod dominii genus hic regnum appellat
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Sed hic aliquis quaeret: quomodo, sicut Lucas narrat, ibant parentes eius per omnes annos pueritiae Christi in Ierusalem, si Archelai timore ibi prohibebantur accedere? Hoc dissolvere non est difficile: fieri enim poterat ut per diem festum, inter tam ingentem turbam latenter ascenderent mox reversuri, cum tamen aliis diebus habitare metuerent: ut nec solemnitate praetermissa essent irreligiosi, nec continua mansione perspicui. Iste quoque intellectus patet; ut quod Lucas dicit per omnes annos eos ascendere solitos in Ierusalem, tunc accipiamus factum cum iam non metueretur Archelaus, qui, secundum historiam Ioseph, solum novem annis regnavit. Sequitur et admonitus in somnis secessit in partes Galilaeae. Sed forte hic quispiam moveatur: cum Matthaeus dixerit, ideo timuisse Ioseph cum puero redeuntem ire in Iudaeam quia pro patre suo Herode Archelaus filius eius regnabat, quomodo potuit ire in Galilaeam, ubi alius filius eius Herodes tetrarcha erat, ut Lucas testatur? Quasi vero ipsa sint tempora quibus puero timebatur, quae Lucas commemoravit, quae usque adeo mutata erant ut in ipsa Iudaea non rex esset Archelaus, sed praeses Pilatus
Glossa
Sed tunc quaeritur: quare non timuit Ioseph in Galilaeam ire, cum et ibi Archelaus regnaret? Sed melius potuit latere cum puero in Nazareth, quam in Ierusalem, ubi erat caput regni et assiduus Archelaus
Chrysostomus in Matth
Immo quia regionem ortus sui mutavit, res in posterum caligine obducta est. Omnis quippe impetus persequentis in Bethlehem eiusque fines desaevierat. Venit igitur Ioseph in Nazareth et periculum fugiens et in patriam rediens; unde sequitur et veniens habitavit in civitate quae vocatur Nazareth
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Forte et hoc movet, quomodo dicat Matthaeus, propterea cum puero Iesu parentes eius isse in Galilaeam, quia metu Archelai in Ierusalem ire noluerint; cum propterea magis esse in Galilaea videantur, quia civitas eorum erat Nazareth Galilaeae, sicut Lucas non tacuit. Sed intelligendum est, quia ubi Angelus in somnis in Aegypto dixit ad Ioseph: vade in terram Israel, sic intellectum primo esse a Ioseph, ut putaret rectius esse pergere in Iudaeam: ipsa enim primitus intelligi potuit terra Israel. Postquam vero comperit ibi regnare Archelaum, noluit obiicere se periculo, cum posset terra Israel etiam Galilaea intelligi, quia et ipsam populus Israel incolebat. Quamquam possit et aliter solvi: quia potuit videri parentibus Christi non esse habitandum ibi cum puero, nisi in Ierusalem ubi erat templum domini; et illuc ivissent, nisi Archelai praesentia terrerentur. Non autem divinitus iubebantur in Iudaea vel in Ierusalem habitare, ut de Archelao quod timebant deberent contemnere; sed in terra Israel, in qua etiam, ut dictum est, poterat intelligi Galilaea
Hilarius in Matth
Verum typica ratio conservata est: Ioseph enim apostolorum tenet speciem, quibus Christus circumferendus est creditus. Hi tamquam Herode mortuo, idest populo eius in passione domini deperdito, Iudaeis praedicare sunt iussi (missi enim erant ad oves perditas domus Israel); sed manente hereditariae infidelitatis dominatu, metuunt et recedunt; admoniti per visum, spiritus sancti donum in gentibus contemplantes, ad eas conferunt Christum
Rabanus Maurus
Vel hoc ultima tempora Ecclesiae designat, quando plurimis Iudaeorum ad praedicationem Enoch et Eliae conversis, ceteri ad instinctum Antichristi contra fidem pugnabunt. Pars igitur Iudaeae in qua regnabat Archelaus, Antichristi sequaces ostendit; Nazareth autem Galilaeae, quo transfertur Christus, partem eiusdem gentis quae fidem est susceptura designat: unde Galilaea transmigratio, Nazareth autem flos virtutum interpretatur, quia Ecclesia quo ardentius a terrenis ad caelestia transmigrat, eo magis virtutum flore et germine abundat
Glossa
Huic autem prophetae testimonium adiungit dicens ut impleretur quod dictum est per prophetas, quoniam Nazaraeus vocabitur
Hieronymus
Si fixum de Scripturis posuisset exemplum, nunquam diceret quod dictum est per prophetas; sed simpliciter: quod dictum est per prophetam. Nunc autem pluraliter prophetas vocans, ostendit se non verba de Scripturis sumpsisse, sed sensum. Nazaraeus interpretatur sanctus; sanctum autem dominum futurum omnis Scriptura commemorat. Possumus et aliter dicere: quod etiam eisdem verbis iuxta Hebraicam veritatem in Isaia scriptum sit: exiet virga de radice Iesse, et Nazaraeus de radice eius consurget
Chrysostomus super Matth
Aut forte legerunt et aliquos prophetas ita dicentes, qui non sunt nobis canonizati, sicut Nathan et Esdra. Et quoniam hoc prophetatum erat, manifestat Philippus dicens ad Nathanaelem: quem scripsit Moyses in lege, invenimus Iesum a Nazareth. Unde etiam prius Christiani Nazaraei vocabantur; sed apud Antiochiam mutatum est hoc nomen, et dicti sunt Christiani
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Haec autem omnia quae sunt a narratione magorum et deinceps, Lucas tacet. Hoc proinde cognoscendum, quod deinceps ad cetera valeat: sic unumquemque Evangelistarum contexere narrationem suam, ut tanquam nihil praetermittentis series digesta videatur; tacitis enim quae non vult dicere, sic ea quae vult dicere illis quae dicebat adiungit ut ipsa continuo sequi videantur; sed cum alter dicit ea quae alter tacuit, diligenter ordo consideratus indicat locum ubi ea potuerint a quo praetermissa sunt, transiliri
2:1
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Juda in the days of king Herod. It is better to read here in the Greek in Bethlehem-Juda. Juda means the tribe of Judah, to which, after the schism of the ten tribes, who made a king of their own, Jeroboam, the tribe of Benjamin adhered. And these two formed the kingdom of Judah. S. Matthew adds the word Judah to distinguish the town from another Bethlehem, in the tribe of Zebulon, in Galilee. (See Jos 19:15) So S. Jerome. This was Herod I., the son of Antipater, surnamed the Great, and of Ascalon, and an Idumæan by race, whom the Roman Senate, on the recommendation of Antony, created the first king of Judæa, after its conquest. (See Josephus, lib. 14, Ant. c. 18.) Matthew makes mention of Herod, to intimate that the sceptre was now transferred from Judah to an alien, for such was Herod, and therefore that Messiah or Christ was now come. For the patriarch Jacob had foretold that this should be the sign of His advent. (Gen 49:10.) So S. Chrysostom, and Theophylact. Herod, being aware of this prophecy, applied the oracle to himself in order to strengthen his kingdom. He wished to be accounted the Messiah; and therefore he built a most magnificent temple for the Jews, and dedicated it on the anniversary of the day when he commenced his reign. (See Josephus, lib. 15, Ant. c. 14, and lib. 20, c. 8.) Herod Antipas, who beheaded John the Baptist, was the son of this Herod the Great. He also it was who clothed our Lord in His Passion with a white robe, and mocked Him. And the grandson of Herod the Great, by his son Aristobulus, was Herod Agrippa, who killed James the brother of John, and who was smitten by an angel and died. And the son of this Agrippa was Herod Agrippa the younger, before whom Paul the prisoner pleaded. (Act 25:23, &c.) Salianus, Scaliger, and others, think that Christ was born in the thirty-sixth, or last year but one, of Herod's reign. For he reigned thirty-six years. (See on ver. 16.) But Baronius thinks that Christ was born in the twentieth year of Herod, Abul. in the thirtieth, Bede in the thirty-first, Eusebius in the thirty-second, Sulpitius Severus in the thirty-third, Torinellus in the thirty-fourth, and others give other dates, so that in a matter of such uncertainty nothing can be exactly determined.
Behold, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews ? Wise men, Gr. Magi, a common word among the Persians, whence the Persian translation of S. Matthew has here Magusan, Magi, or wise men, or astrologers, or philosophers. The word seems to be derived from the Hebrew as Genebrard, on Ps. i., thinks, from the root haga to meditate, whence Magim, those who meditate. "For meditation is the key of wisdom," as Ptolemy says in the procemium of Almagestus. Hence those who are given to meditation either are, or else become, wise. The Chaldees, following the Hebrews, were accustomed to call their philosophers Magi, according to S. Jerome in Dan. c. 2. Hence the Arabians, Syrians, Persians, Ethiopians, and other Orientals, whose languages are either derived from, or akin to Hebrew, call their wise men and astrologers, Magi, according to Pliny, lib. 25. C. 2, and Tertull., contra Judæos.
Came to Jerusalem. 1. Because they thought that the King of the Jews must be sought for in the royal city; so S. Leo says. 2. Because the chief priests, and scribes, and doctors of the law, were at Jerusalem, who, from the prophetic oracles, would be likely to know where and when Christ should be born, as in fact they did inform the wise men that He should be born at Bethlehem. For prudently the Magi, although they had the star, wished to consult also the living interpreters of God's will. And thus it was that the star for a time withdrew itself, as though to compel the wise men to approach the Scribes. For it is God's will that men should be taught by men, and by doctors appointed by Himself, the way of salvation.
From the east, Gr. α̉πό α̉νατολών, i.e., from eastern parts, as though these Magi came from several regions or provinces of the east. You ask from what country the Magi came?
1. Clemens Alex., S. Chrysostom, Cyril Alex., and S. Leo, cited by Baronius, think that they came from Persia. But the distance would seem too great. For Persia is 300 leagues from Judæa, which the Magi would scarcely traverse in thirteen days. It is true that with dromedaries, which can travel forty leagues in a day, the journey might be accomplished post-haste in that time; but those kings, with their luxuries and their litters, were not travellers post-haste, and could not perform the distance in any such time. And the more common opinion of the Fathers and Doctors is that the Magi came to Bethlehem on the thirteenth day from the first appearance of the star and the birth of Christ, and there adored Him, and that this is the force of the word lo! Also because they found Christ still remaining with His parents, among strangers at Bethlehem, and they, a little after, returned with Christ to their own city, Nazareth. This is the opinion of S. Augustine, Serm. I, 2, 3, de Epiphan., and S. Leo, de eadem. Whence also the Church commemorates this mystery on the thirteenth day after Christmas.
2:2
2. Others with more probability think that the Magi were Chaldæans, both because the Chaldæans were addicted to astrology; and these Magi recognized Christ by the teaching of a star, and because they themselves were followers of Abraham, who was called by God out of Chaldæa into Judæa. So think S. Jerome, Chalcidius the Platonic, and Jansenius.
Who is born King of the Jews. Observe here the faith and greatness of soul of the Magi, who in a royal city seek another King rather than the reigning monarch; nor fear the wrath and power of Herod, because they trusted in God.
The King of the Jews, put antonomastically for Messiah, or Christ. Wherefore when Herod heard this question, he gathered the Scribes together, and asked them where Christ should be born? For the star was the index of Christ; whence it is subjoined, "For we have seen His star." This is what is meant "The King of the Jews, yea, of heaven, has been born; for a star of the heavens has made Him known to us. It has called us: it has invited all to visit Him, to honour and adore Him. For in this new star which has been put forth in heaven, heaven manifests her admiration of so great a King, even the Word incarnate." When Christ is born, the heaven is astonished, the angels are amazed, and, wondering at the love of God for man, they sing with jubilation, "Glory to God in the highest," that so they may arouse senseless man to wonder at and venerate so great condescension. So from a like cause, at the passion of Christ, the sun and the moon were darkened, the earth quaked, rocks were rent, graves were opened, to show that their God was dying, and to manifest their sympathy. This is what Haggai foretold (ii. 7) "Yet a little while, and I will move the heaven and the earth: and the desire of all nations shall come." At this also Habakkuk was amazed when he said (iii. 2), "I considered thy works, and was afraid. In the midst of the two living creatures thou shalt be known" (LXX) that is to say, in the manger, by the shepherds and the Magi. Wherefore Francis Mayro, in a sermon on the Nativity, teaches that the incarnation of the Word was a greater and more stupendous work of God than the creation of the world. For man is more distant from God than he is from nothing. For man is finite, God is infinite, and, by the incarnation, God is united to man; but, in creation, man is united to nothing that is, to a body created out of nothing. Lastly, from this star, that impostor who, a little after Christ, under the Emperor Adrian, feigned himself to be Messiah, gave himself a name. He excited the Jews to rebel against the Romans, and became their leader, calling himself Barchochebas, i.e., the Son of the Star, saying "that he, for their salvation, had glided down from heaven, as a great star, to bring the help of light to diseased mortals, who were condemned to long darkness." Thus Eusebius, Hist. 4. 6. But this star soon set, for he and all his followers were cut off by the Romans. Appropriately did a star lead the three royal Magi to Christ, the King of kings, for a star has the appearance of a kingly crown, with its resplendent rays; and therefore a star is an emblem of a king and a kingdom. Whence God promises to Abraham (Gen 15:5), saying, "Look up to heaven, and number the stars, if thou canst. And he said to him: so shall thy seed be." Here, amongst other things, He designated the kings of Israel and Judah, who should spring from Abraham, but especially Christ the King. Hence, unfolding the same thing, God says to Abraham explicitly, "Kings shall come out of thee." (Gen 17:6.) Wherefore S. Fulgentius (Serm. on the Epiph. 5) says "Who is that King of the Jews? At once poor and rich, lowly and exalted, who is carried as a babe, and worshipped as a God: a babe in a manger, incomprehensible in heaven, sordid in rags, priceless among the stars." Hence has been taken that ancient military order of the kings and princes of France, who bore the figure of a star on their vestments, with this motto "The stars show the way to the kings." This order was afterwards changed, by Louis XI. of France, into the Order of S. Michael. The Order of the Star was first instituted by Robert of France, about A.D. 1022 (in honour of the Blessed Virgin, to whom that monarch was greatly devoted), because she is the very Star of the sea, imploring that she, like a guiding-star, might be the leader of his kingdom, and especially of the nobles. Wherefore he elected thirty knights of the chief nobility of France to be of this Order, and gave to each a golden collar, with a star pendant on the breast. (See the "Annals of Paris," by Jacob Broneius.)
For we have seen his star namely, of the King of the Jews, i.e., Christ, or the Messiah, newly born. From hence it would appear that this star extended its rays with greater length and brightness in the direction of Judæa, in the same manner that comets extend their tails towards such and such a country; so that the Magi might understand that they were to go in the direction of Judæa, where Messiah was to be born. This seems to be the force of the word for in this place. Wisely does S. Gregory say (Hom. 10) "All the elements testified that their Creator was come. The heavens acknowledged Him to be God, and so they sent the star. The sea knew Him, for it suffered Him to walk upon it. The earth knew Him, for, when He died, it trembled. The sun knew Him, for he hid his rays. The rocks and stones knew Him, for they were rent asunder. Hell knew Him, for it gave up the dead that were in it. And yet Him, whom all the senseless elements felt to be the Lord, the hearts of the unbelieving Jews even yet acknowledge not by any means to be God, and, harder than the flint-stones, they will not be broken by repentance." You will ask how the Magi, when they saw the star, knew by it that Christ was born? In the first place, the Priscillianists, as S. Gregory (Hom. 10) testifies, said that this star was the Fate of Christ; that as fate determines things future, so this star signified and determined Christ. But this opinion S. Gregory rightly refutes, saying, "It was not the Child who hasted to the star, but the star to the Child. So may it be said, that the star was not the fate of the Child, but the fate of the star was the Child who appeared." S. Augustine also (lib. 5, de Civitat. Dei, c. 1, &c.) confutes the astrologers, who say that the stars assign their fates to every one. [There follows here a refutation of astrological views, which is not translated, as unnecessary in the present age. Trans.] A second opinion is that of the Imperfect Author. This star, he says, was distinguished by the figure of a boy bearing a cross, because the light of faith manifested the Incarnation and Cross of Christ. But this is said without foundation. It is not related in any history, except that of the Sethiani, of whom presently. I say, therefore, that the Magi knew Christ was born by the token of a star. 1. Because Balaam had prophesied of it (Num 24:17), "A Star shall rise out of Jacob." But the Magi were the posterity, or successors of Balaam. The meaning therefore of "Where is he who is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star," is, we seek Him whom we all have hitherto expected to be designated by a star; and now, since we have seen the star, we believe that He has been born. There is, moreover, this oracle of the Erythræan Sibyl extant (lib. 8, Sibyl. orac.): "The Magi worshipped the Star, recent and divine; and when they followed the commands of God, an infant was shown to them in a manger." That the Magi knew that this star was the harbinger of Christ from Balaam and the Sibyl, is the opinion of S. Basil, S. Jerome, Origen, S. Leo, Eusebius, Prosper, S. Cyprian, Procopius, and others, whom I have cited on Num 24:17. Whence Suetonius, in Vespas., and Cicero, lib. 2, de Divinat., and Orosius, lib. 6, c. 6, say that it was then a general belief that a King would come forth from Judæa who would have universal dominion. This the heathen falsely applied to Vespasian. Chalcidius, who was a heathen and Platonic philosopher, commenting upon the Timæus of Plato, thus writes: "There is another very sacred and venerable history," meaning the Gospel of S. Matthew, "which tells of the rising of a certain star, not one denouncing disease and death, but declaring the descent of a God to be worshipped, for the sake of converse with man and mortal concerns. When certain wise Chaldæans, in a journey by night, had seen this star, and had well considered the circumstance, they are said to have searched for the God newly born, and, when they had found the august Child, they worshipped Him, and presented gifts suitable for so great a Deity." The author of the Imperfect Homily, upon this passage of S. Matthew, adds that the successors of Balaam, after his prophecy concerning the star, deputed some persons, in each generation, to watch the heavens, who might observe the rising of this star, on the mountain which is called Victorialis; and at length, when these Magi were watching for its appearance, "it came," he says, "upon that mountain Victorialis, descending, as it were, in the form of a little child, and upon him the likeness of a cross. And it spoke with them and taught them, and told them to go into Judæa. And as they went, the star went before them for the space of two years. And they wanted neither food nor drink. But the rest of all the things which were done by them is compendiously related in the Gospel." These things, however, are of doubtful credit, and are taken from the apocryphal books of the Sethiani, as the writer acknowledges.
2. More probably, they knew by a divine instinct and revelation; for the Magi were endowed with a hidden celestial afflatus. "This they heard," says S. Augustine (Serm. 2 de Epiph.), "telling them in the language of heaven, as it were, that Christ was born in Judaea. Thus they followed the star on to Bethlehem and the cradle of Christ." For, as S. Leo says (Serm. 4 de Epiph.), "God, who manifested the sign of the star, gave understanding to those who beheld it: for He made it to be understood and inquired after, and, being sought after, He presented Himself to be found." The brightness and majesty of the star were so great that the Magi understood that something divine was portended, even that God, as the Holy Spirit suggested to them, had become incarnate. In fine, the Divine countenance of the Child Christ shed forth such a ray of heavenly light as illuminated the eyes, but still more the minds, of the Magi, so that they perceived that that Infant was not a mere man, but true God; for, as S. Jerome says, on the ninth chapter of Matthew, "The splendour and the majesty of the hidden Divinity, which shone even in His human face, were able at the first glance to attract those who beheld Him." You will ask, secondly, of what kind, and how great was this star? Was it of the same nature as the rest of the stars, or was it peculiar and diverse from others? First, the writer concerning the marvels of Scripture (lib. 3. c. 40, as extant in tom. 3 of S. Augustine's Works), thinks that this star was the Holy Ghost, who, like unto a dove, descended upon Christ, and, by means of a star, guided the Magi. 2. Origen, Theophylact, S. Chrysostom, and Maldonatus think that this star was an angel, because, indeed, an angel was the mover, and, as it were, the charioteer of the star. 3. Others think that it was a real and new star, similar to the one which appeared in the Constellation of Cassiopeia, A.D. 1572. 4. Others think that it was a comet. But I reply that it was a new and unknown star, entirely different from other stars, and superior to them in nine prerogatives, and, as one may say, portents. It was formed by the angels for this purpose, that it might lead the Magi to admire it, that they might feel assured that it presaged something new and divine. 1. This star surpassed all others as to its creation or production. For they were produced in the fourth day of the Creation, but this was produced upon the very night of Christ's nativity. It was therefore a new star, and was never seen either before or after this time. So S. Augustine, lib. 2, contra Faustum, c. 5.
2. In its material: for in other stars this is celestial, but in this it was aerial. For the angels framed it of condensed air, and infused brightness into it.
2:3
3. Abul. (in Numb. c. 24), and the Jesuit Sebast. Barradi, think that the Magi were Mesopotamians, because Balaam, who predicted this star was from thence.
3. In place: for other stars are in the firmament; this was in the atmosphere. It went before the Magi in their journey from Arabia to Judæa.
When king Herod heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. Herod was troubled, because he feared that he would lose the kingdom of the Jews, now that Messiah, their true and legitimate Prince, was born. "What wonder," says S. Augustine, "that impiety should be troubled at the birth of piety?" (Serm. 2 de Innocent.) Jerusalem was troubled, as well because there were many in it who favoured Herod, as because the Scribes and chief Priests, having leisure only for their own advantage, and being thus in a state of spiritual slumber, had no thought about the coming of Messiah; that now the sceptre was departed from Judah, as Jacob had foretold, Messiah should be born. Wisely does S. Gregory say (Hom. 10. in Evangel.), "When the King of heaven was born, the earthly king was troubled because, indeed, terrestrial exaltation is confounded when celestial greatness is disclosed." "For," as S. Fulgentius says (Serm. 1 de Epiph.), "This King came, not to fight against and conquer earthly kings, but, by dying, marvellously to subdue them. Not, therefore, was He born to be thy successor, O Herod; but that the world might faithfully believe in Him." "Christ seizes not thy royalty," says S. Leo, "nor would the Lord of the universe be contented with thy petty sceptre. He, whom thou wishest not to be king in Judæa, reigns everywhere, and thyself wouldst reign more prosperously if thou wouldst be subject to His sway." And Herod, as we may see in Josephus, cut off all the members of the royal house of Judah, lest there should be any rival to his sovereignty.
2:4
4. Navarrus (Tractat. de Orat. c. 21) asserts that he received from Jerome Osorius, Bishop of Algarbii, and a celebrated writer, that it is found in the very ancient records of Calecut, that the king of Calecut was one of the Magi, or certainly a chief associate (socium) of the three wise men. It is credible that this may have afterwards been the case when the Magi preached with S. Thomas the Apostle, in that place. See Osorius, lib. I, on the actions of Emmanuel, king of Portugal, where he asserts from Indian traditions that the king of Cranganore, which is not very far from Calecut, was one of the Magi: for that the two other Magi, the Persian, and the Caramanian, as they were hastening to Christ with the star for their guide, associated with themselves this Indian king; and that hence he was called Chereperimale, or one of three. He adds that he was nearly black, and like an Ethiopian. Maffei has a similar account, lib. 2, Hist. Ind., where he calls this prince Pirimal, and asserts that he was king of Calanum, and that the star was his guide to Christ by the admonition of the Indian Sibyl.
4. In motion: other stars move in circles; but this went straight forward. For it moved in a direct line from east to west.
And assembling together all the chief priests and the scribes of the people, he inquired of them where Christ should be born. He calls the learned doctors of the law, the Scribes, who occupied themselves in transcribing, reading, and expounding the sacred Scriptures. They are sometimes called lawyers; such a one was Ezra.
2:5
5. And most probably, these Magi were eastern Arabians. Whence Tacitus (lib. 5, Histor.) says that Judæa was bounded by Arabia on the east. This is proved, 1. Because it was the opinion of S. Justin, Tertullian, Cyprian, Epiphanius, and others, whom Baronius cites. 2. Because this answers best to the prophecy of Isaiah, who foretells (Isa 60:6) that the Sabeans, Midian, and Ephah, who are all Arabians, should come to Christ with presents. And it would appear that the Church has thus understood Isaiah's prophecy, since she so frequently recites it in the office for the Epiphany. This is likewise plainly in accordance with the Psalmist: "The kings of Tharsis and of the islands shall offer presents, the kings of the Arabians and of Saba shall bring gifts." (Psa 72:10.) 3. Because Arabia is nearer to Judæa than Chaldæa, India, Persia, &c. 4. Because the Queen of Sheba was a type of these kings. And she came with similar presents from Arabia to Solomon, a type of Christ. And although this queen be said to have come from Ethiopia, yet this Ethiopia was not Abyssinia, but a part of Arabia. For she came from eastern, not western Ethiopia, as S. Anselm says. Arabia includes the Red Sea and the adjacent regions, especially the neighbouring part of eastern Ethiopia. So the Madianites are called Ethiopians because of their black, or dark, colour. Whence Moses wife is called an Ethiopian woman. (Num 12:1) Also the Red Sea is called the Arabian, not the Ethiopian Gulf, because Arabia stretches itself even beyond it. Hence again it is probable that one or more of the Magi were black, both because this is the universal opinion, as painters thus depict the Adoration of the Wise Men, and because the Queen of Sheba is said to come from Ethiopia: "Before him the Ethiopians shall fall down." (Psa 72:9, Vulg.) And the Magi are called "kings of Tharsis, i.e., of the Red Sea." 5. It is plain, from the gifts which the Magi offered to Christ: Arabia abounds in gold, frankincense, and myrrh. This is why it is called Felix, the Happy. "Nowhere is frankincense," says Pliny, "except in Arabia." And Virgil, "The frankincense tree belongs to the Sabeans alone;" and (2 Geor.), "India sends ivory, the unwarlike Sabeans their frankincense." In this Arabia there is also abundance of myrrh and spices, so that they use none other than such wood for kindling fires. (Pliny, lib. 12, C. 17.) In the same country there is so great a quantity of gold that their furniture is resplendent with it; and in Saba of Ethiopia even the prisoners' chains are made of it. (See Mela, lib. 3, c. 10.) 6. Because the prophecy of Balaam, concerning the star of these wise men, was uttered in the land of Moab, which was a part of Arabia. See S. Jerome, in Locis Hebraicis. See also Pineda, lib. 5, de rebus Salomonis, who shows that the Queen of Sheba came to Solomon, and the three Magi to Christ, from Saba, in Arabia Felix, a district inhabited by the Homeritae, amongst whom the Christian religion afterwards marvellously flourished under Ely Gaan, who received it from the kings, his ancestors, who were probably these Magi. The common opinion of the faithful is that these Magi were kings, that is, petty kings, or princes. And this belief, let Calvin laugh as he may, is fully handed down by SS. Cyprian, Basil, Chrysostom, Jerome, Hilary, by Tertullian, Isidore, Bede, Idacius, who are all cited by Maldonatus and Baronius. S. Matthew, however, does not call them kings, but Magi, because it was the part of these last to recognize Christ by the star. Hence also in Ps. lxxi., they are called "kings of Tharsis," and "kings of the Arabians and of Saba." Again, that they were three in number, from the three species of gifts which they offered gold, frankincense, and myrrh, is taught by Augustine, Serm. 29 & 33, de Tempore. The pious tradition of the faithful favours the same opinion. And the office of the Church for the Epiphany implies it. The author of the imperfect work upon S. Matthew in S. Chrysostom asserts that after the resurrection of Christ, S. Thomas the Apostle came to the country of these Magi, and baptized them, and associated them with him in preaching the Gospel. Venerable Bede, to whom we may well give credit, in his Collectanea, not far from the beginning, names and describes them as follows: The first is said to have been called Melchior, an old man, grey-headed, with flowing beard and locks; he presented gold to the Lord the King. The second was Gaspar, young, beardless, and ruddy; he with frankincense, as an oblation worthy of God, honoured God. The third was Fuscus: he had a full beard, and by means of myrrh signified that the Son of Man should die. Lastly, some say that these Magi, as they preached Christ, were slain by the idolaters, and gained the crown of martyrdom; and offered themselves, as it were, an holocaust of gold and frankincense and myrrh to Christ. Amongst these, L. Dexter, in his Chronicle, under A.D. 70, says: "In Arabia Felix, in the city of Sessania, took place the martyrdom of the three Royal Magi, Gaspar, Balthazar, Melchior." From Sessania their sacred remains were translated to Constantinople, from thence to Milan, and from Milan to Cologne, where they still remain, and are greatly venerated, and where I myself have often honoured them.
5. In time: other stars only shine by night; for the sun's light obscures them during the day. But this was as bright by day, during the shining of the sun, as it was by night.
2:6
6. In duration: for other stars always shine; this was temporary, for it continued only during the period of the wise men's journey, and afterwards vanished.
But they said to him: In Bethlehem of Judæa. For so it is written by the prophet: And thou Bethlehem the land of Juda art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come forth the captain that shall rule my people Israel. I have explained this prophecy in my Commentary upon Micah v., so that I shall not here repeat it. Only let us observe three discrepancies between S. Matthew and Micah. The first is that S. Matthew, in speaking of Bethlehem, omits the name Ephratah. The explanation is that Bethlehem had two names. It was called by its founders Bethlehem and Ephratah, because Ephratah was the father of Bethlehem. (See 1Ch 4:4); and Ephratah in Hebrew signifies fruitful, or fruit-bearing. Bethlehem has a similar meaning, being house of bread. The literal reason why Christ would be born at Bethlehem was that He might be accounted David's Son, who was promised to him, who was himself born in Bethlehem. The moral reason was to teach us humility, to be content with a lowly parentage, a lowly country, a humble cottage. Whence S. Leo (Serm. I de Epiph.) says "He who took the form of a servant chose Bethlehem for His birthplace, that in that obscure place He might hide His glory, but Jerusalem for His passion, that He might the more make known abroad the shame of the Cross." He taught us, therefore, to cover our glory, to uncover our shame. He here taught us that heavenly glory, which is a paradox to the world, is, that "the way to glory is flight from glory." Christ, who is a star i.e., a light and guide to glory and blessedness hid Himself, and His Godhead and His dignity of Messiah, by abiding in the manger of Bethlehem. And therefore God the Father displays Him to the whole world, and glorifies Him by means of a star shining out of heaven. If, therefore, thou seekest true glory, shun fame, court ignominy; for if thou desirest glory, thou shalt lose it; but if thou despisest it, then, even against thy will, thou shalt be had in honour. For this paradox is most true "Glory follows him that shuns it, flees from him that pursues it, as a shadow the body." "Humility goeth before glory." (Pro 15:33.) God exalteth the lowly, and humbleth the proud. Whence "Christ emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross: for which cause God also hath exalted Him, and given Him a name, which is above all names." (Phi 2:7.) 2. The second discrepancy is, that for, thou art not the least, as S. Matthew has it, Micah has, thou art a little one (parvulus, Vulg.) i.e., art the least, or very little. The explanation is that, in Micah, an adversative particle is implied from the context, as in Psa 117:141, Psa 117:157, meaning "Very little art thou, O Bethlehem, if I look at thy walls, thy citizens, thy buildings, thy fame; but yet very far art thou from being little, if I consider the princes that have come from thee, and that have been and shall be born in thee. For in thee was born King David, and of thee shall be born Christ, David's antitype." Some read the words in Micah interrogatively Art thou very small ? That is, Thou art by no means the least, but, by reason of Christ, thou shalt become very great and famous. 3. Instead of among the princes, Micah has, among the thousands. The explanation is, that the Hebrew aleph denotes both a thousand and a prince. But either translation in this place comes to the same thing; for, in the princes means among the princes i.e., the cities, or even the inhabitants of Judah; this is, from the great number of princely men who have, or shall come forth from thee. In the thousands. This is the same as among the cities, which contain many thousands of people; and therefore they are princes, and have their own chiefs, or princes. For the people of Israel was divided by Moses into chiliads, or so many thousands of families, each of which had their own dukes and princes. (See Exod. xviii. 25, and Judges vi. 15.)
2:7
7. In size: for the other stars are greater than the earth and the moon, but this was less than either. This, however, appeared greater because it was nearer the earth; just as the moon appears larger than the fixed stars, because it is nearer to us, although it is in reality far less.
Then Herod, privately calling the wise men inquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. This he did secretly, in order to avoid popular rumours, murmurs, and tumults. For the people were expecting their Messiah. It was also that he might more thoroughly and reliably find out all the particulars concerning the star. He learned from them when the star appeared, that thus he might know when Christ was born, and so, by killing all the infants who were born about that date, might slay Christ among them. For even already he had determined on the slaughter of the infants, in his own mind. Whence the Arabic version hath it, "He was informed by them concerning the time in which the star appeared to them."
2:8
8. In being inconstant: for this star sometimes hid itself, as at Jerusalem; at other times it was visible, and a guide of their journey. 'When the Magi went forward, it went forward; when they rested, it rested. At length it stood over the house where the Child was. And then, as though its work were accomplished in Christ's Epiphany, it vanished. The other stars have no such property.
And sending them into Bethlehem, said: Go and diligently inquire after the child, and when you have found him, bring me word again, that I also may come and adore him. This was the fox-like cunning of a fox. He would make the Magi obedient and faithful to himself, by pretending that he wished to worship Christ, when he was taking thought how to kill Him. So Caracalla, in order to reign alone, slew his brother Geta in his mother's arms, because he was associated with him in the empire; and, to extenuate his crime by piety, he placed his brother among the gods, saying, "Let him be a god, so long as he is not alive." In like manner, Herod saith to the Magi, that he would worship Christ as God, whilst he purposed in his mind to kill Him as a man and a king.
2:9
9. In splendour: in which it surpassed all the other stars. Whence S. Ignatius, who lived a little after Christ, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, writes thus: "The star shone so as to surpass in brightness all that were before it. For its light was indescribable; and struck with amazement all who beheld it. For all the rest of the stars, together with the sun and moon, were a kind of chorus of audience for that star, for it surpassed them all in splendour." Prudentius in his hymn for the Epiphany says, "That star which surpasses the sun's orb in beauty and radiance." S. Chrysostom says the same thing. Whence S. Leo (Serm. 1 de Epiph.) says, "A new star appeared in the eastern parts to the three Magi. It was brighter and more beautiful than all the other stars. It attracted to it the eye and the mind of those who beheld it, so that it was immediately perceived that this strange sight was not without a purpose." This star was a new meteor formed by the angels from the atmosphere, and filled with an immense light, and moved by an angel, like the pillar of fire and cloud, which guided the Hebrews through the desert to the promised land. So S. Chrysostom, Fulgentius, Basil, and others. Indeed, that pillar was a type of this star. Truly does S. Chrysostom say (Hom. 16 ex veriis in Matth. loc.) "Thou, O star, by thy advent calledst the Magi from the east, and sentest them back to preach the gospel in their own land." Furthermore, in the books passing under the name of Seth, the son of Adam, there are various things related of the Magi, and of the star in the figure of a child carrying a cross, &c., which seem to have been fabricated by the Sethianist heretics. (See Epiphanius, Hæres. 26 & 39.) Also Gregory of Tours, says Haymo, relates, that this star fell into a well, where it may be even now seen, but only by virgins; and that once three men came to behold it, and that only one of them, who was a virgin, could see it. But such things, says S. Anselm, are fables and trifles. Allegorically, Christ is "the bright and morning star." (Rev 22:16.) Whence S. Ambrose saith, "Christ is the star: for a Star shall rise out of Jacob, and a man come forth of Israel." (Vulg.) In fine, where Christ is, there is the star. For He is the bright and morning star: therefore doth He make Himself known by His own light. Again, the star of the sea, that is, of this storm-tossed world, who shows us thereby the way, and goes before us to the harbour of safety, is the Blessed Virgin, whence her name Mary. The Hebrew Mariam means teacher, or mistress, or guide of the sea. "Behold the star, invoke Mary," says S. Bernard. Hence, also, the Church invokes her, saying, "Hail, star of the sea, bounteous Mother of God." Tropologically, the star is, 1. The faith of a believer. 2. Prudence. 3. Precepts. 4. Evangelical counsels, especially obedience to a superior. 5. Holy inspirations infused into the mind by God, whereby He calls the soul to some action, in a more perfect state, as, for example, virginity, or martyrdom. God, let us say, calls thee to sanctity and heroic virtue, to a state of perfection; He shows thee a star to go before thee on the road to heaven. Gaze then upon it, follow it, lest this star of a divine vocation, being seen of thee, be despised, and in the day of judgment accuse and condemn thee before God. "There is nothing, therefore, too difficult for the humble," says S. Leo (Serm. 5 de Epiph.), "nothing too rugged for the meek, and all things can be accomplished, when grace furnishes her assistance, and obedience lightens the command." Hear S. Gregory (Hom. 39 in Evang.): "Behold God calls us by Himself, by the angels, by fathers, by prophets, by apostles, by pastors. He calls us also by our own selves, by miracles, very often by chastisements. He calls us by worldly prosperity, and sometimes by adversity. Let no one despise the call, lest the time should ever come, when they will wish to answer and not be able." Anagogically, doctors and whoever instruct many to righteousness shall shine as the stars for ever and ever. (Dan 12:3; and Rev 2:28.) Wherefore S. Leo says, "Whosoever shall live a godly life in the Church, and shall seek those things which are above, not which are upon the earth, is like a heavenly luminary. And whilst he himself preserves the brightness of a holy conversation, he, like a star, shows to many the way of the Lord. In such a course ye all ought, well-beloved, to profit one another, that in the kingdom of God at which we arrive by means of a right faith and good works ye may shine as the children of the light." Lastly, the star invites and calls us to heaven, that, by means of a heavenly life, we may come to the most blessed company of the angels and all the heavenly citizens.
We have seen his star in the east. Some writers refer the words, in the east to we have seen. That is, "We, being in the east, saw the star in the west, shining over Judæa;" so that the Magi knew whither to wend their way. Similarly, the pole-star shows the way to sailors. Others, with more probability, refer in the east to the word star i.e., "we, in the east, saw the star there with us in the east." But both opinions are tenable. For, first, this star seems to have appeared over Judæa to signify that the King of the Jews was born there, and must there be sought. Hence, in Num 24:17, for "shall rise" the Hebrew has darach i.e., "hath proceeded." "A star proceedeth out of Jacob." You will ask, Did the star remain stationary in the east, or was it a constant attendant upon the Magi in their journey to Judæa? Jansen, Cajetan, and others think that it remained stationary. They attempt to prove this: 1. Because the Magi say, "we have seen His star in the east." And when they departed from Jerusalem, S. Matthew says, "And lo, the star which they had seen in the east." 2. Because Herod, and the Jews, and the rest did not, as it would seem, behold the star. For had they done so, some surely would have followed it, and have come with the Magi to Christ. 3. Because the Magi knew from Balaam's prophecy that the star portended that the King of the Jews was now born. And as they knew the way to Judæa, they did not require the star to guide them. On the other hand, SS. Chrysostom and Leo, Theophylact, S. Thomas, Lyra, Suarez, Maldonatus, and Chrysologus (Serm. 156) are of opinion that the star did accompany the Magi as far as Judæa. As Chrysologus says (loc. cit.), "When they walked, the star went on; when they sat down, it stayed; when they slept, it kept vigil over them." This is the common opinion of believers; whence the Church sings in her hymn, "The Magi went on following the star which they had seen, which went before them." So, therefore, when the Magi say, We have seen has star in the east, they are speaking only of their beginning to see the star. We have seen, meaning "We first saw His star when we were in the east; and, being called by the sight of it, we are come, with that star for our guide, having followed it as it went before us until we came to Jerusalem." And because the star disappeared at Jerusalem, they then went to Herod and the Scribes, and asked them where Christ was born. Both opinions are probable and worthy of examination, and may perhaps be reconciled one with the other, by supposing that the star which shone in the east was of exceeding brightness, as S. Ignatius testifies, at its first appearance, when it attracted the eyes of the Magi, and to which they referred when they said "we have seen His star in the east;" but that afterwards, when it went with them in their journey, it was covered with a cloud, and shone less brightly, so that it was visible to scarcely any save the Magi; lest if other men had seen it in its utmost brilliancy, and had accompanied them in a great band to Jerusalem, they might have stirred up Herod and the Jews against Christ to destroy Him. For it was plainly fitting that the star which called forth the Magi should show them the way to Christ, who was afar off and hidden. In like manner, the pillar of fire and cloud which was the leader of the camp of the Hebrews shone before them like fire by night, but by day was covered with a cloud, as I have shown in my commentary on Exo 13 and Num 9. But that some others besides the Magi saw the star is probable. For since the star was a large one, bright and visible to them, why not to others? For God willed Christ to be made known to all the world. Still, few or none followed the star with the Magi, both because they understood not the mystery, and because they were hindered by worldly cares. Hence we learn how necessary is powerful and efficacious grace for seeking Christ. Of this He speaks (S. Joh 6:44): "No man can come unto me, except my Father draw him." Thus in the passion of Christ, the eclipse of the sun was seen at Athens by S. Dionysius, the Areopagite; and this was why he was converted by S. Paul when he learnt from him the cause of the eclipse, because, namely, it was at that very day and hour that Christ was crucified. Suarez adds, that the star only shone by day in places near the Magi, but was at a loftier elevation by night, and was then less conspicuous. So says Nicephorus, H. E. 1. 13. Lastly, the Magi were appropriately called by a star, because they were astronomers. Hence they knew that this star was not a common one, but a prodigy, and portended some divine event. Thus they understood that the Maker and Lord of the stars, to whom all the stars are obedient, was born. Hence the Church celebrates with so great solemnity the Feast of the Epiphany, in which the Magi were called to adore Christ, because in them and by them was begun the calling and salvation of the Gentiles. Wherefore S. Leo (Serm. 2 de Epiph.) says "Let us, brethren beloved, recognize in the Magi, who worshipped Christ, the first-fruits of our vocation and faith, and with exulting minds let us celebrate the beginnings of blessed hope. From this time forth we began to enter into our eternal inheritance." And S. Augustine (Serm. 2 de Epiph.) says "This day, on which we keep the anniversary of our festival, first shone upon the Magi. They were the first-fruits of the Gentiles, and we are the people of the Gentiles. To us hath the tongue of Apostles announced it; but to them, the star, as though the tongue of heaven. And the same Apostles, as though they were other heavens, have declared unto us the glory of God."
Who having heard the king, went their way; and lo! the star which they had seen in the East went before them, until it came and stood over where the child was. From hence it would appear that the star which shone in the east with great effulgence, afterwards, when it accompanied the Magi, appeared less brilliant, and, at Jerusalem, was hidden altogether, so as to force the Magi to inquire of the Scribes where Christ should be born, that, by this means, it might be made known even to them that He was born. For Herod and his minions were unworthy of beholding this celestial star; for if they had, they would have used their knowledge to seek out and destroy Christ. But when the Magi departed from Jerusalem, the star again appeared, and shone with its former lustre, to indicate Christ, who is the Light yea, the Sun of this world and by its radiance to point out the very spot that is to say, the stable in which he abode after his birth so that they might not have to wander in vain, searching for Him from house to house.
2:10
And seeing the star i.e., as brilliant as at first they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. Exceeding great. This is the force of the Hebrew gedolah meod. And they rejoiced so greatly because, by the star being thus lustrous, they knew that they were come nigh to Messiah, and were going to Him in a direct course.
2:11
And entering into the house, they found the child with Mary his mother. From this passage some are of opinion that, after their enrolment, the wealthier people, who had come to Bethlehem for the purpose, were departed; so that there were now many houses in Bethlehem at liberty for the purpose of hospitality and that Christ had been removed from the stable in which He was born, to some worthier abode of one of the citizens, and was there worshipped by the Magi. For it is said, they entered into the house. So S. Epiphanius, Hæres. 51, Maldonatus, and others. But the more common opinion is, that the stable in which Christ was born is called the house. For the Hebrews call any place in which people live, a house, as Psa 103:17. The house i.e., the nest, of the coot (Ital.) is their leader namely, of birds and flying creatures. For since the census of the whole people proclaimed by Augustus was being taken during some weeks and months, and since during that period a succession of wealthy people kept arriving for enrolment, and afterwards departing, there was no room for Mary and Joseph, who were poor people, in the hostelry, until the thirteenth day after Christ's birth. And God ordered this, both to try the constancy of the Magi, and to teach them and others that Christ's kingdom consists in poverty, humility, and contempt of the world, not in earthly wealth, and pride, and pomps, and palaces. So S. Augustine (Serm. 1 & 2 de Epiph.), Justin, c. Tryph., Chrysostom, &c., and Suarez, which latter adds "It is plain that Christ, and the Blessed Virgin, as a woman who had lately given birth to a child, remained in the stable until her Purification." Whence S. Jerome (Epist. 17 ad Marcellam) says, "Behold in this little hole of the earth, the Maker of the Heavens is born. Here He was wrapped in swathings, here adored by the Magi." And Augustine (Serm. de Epiphan.) says: "He was lying in a manger, yet He led the Magi from the East. He was hidden in a stable, and was acknowledged in Heaven; that being recognized in Heaven, He might be manifested in a stable." You may reconcile these two opinions with each other, if you suppose that in Bethlehem, being a small city, there was only one public hospice for strangers, to which was attached a stable for their horses and other beasts of burden. And so it is said that the Magi entered into the house, or inn, because they went into the stable of the inn. S. Luke's words are in favour of this, when he says: "There was no room for them in the inn." This means the common hospice of the place. And they found the Babe lying in the manger, plainly, the only manger belonging to the stable of this hospice. No mention is made of Joseph upon this occasion, either because he had gone away into the city or the country, to procure food and other necessaries for the Blessed Virgin and Christ. And this was in accordance with the Divine purpose, that the Magi might not suppose him to be the father of Christ, and Christ to be born as other children are. Or if he were present, he was supposed, under the name of Mary's husband, to be the guardian of Christ, and the keeper of the stable. And S. Matthew signifies by his narrative that the Blessed Virgin and Joseph so conducted themselves in the presence of the Magi, that they understood by God's inspiration that Christ was born of the Virgin alone by the power of the Holy Ghost, and that Joseph only took care of them. Wherefore it is not doubtful that the Magi conversed with Mary either in Arabic, for she had the gift of tongues, or else in Hebrew, through an interpreter, and learnt from her the manner of the Conception and Birth of Christ. And therefore they adored Him as God and the Son of God, and offered unto Him their threefold gifts, but received from Him far greater spiritual gifts for their souls, even illumination, consolation, and heavenly warmth. In return for their gold, they received the increase of wisdom and burning love; instead of their frankincense, the gift of prayer and devotion; and in exchange for myrrh, zeal for a pure and uncorrupt life. They fell down and worshipped him. The Arabic has they fell down in adoration of him. Erasmus thinks that the Magi did not know Christ was God, and therefore did not worship Him with latria, but with civil respect, as the King of the Jews. But the fathers and interpreters teach the contrary that the Magi, by Divine inspiration, were aware of Christ's Divinity, and worshipped It with latria, and that for this reason, they offered Him frankincense, which is due to God alone. So S. Irenæus, lib. 3, c. 10; S. Leo, Serm. de Epiphan.; and others passim. Whence S. Fulgentius says wisely in his sermon on the Epiphany, "Consider what they offered, and you will know what they believed." Hence this day is called by the Greeks, Epiphany and Theophany i.e., the appearing of God because on that day Christ was declared to the Magi to be God, and was worshipped by them as God.
And opening their treasures, they offered him gifts; gold, frankincense, and myrrh. In these things Arabia abounds. (See Eze 27:22, and Pliny, lib. 12, c. 14.) It was the ancient custom of the Arabians and other Orientals, not to approach their kings and rulers except with a gift, as it were a tribute due to them. (See Gen 43:11; 1Sa 10:27.) Whence Seneca says (Epist. 17), "No one may salute the monarchs of Parthia without a present." Moreover, it was God's law (Exo 23.), "Thou shalt not appear empty before me." Lastly, the Queen of Sheba gave precious gifts to Solomon, and received greater from him. Thus it was with the Magi and Christ, who is the true Solomon. S. Bernard thinks that the Magi offered gold to the Blessed Virgin and Christ to succour their poverty, myrrh to strengthen Christ's infant limbs, frankincense to prevent the unpleasant odours of the stable. This is a very literal and undignified sense. For the fathers teach, passim, in a far higher way, that illuminated by the Holy Ghost they offered gold to Christ as the most wise King; for wisdom is compared to gold (Pro 8:19); frankincense as to God, and according to His humanity, as the High Priest and Pontiff; Myrrh to Christ as man, about to die and be buried for the redemption of the human race, and the third day to rise again to immortality and eternal glory. For the bodies of the dead are buried with myrrh, that they may remain incorrupt. Myrrh has the property of drying up moisture, and preventing the generation of worms. So S. Leo says, "Frankincense they offer to God, myrrh to man, gold to the king, wisely venerating the Divine and Human Nature joined in one. What they believe in their hearts they show forth by their gifts." And S. Ambrose says "Gold for a king, frankincense for God, myrrh for the dead." And S. Gregory (Hom. 10), "By gold they proclaim a king, by frankincense God, by myrrh a mortal man." "Very beautifully," says S. Jerome, "does the Presbyter Juvencus in one sentence comprehend the mysteries of the gifts, 'Gold, frankincense, myrrh, for a king, man, and God.'" Grammarians derive thus (frankincense) from the Greek θυόω, I make an odour, or better, from θύω, I sacrifice, because the first sacrifices of primitive men were fumigations of incense. Hence, "honours of frankincense" meant divine honours. Bede, whose words I have already quoted, asserts that the first of the Magi, whose name was Melchior, gave gold, Gaspar the second, frankincense, Balthasar the third, myrrh. But others, with more probability, think that each of them offered all these their gifts to Christ, and that each, by these their gifts, attested their own faith in Christ as being a King and God, and about to suffer for man. Hence the Gloss says: "All this was done by divine inspiration to signify the regal power in Christ by gold, the divine majesty by frankincense, and human mortality by myrrh." Allegorically, these three gifts signify Christ, who offered Himself to God the Father upon the cross as it were gold, since out of golden love, even love to man, He immolated Himself; as the myrrh of the very bitter passion of His griefs and torments; and as the frankincense of the highest devotion, submission, veneration, and worship. Whence also on the same day of the week on which Christ offered Himself upon the cross the Magi offered their three gifts to Christ. For the tradition is that Christ was born on the Lord's Day. And if from thence you reckon thirteen days you will come to the Friday of the following week. For the Magi worshipped Him on the thirteenth day after His birth. Again, Christ offered three gifts to the Holy Trinity, namely, His flesh, soul, and divinity, just as Christians offer to the same Triune God acts of faith, hope, and charity. Tropologically, in the first place, gold is charity, or love, and wisdom; frankincense is prayer and devotion; myrrh is mortification. Whence S. Gregory says (Hom. 10), "we offer gold, if we shine by the light of wisdom; frankincense, if we are redolent with fervent prayer; myrrh, if we mortify the vices of the flesh." Hence in Sont 5:14, the bride says of Christ, the bridegroom: "His hands are turned and as of gold, full of hyacinths." (Vulg.) "His hands," that is, the works of Christ, and therefore perfect. They are as rings, they may be turned and adapted to every thing good. They are golden, because adorned with charity; full of hyacinths, because they breathe the love of heavenly things. Thus the golden works of charity make golden hands. As many works of charity as thou doest, so many golden rings dost thou put upon thy fingers, yea, verily, upon the fingers of Christ. "Good works," says S. Bernard (de Convers. ad Cleric., c. 15), "are the seed of eternity and of eternal glory." The very celebrated painter, Zeuxis, used to paint very slowly. Being asked the reason, he replied "I paint for eternity." Thus also do thou, O believer, work, live, paint, for eternity, that thy works may, through all eternity, shine in heaven before God, the angels, and the blessed. That frankincense denotes prayer, and myrrh mortification, is plain from Song iv. 6, "I will go to the mountain of myrrh and the hill of frankincense." And i. 12, "A bundle of myrrh is my beloved to me." And iv. 14, "The smell of thy garments, as the smell of frankincense," i.e., lifting up prayers and sighs to God. "For," says S. Gregory, "in all his works he prays, whilst he performs all such good works as he is able to do, with the intention of arriving at heavenly things." The same says on Song chap. iii., "The holy soul makes its heart, as it were, a thurible to its God." Mark the saying of S. Gregory Nyssen., "The cause of sin is not to implore the help of God by prayer." Again, gold is voluntary poverty. For this poverty is most rich, and far more pleasing to God than all the gold in the world. Whence the apostle, "As having nothing and possessing all things." (2Co 6:10.) Frankincense is obedience, whereby a man offers his own will and intellect, yea, his entire self, to God, as a holocaust of frankincense. Myrrh is fasting, mortification of the flesh; and what springs from mortification, chastity. Wherefore many think that the three vows of religion are here mystically signified: namely by frankincense, the vow of obedience; by myrrh, the vow of chastity; by gold, the vow of poverty. Moreover, by these three gifts three kinds of good works are denoted: almsgiving, prayer, and fasting, to which all species of virtues may be referred. For almsgiving helps our neighbour; prayer worships and calls upon God; fasting steadies a man within himself. So then, by means of these three, we offer to God whatever good things we have namely, by almsgiving, our works; by prayer, our souls; by fasting, our bodies. Anagogically, S. Maximus thinks that by gold is signified man's redemption, by frankincense the Christian religion, by myrrh the resurrection.
2:12
And having received an answer from God (Vulg.: the Greek, χρήομοι, signifies oracles; and the word answer implies, that the Magi in a doubtful matter, in the first place asked light of God, and received an answer from Him), in sleep that they should not return to Herod, they went back another way into their country. Cyril, the monk, in his life of the Abbot S. Theodosius, relates that the Magi, when they fled from Herod, avoided high roads and public hospices, and rested in mountains and caves. "Because," he adds, "they had determined not to enter Jerusalem, it was difficult for them to return home any other way, just as we see now is the case, those who come from Bethlehem pass through Jerusalem." The author of the Imperfect Commentary cries out in admiration of the faith and constancy of the Magi: "O faith! which contradicted not the admonition of the angel, nor said, 'We have come so great a journey; as we came we feared not the crowds of so many cities; we were not terrified at the face of that dreadful king, but we stood before him and confidently proclaimed that King who had been born, and we offered unto Him, as God, worthy gifts; and now you bid us conceal ourselves like slaves and take to flight, as having come one way and departing another way.' But they continued faithful. And as before they were not afraid to be known, so now they blushed not to depart in secret." Tropologically, Herod is the devil, the world, and the flesh, and the way to him is pleasure and greed. They, therefore, who pass from him to Christ, walk by the other way of the cross and mortification; and thus it behoves them to return to their own country that is, the heavenly paradise. Hear the author of the Imp. Com. (Hom. 2): "He who comes from the devil to God must never walk by the way by which he went to the devil. Thou wentest by the way of fornication; for the future, walk by the way of chastity. Thou wentest by the way of avarice; walk for the rest of thy life in the way of almsgiving. For if thou goest back by the way by which thou camest, thou shalt come again under the dominion of Herod, and shalt become a traitor to Christ." And S. Gregory saith (Hom. 10), "Our country is paradise. And when we have known Jesus, we are forbidden to return to it by the way which we came. For we departed from our country by pride, by disobedience, by following things that are seen, by tasting the forbidden fruit. But we must return to it by weeping, by obedience, by despising things that are seen, and by bridling the carnal appetite. We return to our country by another way; because we left the joys of paradise by the way of pleasures, we return to them by the way of sorrows.
2:13
And when they were departed, behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph, saying: Arise, and take the child and his mother, and fly into Egypt: and be there until I shall tell thee. For it will come to pass that Herod will seek the child to destroy him. Note that these things did not happen immediately after the adoration of the Magi. Something must be supplied here from S. Luke (ii. 22). That is to say, after their departure on the 6th of January, Christ was taken to Jerusalem, and presented in the Temple; this was on the 2nd of February. From thence He returned to His own country, Nazareth, and from thence He fled into Egypt. So Euthymius and Maldonatus, in loc.; also Ammon and Tatian, in Harmon. Evangel. Although S. Augustine, and Jansen after him, think that Christ went into Egypt from Judæa, and not from Galilee, because S. Matthew here says ver. 22, that when Joseph was returning from Egypt, he was minded to go into Judæa. And so they say that he had fled into Egypt from Judæa, but S. Matthew does not say this expressly, but, "When he heard that Archelaus reigned in Judæa in the stead of his father, Herod, he was afraid to go thither." This, indeed, intimates that he was thinking of going into Judæa, probably to Jerusalem and the Temple, there to give God thanks for his safe return, as pious persons are wont to do. The reason why Christ fled into Egypt, rather than into Assyria, or any other country is: 1. Because it was near to Judæa, and on account of the streams of the Nile, by which it was surrounded, and the sea, by which it was washed, secure from the attacks of enemies. Hence, when the Jews fled from the Chaldæans and the Assyrians, they went into Egypt. 2. Because Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the children of Israel, from whom Christ was sprung, dwelt in Egypt for two hundred years, and were called forth from thence by God, by the hand of Moses. And this was a type of the calling back of Christ out of Egypt, as S. Matthew adds, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken of The Lord by The prophet (Hosea xi.), saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son. Especially because the Hebrews were delivered out of Egypt by the blood of the Paschal Lamb, which was a type of Christ. "That not without that region the sacrament of the one only Victim might be prepared, in which first the safe-giving sign of the slaying of the Lamb, and the Passover of the Lord, had been prefigured," says S. Leo. (Serm. 3 de Epiph.) 3. Because Egypt was full of idols and superstitions. They worshipped dogs, crocodiles, cats, calves, rams, goats, and what not? Christ entered into Egypt that He might cleanse it from this filthiness, and consecrate it to the true God. Listen to S. Leo Serm. 2 de Epiph.): "Then also the Saviour was brought to Egypt, in order that a nation given up to ancient errors might now be signed for salvation nigh to come, for hidden grace, and that she which had not yet cast out superstition from her mind might receive truth as her guest." Whence also Isaiah prophesies mystically of the same thing (xix. 1), saying: "Behold the Lord shall ascend upon a light cloud, and shall enter into Egypt, and all the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence." And so S. Jerome and others relate that the idols of Egypt did, in truth, fall down when Christ came into it. (See my comment on this chapter of Isaiah.) Sozomen (lib. 5, c. 20) relates that there was an ancient tradition that when Christ entered Hermopolis, a city of Egypt, a lofty tree bowed herself down, and worshipped Him as God. Many suchlike things are told, but because they are taken from an apocryphal book, called the "Infancy of the Saviour," and from the Koran, it would seem that they ought to be rejected, as fabulous, or of doubtful credit.
For Herod will seek the child to destroy him. The angel knew this by the revelation of God. He would also conjecture the same thing from the disposition of Herod, and his ambition of reigning. Herod's suspicious, cruel, savage disposition is thus described by Josephus (lib. I, de Bell. Jud. c. 19): His fear made him timid, and incited him to every kind of suspicion. And from dread lest any who were obnoxious to him should escape him, he put to the torture many who were innocent.
2:14
Who arose, and took the child and his mother by night, (mark his prompt obedience) and retired into Egypt that Christ might sanctify and bless it by His coming. Hence faith and sanctity so flourished in Egypt that it produced the Pauls, the Antonys, the Macarii, and those crowds of monks and anchorites who emulated the life of angels upon earth, as is seen in Eusebius, S. Jerome, Palladius, S. Athanasius, and the lives of the Fathers. Whence S. Chrysostom, in loc., says, that Christ converted Egypt into a paradise. "Heaven does not shine so brightly with the various choirs of the stars as Egypt is illuminated by its innumerable habitations of monks and virgins." And Trismegistus, quoted by S. Austin (lib. 8, de Civ. Dei, c. 14), says, "Egypt is an image of Heaven, and the temple of the whole world." Adrichomius adds out of Brocardus and Saligniac, in his description of the Holy Land (page 47, n. 116), on the word Engaddi, that when Jesus fled out of Judæa into Egypt, He took balsam with Him. For Cleopatra, the friend of Antony, envying Herod the possession of such a treasure, obtained from Antony the privilege of transporting balsam-plants out of Judæa into Egypt. (See Josephus, lib. 5, Bell. Jud. c. I 3.) This was a just judgment of an avenging God, that Herod before was the possessor of the balsam, but that when he persecuted the child Jesus, Jesus fleeing into Egypt should, as it were, draw the garden of balsam after Him. For Jesus is the true and pure balsam of the soul, according as it is said, "Thy name is oil poured forth." (Song i. Vulg.) Adrichomius adds, this garden in Egypt is irrigated by a small fountain, which has, however, a very copious supply of water; and the tradition is, that in it the Child Jesus was often placed by the Blessed Virgin, and that the holy Joseph often drew water from it, for himself and his holy spouse, when they were in Egypt; and that it is therefore held in great veneration by the inhabitants of the country. Anselm asserts that Christ, when in Egypt, dwelt in a city called Heliopolis, or the city of the sun. In short, this flight of Christ was a mark, not of fear, but of prudence and fortitude. Hear Chrysologus (Serm. 50): "So Christ was born that He might make man anew; and that He might recall the fugitives, He fled. And if He himself wandered, so that He might call back the sheep which was wandering upon the mountains, how shall He not flee to bring again His flying people?" And shortly afterwards, "The refuge of all things fled, the help of all things lies hid, the strength of all things fears, the defence of all things defends not himself." And again "When the valiant warrior flies in battle, it is of design, not fear. When God fled from man, it was a mystery, not from dread." Tropologically, Christ fled into Egypt that He might teach us to despise exile, and that we, as pilgrims and exiles on the earth, might pant after and strive for heaven as our true country. Whence Peter Chrysologus says (Serm. 115), "Christ fled that He might make it more tolerable for us, when we have to flee in persecution." S. Gregory Nazian. (Orat. 28) says "Every land, and no land is my country." No land was Gregory's country, because heaven was his country. Again, every land was his country, because he looked upon the whole world as his country. Thus Socrates, when he was asked what countryman he was, replied, "A citizen of the world." S. Basil said the same, as Nazian. testifies (Orat. 20) "In every land the brave man is as much at home as fishes in the sea."
2:15
And he was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: Out of Egypt have I called my son. He cites Hos 11:2. See my comment on that prophet, where I have fully expounded the passage. Tropologically, S. Chrysostom, in loc., says, that God weaves, as it were, a fair and variegated crown out of the prosperous and adverse circumstances of the life of Christ and Christians. When Joseph saw his wife great with child, he was sorely troubled: but forthwith an angel came to him, and put an end to his suspicion, and drove away his fear. Then came the joyful adoration of the Magi, but this was followed by the persecution of Herod, and the flight into Egypt. It cannot be doubtful that when the Egyptians saw the sanctity of the Blessed Virgin and Joseph, and had had frequent opportunities of converse and intercourse with them, they came to know, worship, and love the true God. The Roman Martyrology assigns the 7th of January to the return of Christ from Egypt. Some say that he was three years in Egypt, some seven, others eight. But nothing is certain.
2:16
Then Herod perceiving that he was deluded by the wise men, was exceeding angry: and sending killed all the menchildren that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof. When Herod saw that the wise men did not return, he supposed that they were under a delusion, and had not found Christ, and were therefore ashamed to return. But when he heard of the things which had happened at the Presentation of Christ in the Temple, on the 2nd of February, how holy Simeon and Anna had openly professed Him to be the Messiah that is, "a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of the people of Israel"-he then saw that he had been mocked by the Magi, and belched forth his burning wrath upon all the children. For, as S. Chrysostom says, "Unquenchable is the anger which jealousy of the rival of a crown enkindles. Like a wounded wild beast, it tears in pieces whatever meets the eye, as if the cause of his wounds." Herod's inordinate ambition for retaining and augmenting the kingdom of Judæa drove him to this horrible infanticide. He knew from the Scribes that the time of Messiah was near at hand, because the sceptre of Judah was transferred to himself, an alien. And he himself was ambitious of the title, and told the Jews that he was their promised Messiah. And he built them that magnificent Temple, rivalling Solomon's, of which the Jews said to Christ, Six and forty years was this temple in building, and wilt thou raise it up in three days ? But vainly did he covet the name of Messiah; for Messias was to spring out of Judah, and was the promised son and heir of David. But Herod was sprung from the Idumæans, who were the Jews' constant enemies. Herod then, becoming aware that the true Messiah was born, and had been indicated to the Magi by a star, destined Him to death. And when he learnt from the Scribes that He was born in Bethlehem, but knew not in what family, or house, he slew all the infants of Bethlehem. But see here the just judgment of God, by which it came to pass that Herod, by that very act, confirmed the kingdom to Christ, and took it away from himself. For, as a punishment of his wickedness, Herod slew his own sons, who would have succeeded him in his kingdom, and in the same year, shortly after this massacre of the infants and his son Antipater, he himself was eaten of worms, and died just before the Passover. Again, Christ escaped the massacre of the infants by flying into Egypt; and from thence, by degrees, His name, and kingdom, and glory increased. Yea, the infants slain by Herod out of hatred of the Messiah, by their very death attested that Christ was born. Tropologically, Herod is the devil, who strives to cut off infants that is, those who are weak in faith and virtue, also the first inspirations from God, and good thoughts, before they have become strong and increased. "Whence if he slay the little ones," says S. Leo (Serm. 2 de Epiph.), "he appears to himself to kill Jesus, which indeed he strives to do without ceasing, whilst he endeavours to deprive those newly born again of the Holy Spirit, and to kill, as it were, the infancy of tender faith."
From two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men. The Greek is, α̉πὸ διετιάς i.e., from two years. The Syriac and Arabic give this turn to it, from the son of two years. The Egyptian, from two years and under. Thus, also, the Persian version. For, diligently inquired, the Greek has ρ̉κρίβωσε, accurately searched out. You will ask why he slew all the children under two years old, especially since many are of opinion that Herod slew them immediately after the departure of the Magi as soon, that is, as he had heard of Christ's Presentation in the Temple. And this was before the Passover, when Christ was three months old? Jansen, Maldonatus, Baronius, and others reply, that he did it out of his intense fear of losing his kingdom through Messiah, and so extended the three months from Christ's birth to two years. If you object that Matthew says this slaughter was made from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the Magi, they answer that the expression, according to the time, &c., must be referred, not to the words, from two years old, but to, from under, so as to signify that Herod made, not a beginning, but only a termination of slaughtering the children, according to the time which he had inquired of the Magi, that, indeed, he should not further kill infants who were born subsequent to those thirteen days which had elapsed after the appearance of the star which indicated the birth of Christ; meaning that Herod slew all the infants from two years old because he was very sagacious and cruel; and below two years old, according to the time which he had carefully inquired of the Magi, because he excepted only those from slaughter who were born after the time at which the star had declared the birth of Christ; for he felt secure that none of those who were born after the star could be Messiah, and give him cause of apprehension. But it seems scarcely credible that one so ambitious and fearful as Herod should have wished to kill infants born two years before the appearing of the star, and yet have spared those who were born a few days after its appearance, when there would be an equal or greater reason for suspecting that Christ might be amongst these last, especially in the case of such a very suspicious person as Herod. Whence Bede, the Gloss, Dionysius, and Barradi think that he killed the little infants who were born after as well as before the appearing of the star. But why did he slay infants born almost two years before the star appeared? for there could be no suspicion that Christ was born amongst them. So that to kill them would have been not merely inhuman, but altogether foolish and brutish, and could have had no other effect than to expose him to universal infamy and execration yea, to raise up every one in arms against him as an intolerable tyrant, and more like a wild beast than a human being. I maintain, therefore, that not immediately, nor even in the same year in which the Magi came, did Herod put the infants to death; but in the following, or second year from the birth of Christ. And so the meaning is, that Herod slew the children from two years old, that is, who were two years old and under, that is, those who had not yet reached that age; but who were a year, or so many months, or days old. That is, he slew all who had been born within two years from the rising of the star, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men. Again, the expression, according to the time &c., might more strictly and precisely be taken thus: Herod did not take the whole time of the two years, but drew his conclusions from when the star appeared, which was the period whence the rising of the star began, but which was not completed. For Herod slew the children in the second year from the rising of the star, about the time of the Passover, or when Christ was about a year and three months old. Wherefore, he did not slay those who were born much before the fifteen months since which the star appeared. This is the force of the expression, he diligently inquired, in order that he might slay only those who had been born about the time when the star appeared, and not those who were born much before or much after, that he might not, with uselessly barbarous cruelty, slay more than might be necessary to secure the death of Christ. So that, from two years old and under, &c., means the same thing as those who were fifteen months old. That was the time of the appearance of the star, and it continued for thirteen days, during which it went before the Magi to Bethlehem. Herod, therefore, would only seem to have slain the infants who were about fifteen months of age. For he believed the wise men, that Christ had been born at the time when his birth had been indicated by the star, and neither much before nor yet much after. So that he did not desire that any should be slain except such as were born about the time of the star's appearance. And hence we may gather that the expression, from two years old and under, should be taken, not disjunctively, but unitedly, as when we say, "Two and three are five;" "All the planets are seven," &c. That this murder of the Innocents took place, not in the third month, but after the commencement of the second year, or about fifteen months from the birth of Christ, is the common opinion of Eusebius (in his Chronicle), Epiphanius (Hæres. 30), S. Augustine (Serm. de Epiph.), Encherius, Cedrinus, S. Anselm, Haymo, Hugo Victor, S. Thomas, &c. But some of these have not correctly distinguished either the rising of the star from the birth of Christ (for they say that it appeared to the Magi two years before Christ's birth, as SS. Augustine and Chrysostom); or the birth of Christ and the appearance of the star from the adoration of the Magi; for they say that on account of the length of the journey, they arrived at Bethlehem, and worshipped Christ there, two years after His birth. So S. Epiphanius (lib. 2, Hæres. 30, contra Ebionæos), and the Imperfect Author; for it is far more probable that the star arose at the same time that Christ was born, that it might be, as it were, an indicator and standard-bearer of that event, and that the Magi came to Bethlehem in the same year in which the birth of Christ took place, indeed thirteen days afterwards; and that Herod put off the infanticide, which he had already planned in his mind, until the year following, for reasons which I shall assign presently. The obvious meaning of S. Matthew's narrative, and especially the expression, from two years old, require this meaning. Also the number of events which happened after the Adoration, and before the Flight into Egypt, require the same sense; for after the departure of the Magi, Christ was presented in the Temple on the 2nd of February. After that He went and dwelt in Nazareth, and from that place fled into Egypt, as is clear from S. Luke (ii. 22-39). And all this would occupy many weeks, or rather months. What Nicephorus (lib. I, C. 14) and Cedrinus say is in favour of this opinion. They say that S. John Baptist, on account of this persecution, fled into the wilderness when he was in his second year, that is, when he was not quite two years old. For the Baptist was born six months before Christ; so that, at the time of the Infanticide, he was a year and nine months old. Whence Nicephorus relates: "When John was a year and a half old, he was preserved in safety, with his mother Elizabeth, in a cave in the mountains, probably to escape the bloody hand of Herod." Again, Macrobius says, not from two years old, but under two years, the infants were slain by Herod. Those who were fifteen months would be under two years old. In addition to this, Lucius Dexter says, in his Chronicle: "In the third year of Christ (U.R.C. 754) Herod slays all the male children in Bethlehem and its neighbourhood." It was the third year from the birth of Christ by beginning the year with the 1st of January. You may ask why Herod put off the Infanticide until the second year from the rising of the star and the birth of Christ. It is answered: 1. That he might the better, by degrees, inform himself of the birth, person, parentage, and dwelling of Christ. So the Gloss. Again, because he sought by all means to avoid the imputation of such hateful cruelty, by finding and killing Christ alone. S. Matthew appears to intimate this (ver. 13). so S. Augustine (lib. de Consens. Evang. 2, c. 12). 2. Because, as Euthymius, S. Thomas, and Lyra show, Herod, towards the close of his life, being accused by the Arabians before Augustus Cæsar, that emperor three times refused even to speak to his ambassadors, although at length with wonderful art he appeased Cæsar, as Josephus relates, Ant. lib. 17, c. 7, &c. And then he sought and obtained permission from Augustus, as it would seem, to slay the children; in which Augustus deserves no small blame for giving this permission. So Ruperti, lib. 2 de Vict., c. 2. 3. He delayed the massacre in order to find out a sure way of killing all the infants, that none might be hidden by their mothers and so escape. Hence Abulensis thinks that Herod, in the first place, ordered the little boys to be enrolled with the name and age of each; and, when he had gathered them together, slew them all; but that he gathered them, not in one place, but in the various villages or districts, to each of which he sent executioners to seek out, gather together, and slay. Such a thing might be easily done amongst the Jews, because they kept very exact records of their genealogies, that it might be known that Messiah was born, according to Jacob's prophecy of the tribe of Judah. Hence, when any child was circumcised, his name and parents, and the date of his birth, were set down, just as parish priests register the children who are baptized. S. Antoninus thinks that Herod instituted a feast for boys, and ordered all the mothers to bring all their children who were about two years of age, as though they were to receive a reward. Moreover Herod obtained leave from Augustus to put his own three sons, Alexander, Aristobulus, and Antipater to death. Whence he slew the first two named some time previously, and Antipater about five days before his own death, which happened, says Josephus, at the Passover, in the thirty-seventh year of his reign. (Ant. lib. 17, cc. 10 & II.) And it was then he slew the young children. This we learn from Macrobius. who, amongst other anecdotes of Augustus, relates this (Saturnal. lib. 2, c. 10): "When he heard that the king of the Jews had ordered the boys in Syria under two years old to be slain, and that his own son had been killed, he said, 'It were better to be Herod's pig than his son, because the Jews do not eat pork.'" From what has been said, it may be gathered that the infants were slain about the time of the Passover, or about fifteen months from the birth of Christ. The Church, however, celebrates their festival at Christmas, because they were killed for Christ's sake, that she may thus, as it were, magnify and decorate the Festival of the Nativity. Barradi, however, and Emmanuel Sa., think that they were slain on the anniversary of the very day on which the Church keeps their festival. They were slain when Christ was in the second year of His age, in spring and in the month of March, when their ancestress, Rachel, had died (Gen 35:16). It was about the same time that he ordered his own son Antipater to be put to death. He also cut off the Sanhedrim, as the great Council of the Jews is called, together with many of the Pharisees, because they would not acknowledge him to be king. The rest were compelled to take an oath of allegiance. In doing these things, he was aided by his father-in-law, Simon the son of Boethus, whom he had made high priest. And all was with the connivance of Quintilius Varro, the governor of Syria, a friend of Herod's. Whence he was not afraid to shut up all the chief of the Jews in prison, and would have put them to death if he had lived. For just before his own death, he ordered his sister Salome, and her husband, Alexas, to kill them, in order, as he said, "that the Jews may wail at my death, whether they like it or not, since they must weep for their own friends." But Salome, who was of a milder disposition, set them all at liberty as soon as Herod was dead. So Josephus, &c. Some think from the Apocalypse (xiv. I) that the infants who were slain by Herod were 144,000, But S. John is speaking of the Virgins who shall resist the lust and persecution of Antichrist, even unto death and martyrdom. Neither is it credible that in so small a district as that of Bethlehem there were 144,000 boys under two years old. What the Abyssinians have in their Canon of the Mass, that the number was 14,000 is rather more probable; of this opinion are the Jesuit Salmeron, Franc. Lucas, and Gerebrard (lib. 2, Chronolog. A.C. III.). This last adds, that the Greeks give the same number in their Kalendar. And yet it is hard to suppose that there could be 14,000 infants in so small a place, more than are to be found in Rome, or Naples, or Milan, or other large cities. Note, in the first place, that the infants who were slain by Herod, through hatred of Christ, were true martyrs, and as such are honoured by the Church, and their Festival kept. And the same may be said of all infants who are killed out of hatred to the Faith, through the unmerited and bountiful disposition of God. Whence it follows that martyrdom justifies ex opere operato, for by it these little ones who had not yet been circumcised were cleansed from original sin and justified; and the same thing was wrought which baptism worketh. So the Fathers and Doctors, passim, and indeed the whole Church. (See S. Bernard, Serm. de Innocent.) Hence Doctors teach that there are three classes of martyrs. To the first belong those who, in deed as well as will, are martyrs. Such are adults who voluntarily accept death from a tyrant for the sake of Christ. The second class are those who are martyrs only in deed; such as infants who are slain for Christ. The third are those who are martyrs only in will who desire martyrdom as S. Francis desired it. With this object in view he sent to the sultan of Egypt; but he, seeing him to be a holy man, would not kill him. Thus he missed the laurel crown of actual martyrdom. Note, secondly, the wonderful providence of God, whereby, first, He punished the Bethlehemites by the slaughter of their children, because they themselves would not receive the Blessed Virgin, and her Son Jesus with hospitality, but compelled her to go into a stable, and there bring forth. Secondly, because by means of this massacre, He decorated the boys themselves, who were slain, with the laurel of martyrdom. Thirdly, because He brought about that Christ should escape by flight into Egypt, and should through this slaughter become better known to the world. By this "it was prophetically declared that the Church of God should increase by the cruel fury of her persecutors; since by the punishments and deaths of the blessed martyrs, whilst Christians were supposed to be diminished in numbers, they were augmented by example." (S. Leo, Serm. de Epiph.) "And the blood of the martyrs is the seed of Christians," as Tertullian observes in the end of his Apology. Moreover, Christ as He was man, although an infant, had the use of reason. And when the Word, which was united to Him, revealed to Him this slaughter of the little children for His sake, He grieved, because of the deep sympathy of His tenderness, and suffered with them and their parents. But in spirit He exulted over their glory and martyrdom. And thus He offered them to God the Father, as the first-fruits of His Advent, and the earliest oblations of His grace. Note, thirdly, God's just vengeance upon Herod for his murder of the infants, and as far as in him lay of Christ Himself. For, five days after the masacre, he himself breathed out his cruel soul; being smitten with fever, a cough, dysentery, dropsy, gout, consumption, the lousy disease, putrefaction, asthma, and such an intolerable stench, that he endeavoured to lay violent hands upon himself. His sons were not allowed to reign as kings, but were only tetrarchs, and perished miserably. Also his entire posterity, most numerous as it was, became, with few exceptions, entirely extinct within a hundred years, as Josephus relates (Ant. lib 17, c. 8, &c.), who adds that all men were of opinion that it was the effect of the just vengeance of God. Allegorically, the infants slain by Herod at the Passover, as it were Paschal lambs, were a type of Christ, who, thirty-two years afterwards, was mocked by Herod, a descendant of this Herod the infanticide, and crucified by Pilate at the season of the Passover, and who offered Himself to God the Father, as it were a Lamb and a Paschal Victim, for the salvation of the world. Hear S. Augustine (Serm. 8 de Sanctis): "When Christ was born, grief began, not in heaven, but on earth. To mothers is proclaimed lamentation, to angels exultation, to infants translation. He is God who is born. To Him innocents are due as victims, for He came to condemn the wickedness of the world. Angels ought to be immolated, because the Lamb, who taketh away the sins of the world is about to be crucified. But the mother-sheep lament, because they lose their lambs bleating without speech: a glorious martyrdom, though a cruel spectacle." And Prudentius, in his hymn. says: Symbolically, the children who were slain by Herod in the springtime were like vernal flowers put forth in the country of Bethlehem by the warmth of the rays of the Sun of righteousness, and offered to Jesus of Nazareth as the Flourishing One. Whence Prudentius in his Epiphany hymn, and the Church in her office, sings: And S. Augustine (Serm. 2 de Innocent.): "How happily born were they whom eternal life met on the threshold of existence." And (Serm. 3): "Rightly are these Innocents called the flowers of the Martyrs, whom, in the mid-winter of unbelief, a hoar frost as it were of persecution caused to bloom like the primal buds of the Church." And S. Chrysostom (Serm. 4) says: "Infancy, unconscious of suffering, bore away the palms and crowns of martyrdom. True martyrs of grace! they confess without voice; knowing it not they fight; ignorant of it, they conquer; unconscious, they die, they bear away the palms, they seize the crowns." We see that God made these little ones first to triumph, then to live. He adorns them with crowns before He bestows upon them perfect members. Tropologically, Christ loves infants, that is, the little ones and the lowly; and raises such to the perfection of grace, that is, to martyrdom. Hence He Himself says, "Whosoever shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven." Hear S. Leo (Serm. 7, in Epiphan.): "Wherefore my beloved brethren, the whole discipline of Christian wisdom consisteth, not in a copious flow of words, nor in cunning disputation, nor in the desire of praise and glory, but in true and voluntary humility, which the Lord Jesus Christ, from His mother's womb even unto the death of the Cross, both chose and taught instead of every kind of strength." And shortly afterwards: "He loveth infancy, which at the first He assumed, both in mind and body. Christ loveth infancy, the mistress of humility, the rule of innocence, the pattern of meekness. Christ loves infancy, which guides the manners of elders; unto which He directs the years of old men, and inclines to His own example those whom He would lift on high to the eternal kingdom." And previously: "The whole victory of the Saviour, which overcame both the devil and the world, was conceived and completed by humility."
2:17
Verses 17, 18. Then was fulfilled, &c. They are not, because indeed, as far as the body was concerned they perished, in that they were slain by Herod; but as to their souls, they were carried into eternity, says S. Hilary. I have explained this passage in my Commentary on Jer 31:15, which see. S. Augustine graphically portrays this weeping of the mothers (Serm. I de Innocent.), and thus concludes: "The lamentation of the mothers was mingled with the oblation of the little ones, as they passed into heaven." Tropologically, Rachel, the sheep, as the word signifies in Hebrew, bewails the death of her lambs; but the angels rejoice, yea, even the little ones, because their souls passed to the society of the angels. Whence S. Augustine (Serm. 3 de Innocent.): "Behold, the profane enemy could never have benefited the little ones by kindness as much as he did by hatred. And wherefore? Because they received the dignity of eternal life before they received the use of time present." Therefore, in being born, they died unto the world; and by dying, they began to live in heaven. To these infants are most appropriate those words of S. Paul: "We are made a spectacle (Gr. θεατρὸν, a theatre) to the world, and to angels, and to men." (1Co 4:9.) That is to say, in the circus, in the amphitheatre, we are seen of all. We are βιοθάνατοι, i.e. we are exposed to gladiators and to wild beasts. Wherefore consider: by this infanticide God would teach us, as by a scenic representation, that the whole of a Christian's life, from childhood unto death, is perpetual persecution, the cross and death; and that the fortitude and courage of a Christian consist rather in enduring hardness than in doing hard things; in constant patience than in fighting: for it is more difficult to suffer than to act and fight. "To act bravely," saith one, "is the part of a Roman; to suffer bravely is the part of a Christian." When Christ suffered for us, He said, "I have given my body to the strikers, and my cheeks to them that plucked them. I have not turned away my face from them that rebuked me, and spit upon me." (Isaiah i. 6.) These little ones in their turn, for Christ's sake, gave their limbs to be mangled by the executioners. A Christian may do the same, and for God's sake give his body for a prey, give it unto death, unto labours, unto torments of every kind. Thus did S. Eusebius, Bishop of Vercelli, who writes to his flock, "I have given my body to the Arians for a prey." By them he was tormented, and became a glorious martyr of Christ, and a defender of His Godhead, even unto death. Truly saith S. Fulgentius (de Epiph.), "To this end God permitted Herod to slay the infants, that He might cause them to triumph over Herod." Lastly, S. Cyprian (lib. 4, Epist. 6 ad Thibarit.) says, "An age not suitable for battle was made fit for a crown. The Son of God suffered that He might make us sons of God; and the Son of Man wills not to suffer, that He may continue to be the Son of God."
2:19
Now when Herod was dead, &c. (verses 19, 20). Herod died a few days after the slaughter of Antipater, as Josephus says, and so but a few days after the murder of the Innocents, as is clear from Macrobius. Hence Christ does not appear to have remained in Egypt more than two years. For He did not go there more than one year before Herod's death; and after Herod's death, when Archelaus his son had been to Rome and returned, Christ came back from Egypt, as the Gospel here states. Thus Onuphrius Pavinus, (in his Fasti), and before him S. Epiphanius (Hæres. 78); although Baronius thinks that Christ returned from Egypt in the ninth year of His age.
2:20
They are dead, &c. They, viz., Herod and his sons Aristobulus, Alexander, and Antipater, who, it would appear, entered into a conspiracy with the Scribes and Pharisees against their father, and by consequence against Messiah, and were by Herod put to death.
2:21
Verses 21, 22. Who arose, and took the child &c. Observe, Archelaus reigned as tetrarch, not as king. The angel had said to Joseph, Go into the land of Israel. Joseph understood Judæa, because that was the most important part of the land of Israel, and therein was the temple. Thither, therefore, he thought of going to render God thanks for his happy return, especially because, by God's command, all the Hebrew males were commanded to go up to the temple thrice a year. Whence St. Augustine (lib. 2 de Consensu. Evang. c. 9): "The angel does not express into what part, that he may return to him again, when he is in doubt; but because he had not told him expressly, Joseph understood Judaea, the more worthy part of the kingdom: for he thought that with such a boy he might only dwell at Jerusalem. But the angel meant Galilee." Moreover, Joseph turned aside into Galilee, although he knew that Herod Antipas, the brother of Archelaus, ruled there. He did so, both because Archelaus was more ambitious and cruel than Antipas, as because the infant slaughter of Herod of Ascalon, the father of Archelaus and Antipas, had taken place in Judæa, namely, in Bethlehem. Wherefore Archelaus would remember it, and would easily perceive that when Christ came back to Judæa He had escaped the slaughter, and would therefore again seek to put Him to death. Fully to enter into this history ab ovo, as they say, consult Josephus, Ant. Lib. 10, c. 10, et seq. When Herod died, in the thirty-seventh year of his reign, two of his surviving sons Archelaus, and Herod Antipas, who clothed Christ in His Passion with a white robe, to mock Him contended together for the possession of his kingdom. Augustus entrusted the settlement of the dispute to Caius Cæsar his grandson by his daughter Julia, who decided as follows that neither disputant should succeed to the kingdom, but that it should be divided into four tetrarchies, whose rulers should be tetrarchs, not kings. In pursuance of this he assigned Judæa to Archelaus, Galilee to Antipas, Trachonitis to their third brother, Philip, Abilene to Lysanias. This is clear from Luke iii. 1. When, therefore, S. Matthew says, Archelaus reigned, you must not understand that he was a king, or had the title of a king, but of a tetrarch, or toparch, but yet with the hope of the kingdom and the kingly name, if he conducted himself well, according to the promise of Augustus Cæsar. After Archelaus had reigned as tetrarch for nine years, he was sent into exile for his bad government, thirty-seven years after the battle of Actium, and seven before the death of Augustus. So Josephus, Eusebius, Scaliger, &c. After Archelaus was exiled, Augustus appointed governors of Judæa, who ruled it in his name. There were three of those who presided over Judæa during the seven years which elapsed before the death of Augustus. The first was Coponius, who, together with Quirinus, prefect of Syria, confiscated the riches of Archelaus; the second was M. Ambinius; the third was Annius Rufus. From these facts much light is thrown upon the narratives of SS. Matthew and Luke. And, in the first place, it is clear why Matthew says that Joseph turned aside into Galilee from fear of Archelaus, reigning in Judæa. It was lest he, following in the steps of his father Herod, should seek to slay Christ, as the King of the Jews. In the second place, we see why Christ only went up to the temple in Judæa when He was twelve years old: Archelaus had been then deprived of the tetrarchy, and driven into exile. In Archelaus the race of Herod ceased to rule in Judæa, and were succeeded by Roman governors, from whom Christ had nothing to fear, for they knew Him not, and had not heard even His name.
2:23
Ver. 23. And he came and dwelt, &c. S. Mar 1:24, following the Latins, has Ναζαρηνὸς; the other Evangelists write Ναζαραίος. Adrichomius (Descr. Terræ Sanctæ, p. 241, num. 73) gives the following account of Nazareth, which he has collected out of S. Jerome, Eusebius, Brochard, and others: "Nazareth, which is interpreted a flower, is a fair and flourishing city of Galilee, not far from Capharnaum. It is built upon a mountain, which it girds like a crown. It is two leagues from Mount Tabor, and three days' journey from Jerusalem. Here Blessed Mary, the Flower of Virgins, was born; here Christ, our Lord and Saviour, our glory and our crown, like a flower of the field, as Jerome says, was conceived and brought up in all virtues, and lived for four-and-twenty years. Hence this was His own and His father's city; hence, also, He was called Nazarenus, or Nazaræus, and a Galilæan; hence, too, we who now are called Christians were anciently called Nazarenes and Galilæans, as terms of reproach." "Moreover," says Rabanus, "Galilee is interpreted migration, Nazareth a flower, because the more earnestly the Church passes over to heavenly things, the more she abounds in the flowers of virtues.
That it might be fulfilled a Nazarene. The name of Nazareth does not once occur in the Old Testament. Hence we are unable to tell whether it were written in Hebrew with zain or tsade. If with the former, Nazareth means sanctified, separate, consecrated; if with tsade, full of flowers, or guarded. The question arises, by what prophet, when, and wherefore was Christ called a Nazarene? There are several opinions; two are most probable:? 1. Christ was called a Nazarene, in Hebrew nazir, or nozeri, written with zain, meaning separate, holy, consecrate, crowned, religious, because Christ, as man, being separated from every other thing, was hypostatically and wholly united to the Word. For the word nazar signifies to separate, to consecrate, to crown. Wherefore the religious, under the old law, who separated themselves from wine and from the world, and consecrated themselves to God, were called Nazarites. (See Num 6:2, seq.) But that Christ would be holy, and consecrated to God, all the prophets foretold, especially Dan 19:24: "The Holy of Holies i.e., Christ shall be anointed." (Vulg.) Thus, too, Samson, who was a type of Christ, was a Nazarite. (Judg. xiii. 7.) So, too, was Joseph. (Gen 49:2.) And as Joseph, after his imprisonment, was made lord of Egypt, so Christ, after His death, was made lord of the universe. So S. Ambrose and Ruperti. These Nazarites, however, are called in Greek Ναζαραίοι, written with alpha (Nazaræi); but Christ is always called Ναζωραίος, (Nazoraeus), written with omega, to distinguish him from the Nazarites, because he was not a Nazarite by vow, like them, but was called Nazaræus, from his country, Nazareth. Christ drank wine, which was forbidden to the Nazarites by their vow. The above is the explanation of S. Jerome on this passage, and of Eusebius (lib. 7, de Demonstrat. c. 2, Deu 5), where he cites Lev 21:12, concerning the Aaronic priest, who was a type of Christ: "Neither shall he go forth out of the holy place, because the oil of the holy anointing of his God is upon him." Instead of holy, as qualifying anointing, the Hebrew has nezar, i.e., consecration, or sanctification with the oil of the anointing of his God. The index of Hebrew words usually found at the end of our Bibles, and Paul of Burgos, think that the passage which is here cited is Psa 131:18: "Upon him shall my sanctification flourish." (Vulg.?Heb. nizri, which S. Jerome translates his diadem.) Whence also the golden plate affixed to the pontifical tiara, on which was inscribed, Holiness to the Lord, is called nezor, i.e., a crown or diadem of holiness. (Exo 29:6.) It was a type, yea, an index of Christ of Nazareth, holy and crowned. To this the Apostle alludes (Heb 2:9): "We see Jesus, for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour." On which see my comment. Eusebius says, the LXX translate nazer by holy; Aquila has separation; Symmachus, untouched. From these, therefore, the name Nazaraeus signifies either holy, or separate, or untouched. But some of the ancient priests, who were anointed with the prepared oil, which was called by Moses nazer, were named Nazarites from this word nazer. But our Saviour and Lord, by His own nature possessing in Himself holiness and separation, neither having need of any human anointing, still obtained the title of a Nazarite among men; not as though He were so called from any oil named nazer, but from the city Nazareth, where He was brought up among His own relations, forasmuch as He was a man. Christ, therefore, was a Nazarite, i.e., separated from other men, sanctified, consecrated, and crowned High Priest, Legislator, Teacher, Redeemer, and Sanctifier of the Universe. The letter which is employed favours this opinion. The Evangelists always wrote Nazaræus, or Nazarenus, with the letter z, which is the one which occurs in the Hebrew nezer and nazir. For if Nazarene is derived from נצר nezer, with tsade, so as to signify flourishing, it ought to be written Nasarene with an s. In all other names the Hebrew letter tsade is represented by an s (in the Vulg.), as in Bosra, Asor (see Joshua, chaps. xii. and xv., where some suppose Asor to be Nazareth), Melchisedech, Sabaoth, &c. On the other hand the Hebrew zain is translated by our z, as appears from Zabulon, Zacharias, Beelzebub, &c. Let us add, it is more worthy the dignity of Christ that He should be called Nazarene, with the letter zain, i.e., holy, than Nasarene, with tsade, that is, flourishing. For נזר nazer, i.e., holiness, the consecration and crown of Christ, quà man, was the hypostatic union, or rather the actual Godhead of the Word, which crowned, sanctified, separated to Itself, united, and consecrated the whole Humanity of Christ. Lastly, it is in favour of this opinion that S. Matthew says, "which was spoken by the prophets," not by the prophet; "by which he shows," says S. Jerome, "that he was not quoting the words of one passage of Scripture, but the sense of several." 2. It is the opinion of others that Christ is called a Nasarene from נצר neser, with tsade i.e., flourishing, from flower or, rather, germinating, from germ. For both Aquila and Theodotion, according to S. Jerome, render neser in Isa 11:2 by germen. In Isaiah xi. 1, the Vulg. has, "A flower shall rise up out of his root," translating the Hebrew neser by flower. Nazarene, therefore, is the same as flourishing or germinating, growing into a great and glorious tree, and producing abundant fruit. The first reason is that Christ is elsewhere called צמה tsemach i.e., germen, which the Vulg. renders Oriens, the dawn, or daystar, as though arising out of the earth. (See Zec 6:12; Zec 3:8.) For Christ sprung from the Virgin as an undefiled germen, or plant, and pure from every stain of sin. So He flourished with every virtue, and scattered the odour of His sweetness far and wide. Whence S. Ambrose (lib. de Spirit. Sanct., c. 5) says, "When a flower is plucked, it does not lose its smell; when it is bruised, it increases it." So, when Christ was bruised in His Passion, He the more manifested the power of His Divinity and His grace. The second reason is that in the inscription placed on the Cross of Christ, which is preserved in the Basilica of the Holy Cross of Jerusalem, in Rome, נצרי notseri is written with tsade, not zain. So says Pagninus, from ocular inspection. So, too, the Syrian and Arabic versions write Nazarene with tsade. And the modern Jewish Rabbis call Christians Notserim i.e., Nazarenes, writing the word with tsade. I myself have often seen the title of the Cross at Rome and carefully inspected it, but the letters are so worn away that I have never been able to see that the Hebrew inscription has tsade. On the contrary, zain, not tsade, seemed to me to be the letter. Bosius (lib. I de Cruce triumph.) has a perfectly exact impression of the superscription of the Cross. Examine it, and you will agree with me. Besides, this title was written by Pilate the Roman governor, or his Roman servants, who had little knowledge of Hebrew, and could not tell whether Nazarene were spelt with a tsade or a zain, and certainly would not care for the distinction between them. Various commentators, as Rabanus, Salmeron, Jansen, &c., write Nazarene with a tsade, and translate it flourishing, but most of them seem to have been influenced by Pagninus, who said that he had found notseri spelt with a tsade on the title of the Cross. Both opinions may be conjoined and reconciled with each other by saying that if you look strictly to the letters you will find נזר nezer with zain that is to say, holiness, consecration, crown; yet that there is an allusion to netser with tsade i.e., a shoot, a flower for these two letters are somewhat akin both in form and sound, and are occasionally interchanged both with one another and with some other Hebrew letters, as appears in the conjugation Hispael. (See Bellarmine's Hebrew Grammar.) Wherefore the Psalmist conjoins the two (Psa 131:18), saying: "My sanctification (nazer) shall flourish (nazarene) upon him." (Vulg.) So also S. Jerome says, " Nazaræus is interpreted holy." All Scripture testifies that the Lord shall be holy. We are able also to use, in another sense, what is written in the same words in the Prophet Isaiah according to the Hebrew verity, "Behold a rod shall come forth from the root of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall arise out of his root." Lastly, as in their letters, so also in their significations these two words are closely connected; for He who is Nazarenus i.e., separated from earthly pleasures is likewise Nasaræus i.e., flourishing with virtues. Hence some derive the Greek άγιος, holy from α̉, not and γή the earth; for he who is separated from the earth, cultivates heavenly things, and is holy. Matthew adds this, because Nazareth was a small and despised town. Hence the name of Nazarene seemed both to Jews and Gentiles vile and mean, so that on account of it many were kept back from Christ, and from acknowledging Him as Messiah. Whence Nathanael said to Philip, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?" And Julian the Apostate was wont, in contempt, to call Christ "the Galilæan," and "the Nazarene." When he was struck by a dart from heaven, and was about to die, he cried, "Thou hast conquered, O Galilæan, thou hast conquered." Matthew, therefore, here shows that the name of Nazarene was a glorious one, forasmuch as it had been spoken of by the prophets, and assigned to Christ many ages previously. The sense then is as follows although Christ was born in Bethlehem He was conceived and brought up in Nazareth, a city small and obscure, that He might the better elude Herod and his posterity when they sought to slay Him, and that He might give us an example of humility and contempt of the pomps of the world. Whence He was called a Nazarene from the city of Nazareth, but so that not only the name Nazarene, but what was signified by the name, that is, holiness, should apply to Him. So there was in reality fulfilled what Isaiah and the prophets foretold concerning Christ, that He was nazir, holy, and noseri, or Nasaræus, flourishing with all virtue and grace. Consequently, the name of Nazarene, which the Jews and others gave to Christ by way of reproach, is most illustrious, yea, a note and mark of the true Messiah; for by this very title the prophets indicated and glorified Messiah. Tropologically, Christ is a Nazarene, i.e., separated from the world and consecrated to God, flourishing with all virtues, and the origin, father, and prince of the Nazarenes, that is, the religious, who despise the world, and dedicate themselves wholly to God, that they may flourish in virtues, according to those words in Lam. iv. 7. "Her Nazarites were fairer than snow, whiter than milk; they were more ruddy than ancient ivory, brighter than sapphires." (Vulg.) Where see my Comment. Salmeron adds, Nazarene is the same as Samaritan, i.e., a keeper (for נצר natsar, is to keep, to guard) namely of men; according to those words of Job, "What shall I do unto thee, O thou keeper of men?" (Vulg.) And Psalm 121., "Behold He shall neither slumber nor sleep, that keepeth Israel." So, too, Francis Lucas says, Nazarene, that is, keeper, preserver, defender. By Nazareth, therefore, the Blessed Virgin is represented, of whom Christ the Nazarene was born. For she was kept from original sin, from the shame of conception, from the corruption and pain of child-birth, and from turning to dust after death. For the body of the Virgin was not resolved into ashes after her death, as is the lot of other bodies; but it was, together with her soul, taken up into heaven. These things are true, but rather symbolical than literal.
2:1
Supra egit Evangelista de Christi generatione, hic intendit manifestare eius nativitatem. Et primo, testimonio magorum; secundo, testimonio innocentum, ibi qui cum recessissent. Circa primum tria ponuntur: primo enim annuntiatur Christi nativitas; secundo inquiritur locus; tertio inquiritur persona. Secundum ibi audiens autem Herodes. Tertium ibi tunc Herodes. Circa primum tria facit: primo enim proponitur Christi nativitas, cui testimonium perhibetur; secundo inducuntur testes; tertio ponitur testimonium. Secundum ibi ecce magi. Tertium ibi ubi est qui natus est? Circa primum quatuor tanguntur: nativitas, nomen nati, locus et tempus. Primum ibi cum ergo natus esset. Et notandum, quod Lucas plenius exequitur nativitatem, sicut e converso Matthaeus plenius exequitur de adoratione magorum, quam Lucas. Nomen tangitur ibi Iesus. Locus ibi in Bethlehem Iudae, non Iudaeae, quia Iudaea vocatur tota regio populi Israelitici; sed Iudae; ista est terra illa, quae venerat in sortem Iudae. Dicitur Bethlehem Iudae ad differentiam alterius Bethlehem, quae est in tribu Zabulon, de qua Iosue IX, 10. Et nota, quod ista tria verba cum natus esset Iesus in Bethlehem Iudae in diebus Herodis regis, congrue ponuntur. Bethlehem enim significat Ecclesiam, in qua natus est Iesus, qui est verus panis, de quo Io. VI, 51: ego sum panis vivus qui de caelo descendi. Nulli ergo provenit salus, nisi sit in domo domini. In his salvator natus est Christus; Is. LX, 18: occupabit salus muros tuos, et portas tuas laudatio et cetera. Et addidit regis, ad differentiam alterius Herodis: hic enim fuit, sub quo natus est Christus, Ascalonita; alius autem, qui Ioannem occidit, fuit filius huius Herodis, et non fuit rex. Sed quaeritur quare Scriptura facit mentionem de isto tempore. Et dicendum propter tres rationes. Primo, ut completam ostendat esse prophetiam Iacobi, Gen. penult., 10: non auferetur sceptrum de Iuda, et dux de femore eius, donec veniat, qui mittendus est, et ipse erit expectatio gentium. Herodes enim fuit primus alienigena, qui regnavit in Iudaea. Secunda ratio est, quod maior morbus indiget maiori et meliori medico. Populus autem Israel tunc erat in maxima afflictione sub gentili dominio, et ideo indigebat maximo consolatore: in aliis enim afflictionibus suis mittebantur eis prophetae, sed nunc propter magnitudinem afflictionis mittebatur eis prophetarum dominus; Ps. XCIII, 19: secundum multitudinem dolorum meorum in corde meo consolationes tuae laetificaverunt animam meam. Inde ponuntur testes, ibi ecce magi. Et describuntur tripliciter: a professione, a regione, et a loco, ubi testimonium dederunt. De primo dicit ecce magi: qui secundum communem usum loquendi vocantur incantatores; sed lingua Persica vocat magos philosophos et sapientes. Isti quidem venerunt ad Iesum, quia gloriam sapientiae, quam possidebant, recognoverunt a Christo. Et sunt quidem primitiae gentium, quia primo venerunt ad Christum. Et impletur, secundum Augustinum, in istorum adventu illud Isaiae VIII, 4: antequam sciat puer vocare patrem suum, et matrem suam, auferetur fortitudo Damasci, et spolia Samariae coram rege Assyriorum etc.; ante enim quam Christus loqueretur, eripuit fortitudinem Damasci, et divitias et spolia Samariae, idest idololatriam. Dimiserunt enim illi idololatriam, et munera obtulerunt. Item considerandum quod ad Christum venerunt aliqui ex Iudaeis, scilicet pastores; aliqui ex gentibus, scilicet magi: ipse enim Christus est lapis angularis, qui fecit utraque unum. Et quare magi et pastores? Quia pastores magis simplices, et isti magis peccatores, ad significandum quod Christus utrosque recipit. Quot autem fuerint illi magi, Evangelista non dicit. Videtur autem, secundum munera, quod fuerunt tres reges, quamvis plures alii in eis repraesentabantur; Is. LX, 3: ambulabunt gentes in lumine tuo. De secundo, scilicet de regione, dicit ab oriente. Et notandum quod quidam ab oriente exponunt a finibus orientis; sed tunc quomodo in tam paucis diebus venissent? Et respondetur, ut quidam dicunt, quod miraculose venerunt; alii quod dromedarios habuerunt. Chrysostomus tamen dicit, quod stella apparuit eis per duos annos ante nativitatem, et quod tunc se paraverunt, et venerunt Ierosolymam in duobus annis et tredecim diebus. Aliter autem potest exponi, ut dicatur ab oriente, idest a quadam regione quae erat prope Ierusalem a parte Orientali; dicuntur enim isti fuisse de secta Balaam, qui dixit Num. XXIV, 17: orietur stella ex Iacob, qui Balaam habitabat iuxta terram promissionis in parte Orientali. Sequitur de loco Ierosolymam venerunt. Sed quare venerunt Ierusalem? Duplex est ratio. Una quia erat civitas regia; unde regem Iudaeorum in regia civitate quaerebant; item hoc factum fuit ex divina dispensatione, ut primo testimonium ferretur de Christo in Ierusalem, ut adimpleretur prophetia Is. II, 3: de Sion exibit lex, et verbum domini de Ierusalem. Consequenter ponitur testimonium, ibi ubi est qui natus est? In quo tria dicunt: primo denuntiant regis nativitatem; secundo afferunt nativitatis signum, ibi vidimus enim stellam eius; tertio profitentur pium propositum, ibi et venimus adorare. Dicunt ergo ubi est? Considerandum autem quod isti magi sunt primitiae gentium, et praefigurant in se statum nostrum. Isti enim aliquid supponunt, scilicet Christi nativitatem, et aliquid quaerunt, scilicet locum; et quidem nos fide tenemus Christum, sed aliquid quaerimus, scilicet spe: videbimus enim eum facie ad faciem. II Cor. V, 7: per fidem ambulamus, et non per speciem. Sed quaestio est. Cum ipsi audissent regem esse in Ierusalem, quomodo ista dicebant? Omnis enim qui alium regem profitetur in civitate regis, se exponit periculo. Sed certe hoc zelo fidei faciebant. Unde in istis nuntiabatur fides illa intrepida. Infra c. X, 28: nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus. Consequenter proponunt signum huius nativitatis vidimus. Et nota quod in istis verbis fuit occasio duorum errorum. Quidam, sicut Priscillianistae, dixerunt omnes actus hominum fato agi et regi. Et confirmant per hoc, vidimus enim stellam eius. Ergo natus est sub aliqua stella. Alius error Manichaeorum, qui reprobant fatum, et per consequens istud Evangelium; quia dicebant quod Matthaeus introducit fatum. Sed excluditur error utriusque. Sed antequam procedamus ad expositionem litterae, oportet primo videre quid est fatum, et quomodo sunt haec credenda, et quomodo non. Nota ergo quod videmus multa in rebus humanis per accidens et casualiter accidere. Contingit autem aliquid casuale et fortuitum esse relatum ad causam inferiorem, quod relatum ad causam superiorem non est fortuitum: sicut si aliquis dominus mittat tres ad quaerendum aliquem, et unus nesciat de alio, si occurrant sibi invicem, est eis casuale; sed si referantur ad intentionem domini, non est casuale. Sed secundum hoc fuit duplex opinio de fato. Quidam dixerunt quod ista casualia non reducuntur in aliam causam superiorem ordinantem: et isti sustulerunt fatum, et ultra hoc omnem providentiam divinam. Et fuit, secundum Augustinum, haec opinio Tullii. Sed dicimus quod ista casualia reducuntur in causam superiorem ordinantem. Sed cum fatum dicatur a for faris, quasi quoddam pronuntiatum et prolocutum, a qua causa sit ista ordinatio, est differentia. Quidam enim dixerunt quod est ex virtute corporum supercaelestium. Unde dicunt fatum nihil aliud esse quam dispositio siderum. Alii ista contingentia reducunt in providentiam divinam. Sed primo modo negandum est esse fatum. Actus enim humani non reguntur secundum dispositionem corporum caelestium: quod patet ad praesens, cum multae sint ad hoc rationes efficaces. Primo, quia impossibile est, quod virtus corporalis agat supra virtutem incorpoream, quia nihil inferius in ordine naturae agit in superiorem naturam. In anima autem sunt quaedam potentiae elevatae supra corpus; quaedam potentiae sunt organis affixae, scilicet potentiae sensitivae et nutritivae: et corpora quidem caelestia, quamvis directe agant supra corpora inferiora, et mutent ea per se, per accidens tamen agunt in potentiis organis affixis. In potentiis autem organis non affixis nullo modo agunt necessitando, sed inclinando tantum. Dicimus enim istum hominem iracundum, idest pronum ad iracundiam, et hoc ex causis caelestibus, sed directe electio ut sic in voluntate est. Unde numquam potest fieri tanta dispositio in corpore humano, quin superabundet iudicium liberi arbitrii. Unde quicumque poneret liberum arbitrium sub corporibus caelestibus, de necessitate poneret sensum ab intellectu non differre. Secundo, quia per hoc excluditur omnis cultus divinus, quia tunc omnia essent ex necessitate; et sic tunc etiam regimen reipublicae destrueretur, quia nec oporteret consiliari, neque aliquid providere, et huiusmodi. Tertio, quia nos attribueremus Deo malitias hominum; quod esset ipsum infamare, qui creator est stellarum. Patet ergo quod hoc dicere est contra fidem omnino. Et ideo dicit Gregorius: absit a fidelium cordibus ut fatum aliquid esse dicatur. Si autem vis vocari fatum divinam providentiam, tunc aliquid est. Sed, sicut dicit Augustinus, quia nihil commune debemus habere cum infidelibus, non hoc nomen ei imponere debemus, unde dicit: linguam corrigas, sententiam teneas. Non ergo potest dici vidimus stellam, idest a qua tota vita eius dependeat; quia, secundum Augustinum, tunc stella non sequeretur generatum, quia tunc Christus magis diceretur fatum stellae, quam e converso. Et notandum quod ista stella non fuit de primis causatis: quod patet ex quatuor. Primo ex motu, quia nulla stella movetur de Septentrione in meridiem. Regio autem Persarum, unde isti magi veniebant, est posita ad Septentrionem. Item, aliae numquam quiescunt; ista autem non continue movebatur. Tertio ex tempore, quia in die nulla lucet; ista autem de die praebebat lucem magis. Quarto ex situ, quia non in firmamento, quod patet, quia isti per eam determinate distinxerunt domum. Ergo dicendum quod ista specialiter creata fuit ad servitium Christi. Et ideo dicit vidimus stellam eius, idest ad obsequium eius factam. Quidam autem dicunt, quod ista stella fuit spiritus sanctus, qui, sicut super baptizatum apparuit in specie columbae, ita et nunc in specie stellae. Alii dicunt quod fuit Angelus. Sed dicendum est quod vera stella fuit. Et voluit ostendi sub indicio stellae, primo, quia conveniebat ei. Est enim rex caelorum, et ideo per caeleste indicium voluit manifestari; Ps. XVIII, 1: caeli enarrant gloriam Dei et opera manuum eius annuntiat firmamentum; Iudaeis quidem per Angelos, per quos legem acceperant; Gal. III, 19: lex data est per Angelos; gentilibus per stellam, quia per creaturas in cognitionem Dei venerunt; Rom. I, 20: invisibilia Dei per ea quae facta sunt, intellecta conspiciuntur. Secundo, quia congruebat his quibus demonstrabatur, scilicet gentilibus, quorum vocatio promissa fuit Abrahae in similitudinem stellarum; Gen. XV, 5: suspice caelum, et numera stellas si potes et cetera. Unde tam in nativitate, quam in passione factum est signum in caelo, quod omnibus gentibus Christum notum fecit. Item, congruebat omnibus, quia ipse est salvator omnium. Sed dicit in oriente, quod exponitur dupliciter. Secundum Rabanum, sic: stella existens in Iudaea apparuit illis gentibus in oriente. Vel: nos vidimus stellam in oriente. Istud melius dicitur. Unde ecce stella, quam viderant in oriente antecedebat eos. Item patet ex hoc quod ista secundum situm erat propinqua terrae, quia aliter non distinxisset locum. Ergo non potuisset videri a tam remota regione.
2:2
Consequenter ponitur pium propositum et venimus adorare. Hic est duplex quaestio. Dicit enim Augustinus: numquid isti erant curiosi, quod quandocumque fieret aliquod indicium per aliquam stellam quaererent regem natum? Hoc enim stultum fuisset. Sed dicendum quod non praestaverunt obsequium regi terreno, sed caelesti: in quo virtus divina ostenditur affuisse; quia aliter si terrenum regem quaesissent, totam devotionem amisissent, quando vilibus pannis invenerunt involutum. Sed quaerit iterum Augustinus: quomodo ex stella potuerunt scire, quod homo Deus natus esset? Et respondet quod hoc fuit Angelo revelante; qui enim ostendit eis stellam, misit Angelum qui hoc revelaret. Leo Papa dicit, quod sicut exterius oculi replebantur lumine istius stellae: ita interius radius divinus revelabat. Tertia ratio: quia isti erant de stirpe Balaam, qui dixit: orietur stella ex Iacob. Unde habuerunt a prophetia eius. Et ideo videndo tantam claritatem stellae, suspicati sunt, quod rex caelestis natus esset, et ideo quaerebant. Et hoc est et venimus adorare. In hoc impletum est illud Ps. LXXI, 11: et adorabunt eum omnes reges, omnes gentes servient ei.
2:3
Praenuntiata Christi nativitate per magos, hic inquirit de loco nativitatis: et ponuntur tria: primo ponitur motivum ad inquirendum; secundo imponitur inquisitio; tertio inventio veritatis. Secundum ibi et congregans. Tertium ibi at illi dixerunt ei: in Bethlehem Iudae. Motivum fuit turbatio Herodis; unde audiens. Et signanter vocat Herodem regem, ut ostendat esse alium a rege, quem quaerebant. Fuit autem triplex causa turbationis. Prima processit ex ambitione, quam habebat circa custodiam regni sui, propterea quia alienigena erat. Sciebat enim vel audiverat illud Danielis II, 44: in diebus regnorum Israel suscitabit Deus caeli regnum, quod in aeternum non dissipabitur, et regnum eius alteri populo non tradetur et cetera. Sed in hoc decipiebatur, quia regnum illud spirituale erat; Io. XVIII, 36: regnum meum non est de hoc mundo. Unde Herodes turbabatur timens amissionem regni sui; sed magis turbabatur Diabolus timens regni sui destructionem totalem; Io. XII, 31: nunc princeps mundi huius eiicietur foras. Et nota quod homines, sicut dicit Chrysostomus, in sublimibus constituti ex levi verbo contra se prolato conturbantur; Ps. LXXXVII, 16: exaltatus autem, humiliatus sum et conturbatus; humiles autem numquam timent. Secunda causa processit ex timore Romani imperii. Statutum enim erat a Romano imperio quod nullus Deus aut rex diceretur sine eorum consensu; unde timebat. Sed iste timor mundanus erat, qui prohibetur; Is. LI, 12: quis tu ut timeas ab homine mortali, et filio hominis, qui quasi foenum ita arescet? Tertia ex rubore verecundiae. Verecundabatur enim coram populo ut alius rex vocaretur; similis in hoc Sauli, qui dixit: peccavi, sed nunc honora me coram senioribus populi mei, et coram Israel et cetera. I Reg. XV, 30. Sed mirum quod sequitur et omnis Ierosolyma cum illo. Videbatur enim quod deberent gaudere. Sed sciendum quod triplicem causam turbationis habuerunt. Prima fuit ipsorum iniquitas; iniqui enim erant, quibus semper detestabilis est conversatio iustorum. Prov. XIII, 19: detestantur stulti eos qui fugiunt mala. Secunda ut placerent Herodi; Eccli. X, 2: secundum iudicem populi, sic et ministri eius. Tertia quia timebant ne Herodes hoc audito amplius desaeviret in gentem Iudaeorum. Mystice autem in hoc significatur quod iste terrenus erat. Gregorius: rex terrae turbatus est, caeli rege nato, quia nimirum terrena altitudo confunditur, cum caelestis celsitudo aperitur. Is. XXIV, 23: erubescet luna, et confundetur sol, cum regnaverit dominus exercituum in monte Sion, et in Ierusalem. Et notandum quod, sicut dicit Augustinus, quid autem erit tribunal iudicantis, quando superbos reges cuna terrebat infantis? Pertimeant reges ad dexteram patris sedentem, quem rex impius timuit matris ubera lambentem. Et congregans. Hic ponitur inquisitio. Et, sicut dictum est, Herodes sollicitus erat inquirere, et propter regnum, et propter timorem Romanorum: unde inquisivit veritatem. Sed ad habendam certitudinem de aliquo tria requiruntur ab inquirentibus: creditur enim multitudini, auctoritati, et litteratis. Unde congregavit multos, et auctoritatem habentes, et sapientes. Et hoc est quod dicit congregans omnes, quantum ad primum Sap. VI, 26: multitudo sapientium sanitas est orbis terrarum. Principes sacerdotum, quantum ad secundum; Mal. II, 7: labia sacerdotum custodiunt scientiam, et legem requirunt ex ore eius (...). Et Scribas, quantum ad tertium: non ad scribendum tantum dicitur, sed ad interpretandum legis Scripturam; per istos quidem volebat investigare veritatem. Eccl. XXXII, 13: in medio magnatorum loqui non praesumas, et ubi sunt senes non multum loquaris.
2:4
Sciscitabatur ab eis ubi Christus nasceretur. Magi regem vocaverunt, sed ipsi Christum quaerebant: sciebant enim ex conversatione cum Iudaeis regem Iudaeorum legitimum inungi. Sed quaeritur: aut ipse credebat prophetiae, aut non. Si credebat, sciebat quod non poterat impediri quin ipse regnaret; quare ergo interfecit pueros? Si non credebat, quare ergo quaerebat? Sed dicendum quod non perfecte credebat, quia ambitiosus erat et ambitio hominem caecum reddit.
2:5
At illi dixerunt: in Bethlehem Iudae. Hic invenitur veritas. Et primo ponitur veritas; secundo confirmatur eius prophetia, ibi et tu, Bethlehem, terra Iuda. Et sciendum quod Christus voluit nasci in Bethlehem propter tria. Primo ad vitandam gloriam. Propter hoc enim elegit duo loca: unum in quo nasci voluit, scilicet Bethlehem; alium in quo passus fuit, scilicet Ierusalem. Et hoc est contra illos qui gloriam quaerunt, qui volunt nasci in sublimibus locis, et nolunt pati in loco honoris. Ioan. VIII, 50: ego gloriam meam non quaero. Secundo ad confirmationem suae doctrinae, et ostentationem suae veritatis. Si enim natus fuisset in aliqua magna civitate, virtus suae doctrinae potuisset adscribi humanae virtuti; II Cor. VIII, 9: scitis gratiam domini nostri Iesu Christi. Tertio ad ostendendum se esse de genere David; Lc. II, 3: Ioseph et Maria ibant in Bethlehem ut profiterentur ibi, eo quod essent de domo, et familia David. Competit etiam mysterio, quia Bethlehem interpretatur domus panis: et Christus est ille panis vivus, qui de caelo descendit, Io. VI, 51. Consequenter confirmatur veritas. Unde et tu, Bethlehem, et cetera. Ex ista prophetia duo possemus considerare: magi enim aliquid annuntiabant, et aliquid quaerebant.
2:6
Et ex ista prophetia ostenditur utrumque: quia quantum ad primum dicit et tu Bethlehem; quantum ad secundum dicit ex te enim exiet dux. Et ita confirmatur nativitas Christi duplici testimonio, scilicet stellae et prophetiae, quia in ore duorum vel trium testium est veritas; Deut. XIX, 15: in ore duorum aut trium testium stabit omne verbum. Et nota, quod quando erant omnes infideles, data sunt signa corporalium; quando iam erant fideles, data est prophetia; I Cor. XIV, 22: itaque linguae in signum sunt non fidelibus, sed infidelibus; prophetiae autem non infidelibus, sed fidelibus. Et sciendum quod Iudaei dupliciter defecerunt in prolatione prophetiae. Quia ibi dicitur et tu, Bethlehem Ephrata, et iterum quia non est ibi, nequaquam minima es. Et potest assignari duplex ratio quare mutaverunt. Uno modo potest dici, quod hoc fecerunt ex ignorantia. Alio modo potest dici quod isti usi sunt scienter aliis verbis. Et dicunt sententiam. Quia cum Herodes esset alienigena, non intellexisset auctoritatem prophetae, et ideo dixerunt illud quod notum erat Herodi. Unde dicunt: terra Iuda, et nequaquam minima es, idest tu non es minima inter millia hominum Iuda; vel in principibus Iuda, idest inter principales civitates Iuda. Ex te enim exiet dux qui regat populum meum Israel. De isto duce habetur Dan. IX, 25: usque ad Christum ducem; et Ps. XXX, 5: dux mihi eris: regit enim populum Israel non solum carnaliter, sed etiam spiritualiter; Rom. XI, 1: numquid Deus repulit populum suum? et cetera. Ps. LXXIX, 2: qui regis Israel, intende, qui deducis velut ovem Ioseph. Et nota quod truncant caudam auctoritatis, scilicet et egressus eius sicut ab initio, a diebus aeternitatis. Per quod insinuatur quod non debebat esse rex terrenus, sed caelestis; quod si scivisset Herodes, non fuisset impius. Unde fuerunt causa necis illorum. Item ex illa etiam cauda patet esse falsam interpretationem Iudaeorum, qui exponunt de Zorobabel: quia non convenit ei et egressus eius ab initio a diebus aeternitatis. Item non in Iudaea, sed in Babylone natus est.
2:7
Consequenter inquiritur de persona nati, cum dicit tunc Herodes, clam vocatis magis, diligenter didicit ab eis tempus stellae quae apparuit eis. Et primo ponitur inquisitio; secundo inventio inquisiti, ibi invenerunt eum etc.; tertio veneratio inventi, ibi et procidentes adoraverunt eum. Ad inquirendum personam ex duobus moti sunt: ex persuasione Herodis, et ex ductu stellae. Unde circa primum ponitur exhortatio; secundo studium magorum in mutatione stellae, ibi qui cum audissent regem abierunt. Circa primum tria ponuntur: primo enim inquirit tempus; secundo annuntiat locum, ibi et mittens illos in Bethlehem; tertio iniungit officium inquisitionis, ibi ite, et interrogate diligenter de puero. Dicit ergo tunc Herodes. Ubi considerandum quod Iudaei sciebant locum, sed non tempus. Unde confutantur a domino, Lc. XIX, 44: eo quod non cognovisti tempus visitationis tuae, et Is. I, 3: cognovit bos possessorem suum, et asinus praesepe domini sui; Israel autem me non cognovit, et populus meus non intellexit. Ergo inquiritur tempus. Et dicit Chrysostomus quod per biennium ante apparuit istis stella. Alii autem quod in ipsa die nativitatis. Annuntiat locum, ibi et mittens. Iungit officium inquisitionis, ibi ite, et interrogate et cetera. Et admonet duo: et ad hoc quod impleant praemittit tertium. Quantum ad primum dicit ite et cetera. Et quaerit insidiose ad occidendum, sicut illi quibus dicitur Io. VII, 34: quaeretis me, et non invenietis. Quantum ad secundum dicit sic cum inveneritis renuntiate mihi. Et hoc propter malum etiam dicebat; Eccli. XIII, 14: ex multa loquela tentabit te.
2:8
Quantum ad tertium dicit ut et ego veniens adorem eum; et quidem dolose promittit Dei cultum; Ier. IX, 8: sagitta vulnerans lingua eorum dolum locuta est; Ps. XXVII, 3: qui loquuntur pacem cum proximo suo, mala autem in cordibus eorum. Et nota quod cum magi profiterentur regem, iste vocat puerum, quia ex abundantia cordis os loquitur. Nota etiam, quod petit a Iudaeis ubi Christus nasceretur, volens experiri, et tentare utrum gauderent. Consequenter ponitur studium magorum. Duo iniunxerat: quod inquirerent, et reverterentur; sed unum fecerunt magi. Unde qui cum audissent regem abierunt. Aliud autem non fecerunt. Tales quidem debent esse auditores, quod bona addiscant, mala vero relinquant; infra XXIII, 3: quae dicunt facite, secundum opera eorum nolite facere et cetera.
2:9
Supra Evangelista posuit unum motivum magorum, scilicet persuasionem Herodis, hic ponit aliud motivum magorum ad inquirendum Christum, scilicet ducatum stellae; et circa hoc duo facit: primo enim ponit ducatum stellae; secundo effectum laetitiae huius ducatus, ibi videntes autem stellam, gavisi sunt gaudio magno valde. Et nota, quod stella primum exequitur suo motu, quia directe ducebat magos ad Christum; item manifestat suo statu pueri locum, ibi usque dum veniens staret supra ubi erat puer. Unde quantum ad primum dixit antecedebat eos. Ex hoc autem quod dicit ecce stella, quam viderant in oriente, antecedebat eos, datur intelligi quod quando magi declinaverunt in Ierusalem, stella disparuit; recedentibus autem ab Herode, apparuit. Disparuit autem propter tria. Primo propter confusionem Iudaeorum, qui cum instructi essent in lege, ut Christum quaererent, et gentes non essent instructae, tamen gentes quaerunt, et Iudaei contemnunt. Unde impletur illud Is. LV, 5: gentes quae te non cognoverunt, ad te current. Secundo propter magorum instructionem: non enim solum per stellam dominus voluit se eis manifestare, sed etiam per legem, ut sic adiungeretur cognitioni creaturarum cognitio legis. In ore duorum vel trium testium stabit omne verbum, Deut. XIX, 15. Is. VIII, 20: ad legem magis et ad testimonium. Tertio propter instructionem nostram. Et instruimur de duobus, secundum Glossam. Primo quod qui humanum auxilium quaerunt, deseruntur a divino. Illicitum est enim humanum auxilium quaerere, non quaerendo divinum; Is. XXXI, 1: vae qui descenditis in Aegyptum ad auxilium, in equis sperantes, habentes fiduciam super quadrigis, quia multae sunt, et super equitibus, quia praevalidi nimis, et non sunt confisi super sanctum Israel et dominum non requisierunt. Secundo instruimur quantum ad hoc, quod nos, qui fideles sumus, non debemus quaerere signa, sicut isti, qui videntes stellam gavisi sunt etc.; sed debemus esse contenti doctrinis prophetarum, quia signa data sunt infidelibus. In hoc etiam est duplex mysterium. Stella enim significat Christum; Apoc. ult., 16: ego sum radix David, stella splendida et matutina. Unde per istam stellam intelligere possumus gratiam Dei, quam amittimus, cum ad Herodem, idest Diabolum, accedimus; Eph. V, 8: eratis aliquando tenebrae, nunc autem lux in domino. Item, cum ab Herode, idest Diabolo, recedimus, stellam, idest Christi gratiam, invenimus: simile Ex. XIII, 21, ubi dicitur, quod dominus praecedebat Israel, quando exivit de Aegypto, in specie ignis et cetera. Hic autem praecedebat in specie stellae. Usque dum veniens staret supra ubi erat puer. Duo intelligimus hic. Unum quod ista stella non erat multum alta, quia aliter non discrevissent domum pueri. Aliud quod stella completo officio suo redacta est in suam materiam. Ubi erat puer. Frequenter puerum vocat, ut scias illum esse de quo dicitur Is. IX, 6: puer natus est nobis. Consequenter ponitur effectus ducatus huius quantum ad magos.
2:10
Unde videntes autem stellam gavisi sunt et cetera. Gavisi sunt propter spem, quam recuperaverunt. Timebant enim, quia de longinquis partibus venerunt, amittere quod sperabant; Rom. XII, v. 12: spe gaudentes. Item addit gaudio; aliqui enim gaudent, et non gaudent, quia laetitia humana non est perfectum gaudium; Prov. XIV, 13: extrema gaudii luctus occupat. Verum autem et perfectum gaudium de Deo est; Is. LXI, 10: gaudens gaudebo in domino, et exultabit anima mea in Deo meo. Tertio addit magno, quia isti magna iam cognoscebant de Deo, quia Deum incarnatum, et multum misericordem; Is. XII, 6: exulta et lauda, habitatio Sion, quia magnus in medio tui sanctus Israel. Quarto addit valde, quia intense gaudebant; recuperaverant enim quod amiserant; Luc. XV, 10: gaudium erit Angelis Dei et cetera. Consequenter agitur de inventione pueri. Unde et intrantes domum, invenerunt puerum. Et tangit tria: domum, quae, si quaeratur qualis erat, ostenditur Luc. II, 7. Item si quaeratur qualis puer, in nullo ab aliis differebat, sicut dicunt sancti. Quantum ad apparentiam, non loquebatur, infirmus videbatur, et huiusmodi. Item si quaeratur qualis mater, respondetur, qualis est uxor carpentarii. Et hoc ideo dico, quia si isti quaesivissent regem terrenum, videndo ista scandalizati fuissent; sed videntes vilia, et considerantes altissima, moti sunt ad admirationem, et adoraverunt eum. Et hoc est et procidentes adoraverunt eum. Sed quare non fit mentio de Ioseph? Dicendum quod divina dispensatione factum est quod non adesset, ne istis qui primitiae gentium erant, daretur suspicio pravae opinionis. Consequenter tangitur reverentia quam exhibuerunt ad puerum, ibi et procidentes. Et fuit triplex: in adorando, offerendo et obediendo.
2:11
Dicit ergo et procidentes adoraverunt eum, tamquam Deum in homine latentem; Ps. LXXI, 9: coram illo procident Aethiopes. Item offerendo, reverentiam exhibuerunt; unde et apertis thesauris suis. Consuetudo enim erat apud Persas, quod semper cum munere adorabant; et hoc est et apertis thesauris suis, obtulerunt ei munera, aurum, thus et myrrham. Ps. LXXI, 10: reges Tharsis et insulae munera offerent, reges Arabum et Saba dona adducent. Is. LX, 6: omnes de Saba venient, aurum et thus deferentes, et laudem domino annuntiantes. Mystice considerandum est quod isti non in via, sed tunc primo aperuerunt thesaurum, quando venerunt ad Christum: similiter nos bona nostra in via non debemus manifestare. Unde reprehenditur hoc inf. XXV de virginibus, et XIII, 44 dicitur: simile est regnum caelorum thesauro abscondito in agro, quem qui invenit homo abscondit, et prae gaudio illius vadit, et vendit universa quae habet et emit agrum illum. Obtulerunt ei munera et cetera. Aliqui assignant rationem istorum munerum litteralem et dicunt isti, quod tria invenerunt: domum sordidam, puerum infirmum, et matrem pauperem. Et ideo obtulerunt aurum ad sustentationem matris, myrrham ad sustentationem membrorum pueri, thus ad tollendum foetorem. Sed dicendum, quod aliquid mystice hic praetenditur, et potius ista tria ad tria referuntur, quae offerre debemus, sc. fidem, actionem et contemplationem. Quantum ad fidem dupliciter: primo quantum ad ea, quae in Christo concurrunt. Scilicet regia dignitas; Ier. XXIII, 5: regnabit rex, et sapiens erit etc.; et ideo in tributum obtulerunt aurum. Sacerdotii magnitudo; et ideo thus in sacrificium. Hominis mortalitas; et ideo myrrham. Item quantum ad fidem Trinitatis, quia designantur in nobis personae Trinitatis. Secundo possunt referri ad actionem nostram. Per aurum enim potest signari sapientia; Prov. II, 4: si quasi thesauros effoderis illam, tunc intelliges timorem domini. Per thus oratio devota; Ps. CXL, 2: dirigatur, domine, oratio mea, sicut incensum in conspectu tuo et cetera. Per myrrham mortificatio carnis: Col. III, 5: mortificate membra, quae sunt super terram; Cant. V, 5: manus meae distillaverunt myrrham. Quantum autem ad contemplationem, per ista tria possunt significari vel tres sensus sacrae Scripturae, scilicet litteralis, sub quo comprehenditur allegoricus, anagogicus et moralis; vel tres partes philosophiae, scilicet moralis, logica et naturalis: omnibus enim his debemus uti ad servitium Dei. Consequenter ponitur quomodo reverentiam exhibuerunt in obediendo.
2:12
Unde et responso accepto in somnis, ne redirent ad Herodem, per aliam viam reversi sunt in regionem suam. Sed quomodo responsum acceperunt qui non interrogaverunt? Sed dicendum quod dominus respondet aliquando interrogationi mentali, et isti intus quaerebant quid placeret Deo de reversione; Ex. XIV, 15: quid clamas ad me? Sed numquid sunt revelationes immediate a Deo? Dionysius probat quod non, nisi mediantibus Angelis. Quare ergo non nominat Angelum? Sed dicendum, quod quandoque Scriptura facit mentionem de Deo, et non de Angelo, hoc fit per quamdam excellentiam illius manifestationis; Gal. III, 19: lex ordinata per Angelum in manu mediatoris; Act. VII, 37: hic est Moyses, qui dixit filiis Israel: prophetam suscitabit vobis Deus de fratribus vestris, tamquam me ipsum audietis et cetera. Unde quod dicit Glossa, quod hoc fuit immediate per Deum, refertur ad modum loquendi Scripturae. Per aliam viam reversi sunt in regionem suam. In hoc ostenditur quod ad regionem nostram Paradisum, a qua per peccatum expulsi sumus, per obedientiam pervenimus. Prov. IV, 27: vias quae a dextris sunt novit dominus; perversae vero sunt quae sunt a sinistris. Chrysostomus hic dicit, quod isti reversi egerunt sanctam vitam, et postea facti sunt coadiutores s. Thomae apostoli; tamen nihil de eis invenitur scriptum in sacra Scriptura post recessum eorum.
2:13
Supra habitum est quomodo nascenti Christo magi testimonium perhibuerunt, nunc autem agitur quomodo innocentes testimonium perhibent, non loquendo sed moriendo. Et circa hoc tria facit Evangelista. Primo enim ponitur occultatio Christi; secundo interfectio puerorum, ibi tunc Herodes; tertio ponitur reditus ipsius Christi, ibi defuncto Herode. Circa primum tria facit. Primo enim ponitur admonitio Angeli; secundo ostenditur obedientia Ioseph; tertio impletio prophetiae. Secundum ibi ut adimpleretur. Circa primum tria tanguntur. Primo ponitur tempus apparitionis; secundo describitur ipsa apparitio et modus apparitionis ibi ecce Angelus; tertio ponitur ipsa admonitio facta per Angelum, ibi surge et accipe puerum. Tempus describitur ibi qui cum recessissent. Et intelligendum quod non statim post recessum magorum facta est ista apparitio, quia totum quod dicitur Luc. II, 6, debet interponi, scilicet de purificatione: postquam impleti sunt dies et cetera. Non enim Herodes statim cogitavit de interfectione puerorum. Unde cum dicit qui cum recessissent, debet interponi tota historia purificationis. Consequenter ponitur ipsa apparitio; unde ecce Angelus apparuit in somnis et cetera. In somnis dicitur apparere, quia tunc homines ab actibus exterioribus cessant, et talibus fit revelatio per Angelos; Ps. IV, 9: in pace in idipsum dormiam, et requiescam; Prov. III, 24: quiesces, et suavis erit somnus tuus. In ista admonitione tria ponuntur. Primo enim persuadet Angelus fugere; secundo determinat moram; tertio assignat causam. Dicit ergo surge. Et nota, quod, sicut dicit Hilarius, beata virgo ante nativitatem ab Angelo nominatur coniux, supra I, 5, sed post nativitatem non. Et hoc propter duo. Primo ad commendationem virginis; sicut enim virgo concepit, ita virgo peperit. Secundo propter dignitatem eius: erat enim mater Dei, qua dignitate nulla maior, et denominatio fit a digniori. Item quod, sicut dicit Chrysostomus, puer non venerat propter matrem, sed potius e converso; et ideo dicit accipe puerum, et matrem eius et cetera. Sed quare fuge in Aegyptum? Nonne dicit Ps. XVIII, 15: dominus adiutor meus, et redemptor meus? Sed sciendum quod propter tria fugit. Primo ad manifestandam suam humanitatem; sicut enim divinitas in stella apparuit, ita humanitas in fuga. Phil. II, 7: in similitudinem hominum factus. Secundo propter exemplum; illud enim exemplo ostendit, quod verbo docuit. Infra X, 23: cum autem persequentur vos in civitate ista, fugite in aliam. Tertio propter mysterium: sicut enim voluit mori, ut nos a morte revocaret, ita voluit fugere, ut fugientes a facie sua propter peccatum revocaret. Ps. CXXXVIII, 7: quo ibo a spiritu tuo? Et esto ibi. Sed quare potius in Aegyptum, quam alibi in aliam regionem? Dicendum propter duas rationes. Prima est, quia proprium est Dei, ut memor sit misericordiae in ira, Hab. III, 8. Dominus enim iratus fuit contra Aegyptios persequentes filios Israel, quia filii Israel erant primogenitus Dei. Et ideo datum est ei, ut obsequeretur unigenito; Is. XIX, 1: ecce dominus ascendet super nubem levem, et ingredietur Aegyptum etc.; ibid. IX, 2: populus qui ambulabat in tenebris, vidit lucem magnam: habitantibus in regione umbrae mortis lux orta est eis; Io. I, 14: vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi unigeniti a patre, plenum gratiae, et veritatis. Secunda, quia ipse induxerat tenebras in Aegypto, ideo voluit eam primo illuminare; et ideo bene ibi fugit; Is. IX, 2: populus qui ambulabat in tenebris, vidit lucem magnam; habitantibus in regione umbrae mortis lux orta est eis. Nota quod quando aliquis vult fugere peccatum, primo debet excutere pigritiam; Eph. V, 14: surge qui dormis, et exurge a mortuis, et illuminabit te Christus. Secundo debet accipere fiduciam a matre, et filio, scilicet Christo; Eccli. XXIV, 25: in me omnis spes vitae et virtutis. Tertio debet fugere a peccato adiutus auxilio matris et pueri; Ps. LIV, 8: ecce elongavi fugiens, et mansi in solitudine. Subdit causam huius fugae futurum est enim, ut Herodes quaerat puerum ad perdendum eum. Deceptus fuit Herodes, quia voluit perdere qui venerat regnum suum communicare; Lc. XXII, 29: et ego dispono vobis, sicut disposuit mihi pater meus regnum. Secundo, quia eum qui non gloriam mundanam quaerebat; Hebr. XII, 2: qui proposito sibi gaudio, sustinuit crucem. Qui consurgens. Hic ponitur executio mandati angelici, et ponit eam quantum ad fugam, et quantum ad moram.
2:14
Unde qui consurgens accepit puerum et matrem eius. Et fit mentio de tempore, unde dicit nocte, propter timorem et tribulationem, secundum illud Is. XXVI, 9: anima mea desideravit te in nocte, idest in tribulatione; in tribulationibus enim recurrendum est ad Deum: Os. VI, 1: in tribulatione sua mane consurgent ad me. Qui consurgens. Tunc adimpletum est illud Is. XIX, 1: ecce dominus ascendet super nubem levem, et ingredietur Aegyptum; quod ad litteram impletum est. Et erat ibi. Dicitur quod septem annos fuit ibi, et habitavit in civitate Heliopoli. Quantum autem ad mysterium, per Ioseph signantur praedicatores, hoc est apostoli, qui ponuntur ad expellendas tenebras per doctrinam, qui recedentes a Iudaeis conversi sunt ad gentes; Act. XIII, 16: vobis oportebat primum loqui verbum Dei; sed quoniam repellitis illud, et indignos vos iudicatis aeternae vitae, ecce convertimur ad gentes. Et esto ibi usque dum dicam tibi, idest usquequo finiatur infidelitas Iudaeorum. Rom. II, 25: caecitas ex parte contigit in Israel.
2:15
Consequenter adhibet testimonium prophetiae; unde dicit ut adimpleretur quod dictum est a domino per prophetam. Istud est, secundum translationem Hieronymi, Osee c. XI, 1. In translatione autem Septuaginta non est ita, sed ex Aegypto vocavi filium eius. Videtur hic esse quaestio: quia non videtur hoc facere ad propositum, quia praemittitur ibi, puer Israel etc., et sic loqui videtur de vocatione Israel de Aegypto. Sed dicendum quod in omnibus auctoritatibus, quae in Evangeliis vel in epistolis ponuntur de Christo, quaedam distinctio notanda est; quia quaedam dicuntur specialiter de Christo sicut illud Is. LIII, 7: tamquam ovis ad occisionem ducetur; quaedam autem dicuntur de quibusdam secundum quod duxerunt figuram Christi. Et sic est ista auctoritas: isti enim non fuerunt filii Israel, nisi inquantum similitudinem gesserunt veri filii unigeniti. Et hoc est: ex Aegypto vocavi filium meum, scilicet specialem. Tunc Herodes. Hic agitur de interfectione puerorum; et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponitur occasio interfectionis; secundo ponitur interfectio; ibi et mittens occidit omnes pueros; tertio inducuntur prophetiae, ibi tunc impletum est. Occasio fuit ira Herodis: unde tunc Herodes iratus est. Iac. I, 20: ira viri iustitiam Dei non operatur. Et notandum quod quando aliquis rex amissionem regni suspicatur, cito irascitur et accenditur. Videns quoniam illusus esset a magis, iratus est valde. Et dicitur iratus valde propter duo: quia quando aliquis irascitur, de modica occasione fortiter accenditur. Unde quia in suspicione erat amissionis regni, et illusus fuit a magis, iratus est valde. Eccli. XI, 34: a scintilla una augetur ignis. Et mittens. In ira ista fuit crudelitas quantum ad tria: quantum ad locum, quantum ad multitudinem et quantum ad tempus. Quantum ad multitudinem, ut unum quaereret, omnes occidit. Unde dicitur et mittens occidit omnes pueros. Et nota quod dicit Augustinus quod iste numquam profuisset tantum obsequio, quantum profuit odio. Sed quaeritur, cum non habuerint liberum arbitrium, quomodo dicti sunt mori pro Christo. Sed, sicut dicitur Io. III, 17, non misit Deus filium suum in mundum, ut iudicet mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus per ipsum. Numquam enim Deus permisisset eos occidi, nisi fuisset eis utile. Unde dicit Augustinus quod idem est dubitare utrum profuerit illis ista occisio, quod est dubitare utrum pueris prosit Baptismus: passi sunt enim ut martyres et Christum moriendo confessi sunt, quamvis non loquendo. Apoc. VI, 9: vidi subtus altare animas interfectorum propter verbum Dei. Secunda crudelitas est, quia occidit in omnibus finibus, timebat enim ne fugeret, scilicet ad aliquam civitatem. Et contigit ei sicut bestiae vulneratae, quae non attendit quem vulnerare debeat; Prov. XXVIII, v. 15: leo rugiens, et ursus esuriens, princeps impius super populum pauperem. Tertia quantum ad tempus. Unde a bimatu, idest duorum annorum. Et nota quod Augustinus dicit quod illo anno, quo Christus natus est, innocentes sunt occisi. Sed quare dicit a bimatu et infra? Dicunt quidam quod stella apparuit per duos annos ante; unde Herodes dubitabat utrum a tempore stellae natus fuisset.
2:16
Et ideo dicit secundum tempus quod exquisierat a magis. Alii autem dicunt quod isti non sunt occisi eodem anno, sed post duos annos. Sed quare tantum distulit? Triplex ratio redditur a diversis. Una est, quia a principio putabat quod magi fuissent decepti et quod nihil invenissent, sed postquam audivit multa verba de Christo a Zacharia et Simeone et Anna, tunc motus fuit ad quaerendum. Alii dicunt quod hoc fecit ex cautela: timebat enim ne puerum, quem quaerebat, parentes occultassent. Unde primo voluit eos assecurare. Alii quod occupatione impeditus, quia misit post magos usque ad Tharsum Ciliciae et fecit incendi naves eorum. Item fuit occupatus, quia citatus fuit Romae accusatus a filiis. Et sic post reversionem incepit saevire. Et dicit et infra etc., quia cogitavit illum esse tantae potentiae, quod posset commutare faciem suam. Per istam occisionem significatur occisio martyrum, quia pueri per humilitatem et innocentiam, infra XIX, 14: sinite parvulos, et nolite eos prohibere ad me venire; item infra XVIII, 3: nisi conversi fueritis, et efficiamini sicut parvuli, non intrabitis in regnum caelorum. In Bethlehem, et in omnibus finibus eius; quia per totum mundum occiduntur: Act. I, v. 8: eritis mihi testes, scilicet moriendo. Duo anni sunt duplex caritas, Dei et proximi, quia fides sine operibus mortua est, Iac. c. II, 20. Et nota quod nato Christo, statim persecutio saevit, quia statim quando quis convertitur ad Christum, incipit tentari. Eccli. II, v. 1: fili, accedens ad servitutem Dei, sta in iustitia et in timore, et praepara animam tuam ad tentationem.
2:17
Tunc impletum est quod dictum est per Ieremiam prophetam. Posita occisione puerorum, hic more suo Evangelista prophetiam annuntiantem ponit, quae est Ier. c. XXXI, 15: vox in Rama audita est, lamentationis, luctus et fletus, Rachel plorantis filios suos, et nolentis consolari super eis, quia non sunt. Et notandum quod, sicut dicit Hieronymus, ubicumque per apostolos et Evangelistas introducitur aliqua auctoritas veteris testamenti, non oportet introducere verbum ex verbo semper, sed sicut dedit eis spiritus sanctus, aliquando sensum ex sensu in usu nostro. Ita habemus Ier. XXXI, 15: vox in excelsis audita est lamentationis, luctus et fletus, Rachel plorantis filios suos, et nolentis consolari super eis, quia non sunt. Et sensus idem est. Et considerandum quod, quantum ad hanc auctoritatem pertinet, ista est una de illis quae introducuntur in Evangelio, quae tamen sensum litteralem habet, qui est figura eius, quod fuit in novo testamento. Unde ad intellectum eius consideranda est quaedam historia, quae legitur Iudicum XIX ubi dicitur quod propter peccatum commissum circa uxorem Levitae fere tota tribus Beniamin extincta est; et dicitur quod ibi fuit maximus planctus, ita quod fuit auditus de Gabaa usque in Rama longe a Bethlehem per duodecim miliaria. Hoc dicitur Rachel plorare, quia mater fuit Beniamin; et est locutio figurativa, scilicet ad exprimendum magnitudinem doloris. Sed haec est prophetia de praeterito. Alio modo est de futuro dupliciter. Quia uno modo potest referri ad captivitatem Israel, qui quando in captivitatem ducebantur, dicuntur in via iuxta Bethlehem plorasse; et tunc dicitur Rachel plorasse, quia sepulta erat ibi, Gen. XXXV, 19. Et dicitur hoc eodem modo loquendi quo locus dicitur plorare mala quae in loco accidunt. Vult ergo dicere propheta quod sicut maximus dolor et luctus fuit, quando extincta est tribus Beniamin, ita futurus est maximus alius tempore captivitatis. Tertio modo exponitur sic. Evangelista assumit factum de occisione innocentum et exaggerat istum dolorem quadrupliciter. Ex diffusione doloris, ex multitudine doloris, ex materia, et inconsolabilitate.
2:18
Dicit ergo: vox in Rama. Quaedam civitas est in tribu Beniamin, Iosue XVIII, 25, et potest accipi pro civitate Liae. Hic autem accipitur pro excelso; et potest dupliciter exponi. Primo sic: vox, in excelso prolata, audita est, quia vox quae in loco alto est, longe lateque diffunditur; Is. XL, 9: supra montem excelsum ascende tu qui evangelizas Sion, exalta in fortitudine vocem tuam. Vel audita est in excelso, idest in caelo apud Deum; Eccli. XXXV, 21: oratio humiliantis se nubes penetrabit, et donec propinquet, non consolabitur, et non discedet donec altissimus aspiciat. Et iterum: nonne lacrimae viduae ad maxillam descendunt, et exclamatio eius super deducentes eas? Ploratus: hoc potest referri ad fletum infantium occisorum. Et ululatus multus; hoc ad matrum ploratus. Vel utrumque ad pueros: ploratus inquantum elevabantur a militibus, ululatus inquantum iugulabantur. Maior est dolor matrum, quam filiorum. Item matrum erat dolor assiduus, puerorum fuit brevis: propter quod dicit Zach. XII, 10: plangent eum quasi super unigenitum, et dolebunt super eum, ut doleri solet in morte primogeniti. Item ex materia doloris, quia de morte filiorum. Unde Rachel plorat. Sed obiicitur, quia Bethlehem non erat in tribu Beniamin, sed in tribu Iuda, qui fuit filius Liae. Et solvitur tripliciter. Primo, quia Rachel sepulta fuit iuxta Bethlehem, Gen. XXXV, 19. Et ita ploravit pueros eo modo, quo aliquis locus dicitur plorare; Ier. II, 12: obstupescite, caeli, super hoc, et portae eius, desolamini vehementer, dicit dominus. Vel aliter. Supra habitum est quod Herodes occidit pueros in Bethlehem, et in omnibus finibus eius et cetera. Bethlehem autem erat in confinio duarum tribuum, scilicet Iudae et Beniamin; unde de pueris Beniamin occisi sunt: et sic cessat obiectio, sicut exponit Hieronymus. Augustinus autem aliter exponit et dicit quod consuetudo est quod quando alicui aliqua prospera succedunt, ille, quando adversitates veniunt, magis dolet. Lia et Rachel sorores fuerunt, et isti qui occisi sunt fuerunt de filiis Liae. Et sic corporaliter occisi sunt, ne aeternaliter punirentur, ut in facto Gabaa. Dicitur ergo plorare videns filios suos occidi et damnari. Vel per Rachel Ecclesia signatur, quia interpretatur videns Deum, et Ecclesia per fidem videt: quae plorat filios suos occisos, non quia occisi sunt, sed quia per ipsos poterat alios acquirere. Vel non plorat propter occisos, sed propter occidentes. Sequitur de inconsolabilitate doloris: et noluit. Et exponitur illud multipliciter. Primo ut referatur ad populum, qui tunc erat. Consolatio enim debetur quamdiu speratur aliquod remedium; sed quando non speratur, non est consolatio, sicut patet in infirmo desperato; et ideo dicit, ut referatur ad opinionem matrum, quia non sunt, quia scilicet non apparent; Gen. XXXVII, 30: puer non comparet. Vel noluit consolari, quia non sunt, idest ac si non essent: consolatio enim non debetur nisi de malis. Unde secundum hoc refertur ad opinionem Ecclesiae, quae habet eos tamquam regnarent; unde, sicut de regnantibus, gaudet de eis, I Thess. IV, v. 12: nolumus vos ignorare de dormientibus, ut non contristemini, sicut et ceteri qui spem non habent vel noluit consolari de praesenti, sed expectat consolationem in futuro; infra V, 5: beati qui lugent, quoniam ipsi consolabuntur. Consequenter agitur de revocatione Christi; unde defuncto Herode, ecce Angelus domini apparuit in somnis Ioseph. Et primo ponitur apparitio Angeli; secundo mandatum Angeli; tertio executio mandati Angeli. Circa primum tria ponuntur. Primo describitur tempus; secundo persona; tertio modus apparitionis. Dicit ergo defuncto Herode: non ille qui fuit in morte Christi, quia ille fuit filius istius.
2:19
Ecce Angelus apparuit. Notandum quod omnis turbatio Ecclesiae secundum mysterium terminatur per mortem persecutorum quia in perditione impii erit laudatio Prov. XI, 10. Item nota quod infidelitate Iudaeorum terminata, Christus redibit ad eos. Rom. XI, 26: et tunc omnis Israel salvus fiet. Ecce (...) apparuit. Notandum quod talis est ordo Angelorum et hominum, ut divinae illuminationes non fiant nobis nisi per Angelos; ad Hebr. I, 14: omnes sunt administratorii spiritus in ministerium missi propter eos qui haereditatem capiunt salutis. Unde etiam Christus secundum quod homo, voluit per Angelos nuntiari. Modus, ibi in somnis Ioseph in Aegypto. Mandatum, ibi surge, et accipe puerum. Non dicit filium, non coniugem, sed puerum, ut designetur dignitas pueri, et integritas matris. In hoc significatur, quod Ioseph non fuit ei datus ad carnalem copulam, sed ad ministerium et custodiam.
2:20
Consequenter assignat causam defuncti sunt enim qui quaerebant animam pueri. Sed quaeritur, quare dicit sunt. Non enim nisi Herodes mortuus erat. Hoc solvitur dupliciter. Primo quia iste tot mala fecerat, quod Iudaei gaudebant de morte eius: qui praesentiens mandavit adhuc vivens sorori suae, quod nobiliores de Iudaeis interficeret in morte sua; et isti quaesiverant animam pueri cum Herode; et hoc est defuncti sunt enim qui quaerebant animam pueri. Vel aliter. Mos est sacrae Scripturae ponere plurale pro singulari: unde mortui sunt, idest mortuus est et cetera. Unde in hoc quod dicit qui quaerebant animam pueri, destruitur error Apollinaris, qui dixit, quod divinitas erat in Christo loco animae.
2:21
Ponitur executio huius mandati qui consurgens, accepit puerum et matrem eius; et circa hoc duo facit: primo ostendit quomodo reversus est in terram Israel; secundo quam partem vitavit; tertio qua parte declinavit, ibi et admonitus in somnis secessit in partes Galilaeae. Dicit ergo qui consurgens. Notandum, quod Angelus non dixit vade in terram Iuda, vel in Ierusalem, sed universaliter in terram Israel, sub qua etiam Galilaea potest comprehendi. Unde potest dici, quod Ioseph intravit fines terrae, quam habitabat Iudas. Consequenter ponitur quam partem vitavit, ibi audiens autem quod Archelaus regnaret in Iudaea. Et notanda est hic historia Herodis. Iste Herodes habuit sex filios, et ante mortem suam occidit Alexandrum et Aristobolum; in morte autem sua mandavit ut occideretur Antipater. Unde tres remanserunt, inter quos Archelaus primogenitus fuit, et usurpavit sibi regnum; sed tandem accusatus a Iudaeis apud Caesarem Augustum, ablatum fuit ei regnum et divisum fuit in quatuor partes, et duas habuit Archelaus, duas alias alii diviserunt sibi, ita quod unam tetrarchiam habuit Herodes, aliam Philippus, sicut habetur Lc. III, v. 1. Iste Archelaus missus est in exilium post novem annos regni sui.
2:22
Et admonitus in somnis. Dixerat primo Angelus, quod iret ad terram Israel; sed quia Ioseph nondum intellexerat, ideo Angelus, qui prius indeterminate revelaverat, nunc determinat. Et hoc est et admonitus (...) secessit in partes Galilaeae. Sed contra. Sicut Archelaus in Iudaea, ita Herodes in Galilaea regnabat. Sed dicendum, quod hoc fuit statim post mortem Herodis, quando Archelaus tenebat totum, quia postmodum facta est divisio. Sed tunc etiam quaeritur, quare non timuit Archelaum. Dicendum, quod in Ierusalem erat sedes regni; unde ibi quasi semper morabatur. Sed quaeritur, quare Luc. II, 41 dicitur quod singulis annis ducebant puerum in Ierusalem. Et solvit Augustinus, quod secure ducebant per turbam magnam, quae tunc ascendebat; sed periculum fuisset si ibi diu moratus fuisset. Item quaeritur, quare innuit Evangelista quod quasi per accidens venit Ioseph in Nazareth, sed Lc. II, 39 dicitur quod in Nazareth habuit proprium domicilium. Sed dicendum, quod Angelus dixerat ei, quod iret in terram Israel, quae stricte accepta non continebat Galilaeam, nec Nazareth: et sic intellexit Ioseph; et ideo non proponebat ire in Nazareth.
2:23
Ut adimpleretur quod dictum est per prophetam: quoniam Nazaraeus vocabitur. Hoc non invenitur scriptum, sed potest dici, quod ex multis locis colligitur. Nazarenus igitur interpretatur sanctus: et quia Christus dicitur sanctus; Dan. IX, 24: donec ungatur sanctus; ideo signanter dicitur per prophetam. Vel potest dici, quod per Nazarenum interpretatur floridus; et hoc habetur Is. XI, 1: egredietur virga de radice Iesse, et flos de radice eius ascendet etc.; et convenit cum eo, quod dicitur Cant. II, 1: ego flos campi et lilium convallium.
2:1
When Jesus, therefore, was born in Bethlehem of Juda. THE Evangelist, according to the laws of history, describes the place, time, and circumstances of the event : The place — Bethlehem ; the time — in the days of Herod the king ; the circumstances — wise men came from the East. Why Christ was born in Bethlehem is plain. — i. Because Micheas the Prophet had so foretold (v. 2), and He must be born on native soil to prove Himself the Ruler of whom the Prophet spoke. 2. Because David was born in the same place (i Kings xvi. I ; xvii. 12), and Christ came as his successor, the restorer of His kingdom, and the flower of the root of Jesse. He must necessarily spring up where the root was. When, therefore, He was as yet scarce born, He compelled His enemies, the chief priests and scribes, if not to believe Him to be Christ, yet in a manner to profess so (verse 5). Hence, as Joseph and Mary lived not in Bethlehem, but in Nazareth, they came to Bethlehem on the enrolling of Augustus (S. Luke u. i), as if the whole world were so described, for no other reason than that the Lord of it might not be born out of His own country, (extra), God thus ordering it that the imperial edict should serve the cause of truth.
Juda. Manyc opies have Judcea, and so S. Chrysostom, Euthymius, and many others seem to read it on the authority of the greater number of copies. S. Jerome, however, with good reason, in this passage and on Micheas v., thinks that Judcea is incorrectly read for Juda. For Judaea included the whole territory of the twelve tribes, but Juda only that of the tribe of Juda. As there were two Bethlehems, one in the tribe of Juda, where David and Christ were born, and another in the tribe of Zabulon (Joshua xix. 1 5), the Evangelist clearly desired to distinguish the Bethlehem of Juda from that of Zabulon, which he would not have done if he had said Bethlehem of Judaea, for both were in Judaea, but only one in Juda.
Herod. This was not Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee (S. Luke i. 5), who put John Baptist to death and mocked Christ, nor the Herod who slew James and bound Peter, but the father of the former and the grandfather of the latter ; who was called " Herod the Great," " Ascalonita," " Antipater," and to whom the Romans first gave the title of King of Judaea (Josephus, Antiq., xiv. 18 ; Hegesippus, i. 36; Eusebius, i. 6). The years were now first numbered according to the Caesars (as in 6\ Luke iii. i ; Acts xi. 28), but S. Matthew, as speaking of the kingdom of Herod, makes mention of him rather than of Caesar.
The King. To distinguish him from the tetrarch. The Evangelist seems to wish to show that the time was now come when Christ should be born ; for, as it had been foretold that the sceptre should not depart from Juda, he shows that, by the rule of a stranger, it had done so, and that the time had arrived when, according to the prophecy of Jacob, Christ should be born. So say S. Chrysostom and Theophylact. Behold. This particle (ecce) has here a twofold force. It shows that the Magi came immediately on Christ's birth, as we shall shortly explain, and that they came unexpectedly, when, as is shown in verse 3, the city was troubled.
There came wise men from the East. Four questions may here be asked — i. Who they were? 2. How many were there ? 3. Whence did they come ? 4. When ? For, of the star, whatever it was, and how they knew by it of the birth of Christ, we will speak here after. The first question seems to depend on another. Did S. Matthew write in Greek or in Hebrew ? If in Hebrew the meaning of the word ^tO^H will have to be followed ; if in Greek, that of the word pdryoi. In the Preface, chap, v., it is. proved that he wrote in Hebrew. We must see, then, who they are who are called in Hebrew ^ftEnn the word found in this passage. The Hebrews call ^tOin what the Latins term pr&stigiatores ; that is, those who by incantations or some other art change the appearance of things so that they seem to be other than they are. Such were the magicians of Pharaoh, who by diabolical arts imitated the divine acts of Moses in transforming things (Exod. vu. n, 22 ; viii. 7). But neither our version nor the LXX. calls these Magi, but the former in every case calls them malefici, the latter <f>dpiuueoi or tyap/juaicevs (Exod. vu. II ; Deut. xviii. 10; 2 Paralip. xxxiii. 6 ; Jerem. xxvii. 9 ; Dan. u. 2; M alack, iii. 5). But both our version and the LXX. call those Magi whom the Hebrew terms ^tt^ft that is, those who, by inspecting the stars, foretell the future, interpret dreams (Dan. i. 20; u. 10, 27 ; w. 4 ; v. 7, 1 1, 15). The ancient writer calls them Magi, the Hebrews illNn Pythones, the LXX. eyyaarpL/jildai, (Levit. xix. 31 ; xx. 6;. I Sam. xxviii. 3, 9). We scarcely believe those of whom 5. Matthew speaks to have been prcestigiatores — a name infamous among all nations — since the Evangelist appears to call them Magi, a title of honour. Magi are so called from three causes. They who practise the arts, not only of natural but diabolical magic, are so termed (Levit. xix. 31 ; xx. 6 ; Acts viii. 9; xiii. 6), and in Strabo it is the name, not of any art or condition, but of a nationality ; for among the five nations who inhabited Media, he mentions the Magi. S. Epiphanius, in his Epitome of the Catholic Faith, does the same, except that he gives them another origin and abode ; for he says that they were the sons of Abraham by Keturah, and when sent out of the country by Abraham, they came to Magodia, a region of Arabia, and there took up their abode — hence, he thinks, they received their name. But the more ordinary meaning of the word is, that the Magi were called by the Persians, in their mother tongue, Sapientes (wise men), as among the Greeks are Philosophers ; among the Italians of Hetruria, Aruspices and Pontifices ; among the Indians, Brachmans or Gymnosophists ; among the Babylonians, Chaldaeans ; among the Egyptians, Hierophants ; among the Gauls, Druids, as stated by Cicero (lib. i., De Divin.\ Strabo (xvi.). and Tertullian (Against Marcion) ; in which sense, as seems very probable, and is most commonly believed, the Magi are mentioned here: both as they came from the East, where the name of Magi was famous, and were led by a star, like men who governed the whole course of their lives by the observation of the stars, in which all their wisdom consisted ; and because the Evangelist seems to have termed them Magi for reasons of honour. Whether or not they were kings is less certain. A heretic — Beza — derides the Catholic Church because she believes them to have been such — as \iPsalm Ixxi. 10, 1 1, had been wrongly understood. He must, therefore, laugh at Tertullian (i., Against the Jews), and (lib. iii., Against Marcion); at S. Cyprian ( Serm. de Bapt.), at S. Chrysostom (Horn. vi. 50 THE GOSPEL OF S, MATTHEW. [Cn. n. i. on S. Matt.\ at S. Hilary, S. Basil, Idacius, S. Jerome or his contemporary (on Ps. xxi.), S. Augustin, or the author of bk. iii. on The Miracles of Scripture^ Isidore, Bede, Strabus, and others. All these believe that they were kings, and put faith in that Psalm. Not that they believe them to have actually ruled over Tharsis, for that word is used for Gentile kings in general, but they think that David mentioned them exempli gratia, as Tertullian shows from many other examples. The Church does the like, using this Psalm in the same sense, on the feast of Epiphany, often adapting, not in ignorance but wisely and designedly, to one person what was originally said of another. She applies, for instance, the words of S. Luke (x. 42) of Mary Magdalene, the sister of Lazarus, to Mary the mother of Christ, on her festival, because she herself was a Mary, and had also chosen the best part. That the Magi were actually kings is held, not as a certain article of the Catholic faith, but as a probable opinion ; and some learned and devout men, not scoffingly but earnestly, have held the contrary opinion. They say that if they had been kings, the Evangelist would not have forborne to mention their names, for these would have added to the honour of the worship of Christ, and that kings would have been received with greater state by Herod. This may be granted, and still the opinion be held that they were kings ; not Persian nobles, but genuine princes who merited the titles of kings or princes ; chiefs (regulorum\ as the man mentioned by S. John (w. 46, 49), and as the friends of Job are called (Tobit u. 15), and as S. Mark (vi. 14) called Herod, the son of Herod the Great, a king when he was not such, but tetrarch of Galilee (SS. Matt. xiv. i, Luke iii. i). The poet Juvencus says that they were not kings, but he admits them to have been the chiefs and nobles of their race. We may suppose them to have been kings — (i) as they came from the East, whence private philosophers would not have taken so long a journey ; (2) as they came to worship one born a king, which only princes do ; (3) as they brought treasures ; (4) as they were not seized by Herod as soon as they came, and dragged off to the cross ; (5) it cannot be that Herod said falsely that he also would come to worship as soon as he knew where the infant was, yet he certainly pretended to be true, as if all kings ought, after the example of the Magi, to worship the new king ; whereas private persons would not venture to confess before the reigning sovereign that he was born a lawful king. But why did not the Evangelist call them kings ? Why did not the author of the Book of Job call his friends kings, but the author of the Book of Tobias did ? If another Evangelist had written the account of the marriage of Cana, he might perhaps have given some other name to him whom S. John called a ruler. S. Matthew might have called them Magi instead of kings, when they were both, for some other reason. He desired to give the tacit reason for their knowing from the star that it was Christ who was born. For this was the work of Magi, not of kings. Their number is less certain. The common opinion, not only of the vulgar, but of great authorities (S. Augustin, Serms. xxix.-xxxiii. de Tempore; S. Leo, Serms. i., w.-viii., de Epiphania; Rupertus, Comment.}, is that they were three in number, which appears the most likely of any. It is certain that there were more than one, or even two, for the Evangelist always speaks of them as many, and he does not even use the dual number of them, but always the plural. That they were three is not a matter of certainty, but from the number of their gifts it is a probable conjecture ; for it is more likely that they all gave different gifts than that all should have given the same — for this was more usual, and was considered more honourable both to giver and receiver. This opinion has some reason at least to support it ; the other has none. Whence did they come ? This is the third question. Although it is in great part answered by the Evangelist, there is yet some room for conjecture. Many ancient authors think that they came from Arabia (S. Justin Mart., Adv. Try ph.; Tertullian, Adv.Jud., and iii., Adv. Marc. ; S. Cyprian, Serm. de Stella et Magis; S. Epiphanius, Epitome}. They are justly influenced in this belief by David (Ps. Ixxi. 10) : " The kings of the Arabians and of Saba shall bring gifts"; and that country produces these things, Arabia and Saba having even been celebrated by the poets for their abundance of gold, perfumes, and frankincense. Others, S. Chrysostom among them, suppose them to have been Chaldaeans. Their chief argument is, that it was impossible for them to have come from Persia and Arabia in the space of thirteen days. But this is scarcely tenable, for although Chaldsea lies between the North and East, it is the custom of Scripture to call it the North. The ordinary opinion, that they came from Persia, seems the best, both as having more authority, and because the word magi itself is a Persian one, and the Evangelist says that they came from the East. They also displayed Persian manners ; for the Persians adore their kings and approach them only with gifts, as all writers on the subject inform us. How they could have performed the journey in thirteen days shall be explained hereafter. The fourth question remains : When did they arrive, and wlten did they set out ? For the question consists of these two parts. S. Epiphanius (Hcer., 30, 31) affirms, on the authority of verse 6, and vehemently contends for it, that they arrived two years after the birth of Christ. So too Eusebius in his Chronicon. The opinion of the Church is much more truth-like, that they came on the thirteenth day after the birth of Christ. So said S. Augustin (DeEpipk., i., u., iii), and S. Leo (Serm. Oct.). It certainly appears that they arrived not many days after. This the Evangelist signifies when he says, "When Jesus was born, behold there came wise men ". For both the connection of the sentence and the word " behold " show that the arrival of the Magi followed immediately after the birth of Christ (as in Gen. xxiv. 15, xxix. 9), and because it is certain that Joseph and Mary did not remain in Bethlehem beyond the forty days of her Purification as ordered by the Law (Levit. xii. 2). For they immediately came to Jerusalem, "to present Him to the Lord " (Luke u. 22), and then returned at once to Galilee (v. 39). But the Magi found Christ in Bethlehem (S. Matt. u. 9). They therefore came before the fortieth day from His birth. 2. When did they set out from their country ? The opinion of S. Augustin (Serm. xxxii.) seems the best, that they did not leave their country till after the birth of Christ. Their words, " We have seen His star in the East," seem to imply this. But when it is proved that they offered their worship thirteen days after, it follows that they could not have been longer than eight or nine days on the road ; for they did not set out on the same day as that on which they saw the star, and it seems most likely that at least two days passed whilst Herod was questioning them and consulting with the scribes and priests. This makes it much more wonderful that they were able to come from Persia in so short time. But two circumstances lessen this wonder : (i) It is probable that they may have come, not from the furthest, but from the nearest parts of Persia, which are scarcely more than two hundred leagues from Jerusalem (2) That they may have travelled on camels, which, although loaded, are said to perform a journey of forty leagues a day. It is not necessary to adopt the opinion of Remigius, that the journey was performed by divine power.
Jerusalem. It is strange that the wise men should have come to Jerusalem when they were led by the star to Bethlehem. Some think that the star disappeared near Jerusalem, that the Magi might relate that a King was born in the Royal City, lest the Jews should appear ignorant of what they had learnt from the testimony of the Gentiles. So S. Ambrose (lib. u., On S. Luke, chap, u.), S. Augustin (Serms. xxx., xxxi., xxxv., de Temp.}, S. Chrysostom (Horn. vu. on S. Matt}, S. Basil (Horn, de Hum. Gen. Chti.}, Theophylact, and S. Bernard on this passage. This is the more probable because the people of Jerusalem did not see the star ; for if they had, the Evangelist would not have passed it over in silence, and if it had not disappeared, all the city must have seen it. The Evangelist seems to signify this inverse 9 — as if while they were at Jerusalem they had not seen the star, but as soon as they left the city, they began to see it again. S. Bernard thinks that the Magi desired to come to Jerusalem first, to ask about the new-born King, and therefore that the star hid itself that they who sought for human counsel might lose the divine guidance. Their coming to Jerusalem would appear to have been caused not so much by their desire for knowledge as by the will of God — partly that the Jews might be without excuse, as S. Jerome says: partly that Christ being born a King might be announced by the Gentiles before it was so by the Jews, lest the testimony of the Jews to their own King might appear matter of suspicion, as S. Basil suggests in his Homily de Hum. Gen. CJiristi ; for human reason required that one who came to seek a new-born King should come to the Royal City.
2:2
That is born. The assertion of the Magi is notable, for they did not ask, as men in doubt, whether He were born, but, like men instructed by God, they asserted decidedly that He was so. They seem to speak as if all would affirm that He was so, and all knew it. Who, indeed, could suppose that men of Persia would know this, but that the Jews would be ignorant of it ? It may be, too, that they inquired for a new King, of whom, when they knew nothing, they came to Jerusalem, to learn in the Royal City what they could not discover in other cities.
King of the Jews. These words may be taken in two ways : either the King of the Jews who is born, or who is born King of the Jews. Either meaning is probable, but the second seems the better as being the more forcible ; nor could the Magi be ignorant that Herod was not the lawful and natural King, but a factitious one given by the Romans. They place the natural King in opposition to the factitious one.
For we have seen His star. The star being the index of His birth, five questions may be asked about this star : 1. Of what nature it was (qualis fueri£)t 2. When was it first seen (^quando) ? 3. Where (//&) ? 4. How did the Magi know by it that Christ was born (quomodd) ? 5. Why were they taught by it rather than by any other means (cur) ? S. Gregory Nyss. thinks that it was one of the other stars, and that it came down to render the Magi obedience (Horn, de Incarn^}. Almost all others suppose that it was not an actual star, but only had the appearance of one (S. Chrysostom, On Matt. vi. ; S. Basil, Horn, de Hum. Gen. Christi ; S. Ambrose, 1. u., On S. Luke ; S. Augustin, Serm. xxx. de Temp.; Fulgentius, Horn. deEpiph.; author of work De Mirabit. Nat., ascribed to S. Augustin, iii. 4). They prove this by many arguments : (i) It was never seen before ; (2) never after ; (3) it was not in the heavens, or it could not have shown the way ; (4) it travelled from east to west, contrarily to the natural course of stars ; (5) it shone not only by night, but also by day ; (6) it sometimes concealed itself, as has been said on verse I ; (7) it stood over the house where the Child was. All these are probable but not conclusive arguments ; for He who at one time caused the sun to stand still, and at another to go back, could cause the star to leave its natural station and perform acts beyond its ordinary nature. But because God is not accustomed to work miracles without necessity, and as we ought not to receive them as miracles without proof, it is more credible that it was not a true star, though it could bear the resemblance of one, and it was sufficient for the Evangelist to give it that name from its resemblance to a real star and not because it really was one, as we call a comet a star. What it was has caused much discussion among the learned. Some suppose it to have been the Holy Ghost, who, as He appeared after the baptism in the form of a dove, so now He descended in the appearance of a star to point out Christ. Others think that it was an angel who assumed the form of a star ; for the angels are called stars (Apoc. i. 20). Many others suppose it to have been a comet. I have said that it was either a comet or an angel. 2. When it appeared is not so certain ; some say that it was seen two 'years before Christ was born ; they conclude this from the words " two years and under " (verse 16), as Euthymius says. The Author and Nicephorus (i. 13) think the same, as at one time did S. Augustin (Serm. xxxvi. de Temp.\ though he afterwards altered his opinion. Others prefer to say one year. S. Chrysostom, Euthymius, Theophylact, and others, put the appearance on the same day as that of Christ's birth (S. Augustin, Serni. w. de Epipk.}. This seems the most probable ; for there is this force in the words, " We have seen His star in the east," that is, the star which shows us that He is born ; and in the others, " Where is He who is born?" as if they certainly knew from the star, not that Christ was to be born, but that He actually was born. Why Herod slew the infants from two years and under shall be explained on verse 16. 3. Where the Magi saw the star is not certain ; for the words are ambiguous, "We have seen His star in the east". The meaning may be either that when they were in the east they saw the star in the west, or that they saw the star which appeared in the east. Some think that the star appeared, not in the east, but in the west. But it does not seem doubtful that it first appeared in the east, and became the guide of their journey. For when they said, "We have seen His star in the east," they meant to describe not so much the place whence they came as the motive which induced them to come — namely, their having seen the star ; the meaning, therefore, is that the star appeared in the east ; for the question was, not whence they themselves were, but where they had seen it. For if it had appeared in the west, that is, in Judaea, it would have been seen by the Jews : a circumstance which the Evangelist could not have passed over in silence. Besides, although he does not say that the star went before the Magi the whole way, yet, as he says (verse 9) that it went before them after they went out of Jerusalem, until " it came and stood over where the Child was," we must believe that it had previously done the same thing as they journeyed from the east to the west. 4. How the Magi knew that Christ was born from the sight of the star is difficult to be explained. It is certain that no man by natural knowledge could ever discover that, not to say, God, but even man, was born. It remains, therefore, that the Magi knew it by revelation from God. But how or when this was made may be matter of question. S. Jerome (On Isaiah xix.) thinks it to have been done by the devils ; and Origen (i., Cont. Cels.} seems to have been of the same opinion. Others consider the angels to have been the means employed ; others, again, that it was the work of God by inward inspiration. But it is the most prevalent opinion of almost all the Ancients that the Magi had long known from the prophecy of Balaam that a star should arise on the birth of Christ (Numbers xxiv. 7) ; and the Magi were either the descendants of Balaam or they received the tradition from such of them as were living in their neighbourhood (Origen, Horn. xiii. in Numbers ; S. Ambrose, u., On S. Luke ; S. Chrysostom, Horn. i. in Evangel. ; S. Epiphanius, Epit. ; S. Basil, Horn, de Hum. Gen. C/iti.}. This, as well from the great number of witnesses in its favour as from its intrinsic probability, seems extremely likely. The Magi, when they said, " We have seen His star in the east," seem to speak of a thing that was known to the Jews, supposing that they could not be ignorant of a prophecy which they themselves, as Gentiles, knew. For they did not say, We have seen a star, but His star; speaking of that star, which, as all knew, would appear when Christ was born. It increases the probability of this that Herod believed that Christ would be shown by this star as a thing known to all the people; for he did not ask the chief priests whether a star should appear when Christ was born, but where Christ should be born. The objection of some to that prophecy, that Balaam calls Christ Himself a star, when it had been said that a star should arise out of Jacob (Levit. xxiv. 17), cannot be denied. But it is common, especially in the Prophets, for the same word to signify both Christ Himself and the figure of Christ, as in verse 1 5. This at least appears certain, CH. 11.4.] THE MAGI. 59 that, either from this Prophet, or from some other source, the Magi had a divine revelation ; for they say, persistently, and like men taught by God, " Where is He that is born King of the Jews?" 5. The last question is, Why did God teach the Magi by means of a star? It is not difficult to answer. S. Gregory says that God willed to instruct them in accordance with their own knowledge, that they who had passed their lives in the observation of the stars might learn Christ from the stars. In all things we can both seek and find God.
And are come to adore Him. They who see nothing here but the worship of Urbanity seem to me themselves too urbane ! For why did none but these Magi come with toil to worship any of the numerous kings of the Jews ? as S. Athanasius asks in his book De Incarnatione. How would they worship one in a stable, and lying in a manger, if they thought Him nothing more than man? and how did Herod say that he also would come and worship Him ? God would, in truth, to no purpose, have taught them by a great miracle to worship a man only, and not God also.
2:4
And assembling together all the chief priests . It is clear from many places that there was only one chief priest (S. Matt. xxvi. 59, 61, 65 ; 5. Mark i. 44; u. 26 ; vS. Luke xxii. 50, 54 ; Acts w. 6 ; v. 17, 21, 27 ; ix. I ; xxii. 5 ; xxiii. 2 ; xxiv. i). It may therefore be rightly asked how they are called chief priests, as if they were many ? The same expression is found in other places also (S. Matt. xvi. 21 ; xx. 1 8, et #/.). Some say that all who had once held the office of high priest were called chief priests ; for the office had been annual and venal (S. John xi. 49 ; xviii. 13) from the time of Pompey's taking the city and bringing the office into his own power and that of the Romans (Josephus, Antiq., xviii. 6 ; Eusebius, Hist., i. 6). So S. Chrysostom and Euthymius on chap. xxvi. 5, and Theophylact on S. Mark xiv. Their opinion is answered as follows : Even before the office was annual, and while it was still held for life, we read of many called chief priests (2 Paralip. xxxvi. 14). They were therefore one and many — one supreme, who was termed absolutely the chief priest or pontifex. There were many who were heads of priestly families, as in Paralip. xv. 6, 12 ; xxiv. 6. Herod therefore calls the priests because it was their duty to answer for the law (Malach. u. 7) ; but he did not call all of them, because their number would have been infinite, but the chiefs, who were fewer and more learned, and of the number of the ordinary judges of the Sanhedrim, and in a manner councillors, as I Paralip. xxiii. 4 ; 5. Matt. xxvi. 3 ; vS. Mark xi. 18 ; Acts w. 26, and many other places, where without the chief priests no council is assembled.
And the scribes of the people. The scribes were properly the public notaries, whose duty it was not only to prepare public instruments, but also to keep the holy writings incorrupt, and to explain their meaning; as we learn from 4 Kings xxii. 8, 9, 10 ; I Esdras vu. 10, 1 1 ; 5. Matt. vu. 29; xvii. 10, et al. They are called lawyers, therefore (S. Luke vu. 30; xi. 46), but they were not legislators, as some say. Their rank was high, as among the Greeks the grammarians were placed in the first order as knowing letters, that is, how to read and write. They corrected their authors and interpreted them, and were the judges in all questions of history, fables, the doubtful meaning of writers. They were therefore summoned by Herod, and also because they formed a great part of the council (S. Mark xiv. 53 ; xv. I ; 5. Luke xxii. 66).
2:6
And thou, Bethlehem. A difference, which at first sight appears great, between the Evangelist and Prophet renders this passage one of difficulty. They appear to be at variance on four points : 1. The Evangelist says — " Thou Bethlehem, the land of Juda " ; the Prophet—" Thou, Bethlehem Ephrata ". 2. The Evangelist — " Art not the least "; the Prophet — " Thou art the least ". 3. The Evangelist — "Out of thee shall come a Governor" ; the Prophet does not name a Governor. 4. The Evangelist says — " Who shall rule (regaf] or feed (TTO travel} my people ". The Prophet says — " Who shall rule " (dominetur, vltflft). 5. " The Evangelist," says S. Jerome, " seems in no way to agree either with the Prophet or the LXX." Some reply, too readily, that the Evangelists, from lapse of memory, frequently cite passages of Scripture, not only in other words, but in a different and even contrary sense to that of the text. They cite S. Jerome, in his Epistle to PammachiuS) as the author of this opinion. To say that the Evangelists ever quote Scripture in a contrary sense I hold to be blasphemous ; nor does S. Jerome ever say this. The meaning of what he does say on this passage in the letter mentioned is opposite to that which these assert it to be. He does not say that the meaning of the passage in the Evangelist is contrary to that of the Prophet, but that the meaning of one word of the Evangelist compared with that in the Prophet, if considered per se, is contrary. For "thou art the least," and " thou art not the least," taken per se, are altogether contrary ; but, as said by the Evangelist and Prophet, they are not contrary, but one and the same, as shall shortly be shown. But let those who ascribe a lapse of memory to the Evangelists, by whose mouths the Holy Ghost spoke, although they excuse it as a human failing, consider whether they do not excuse in the Evangelists that for which, if a man excused it in himself, they would think him an object of ridicule. It seems, too, to be blasphemy, or very closely bordering upon it. S. Jerome was more careful ; for he thought that the priests and scribes should be blamed rather than the Evangelist. He says, in his Commentary on the Fifth Chapter of Micheas, that the Evangelist intended to show not what the Prophet said, but what the priests and scribes answered, that he might show their ignorance of Scripture. But it can hardly be supposed that the priests, however ignorant, cited the words of the Prophet incorrectly, especially when it was probable that, in a question of so much weight, the book itself would be produced. The Evangelist seems, moreover, to have repeated their answer rather to praise than blame them, that he might show, even from the opinion of His enemies, that Christ was to be born in Bethlehem. Some think that the Prophet is to be under stood interrogatively, and that the words, "Art thou the least " and " Thou are not the least," have the same meaning ; but this could not be received even if it could be proved. Others maintain that "V^!£ is put by the Prophet in the neuter gender, so that the sense may be : It is little that thou art among the thousands of Juda ; that is : Thou art the greatest, that thou may be among the princes of Juda, as the Evangelist says : " Thou art by no means the least". It seems no objection to this view that the Hebrews do not generally use "P^S in this sense, but 10^^ as in Gen. xxx. 15 ; Isa. vu. 13. The explanation of the passage probably depends upon another point — whether they are the words of the priests and scribes, or of the Evangelist. Some commentators think them the words of the Evangelist. It is not easy to see how they explain the question, but the context and connection of the words seem to confute them. They are then, it may be thought, the words of the priests, faithfully repeated by the Evangelist. It appears that the Evangelist's intention was not to recite the words of the Prophet, but the interpretation of the priests and scribes, which was something as follows : " And thou, Bethlehem Ephrata," that is, " the land of Juda ". For this Bethlehem was formerly called Ephrata (Gen. xxxv. 16, 19; xlviii. 7). For there was another Bethlehem in the tribe of Zebulon (Josh. xix. 1 5 ; Judges xii. 8), which was not called Ephrata ; and the Prophet added this epithet to distinguish it from the other. The priests wished to explain this by a name still more clear : " And thou, Bethlehem Ephrata " ; that is, who art in the land of Juda, not Zabulon, to teach Herod that the meaning of the Prophet was that, not in the Bethlehem of Zabulon, but in the Bethlehem of Juda, Christ should be born ; for Herod thought it of the greatest consequence to his interests that he should know this. The words that follow, " Thou art the least," they explain as if the Prophet had spoken ironically: "Thou seemest to be the least, if the circuit of thy walls be regarded ; but thou art by no means the least, for out of thee shall come forth the Captain that shall rule My people ". " Among the thousands " (in millibus, D^Q 7fcO they interpret " Among the princes " (in ducibus) that is, among leaders, or in the production of leaders ; for the word D^D ;>N signifies both leaders and a thousand : for leaders are mostly over a thousand men, hence they are called chiliarchs by the Greeks. For the people were divided into thousands, as everyone is aware, and as is plain from Exod. xviii. 25, and I Paralip. xxiii. 4. The same, as we have seen from Aristotle and Plato, was the order of the ancient Greek republic. It is certain that the Prophet not only looked forward to the future coming of Christ, but also alluded to the past of David, signifying that a small city had already produced one most eminent chief — David, and would shortly produce another far more excellent — Christ ; and, as it was a question about the birth of Christ, the priests appositely rendered rmrP l among the leaders of Juda vttMD* Their substitution of TToifjuavel (feeding) for dominetur (ruling) came from their wish to show His manner of ruling, signifying that Christ would not rule His people with an iron rod, like the Gentiles, but with the crook of a kind shepherd, whose sheep were his own. At the same time, they probably allude to David, the figure of Christ, who was brought from feeding his sheep to the feeding of the people of God, as in Ps. Ixxviii. 70, 71, 72. Our version reads reget, more properly, perhaps, than pascet ; for they did not call Christ Troi/jieva, a shepherd, as Homer calls his kings, but rj^/efjiova (ducetn). And the word " ruling " applies better to Him than " feeding ". S. Chrysostom and The Author blame the priests because they did not give the full testimony of the Prophet. For there follows : " And His going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity ". But they seem to have been silent, not from malignity so much as from prudence, because the words had nothing to do with Herod's question of where Christ was born.
2:7
Then Herod privately calling the wise men. He called them privately because he was preparing a snare for Christ.
What time the star. The time when the star appeared, that is, when it first began to be seen by them.
2:10
When they saw the star. They who conclude from these words that the star had not led the Magi the whole of their journey, because they now rejoiced at it as if rendering them a new service, do not appear to observe that in the same way it might be proved that it had never been seen before at all. When the Magi were at Jerusalem it disappeared, as has been said on verse I. But they seem not to have understood the force of the above words, for the Evangelist does not appear to mean that the Magi were rejoiced at the sight of the star, which seems to have vanished before, for if he meant this he would have said "before" and not " now ". " And behold the star which they had seen in the east went before them, until it came and stood where the Child was. And seeing the star they rejoiced with exceeding great joy" (verses 9, 10). He signifies that they were glad to see the star (as he had just said) standing over where the Child was. They rejoiced, not because they saw the star, which they had often seen before, but because they had found Christ, for whom they had been seeking.
2:11
And when they were come into the house. A question has arisen, from the Magi being said to have entered a house and not the stable, as to whether or not they found Christ lying in the manger. Almost all the Ancients say that they found Him in the inn and wor shipped Him (S. Just. Mart., Cont. Tryph.; S. Chrys., Horn. vu. ; S. Aug., Serms. i., u., on Epiph^]. His having been placed in a stable was partly a mystery, and partly from necessity, because as all who were of the family of David came from all parts to Bethlehem, because of the taxing, there would not have been room in the inn (S. Luke u. 7). The mystery was thus fulfilled.
With Mary His Mother. That Joseph was not mentioned was perhaps by chance : or he might not have been in the house : or the omission of his name was by mystery, that the Magi might not suppose him to have been the father of Christ ; for the shepherds are said to have found the Babe with Joseph and Mary (S. Luke u. 16).
They offered Him gifts ; gold, frankincense, and myrrh. In which the East abounds ; yet the mystery, acknowledged with one consent by all ancient authors, should by no means be left out of sight — that gold is given to kings, frankincense to God, myrrh to men. It seems a less mystery that a woman should have poured ointment on Christ, which, however, was an Eastern custom ; yet Christ said it was done to signify His burial, of which the woman perhaps had no thought (S. Matt. xxvi. 12). Of this mystery we have not Christ Himself, indeed, as a witness, but all the ancient Fathers as authorities (S. Irenaeus, i. 3, 10 ; S. Cyprian, Serm. de Stell. et Mag.', Origen, i., Cont. Cels.; S. Basil, Horn, de Hum. Generat. ; S. Greg. Nyss., De Nativ. ; S. Cyprian, i., De Evang. ; S. Ambrose, i., De Fid. ; S. Aug., Serm. i. de Epiph., and Serm. xxxvii. ; S. Jerome, Comment. ; Juvencus and Sedulius in their poems).
2:14
Who arose. Who arose, that is, when he awoke immediately after the vision, he took the Child and fled by night. It is probable that there were executioners at hand who were seeking for the Infant, as they were directed to depart in the night. They fled neither from Bethlehem nor from Jerusalem, but from Nazareth in Galilee, as is plain from .S. Luke u. 39. One reason why Egypt is named is clear : it was out of the jurisdiction of Herod. The Evangelist gives another : " That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Osee the Prophet — I call my Son out of Egypt" (x. i), though the event rather than the reason is signified here. For Egypt was the refuge of the Isaelites. They were driven thither by famine, and, long after, when oppressed by the Chaldaeans in war, the remnant betook themselves thither (4 Kings xxv. 26). Egypt seems to have been the school of the sons of God, who cannot flourish unless they are oppressed. And was there until the death of Herod. How long Christ remained in Egypt, or in what place He lived, the Evangelist does not mention, and it cannot probably be known now. It is the almost universal opinion of antiquity that Christ spent two years in Egypt. If we wish to ascertain what is most probable, three principia may be laid down which can easily be proved from the Gospel. 1. The flight into Egypt happened in the same year as the adoration of the Magi, and not long after it. Verse 1 6 shows this : " Then Herod, perceiving that he was deluded by the wise men " ; and verse 13: " And after they were departed, behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph ". Although this does not prove that the departure of Joseph took place immediately after that of the Magi, yet it certainly shows that not long after it Joseph was warned to depart, and Herod sought to kill the Child. 2. Christ returned from Egypt in the same year as that of Herod's death. This is proved from verses 19, 3. The Magi, as shown above, came a few days after the birth of Christ. From these three principia, although two others might be added from profane authors (viz., how many years Herod reigned, and in what year of his reign Christ was born), we shall certainly find sufficient time for Christ to have stayed in Egypt. Of these two last principia one is certain, that Herod reigned thirty-seven years. We learn this from most credible sources (Josephus, Bell. Jud., bk. i., xxi. ; Eusebius, Chron^). As regards the other, authors differ as to two years. Some say that Christ was born in the forty-first year of the Emperor Augustus (S. Iren., iii. 24 ; Tertull., Adv. Jtid.) ; others in the forty-second (Euseb., Hist., i. 5 ; Epiphan., Her,, li.). Again, it is further doubted, by another year, what year of Augustus fell on what of Herod. Some, like Eusebius, think that the forty-first year of Augustus was the thirty-first of Herod ; others — e.g., S. Epiphanius, that it was the thirty-second. If we follow S. Irenaeus and Tertullian, and say that Christ was born in the forty-first year of Augustus, and Eusebius in saying that that was the thirty-first of Herod, Christ would necessarily have stayed six entire years in Egypt : or seven if we include the year of his flight, i.e., the thirty-second of Herod. This is the first and, as appears, the most ancient opinion. But if we follow S. Irenaeus and Tertullian on the years of Augustus, and S. Epiphanius on those of Herod, there will remain five, or, if we include the ' first, six years, during which Christ was in Egypt, and as many, according to Eusebius, if we follow him alone on the years both of Augustus and Herod. But if we follow Eusebius on the years of Augustus, and Epiphanius on the years of Herod, Christ was in Egypt at most five years if we count the first year, and at least four if we do not count it. So that it is alone certain that Christ spent not more than seven, and not less than four, years in Egypt. Hence the common opinion of two years, and that of Nicephorus of three has no probability, unless we say that the adoration of the Magi took place two years after Christ's birth. But we have refuted this opinion of verse i. In what city of Egypt Christ dwelt, or what He did there, is unknown. There are many accounts by authors of no name, of miracles done by Christ in Egypt. We have John the Evangelist, who teaches us that Christ wrought His first miracle in Cana of Galilee, by turning water into wine (u. n), and although this may be confined to what He did after His return from Egypt, it is much more probable that that which is spoken universally should be understood universally. This, however, need not weaken our faith in authors of good repute who say that when Christ entered Egypt the idols fell down, as S. Jerome says without disapprobation, and which so many have repeated that it may appear to be a true tradition. Sozomen also (v. 20) relates a tradition that when Christ came to Hermopolis, a city of Egypt, a certain lofty tree inclined its head.
2:15
That it might be fulfilled. The word " that," in this place, does not seem to me to signify the cause but the event, as S. Chrysostom and John Damasc. have observed in many parts of Scripture (as infra, verse 16 ; 5. John ix. 39). For Christ did not fly into Egypt that the prophecy might thus be fulfilled, but when He had fled thither to escape from Herod, it was so that the prophecy should appear to be thus properly fulfilled. And as this expression very frequently occurs in Scripture, it shall be explained once for all. There are apparently four methods in which a prophecy may be fulfilled. 1. When the thing itself comes to pass in the proper and literal sense : as when S. Matthew says (i. 22) that the prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled in Mary : " Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son " (vu. 14). 2. When the thing itself of which the Prophet is rightly understood to speak does not take place, but that which is signified by it, as 2 Kings vu. 14 : "I will be to Him a Father and He shall be to me a Son," which, as is plain, was properly said to Solomon, yet is applied by S. Paul to Christ, whose figure Solomon was (Heb. i. 6), as if it were fulfilled in Him, and Exod, xii. 46: "Neither shall you break a bone thereof." is certainly understood of the Lamb ; yet S. John (xix. 36) says that it was fulfilled in Christ, who was signified by the Lamb. 3. When neither that of which the prophecy is properly understood takes place, nor that which is signified by it, but something that resembles it and is of the same nature, so that the prophecy may appear to be said not less aptly of it than of that of which it was spoken. For the words, " This people with their lips glorify Me " (Isa. xxix. 13), were spoken by God of the Jews of the time of Isaiah, but Christ shows that they were fulfilled by those of His own time (S. Matt. xiii. 14; Acts xxviii. 4. When precisely the same thing which had been spoken by prophecy or in Scripture, although it had already taken place, is fulfilled more and more, Scripture is then said to be fulfilled : that is, what was spoken by it is done most cumulatively. We may observe, also, that it often happens in Scripture that a thing is spoken of which has not merely begun to be done, but which is being done more and more, as in 5. John xi. 12. The disciples, when they saw the miracle of the water turned into wine, believed more and more, for they had certainly believed before, as, Deo volente, we will explain that most difficult passage of the book of S. James (u. 23.) That prophecy of Osee, then, " Out of Egypt," &c., was properly understood of the people of Israel when God called His first-born Son (Exodus w. 22), as is clear from the words of the Prophet. But it is said now to have been fulfilled in a second and third manner. For that people was banished into Egypt, and could thus be called a figure of Christ, who was to be banished to the same place : as now the mystical body of the Church is a figure of the natural body of Christ, and Christ resembles the people in each being called the Son of God. But the Evangelist signifies that the prophecy could not be properly and perfectly fulfilled in the people, as they were not properly and by nature the Son of God ; but in Christ, who was such in both senses, it was fulfilled most perfectly. As if we should say that the words, "I will be to thee a Father," were not properly spoken of Solomon, who was not properly and by nature a son ; but of Christ, who was such in both senses, they were properly said. For " I call my son out of Egypt" (Osee xi. i), the LXX. reads "his sons," either because for ^1 " my son," they read V01 " his sons," by the addition of one letter, or because they thought the meaning more applicable, as, indeed, it would have been had not the Evangelist read " my son ". Julian, therefore, ignorantly objected this passage to the Christians, as if the Evangelist had cited the testimony of the Prophet in bad faith, not observing that he followed not the Greek LXX. version, but the Hebrew text of the Prophet (S. Jerome, On Osee xi.).
2:16
Then Herod. The word " then " does not seem in this passage to refer to a point of time, as if Herod slew the children immediately on the departure of the Magi. Some distance of time must necessarily have elapsed between the two events, both because Christ was presented in the Temple on the twentysecond day after the Adoration, for He stayed in Nazareth some time after (S. Luke u. 39) ; and because it is probable that Herod, although a bloodthirsty and cruel tyrant, tried first to find Christ, that he might kill Him alone, before putting to death all the other infants ; a thing that, as he knew, he could not do without incurring the utmost hatred of the people ; especially as we know, from Josephus, that he was accustomed by every means in his power to hunt after their favour, lest he should be deprived of the throne as a stranger. When, therefore, he sought for Christ, but could not find Him, that one child might not escape, he slaughtered all, which he could not have done without the lapse of time. Sent forth. A Hebraism rVWO, The Hebrews use the word and the Greeks dTroo-reXXeiv, absolutely — the person concerned not being expressed, but understood, which the Latins seldom or never do — Understand executioners as in chap. xiv. 10 ; xxvii. 19 ; Psalm Wi. 4 ; civ. 19 ; S. Mark iii. 31 ; vi. 17.
From two years old and under. This passage, from the difficulty of the history and the difference of opinions, is obscure. Some say that the Magi came two years after the birth of Christ, and that this was the reason of Herod's killing the children of two years. Others say one year or thereabouts after it. This would very easily solve the difficulty ; but these opinions have been proved erroneous (verses i, 2). Others say that Herod did not kill the infants immediately on the departure of the Magi, but two years afterwards — he having meanwhile been summoned to Rome to account for having put his sons to death. But this is also confuted, both by the words of the Evangelist, who does not allow so long a time, and by history. For it appears from the Chronicon of Eusebius that he had put his sons to death five years before. We who believe that the star did not appear before the birth of Christ, and that the Magi did not arrive many days after it, cannot adopt these explanations. The opinion of Strabus and Euthymius, with which also many of the learned of our time agree, seems very probable, that Herod added two years to the time of which he inquired of the Magi ; and hence the words, " According to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men," do not mean that all the infants were slain who were born two years after the star had appeared to the Magi, but those who were born two years before it appeared. It may be asked, Why two years before, and not two years after ? The answer may be : (i) Because there were not two years after, but only a few days, as shown on verses I, 2 ; (2) because the Magi, as has been said on verse 2, said, not that Christ would be born, but that He actually was born, but how long He had been born they did not say, and possibly did not know. For the star showed that He actually was born, not when He was born. Herod then sought, for caution and security to himself, to put to death all who had been born two years before the star appeared ; and he slew not only those in Bethlehem, where the priests had said that Christ would be born, but also all who were born in all the adjacent country ; and he thus extended his cruelty not only in place, but also in time, beyond what was necessary. That he might not accidentally err, he augmented his error.
2:17
Then was fulfilled. This prophecy was now fulfilled in the same manner as that s& Jeremiah xxx. i.
2:18
A voice in Rama was heard. The Hebrews explain 4 Kings xxiv. 10, xxv. 4, of the leading away captive of the two tribes Juda and Benjamin. Nor is it doubtful from the circumstances of Jeremiah that it ought so to be understood, and that by Rachel the whole territory of the two tribes is signified by a double metonymy ; one, by which a place is understood by a person ; the other, by which a whole country is understood by a single city. Rachel was buried in Bethlehem (Genesis xxxv. 19). Hence by Rachel, Bethlehem is to be under stood. Why, then, did not the Prophet simply say, " Bethlehem weeping for her children," but spoke of Rachel, who had long been dead, when the dead do not lament ? The reason may be that Rachel was a woman, and it is the nature of women to lament in calamities of this kind. I know not if the Prophet alludes to her birth ; for she is said to have brought forth Benjamin with severe suffering (Genesis xxxv. 18), and mothers usually lament over those lost children the most whom they have brought forth with the most labour. But Rachel's weeping, who was now dead, may be thought not only elegant, but also of great force and full of meaning. For, by this expression, the Prophet most probably wished to show that the future calamity of the people would be so great that not one woman would remain who could weep, so that the mourners must call up even the dead. We see something of the same kind in tragedies, when the manes of the dead or the shades of the cities that have been overthrown are introduced lamenting. But why, by the weeping of Rachel, is the calamity of the kingdom of Judgea signified, when Rachel was the mother, not of Juda, but Benjamin ? (Genesis xxxv. 1 8). Because the head of the kingdom was Jerusalem, formerly called Jebus, which was in the tribe of Benjamin (Jos/ma xviii. 28 ; I Paralip. xi. 4). What the Prophet, then, spoke of the captivity, S. Matthew applied to the slaughter the infants, showing that the prophecy, though not spoken of them, co e applied to them much more properly than to the captive Jews, and because the former were men, and the latter infants ; the former deserving punishment, the latter innocent and undeserving ; the former captives, the latter cruelly slain ; the former of Juda, the latter of Bethlehem. Rachel, therefore —that is, Bethlehem — should rather lament the infants than the men. A deep and profound grief is expressed by the accumulation of words — " lamentation, and mourning) and woe ". Our version, indeed, expresses only two, and perhaps more rightly, because two only are found in the Prophet ^ITC unless we say that the Evangelist followed the LXX., which has rendered the two Hebrew words by the three Greek ones, tfpr^o? >cal K\av6^o^ KOI oSvp/j,os, and by the addition of the word great, which in the Hebrew is Q'H'QfcO (bitter). The meaning, however, is the same, for in Latin we often say, to weep bitterly, that s, much. No one denies that Rama was the name of a city, but because it is neither in the tribe of Juda nor near Bethlehem, but in the tribe of Benjamin and near Gabaon (Joshua xviii. 25), the translators did not think that the Prophet could have spoken of it. It appears, however, that the Prophet did name that city, because it was not in the tribe of Juda, but in that of Benjamin ; for he wished to show that there would be a grief common to each tribe, because each would be taken captive. He therefore named one city of Juda, Bethlehem, and another of Benjamin, Rama. The Prophet named Rama rather than any other city because it was on the confines of Benjamin and Juda, and his intention was to show that the lamentation of Juda would be so great that it would be heard even in the tribe of Benjamin.
Because they are not. Here also the Evangelist, or his Greek interpreter, followed not the original Hebrew, but the LXX. For the Prophet had said I^N ^ " because he is not " ; that is, because none of them had remained, but all were either slain or led into captivity. The LXX., however, because the Prophet had spoken of sons in the plural number, to obviate any difficulty, translated it also in the plural, " because they are not," as is done in many other passages. It is a Hebraism, showing that they who were before were wholly and suddenly dead, so as to seem to have instantaneously disappeared (Gen. v. 24), where it is said of Henoch that he was not ; that is, he was not seen any more because God took him (and Ps. xxxvi. 36, of the wicked). It is signified here, therefore, that the Jewish men were carried into Babylon, and the infants into Abraham's bosom. All ancient writers, with wonderful consent, make these infants true martyrs. For, although neither baptised, nor dying of their own will for Christ, they were baptised in their own blood ; and that which the faith of another does the perverse will of the tyrant, in putting them to death for Christ, effected ; and as much as Herod harmed them, his cruelty profited them. So say S. Irenaeus, S. Justin Martyr, S. Cyprian, S. Chrysostom, and others.
2:19
But when Herod ivas dead. Josephus (Antiq., xvii. 8; Bell. Jud., 21), Hegesippus (i. 45), Eusebius (i. 8), tell us of what death he died. Eusebius adds, that for the slaughter of the Innocents he was destroyed by a shameful disease.
2:20
They are dead. This is by syllepsis, by which, when speaking of one person, the plural is used. Herod alone was dead, but many executioners, by his command, sought the young Child's life.
2:22
But hearing that Archelaus reigned. Herod had nine wives. By two — one his cousin by the mother's side, the other his brother's daughter — he had no sons. By the others he had nine — Alexander, Aristobulus, Antipater, Herod, Antipas (who also afterwards took the name of Herod), Archelaus, another Herod, Philip, Phasellus ; and three daughters — Roxane, Salome, and Olympias (Josephus, Antiq., xvii. i; xvii. 7; Bell. Jud.,\. 18). He strangled his two eldest sons in his lifetime (Antiq., xvi. 17 ; Bell. Jud., i. 17). He put Antipater to death five days before he died himself (Antiq., xvii. 9). The others were dead. Three survived their father — Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip. Herod made two wills. In the first he named Antipas heir of his kingdom. In the second he suddenly changed his intention, and made Archelaus king of Judsea, Antipas tetrarch of Galilee and Petraea, Philip tetrarch of Trachonitis, Gaulonitis, Batansea, and the region of Paneas ; but on the condition that Archelaus should not assume the name of king, and that nothing mentioned in his will should be carried into effect without the approbation of Caesar (Josephus, Antiq.. xvii. 10 ; Bell. Jud., i. 21). Although Caesar would not give Archelaus the name of king, he made him ethnarch of Judaea, Idumaea, and Samaria (Antiq. xvii. i). Yet, as he practised kingly power, and as the soldiers immediately after his father'sdeath saluted him as king (Antiq., xvii. 10), he was commonly called king, and the Evangelist has here given him this title. It may appear strange that Joseph should have been perplexed on hearing that Archelaus was reigning, and have therefore feared to go into Judaea, as he might, we should suppose, have thought that one of Herod's sons would succeed him in his kingdom. Joseph may have thought either that no one would succeed him, as he had possessed the kingdom by no kind of right, or that Antipas would do so, according to his father's first will, whom Joseph knew to be of a milder disposition. This might be one reason why he was directed by the angel to go into Galilee, where Antipas ruled, although there is another more certain. When there was a question about Christ as King of the Jews, more was to be feared from Archelaus, the king, than from Antipater, the tetrarch.
2:23
That it might be fulfilled. This testimony is found in the same words in none of the sacred writers. This has given cause for various explanations. S. Chrysostom (Horn, ix.), Theophylact, and Euthymius think that none of the Prophets' works now extant is cited, but some that have perished, such as Nathan's, Esdras', and others, whose writings S. Chrysostom, S. Athanasius in the Synopsis, and the thing itself, show to have perished. But it is difficult to believe that the Evangelist cited, and without apparent reason, prophecies which are not extant, although we find a lost prophecy of Enoch cited, under wholly different circumstances, by S. Jude. Some think that the Evangelist is producing a testimony from Prophets whose writings were extant in his day, but which were not in the ecclesiastical canon. Others think that the Prophets are cited — that is, the interpreters of the Prophets, who have elicited this meaning from the canonical writers, although it is not expressly found in their books, viz., that Christ should be called a Nazarite (NazarcMts). There were three divisions of Prophets : 1. The first, to whom the Holy Spirit was always present ; as the Greater Prophets, as they are called. 2. The second, to whom the Spirit was not always present, but was so very frequently, like the Minor Prophets. 3. The third, who were called Prophets, not because they foretold future events, but because by the Spirit of God they interpreted the sayings of the Prophets. These are called the Sons of the Prophets in the Old Testament (3 Kings xx. 34 ; 4 Kings u. 3, 5, 7 ; w. 38 ; v. I ; ix. i). In the New Testament they are also called Prophets (i Cor. xii. 28 ; xiv. 29, 32, 37). These authors, however, do not seem to prove that the Evangelist speaks of the third class of Prophets, whose testimony none of the Apostles has ever produced. Others, again, suppose the Book of Judges to be referred to, where it is said, " The Child shall be called a Nazarite (Nazaraus) from his birth ". Although this was said of Samson, the Evangelist says that it was fulfilled in Christ, of whom Samson was a figure, like the other prophecies (verses 13, 14) ; and, therefore, that he did not say " by the Prophet," but "by the Prophets"; because that book was not written by one, but by many in succession, each after each. Opposed to this explanation is the fact that Christ is not called "VW Nasirceus, like Samson, but "H^ Natzereus, or Natzareus, as is seen from the title on the cross and the testimony of the ancient Hebrews. Others still refer to Isaiah xi. I. The Hebrew is germen, surculus, which is the source of the word Natzarceus. S. Jerome and The Author think this probable. Others think that no single testimony of any one Prophet is produced, but one from all the Prophets, for all the Prophets called Christ " Holy," nay, " Most Holy" (Daniel ix. 14), because the word "H'O Nazarceus, means separated, consecrated to God. S. Jerome seems to agree to this. I for my own part, if my opinion be of any value, think that the Evangelist desired to change the odium of the word into honour, and whence Christ was derided, to prove that He was indeed the true Messiah. Christ was called by the Jews, in contempt, a Nazarene, and we know that all Christians were known to the Gentiles by the same term of contempt, as they are termed G"1""^ by the Jews to this day ; and this has been one great hindrance to many to confess Christ to be the Messiah. " Can anything of good come from Nazareth?" '(S. John i. 46 ; vu. 41, 42). And again (verse 52), "Search the Scriptures, and see that out of Galilee a prophet riseth not". The Evangelist would have taught us that this ought not to be any hind rance to us in confessing Christ to be the Messiah. For although Scripture does not say that He would not come from Nazareth of Galilee, but from Bethlehem of Juda, yet Christ was not called a Nazarene because He was born in Nazareth, but because He lived in it. For He was born in Bethlehem Juda. The name Nazarceus is rather a proof that He was the Christ, for Isaiah calls Him *\!E that is, Nazarceus, a Nazarene. There are three objections, however, to this view. I. Christ is called in one sense ""122 germen or flos, by the Prophet. He is called in another by the Jews V"^^ Nazarceus, from the city Nazareth. The Evangelist was not ignorant of this, but was content to teach us that the very name which was given to Christ by the Jews in contempt had been ascribed to Him by the Prophet as an honour. He thus retorted their calumny upon themselves. 2. Nazareth was not written with 2? but with t ; that is, it was not written with s but z. But 1*0 that is, NazarceuS) was written by Isaiah with s "1!£, But — (i.) The Greeks could easily change s into s. (u.) The name of the city is not found written in the Old Testament, that we might judge by what letters it would have been written. (iii.) Lastly, from the title on the Cross, and from the writings of the Hebrews, it is clear that the city was called by the Jews JT"^!£ NatsaretJi, as Christ derived from it it the name of *H!£3 Natsarczus ; but the Greeks and Latins softened the sound of the word to Nazareth and Nazarene. 3. The Evangelist does not say that it was said by the Prophet, but by the Prophets, as if, as S. Jerome says, it were certain that he was not bringing a testimony from the Scriptures. It was nothing new that when the testimony of one Prophet only was produced, it should be said to have been written by the Prophets. Of this we have instances in this same Gospel (xxvi. 56), and 5. John (vi. 45), and Acts (xiii. 40; xv. 15). We have, indeed, seen a similar syllepsis in verse 20 just preceding, where it is said, " They who sought the life of the Child are dead," when, in fact, it was Herod alone who had died.
2:20
v. 20 defuncti sunt enim qui quaerebant animam pueri, qui eius vitae insidiabentur, S. Hier. Pasch. aliique verbis iis etiam sacerdotes et scri- 110 MATTH. 2,:20-22. bas comprehendi volunt qui mortem Christi meditati sint; Patr. quoque existimat indicari non unum Herodem Christo interitum esse machinatum eique sceleris socium adiungit Antipatrum Herodis filium regni cupiditate maxime flagrantem, qui propter eam cupidinem id iam pervicerat ut fratribus pater ipse necem inferret et qui ipsi patri insidias struebat (Iosephus, Antiq. 16,8. 1; 1.9; 8. &; 17,1. 1; &). Herodem sceleris socios habuisse, ex 2,3 utique constat. At eos mortem obiisse, ex modo loquendi non necessario sequitur. Nam, ut S. Thom. Ians. Mald. Bar. et recentiores plerique advertunt, numerus: pluralis categoriae, syllepsis); aliis placet dictionem esse ad Ex. &,19 'conformatam (Arn. Schanz, Keil. Ex v. 19 sequitur de uno Herode - verba esse capienda. In hoc primo persecutore Christi, cuius consilia Deus subvertit et.quem mox e vivis sustulit, sortem et cladem om-. niüm persecutorum Christi et Ecclesiae adumbratam habemus, quibus defunctis « sancta Dei Ecclesia in Christo vivens per amplius et perfectius ad coelestem Ierusalem quotidie invitatur » (Pasch. cf. Thom. cat.). . Uti in fuga, ita in reditu sane laetissimo ad patriam v. 21 prompta describitur obedientia Iosephi. Simul quoque eius commendatur
2:22
v. 22 prudentia : audiens autem quod Archelaus regnaret in Iudaea timuit illo ire; erat enim Archelaus, Herodis filius ex Malthace genitus samaritana (Iosephus, Antiq. 171,1.3), etiam morum Herodis, praesertim crudelitatis, saevitiae, luxuriae fere heres (l. c. 17,11. 2; 13. 2). Quare omnino erat, cur dubitaret in Iudaea sedem figeré. Cum autem cogitaret in Iudaea domicilium collocare, sequi videtur eum iam ante fugam in Aegyptum domicilium ex Nazareth in Bethlehem transtulisse, ad quod induci poterat eo quod Iesus in Bethlehem natus tamquam filius David in eodem oppido Deo disponente videri poterat adolescere debere. Uti S. Lucas narrat, oblatione in templo. facta reversi sunt in Nazareth; quare collata hac narratione Matthaei probabile efficitur Iosephum rebus in Nazareth eo tempore compositis sedem. fixisse in Bethlehem. — Si legitur quod Archelaus regnaret ὅτι βασι- λεύει, cum tamen Archelaus solo ethnarchae titulo ab Augusto. tum esset donatus, minime insimulandus est erroris Matthaeus, uti Keim insimulat (Schenkel, Bibellex. III p. 39), sed sciendum est βασιλεύειν uti regnare latiore quoque adhiberi significatu de eo qui res tamquam princeps vel dux administrat, vel dici potest a populo successorem Herodis regis etiam regem esse appellatum; id quod innui videtur cum dicatur audiens quod regnaret; a& plebe autem regium patris nomen in filium successorem esse translatum, etsi is ab Augusto Romae degente solum ethnarchae appellatione esset honoratus, quis negaverit? In re dubia Iosephus coelitus docetur; unde in partes, in fines, in regionem Galilaeae secessit ἀνεχώρησεν, sese recepit tamquam in locum tutiorem. Erat enim Antipas mitioris ingenii. Habitavit autem. sacra familia in Nazareth oppido in Galilaea inferiore in finibus tribus Zabulon, in regione amoena. Ita id evenire videmus quod Isaias jam clare indicaverat, fore scil. ut Messias adolescat non in urbe regia neque in terra Iuda sed in regione quae olim ad regnum Israel pertinuerit ibique vitam degat satis pauperem (Is. 7,15. 16;.vide meum comment. in Is. 1 p. 185). Uti Galilaea apud ludaeos erat despecta, ita in Galilaea oppidum Nazareth (cf. Ioan. 1,56; 7,52); oppidum in libris vet. test. nullibi nominatur; ipsa sua ignobilitate et obscuritate bene adaptatur ad declarandum concidisse tabernaculum David et ipsum Messiam tamquam tenuem surculum esse oriturum ex trunco lesse et tamquam virgultum ex terra arida (Is. 11,1; 53,2); prae se fert igitur oppidum humilitatem Messiae et obscuritatem illam ex qua opus suum perficiendum aggreditur (Sa/m. lans.). Verum ex hac ipsa commoratione id impletur quod erat annuntiatum : guoniam. Nazaraeus vocabitur v. 23. Ad tale enim vaticinium sufficit, ut Messias eo nomine sit designatus a propheta quo saltem oblique praediceretur futura ipsi haec appellatio. ld autem habetur Is. 11,1 quo loco Messias ^2 appellatur; idem autem nomen «x1 etiam oppido fuit (de qua re infra). Quare non sine providentia divina factum est, ut is qui eo nomine esset praedictus tamquam surculus tener etvirgultum etiam adolesceret in oppido cui idem nomen virgulti esset inditum. Praeterea Christus vocari solebat Nazarenus (Marc. 1,96; 10,47; 15,67; 16,6. Luc. 5,35; 18,37; 25,19. Ioan. 18,5. 7; 19,19. Act. 2,92; 3,6; 4,10; 6,15; 22,8; 26,5; 26,9); nomen istud et oppidi ignobilitas Tudaeis erat offensioni; unde evangelista ostendit eo ipso nomine Messiam esse a propheta laudatum. Voluit itaque, prout Maid. loquitur, odium huius nominis in honorem convertere et unde Christus ridebatur, inde probare verum illum esse Messiam (sim. Salm. Ians.). Cur autem dicat dictum esse per prophetas, haud improbabiliter ita explicari potest cum Fab. lans. Ed. aliisque, quod alii quoque prophetae Messiam vocaverint nomine idem significante quod 3; vocatur quippe germen nox ler. 23,5; 33,15. Zach. 3,8; 6,12; idem tamquam surculus designatur Ez. 17,92. 23. Unde si rei significatio spectatur , istis nominibus idem exprimitur, quod nomine Nazareth et Nazaraei; potuit igitur Matthaeus aramaice scribens nomine surculi reliquas quoque appellationes significatione similes in memoriam velle revocare ideoque monere per prophetas eam rem nomine uno declaratam esse annuntiatam. Ceterum per prophetam saepius legi, vide supra. Atque oraculum hoc laudari Is. 11,1 communis est interpretum sententía (cf. S. fier. praesertim in ep. ad Pammachium; M. 92,515 et ad Is. 11,1; Raó. gl. ord. Pasch. Thom. Salm. lans. Is. I p. 269). Bene quoque adnotant Bed. Rab. Pasch. aliique nomen Nazareth oppido esseimpositum a virgultis , a laeto virore et vigore aliqui recentiores affirmant. — Notatu dignum est quam sedulo evangelista ea quae offensioni esse possent Iudaeis removet oraculis messianis in medium adductis; ita fugam in Aegypto, ita nomen Nazaraei explicat. Hisce et aliis vaticiniis simul probat quantopere sua intersit in Iesu ostendere Messiam a prophetis promissum. Urbem Nazareth scriptam esse littera y iam Salm. lans. Mald. Bar. ex veterum ludaeorum commentariis οἱ Salm. Bar. quoque ex scriptione syriaca affirmant, idque recentiores quoque fere communiter assumunt. Immo Hengstenberg, Christologie II p. 124 seq. contendit nomen urbis proprie fuisse 3x3, aramaice affixam esse terminationem w et in statu emphatico additum n. Nomen urbis revera *y3 fuisse ostendit ex testimoniis veterum Iudaeorum; v. g. Nazaraeus *»y3 est qui natus est in urbe *3 in Galilaea quae distat a Ierusalem itinere trium dierum; porro in talmude Christus "3 13 i. e. Nazarenus appellatur; vide locos apud Buztorf , Lex. chald. p. 1383; vocatur etiam *3Y123 quod nomen in editionibus talmudicis posterioribus omissum est, ut notat Leuy, Neuhebr. und chald. Woerterb. 3 p. 432; Christiani quoque appellabantur ΟΥ̓ΧῚ (Levy l. c. Wünsche p. 15; Ed. 1 p. 222). Tempore Eusebii (hist. eccl. 4,7) et Hieronymi nomen urbis etiam Nazara ferebatur : « est usque hodie in Galilaea viculus contra Legionem in quinto decimo eius milliario ad orientalem plagam iuxta montem - Thabor nomine Nazara » (Onomast. s. ed. Lagarde p. 115) et ex hac nominis forma derivantur Ναζωραῖος, Ναζαρηνός ; nullibi autem legitur Ναζαρε- ταῖος. Obstare solum videtur quod Lap. monet, solere y reddi in graecis vocabulis per c, 1 per ζ. Id utique verum est; at rem contra testimonia antiquorum Iudaeorum non evincit; praeterea v. g. in graeco ,veneto Num. 2,5 àv ζούαρος scribitur; alias quoque Gen. 10,26 vy invenitur scriptum ουζ, Gen. 22,21 item vel etiam ωξ et nv D'Y Ζωφασημίν transscribitur (Ges. Thes. p. 1143). Praeterea quod maximi momenti est Nazareth et apud Arabes ea littera scribitur quae hebr. y respondet et ita quoque apud Syros, uti in versione quae vocatur peschittho. Verum est in evangeliario quod saeculo octavo adscribitur nomen scribi littera zain (cf. Payne Smith, Thesaurus syr. p. 2333); sed haec scriptio est aetatis serioris et insuper fieri potuit ut in ea voce paullatim etiam alterum hoc scribendi genus inva- lesceret. Simile enim exemplum cernitur in 3yY; apud Syros «y: et de Lagarde notat ea in radice in Palaestina s et v poni vel inter se commutari ; ita vy et vy. (Bildung der Nomina, 4889 p. 54. 55). Ex eiusmodi mutatione forte etiam explicari potest, S. Hieronymum etiam tentare interpretationem a 3*11; vide quae dixi in Comment. in Is. I p. 269. Ceterum in libro interpretationis hebr. nominum Nazareth scribi littera y omnino asserit: « Nazareth flos aut virgultum... scribitur autem non per z litteram , sed per hebr. sade quod nec s nec z littera sonat » (Onomast. s. p. 93) quam scriptionem explicatio nominis ἄνθος quae apud veteres frequens est (cf. Onomast. s. ed. Lagarde p. 202. 227) supponit et ex igit. Aliae quoque explicationes propositae. sunt quae tamen admitti nequeunt. Aliqui enim appellationem Nazaraei referunt ad verbum *y3 custodire, protegere; et id quidem vel sensu activo : custos, protector, vel sensu passivo : custoditus vel absconditus. Pro priore acceptione provocant ad Ex. 34,7, quo loco Iahve dicitur custodiens misericordiam vel ad Ps. 31,24; volunt enim ab evangelista dici : quicumque Iesum Nozri appellat existimans ei opprobrium inferri eo nomine, eum nominat eodem nomine - quo lahve salutatur : protector meus (cf. Studien und Kritiken, 1855 p. 603) ; at loci illi non sunt messiani et ea explanatio est argutior. Pro altera ac- -ceptione passiva in medium afferunt, Messiam in Nazareth revera fuisse custoditum et absconditum ab insidiis eumque revera appellari salvatum , protectum a Deo, uti Is. 42,6. Zach. 9,9 et nomen oppidi posse accipi quasi locum custodiae (Schegg). Sed ex Is. 42,6 et Zach. 9,9 nemo illam appellationem derivare potest. Pariter arbitrarium est cum Hi£zig recurrere ad Is. 49,6 quo loco un falso sit intellectum tamquam Messiae nomen vel duz servatorum vel quod Keim vult : cliens meus. Praeclaram sane interpretationis normam qua sacro auctori ignorantia et error puerilis imputatur! S. Hier. praeter oraculum ex Is. 14,1 petitum aliam quoque explicationem proposuit, scil. ut Messias h. l. dicatur ?*72 nasiraeus, homo Deo consecratus, sanctus; « sanctum autem Dominum futurum omnis Scriptura commemorat » quam explicandi rationem multi afferunt (op. imp. Theoph. Bed. gl. ord. Pasch. Thom. Sylv.). Verum nequit admitti. Nam Messias neque ullibi vocatur nasiraeus neque unquam vitae rationem quae nasiraeo sequenda erat (Num. 6,1-21. Iud. 13,5) amplexus est; Ioannes baptista eo nomine designari potest; cf. Luc. 1,45. Praeterea ipsum nomen propter 7 non congruit cum nomine oppidi Nazareth, uti modo demonstratum est. — Denique alii (S. Chrys. Theoph. Euth. aliique, de quibus apud lans. Maid. Sylv.) prophetiam istam ex libris prophetarum deperditis esse depromptam existimabant vel prophetas dici h. 1. interpretes prophetarum qui scil. id ex libris prophetarum derivaverint; quae omnia refutatione non indigent. - Ego quidem baptizo vos in aqua in poe- In ν. 1 cav ydumeae; v. ? car mt val wil hub theo lich steph hent sixt : appropinquabit, graece sine v. 1. ἥγγιχεν. In v. 3 add ex Luc. 3, 5. 6 omnis vallis implebitur... videbit salutare Del in a b o g* gat Ir Arn. In v. 6 C* 33 Hil εθαπτιζοντο mavee; legunt. TI W H ἐν τῷ Ἰορδάνῃ ποταμῷ cum Νὶ B C' M A al plus ? sah cop syr (cu, utr, hr) arm aeth Or; omittitur ποταμὼω C* DEKL SU VT ILal pl it vg. In v. 7 Ti W Ἡ ἐπὶ τὸ βάπτισμα cum Ν᾽ B sah Or Hil; add avo NP CDEKLMSU VT ATI etc it vulg. In v. 8 xapzow abo; L'U al mu a g*m syr (cu, sch). In v. 9 f : et nolite praeferre vos dicentes quia; potest legitur in am cav dub fuld hub' lich ken Ostendit evangelista antequam Iesus inciperet praedicare exstitisse praecursorem eius , sicuti ex oraeulo apud Isaiam oportuit eumque eo in loco annuntiasse regnum messianum appropinquans quo ab Isaia significatum fuerit. Ipse autem loannes indolem regni spiritualem annuntiat, veram expostulat morum in melius mutationem cum detestatione peccatorum ; pravam ac perversam ani morum dispositionem pharisaeorum et sadducaeorum eorumque superbiam falsamque ac perniciosam fiduciam generis abrahamitici reprehendit et Messiam describit tamquam qui malos male perdat, suos bonis coelestibus compleat, qui igitur severo iudicio malos separet et e populo suo eiiciat. — Quare omnia ad id quod Matthaeus intendit recta convergunt. Imprimis manifestat quae maxime opponantur regno messiano; itaque iam indicat cur futurum sit ut regnum hoc ἃ primoribus repudietur, cum hi longe absint ab illo animorum sensu quo accessus ad regnum praeparetur. Evangelistae omnes praecursoris historiam saltem brevem praemittunt. Atque omnino aptum erat, ut qui a prophetis erat annuntiatus cum post longum ab ultimo propheta intervallum se manifestaturus esset, etiam a propheta quasi introduceretur. Necesse enim erat ut animi ad exspectationem Messiae incitarentur et praedicationi Messiae quasi aditus aperiretur. Praeterea talem fore praecursorem oraculis propheticis Is. 40,3 et Mal. 3,1 praedictum erat. Cum insuper Ioannes indolem regni messiani et aditum ad illud adumbraret , merito suum in evangelica praedicatione locum obtinuit. Adde quoque quod Ioannes baptista apud Iudaeos magna in auctoritate habitus sit, uti patet ex Act. 13,24. 25 et etiam ex IosepAo, Antiq. 18,2. 5, et quod Christus ipse eius vitae rationem et de se testimonium magnopere commendarit; idem ergo evangelistis praetereundus minime erat. « Sol appropians ad processum antequam appareat mittit radios suos et facit albescere orientem, ut procedens aurora adventum diei demonstret ; sic Dominus natus in mundo antequam appareat spiritus su* fulgore transmisso illuminavit loannem , ut praecedens ille adventum Salvatoris annuntiet... venit Ioannes quasi magni regis praeparator fidelis; qualis vex, talis et nuntius regis : natus ex gratia, non ex natura » (op. imp.). Quando loannes praedicare coeperit, accurate Lucas 3,1 determinat; hic solum indeterminate in diebus illis (cf. Ex. 2,11. Is. 38,1); « mos est Scripturae hoc uti modo non solum cum ea narrat quae insequenti tempore mox gesta sunt, sed etiam cum illa dicit quae multis postea annis contigerint » (S. CArys.); eam dictionem ad sequentia referri vult Eut^. ita ut manifestetur solum tempus illud quo facta sunt quae narrentur. Hoc modo hisce solum transitus ad aliud designaretur, prout alias τότε, tum adhiberi solet. At melius est quod iam S. Pasch. videt et Fab. Dion. Mald. Arn. Schanz, Keil aliique sequuntur, verba referre ad habitationem in Nazareth , de qua 2,93, ita ut sensus exsistat : cum adhuc in Nazareth degeret Nazaraeus qui vocatus est, venit Ioannes baptista , παραγίνεται (uti 2,13. 19 praes. hist.). Unde venit? quaerit Euth. et respondet : ex interiore deserto, id quod ad Luc. 1,80 congruit. Eum speciali ratione iussum a Deo praedicationis munus suscipere a Luca docemur 3,2 : factum est verbum Domini super loannem, qua loquendi ratione missio prophetarum a Deo facta, qua verba suain eorum ponitore , declarari solet (cf. ler. 1,2; 2,1; 7,1; 11,1 etc.). Atque revera loannes statim se sistit populo eo modo et habitu quo veterum prophetarum munus, dignitatem , auctoritatem in mentem reducit : increpat vitia, docet virtutem, austeritate vitae et vestimento morem aemulatur prophetarum, vaticinium edit quod sitne verum mox ii qui audiunt comprobare possunt;.ergo illam in se exhibet normam ex qua secundum legis institutum verus ac legitimus propheta a Deo missus dignosci debeat (Deut. 18,21. Ier. 28,9). Vocatur baptista ex peculiari muneris ratione qua ritu baptismi poenitentiae populum lustrabat et ad Messiam suscipiendum praeparabat. Eo enim ritu omnium statim ab initio oculos in se convertit (cf. Ioan. 1,25) et magnam de se existimationem excitavit. Utitur itaque evangelista nomine illo quo apud ludaeos designari solebat, uti quoque ex Iosepho patet : Ἰωάννης ὁ ἐπικαλούμενος βαπτιστής (Antiq. 18,5. 2). Praedicat autem (χη- ρύσσων, quasi praeconis officio fungens non sine quadam sollemnitate) in deserto Iudaeae ; desertum ^25 dicitur regio non quidem agriculturae, sed gregibus pascendis apta, ideoque incultior, a paucis habitata. Vocatur autem desertum Iudaeae tractus terrae a Thecoa usque ad mare mortuum. Ex v. 6 et Luc. 3,3 patet desertum h. 1. quoque dici de valle Iordanis quae etiam magis gregibus pascendis quam olendis agris inservit. Eius praedicatio duobus continetur v. 2 agendam esse poenitentiam, iam proxime adesse regnum messianum. Poenitentiam itaque de peccatis commissis, emendationem morum necessariam esse ut quis regno messiano potiatur. Unde iam in ea praeparatione spiritualis regni indoles declaratur. Poenitere, μετανοεῖν vis vocis graecae de sc est mentem, sententiam mutare; at iam apud scriptores profanos si- - gnificat poenitere, dolere de re aliqua !; apud LXX ponitur pro hebr. nm οἵ. ler. 8,6 : nemo est qui agat poenitentiam super peccato suo -dicens : quid feci? 18,8; 31,19 etc. ; dein eodem sensu Eccli. 17,94 (20); 48,15 (16), et praeprimis in libris novi foederis; includi sensum doloris, poenitudinis imprimis apparet ex Luc. 17,3. & et 2 Cor. 7,9; 19,91. Vocis notionem, uti Salm. iam monet (t. & p. 18), bene explicuit Lactantius : « quem facti sui poenitet, errorem suum pristinum intelligit; ideoque Graeci melius et significantius μετάνοιαν dicunt quam. nos latine possumus resipiscentiam dicere ; resipiscit enim ac mentem suam quasi ab insania recipit quem errati piget castigatque se ipsum dementiae et confirmat animum suum ad rectius vivendum ; tum illud ipsum maxime cavet ne rursus in eosdem laqueos inducatur » (Instit. 6,24; M. 6,722). In eundem sensum scribit S. CArys. : « hortatur eos, uf τῇ μετανοίᾳ humiliores effecti et seipsos damnantes ad remissionem impetrandam accurrant ». Latinum poenitere, poenitentiam agere bene exprimit notionem μετανοεῖν; quem autem noxarum vere poenitet , is quoque paratus est et promptus ut eas in se ipso puniat et pro culpis admissis satisfaciens errata resarciat ac deleat. Unde g/. ord. : « prima virtus est per poenitentiam perimere veterem hominem et vitia odisse; quod qui non facit non modo virtutes non comprehendit sed nec etiam supplicia fugit; poenitentiae virtus timore concipitur qui est initium sapientiae; poenitentia a puniendo qua quisque punit quod illicite commisit ». S. Ioannes igitur praedicationem incipit ab eadem re quam prophetae quoque in oraculis de instauratione quasi in limine positam ac plane necessariam exhibent atque commendant et qua sola aditum ad instaurationem aperiunt ac promittunt; vide ad Ier. 3,21-95. Ez. 16,61. Dan. 9,5 etc. Mich. 7,9; porro eandem poenitentiam prophetae ex obliquo docent quotiescumque sanctitatem instaurationis regnique messiani celebrant, id quod fere continuo ab iis fieri negari nequit. Vestigiis itaque prophetarum baptista insistit. Ad poenitentiam autem hortatur, quia appropinquavit regnum coelorum, ἤγγικε, iam prope adest, iam in eo est ut instituatur illud regnum Dei quod prophetae post exsilium solutum fore consensione summa annuntiarunt (cf. Is. 42,1; 49,8. Ier. 3,13-17; 23,2-8 et quater in 30,1-31,40. Ez. 11,16-20; 35,12-31; 36,29-38; 37,21-98. Os. 9, 19-24; 3,3-5; 15,1-8. Am. 9,1-15. Mich. 2,12. 13; 3,12-4,5; 7,11-20. Soph. 3,8-90 etc.). Est itaque illud regnum quod suscitabit Deus coel quod in aeternum non dissipabitur, quod antiquus dierum dabit filio hominis, ut omnes populi et tribus et linguae ei serviant, potestas eius potestas aeterna (Dan. 2,44; 7,13. 14). Rem ssi spectaveris , regnum. coelorumidem significat quod alias dicitur regnum Dei βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. (12,28; 21,31. 43) vel regnum Christi, regnum filii dilectionis suae - (Eph. 5,5. Col. 1,13. 2 Tim. 4,1. Apoc. (12,10) quod hisce in terris. in Ecclesia a Christo instituta consistit. Quae appellatio regni coe/orum Matthaeo peculiaris est. Videtur. autem fortasse selecta (prae alia regni Dez , qua solum utitur 12,28 et 21,31 et probabilius 19,24), ut exspectatio regni terreni apud Iudaeos adeo communis ipsa voce excluderetur, « quasi dicat vos terrenum exspectatis regnum, ego coeleste appropinquare confirmo » (Ma/d.). Optime autem ita' vocatur- « eo quod omnia quae ad regnum istud pertinent coelestia sunt; coelestis enim qui in eo regnat Deus, coelestis lex et spiritus per quem regnat, coelestes secundum conversationem qui regni huius sunt consortes » (lans. Bar.). Est enim origo regui huius coelestis, adiumenta et subsidia quae in eo praebentur coelitus dantur et ad homines coelo inserendos dantur, ut ii scil. quorum πολίτευμα in. coelis est (Phil. 3,20) in terris quoque vitam agant coelestem et Deus unice regnet in eorum animis (cf. 7/eopA.); atque eo potiore iure nomen illud seligitur quia coelum antea clausum iam mox per Messiam erit aperiendum (Ma/d.) et felicitas coelestis per Christum iam omnibus in. promptu est (ans.). Proinde perbene regnum hoc coelorum dicitur, sive originem spectas, sive bona eius, sive mores quibus Deus in animis regnat, sive finem et terminum ad quem tendit et in quo absolvitur, neque aberrant qui regnum coelorum de adventu Christi primo et secundo accipiunt (S. CArys. Theoph.) vel ipsum explicant Christum in quo coelorum sit regnum quique aditum coelestis regni hominibus reserarit (cf. Euh. cat. Cr. Hil. Bed. gl. ord.). Itaque regnum illud prope adesse dicit quod eousque distabat tempore , notitia, affectu, accessu (Cai.).et ad hoc regnum coeleste omnium bonorum thesaurum ut se praeparent poenitendo adhortatur; hoc igitur regnum poenitentia esse acquirendum docet, non iure quodam nativitatis vel nobilitate generis. Hac una voce fastum Iudaeorum deprimit; sed statim quoque patefit periculum ne multi vel superbia vel cupiditatibus vitiisque irretiti se ipsos ab ilio regno excludant. Etiam apud scriptores iudaicos in talmude regnum coelorum ΥΩ noon frequenter usurpatur; locos exhibet Lightfoot, Horae hebr, ad h. J.; dein concludit : « si per regnum coelorum in his atque aliis istiusmodi sententiis internum Dei amorem et timorem volunt quod quidem videtur eousque cum sensu nostro evangelico consentiunt qui regnum Christi internum ac spirituale praesertim asserit... eam phrasiologiam etiam pro exhibitione et revelatione Messiae adhibuerunt pari modo ac historia evangelica » (Opera omnia, Ultraiecti 4699; vol. II p. 264). Praeterea alii advertunt tempore Christi apud Iudaeos in usu fuisse positum ut per metonymiam coelum D'DV diceretur pro Deo; vide Schürer l. c. II p. 454; eius usus exempla Lightfoot |. c. p. 263 quoque affert et Wünsche p. 17; Ed. I p. 267. Eius usus initia iam cernuntur Dan. 4,23. 1 Mach. 3,50..60; 440. 40; 9,46; 12,45. Cum eiusmodi usus loquendi invaluerit, potest dubitari num ratio illa quam Maid. reddit revera consistat. Sed cum Matthaeus alias etiam de regno Dei loquatur (si versio graeca presse secuta est textum aramaicum) non audeo illi explicationi omnem denegare probabilitatem. Cur autem baptista ita praedicare potuerit ac debuerit, probat evangelista pro more suo ex oraculo Is. 40,3; verba enim illa hoc loco allegari non ab ipso Ioanne (uti censet EutA. et valde probabile videtur.S. Augustino, de cons. ev. 2,12. 25; M. 35,1089), sed ab evangelista afferri, ex modo loquendi Aic est enim satis apparet: Oraculum illud directe et per se quasi prooemium est quo instauratio theocratiae ab Isaia annuntiatur; illam autem instaurationem intelligi messianam, statim pandit sacer vates Is. 40,5 : et revelabitur Bloria Domini et videbit omnis caro pariter quod os Domini locutum est, idque ex toto quoque vaticinio (praesertim cap. &2. 49 etc.) colligitur; vide quae de ea re dixi in comment. Is. II p. 67. Isaias enim maxime ob oculos habet iam 50,3 seq. perfectam liberationem messianam , ad quam prior illa ex Babylonia tenue quoddam initium ac primus veluti gradus est. Unde, si unquam, ante Messiam in quo gloria Domini maxime revelatur et per quem omnis caro illam videre debet, voz clamantis εἰ ad viam Domino praeparandam invitantis debuit audiri. Accedit quod in priore liberatione, i. e. in reductione ex exsilio nihil eiusmodi factum esse legitur; unde eo magis cognosci potuit ac debuit verba illa prophetae ante adventum Messiae impleantur oportere. Apud Isaiam propter parallelisnum iungendum videtur : vox clamantis : in deserto parate viam Domini, rectas facite in solitudine semitas Dei nostri. Ceterum sensus vix mutatur, etsi contenderis ab evangelista locum ideo quoque afferri, ut probet Ioannem ἔπ deserto debuisse officio suo fungi et eo etiam oraculum esse impletum; nam etiam apud Isaiam ibi adhortatio fieri censenda est, ubi opus viae advenienti Domino parandae exigitur, ergo in deserto. Cum in hebr. via parari debeat JaAve, haec autem via et ab Ioanne (Ioan. 1,23) et ab evangelistis (Marc. 1,3. Luc. 8,4) via. declaretur Christi, testimonium habemus divinitatis Christi aeque insigne ac perspicuum. JaAve enim nomen Dei esse incommunicabile et quam maxime proprium divinitatis inter omnes constat. Et viam Domini parare nihil aliud est quam auferre omnia quae advenientem Dominum remorari aut offendere possent efficereque ut expedite recipiatur et cupide (lans.)., vel prout Cai, explanat: « duo iubentur, rectificatio et apparatus viarum; rectitudo tollit quidquid tortuosum. est, apparatus facilitatem praebet itineris; ubi apparet officium loannis praedictum ab Isaia praeparatorium animorum ad cognoscendum et suscipiendum Messiam »; cf. Luc. 1,17. 16. Eam vero praeparationem potissimum fieri debere poenitentia, dictum est in v. 2 idque argumentum erat praedicationis. Et quod . praedicabat ipse quoque in se, in habitu et victu, exhibebat; « exhibet vivendo quod docet » (S. Pasch.) et « qui poenitentiam praedicat, habitum poenitentiae praetendit; in eo vilitas vestis et cibi laudatur » (g/. ord.; sim. Theoph. Fab. Ians: Calm.). Habuit quippe vestimentum ex pilis camelorum contextum v. &; « de pilis, "inquit, habebat, non de lana; aliud austerae vitae indicium est, aliud luxuriae mollioris » (S. Hier.) et similiter in op. imp. : « non de lana cameli habuit vestimentum, ne ipsa mollities vestimenti delicata faceret membra et ipsa deliciositas virtutem patientiae emolliret, sed de asperioribus setis cameli, ut ipsa asperitas ad virtutem patientiae animum exerceret ». Zona quoque utebatur non pretiosa "eque ad ornamentum facta (quamvis in cingulo exornando seduli essent veteres; cf. Prov. 31,25. ler. 13,11. Ez. 16,10. 1 Mach. 10,89; 11,58; 15,55), sed pellicea , δερματίνην, ex corio facta ut ipsa hac zona similis fuerit Eliae (& Reg. 1,8, uti adnotant S. Hier. Chrys. Rab. Fab. Dion. lans. Bar.). Uti vestitus pauper erat, ita victus quoque : /ocustae et mel silvestre. Locustae genus reputabatur mundum et esui licitum; cf. Lev. 11,21. 99, ubi LXX καὶ τὴν ἀχρίδα xai τὰ ὅμοια αὐτῇ; ἀκρίδες autem hic quoque dicuntur. Atque hodiedum quoque iis in regionibus pauperes locustis vescuntur; necantur. v. g. fumo sub. arboribus excitato, labentesque e ramis saliuntur vel fumo clibanove siccantur vel etiam sole servanturque in fasciculos collectae (cf. Calm.) atque locustas in cibum esse adhibitas etiam veteres testantur de variis gentibus (S. Hier. adv. lovin. 2,7. Diodorus siculus 3,29; Strabo 16. 772. Plinius 6,35; 11,35) sicut et recentiores (vide v. g. apud Wzner, Bibl. Realw. I! p. 490). Fuerunt qui ἀκρίδας explicarent herbas, melagra, nuces, poma silvestria, uti TAeopA. refert, vel herbarum aut plantarum summitates (S. Isidorus pelu- Siota, epist. 1,132), alii alia commenti sunt quorum plura Cam. refert, sed ad quid talia? « /ocustae cibus sunt maxime vulgaris, simplex, maxime obvius, nullo negotio aut impendio parabilis; id vero optime convenit vitae instituto quod baptista servabat » (Calm.). Et ita recentiores explicant. Probabilius explicandum erit me/ silvestre μέλι ἄγριον non de melle ab apibus elaborato sed de melle quod ex arboribus manare solet, de quo etiam 1 Reg. 15,95. 26. Ita iam videtur S. Pasch. : « mel autem in cibum non ex alveariis, sed ex truncis silvestrium arborum praelibatur » et eodem modo Fab. Schegg , Bisp. Schanz , Weiss. Mel enim ab apibus paratum refertur in s. litteris inter delicias et proverbiali modo pro magna ponitur voluptate (cf. Cant. 4,11); proinde cum mel ab apibus in silvis paratum vix deterius sit melle in alveariis reposito, vix probabile est ἃ Matthaeo has commemorari cupedias quas orientales adeo amant. loannes itaque habitu et victu « in semetipso erudit poenitentes » (gl. ord.) et hac vitae ratione enarrata simul docet evangelista quomodo poenitentia etiam austeritate vitae sit declarada et exhibenda. Huic austeritati Christus ipse debitas attribuit laudes (11,7 seq. 18. Luc. 7,254 seq). Refert S. Epiphanius (haer. 30,13; M. 41,428) in evangelio Matthaei quo utuntur Ebionitae et quod ipsum hebraicum vocant haec legi : cibus eius erat mel silvestre cuius sapor erat mannae similis ὡς ἐγχρὶς iv ἐλαίῳ (velut lagani frixi cum oleo); addit dein : ut veritatis sermonem in mendacium commutent καὶ ἀντὶ ἀκρίδων ποιήσωσιν ἐγχρίδας ἐν μέλιτι. Si ita, Ebionitae etiam habebant versionem graecam hebraici sui evangelii, in quo ut omnem esum carnium excluderent ἐγκρίδας posuerunt. Alii censent eam vocem non ab Ebionitis esse positam, sed Epiphanium id apposuisse ad manna eamque explicationem deprompsisse ex Ex. 16,34 et Num. 14,8. Sed verba eius nimis sunt explicita. Mel silvestre sat multi explicant cum Zuth. quod in petrarum scissuris ab agrestibus apibus conficitur (cf. Jans. Maid. Lap. Sylv. Calm. Grimm TI p. 102, Fil. Keil) et eiusmodi multum reperiri in Iudaea negari non potest; etiam hodiedum plurimum mellis e foraminibus petrarum incolae asportant vel ex arborum truncis; immo sunt qui asserant tale mel suavitate saporis haud raro praestare prae alio. Nomen ipsum μέλι ἄγριον apte de tione non mel tale sed solum arborum plantarumque succum designari. Quae enim afferuntur solum ostendunt succum illum etiam eo nomine appellari, neque tamen. efficiunt ita nomen esse ei proprium ut ad nihil aliud iam applicetur. Suidas 5. v. ἀκρίς haec : μέλι ἄγριον ὅπερ ἀπὸ ' τῶν δένδρων auvaγόμενον, μάννα τοῖς πολλοῖς προσαγορεύεται ; similiter Diodorus siculus 19,94 eodem nomine arborum succum designat. Ex altera parte non potest ostendi mel ab apibus confectum revera μέλι ἄγριον esse appellatum. Unde ex solo nomine utra explicatio sit praeferenda dici nequit. Quare ratio potissima mihi videtur esse petenda ex vitae austeritate quam evangelista describere vult et ad quam mel quod inter cupedias referri debet non congruit. Succum illum (Baumhonig, une sorte de gomme sucrée) in arboribus; arbustis, plantis quibusdam eius regionis inveniri inter omnes constat. Veterum protestantium interpretes complures solitudinem et vitae asperitatem a Ioanne removere studebant, ne scil. ascetae cuiusdam vel monachi speciem et poenitentiae agendae specimen in se exhiberet. Ideo eum non in deserto, sed in domo ac familia prope desertum habitasse explicabant, vestem illi dabant scutulatam undulatamque vel saltem vestem marinos. Contra quorum expositiones plurimis SS. Patrum testimoniis et rationibus ex usu verborum petitis iam egit ὁ. Petrus Canisius, Commentariorum de Verbi Dei corruptelis liber primus, Dilingae 1571, p. 27-95; pariter agunt Maid. Bar. Lap.; recentiores nativam verborum vim explicant et ascesin baptistae describi agnoscunt, uti iam Bengel : habitus quoque et victus Iohannis praedicabat. | Post'Malachiam i. e. post tempus Nehemiae iam nullus a Deo suscitatus erat propheta. Exspectatio tamen et desiderium prophetae vigebat, uti comperimus ex 1 Mach. 4,56 et 15,51. Porro ex Danielis vaticinio de 70 hebdomadis etiam omnino probabile est magnam pro eo tempore excitatam fuisse exspectationem. Quare explicatur, cur longe lateque per Iudaeam maxima exstiterit commotio animorum, cum subito Ioannes in habitu et more et sermone veterum prophetarum surgeret et illi omnium desiderio et exspectationi nova adderet suis concionibus incitamenta ;
2:1
Le simple Ἰησοῦ reprend le Ἰησοῦν de 1, 25, comme Χριστοῦ (τ, 18) avait repris Χριστός (1, 46), et γεννηθέντος ge rattache bien à γέννησις, de 1, 18, quoique le verbe signifie naturellement « étant né »..C'est maintenant seulement que Mt. indique les deux circonstances du lieu et du temps, Bethléem et le règne d'Hérode, parce qu’elles sont nécessaires pour l'intelligence de ce qui va suivre. - ΠῚ en ressortira que la naissance à Bethléem était prédite par des Écritures, sans que Mt. soit obligé d'employer sa formule de 1, 22 etc. Bethléem appartient à la Judée au sens restreint, pour la distinguer de Bethléem de Zabulon (Jos. xx, 15). Jérôme note : Librariorum hic error est. Putamus enim ab evangelista primum editum, sicut ἐμ ipso hebraico legimus, Judae, non Judaeae. Deux raisons : on pouvait distinguer Bethléem de Juda d'une autre Bethléem, mais il n’y en avait pas d'autre en dehors de la Judée au sens large; de plusile texte de Michée va dire terra Juda. On se demande si Jérôme renvoie ici à l'évangile des Nazaréens (Ζλεν, Gesch. n. K. Il, p. 652) ou à l’ancien testament en hébreu (Scawmwrke, TU, xxxvit, p. 276 s.). Nous inclinons pour la seconde bpinion, car, lorsqu'il éerit le Com. sur Mt., Jérôme ne parle plus comme dans 16 de wir. ill. δ. 1 : tpsum hebraicum. Il n’a pas reproché une erreur aux copistes latins, mais aux copistes grecs. Mt. est censé avoir su qu’on devait rendre 17 par Ἰούδα, en latin Judae (1 Regn. xvn, 1) ou Juda. Évidemment le même mot hébreu eût pu se rendre τῆς Ιουδαίας (I Regn. xvn, 4, A), mais c'eût été une erreur au .cas où le texte parlait de la tribu de Juda, non du pays des Juifs. Bethléem de Juda était en effet une expression connue dans l'A. T., cf. Ruth 1, 4 etc. Si Jérôme avait qualifié l'évangile nazaréen d’ipsum hebraicum, il aurait dit non pas putamus, mais certum est. Sur Hérode, voir Comm. Le. — ἰδού après un gén. absolu peut passer pour un trait du style de Mt., dans les récits de l'enfance, 1, 20 ; 11, 43.49, et ailleurs 1x, 48.32; χα, 46; XVII, 8; XXVI, 47; xxvil, 41; Cf. Jntrod. p. cui. — μάγοι, du perse ancien #agus, accadien mabbu (?). En grec.ce mot a eu deux sens. Le prermer assez nettement déterminé et presque officiel indique les Xénophon, Strabon etc.) et par conséquent chefs religieux des Perses (Hérodote, es. Le second sens est plus vague. Après des personnages honorés et honorabl étaient devenus versés dans l'astronomie la conquête de Babylone, les Mages ce qui comportait des pratiques susdu temps, c'est-à-dire dans l'astrologie, pectes, si bien que mage, d'où la magie, était presque synonyme d’enchanteur ou de sorcier (Soph. Plat. etc). C'est dans un sens assez défavorable que les conjurateurs ou enchanteurs chaldéens ont été nommés μάγοι dans Daniel (1, 20; 11, 240.17 ; τν, #3 V, 7.411.148. Théod. et 11, 2.10 Lxx). Or l'intention de Mi. n'est nullement de déprécier les Mages. ἢ était donc très naturel qu'on vit en eux des ens officiel et honorable du mot. C'est la tradition prêtres persans, selon le 8 iconographique de Rome depuis la peinture de Sainte-Priscille au début du second siècle, où 16 costume siècle (bonnets phrygiens), jusqu'à celles du τπὸ et du 1v° est plus développé. Gelte tradition fut exprimée dans la Basilique constantinienne de Bethléem et la préserva.de la ruine (Viwcenr et Agez, Bethléem, p- 127 5.). C'est aussi la tradition presque unanime des Pères : Clém. d'AL (Strom. τ, 15); Origène (6. Cels. τ, 58, distinguant précisément les Mages des Chaldéens), Diodore de Tarse, Chrys., Cyr. d’Alex., Juvencus, Prudence (cf. Dircamr, Hippolytos von Theben, p. 63), l'évangile arabe. de l’enfancé (Tisch. p. 183; Peeters, 1, P- 9). Mais cette opinion ne cadre guère avec les termes de Mt. qui fait venir les Mages d'Orient. Or, d’après la Bible, comme d'après l'usage actuel de Jérusalem, l'Orient ou l’est désigne les pays au delà du Jourdain et de la mer morte. Les présents apportés par les mages sont les présents traditionnels de l'Arabie (cf. τ, 11). Que les Mages soient venus d'Arabie, Justin l'affirme en dix endroits du dialogue contre Tryphon (Lxxvir, &; vaxviu, 1. 2.5.7.8; LxxxVIN, 1; Cr, 2; CHI, 3; γι, 4). Ce n'est pas à cause de la prophétie de l’astre de Num. στιν, 47, qui m'est citée que la dernière fois. Il est vrai que Justin fait allusion dès le début (cxxvu, 3) à Is. vu, 4, mais ce passage n'avait qu'un rapport assez lointain avec dépouilles de Damas que s’il l'adoration des Mages; on ne pouvait songer aux était déjà établi que les Mages venaient d'Orient. Justin emprunta-t-il à un évangile apocryphe inconnu, comme le prétend Resch (Das Kindheitsev. p. 139 s.)? On peut aussi bien croire que ce fut à la tradition locale, soutenue aussi par Épiphane, autre Palestinien (de fide, vu, p. 1088 ὁ; M. xur, 185). Tertullien (aux. Mare. πι, 43) a peut-être été guidé par le Ps. Lxxt : reges Arabum et Saba munera offerent illi : ram et magos reges habuit fere oriens (cf. adv. Jud. 1x). L'Orient par rapport à Jérusalem désigne plutôt le pays au delà de l'Araba que la Mésopotamie ou la Babylonie, assez connues pour que Mt. les ait nommées par leur nom, si c'eût διό son intention. Le juif de Celse (τη, 58) a parlé des Chaldéens dans l'intention de dénigrer les Mages. Jérôme a fait des Mages les descendants de Balaam d’après Num. xxiv, 17, mais en excluant le dénigrement (d'après Dan. π, 2 Com.); consuetudo autem et sermo communis magos pro maleficis accipit ; qui aliter habentur apud gentem suam ex eo quod sini philosophi Chaldeorum. Sans aller jusqu'à la philosophie, l'astrologie n'était pas toujours mal vue, et elle était le fait des Mages; cf. Hipvor. Elenchos 1, 13 : Démocrite avait eu des relations καὶ ἀστρολόγοις καὶ ἐν Βαδυλῶνι μάγοις. Il y a donc lieu de supposer que Mt. a employé μάγοι dans le sens de savants astronomes, sans y joindre cette nuance péjorative contre laquelle les Pères se sont parés en prenant les Mages pour des Persans. La tradition romaine ἃ pu être implantée dans la basilique de Bethléem par les architectes impériaux. Récemment Dieterich (Die Weisen aus dem Morgenlande, ZnTW 1902 p. 9-14) ἃ fait venir les Mages du Nord. Le récit de Mt. ne serait qu’une transformation de la visite de Tiridate à Néron en l’an 66. Dion Cassius (Lxut, τ, 1-7; éd. Boissevain, p. 68 ss., cf. Suétone Nero 13) ἃ raconté assez longuement comment ce roi d'Arménie a obtenu de Néron la couronne en le reconnaissant pour son dieu (aa ἦλθόν τε πρὸς σὲ τὸν ἐμὸν θεὸν, προσχυνήσων σε ὡς χαὶ τὸν Μίθραν), donc au même titre que Mithra. Après quelques scènes jouées avec une pompe orientale qui parut aux Romains une comédie, Tiridathe s'en retourna par un autre chemin ἀνεκομίσθη δὲ oùy ἧπερ ἦλθε, Ni Dion, ni Suétone ne donne à Tiridathe le nom de Mage. Pline (H.N. xxx, 1, 16) dans une charge contre les prêtres charlatans, nous apprend que Néron se fit initier à des rites qui devaient être mithriaques plutôt qu’avestiques, et prononce le nom de Mages, dans un sens défavorable Magus ad eum Tiridates venerat Armeniacum de se triumphum adferens et ideo provinciis gravis. navigare noluerat, quoniam expuere in maria aliisque mortalium necessitatibus violare naturam eam fas non putant. Magos secum adduxerat, magicis etiam cents eum initiaverat. Mais à moins de supposer que Mt. se soit inspiré précisément de ce texte, et il est clair que non, puisqu'il prend les Mages dans un sens honorable, il est impossible de voir un lien entre la démarche du roi d'Arménie, telle que Dion devait la raconter plus tard, et celle des Mages. L'opinion publique n'a regardé les protestations de Tiridate que comme les bassesses d’un candidat royal, non comme un hommage religieux rendu à un Sauveur. D'ailleurs comment supposer qu'un événement de l'an 66 a pu être transformé, antidaté, transporté dans l’histoire de l'enfance du Christ et surtout étre accepté par les chrétiens comme une partie authentique de l'évangile? La tradition subséquente n’a pas même été tentée de faire ce rapprochement qui paraissait de nature à rendre plausible la venue des Mages à Jérusalem (contre Dieterich, cf. En. Meyer, Ursprung.… 1, p. 60, note). — Que les Mages aient été des rois, c'est ce que nous avons vu déjà dans Tertullien par une pure combinaison exégétique avec le Ps. Lxxr, 10. Le nombre de trois est déjà celui de la fresque du début du re siècle, sans doute d'après le nombre des présents qu'ils apportent sur leurs mains nues. Leurs noms, leurs reliques appartiennent à l’hagiographie. Les Mages viennent εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα, capitale des Juifs. La forme est celle de Mt. sauf xxun1, 37 (Ἱερουσαλήμ), au neutre pluriel, sauf ici au v. 3.
2:2
L’explication de ce qui suit dépend en grande partie du sens de ἀστήρ. Depuis Kepler on a même cherché à déterminer par un phénomène céleste la date de la Nativité, en assignant la conjection de Saturne et de Jupiter dans le signe des Poissons. Toutes ces conjectures échouent contre le fait que ἀστήρ, à la différence d’äotpov, ne peut signifier ni une conjonction, ni même une constellation, mais seulement un astre isolé: Boll (Der Stern der Weisen, ZaTW, 1917, p. 40 ss.) l'a prouvé de la manière la plus convaincante. Mais cet astre isolé peut être un météore ou une comète aussi bien qu'une étoile. Il est clair d’après le texte qu'il n'est pas question d’un horoscope d'après l’état normal du ciel. Chrys. en ἃ donné la raison décisive : « L'œuvre de l’astronomie (astrologie) n'est pas de savoir par les astres qui est né, mais de prédire l'avenir d’après l’heure (c'est-à-dire la disposition des astres) au moment de la. naissance » (M. zvnr, 62). Il y a donc dans l'astre quelque chose d'exceptionnel. On l’a entendu de deux manières : a) Cet astre est tellement extraordinaire que ce fut un météore créé par Dieu, qui servit de guide aux mages depuis l'Orient et très spécialement de Jérusalem jusqu’au lieu où était l'enfant : Chrys., Diodore de Tarse, elt., et encore de nos jours Schanz, Kn., Fillon, sauf des réserves sur le rôle du météore comme guide. Mais ces réserves suppriment l'argument principal, tiré du v. 9. Ces auteurs, très nombreux, ont été décidés soït par ce verset, soit aussi par Le dessein de montrer que l’Écriture ne favorisait en rien l'observation des astres, suspecte de conduire à l'astrologie. C'est en particulier le but bien marqué de Diodore de Tarse qui finit par qualifier l’astre de δύναμίν τινα θειοτέραν, εἰς ἄστρον μὲν σχηματιζομένην, une apparence d'astre créée par miracle, ce qui est s'éloigner du sens naturel du passage. Cette opinion ἃ je ne sais quoi d'étrange, car un simple météore ne pouvait guère suggérer la nativité d'un grand personnage; cette manière de guider les mages a aussi quelque chose d’un peu mécanique. On peut répondre que Dieu est tout-puissant et que sa sagesse est infiniment supérieure à la nôtre, mais la question est de savoir si un autre sens ne serait pas plus satisfaisant. δ) Origène a pensé à une comète : τὸν ὀφθέντα. ἀστέρα ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ καινὸν εἶναι νομίζομεν. καὶ μηδενὶ τῶν συνήθων παραπλήσιον, οὔτε τῶν ἐν τῇ ἀπλανεῖ οὔτε τῶν ἐν ταῖς κατωτέρω σφαίραις, ἀλλὰ τῷ γένει τοιοῦτον γεγονέναι, ὁποῖοι χατὰ καιρὸν γινόμενοι χομῆται ἢ δοχίδες (en forme de poutres) ἢ πωγωνίαι (la queue en bas) ἢ πίθοι (en forme de tonneaux). Eusèbe (M. xxu, 656; Dem. ev. IX prooe.) : « Pour d’autres hommes célèbres et illustres, on voit paraître les lueurs d'astres étrangers, tels que ceux qu'on nomme comètes, météores, astres barbus » etc. On ἃ objecté que la comète passait pour un présage sinistre. Mais Origène, devançant les modernes, et ne leur laissant que la peine de, chercher d'autres textes, exposait comment l'apparition d’une comète devait naturellement mettre les mages sur la voie d’un événement, spécialement d’une naissance extraordinaire : « Nous avons lu dans l'ouvrage de Chérémon le stoïcien sur les comètes, comment il arrive que des comètes se sont levées pour des événements favorables, et il en expose l'histoire. » Origène pour sa part n’admet pas le don prophétique des comètes, mais les mages devaient y croire. On a eu tort de citer dans ce sens Cicéron (de. divin. 1, 47 ou 23) : qua nocte templum Ephesinae Dianae defagravit, cadem constat ex Olympiade natum esse Alexandrum, alque, ubi lucere cœpisset, clamitasse magos pestem ac perniciem Asiae proxuma nocte natam (Dieterich etc), car lucere ne fait pas allusion à une autre lueur que celle du jour. Lampride n'est que du 1ve siècle (Alex. Sev. x, 5) : fertur die prima natalis toto die agud arcam Caesaream stella primae magnitudinis visa et sol circa domum patris eius l'ulgido ambitu coronatus. Mais Justin (Hist. sxxvu, 2) sur Mithridate est signifcatif : Nam et eo quo genitus est anno et eo quo regnare primum cœpit stella cometes per utrumque tempus septuagenis diebus ta lurit, ut caelum omne conflagrare videretur. Servius sur Énéide, x, 272, en parlant d'une comète favorable hic dicitur appaæruisse eo tempore quo est Augustus sortitus imperium ; tune denique-gaudia onmibus gentibus futura, sunt nuntiata. Cette opinion sur les comètes se rattache, semble-t-if, à une opinion populaire exposée par Pline qui ne l'admet pas : sidera quae adfixa diximus mundo, non illa ut existimat vulgus, singulis attributa nobis, et clara divitibus, minora pauperibus, obscura defectis, ac pro sorte cuiusque lucentia adrumerata mortalibus, mec cum suo quaeque homüine oriuntur nec aliquem exstingui decidua sigmficant (N. H. =, 28 cf. Boll, qui cite aussi Jean d’Halicarnasse, monophysite du vi s.). Si les riches ont de belles étoiles, les grands rois pouvaient avoir des comètes. J'avoue n'avoir pas prêté attention à cette opinion reprise par le P. Patrizi (de Evangeliis, Ill, p. 333) jusqu'à l'apparition de la comète de Halley que nous vimes en 4910 si brillante à l'Orient, puis passer à l’Oceident le vingt janvier. Ce phénomène explique très bien l'impression produite sur les Mages. Je n’oserais dire avec M. Peserico (Quanto visse Gesu, 1920) que l'astre desmages fut cette même comète qui passa au périhélie le 8 oct. 12 av. J.-C., car ce serait mettre trop ἰδ, la naissance du Sauveur, mais une comète analogue n’at-elle pu passer quelques années plus tard? Des astronomes pourraient nous le dire. — Voyant une comète, les mages ont conclu à un grand événement prochain, peut-être une grande naissance. Justin, Origène, Eusèbe, Jérôme, etc. ont pensé qu'ils avaient conservé le souvenir de la prophétie de Balaam. C'est ce que Mt. ne dit nullement. Mais les idées messianiques des Juifs avaient sûrement trouvé crédit un peu partout, même à Rome, sinon dans Virgile (Egl. 1), du moins plus tard dans Suétone (Vesp. w) et Tacite (Hist. v, 13) sous la forme d'une dynastie venue de Judée, par où ils entendaient les Flaviens. À plus foric raison devaient-elles être répandues en Arabie, Les mages ne s'informent pas du roi des Juifs comme tel, mais parce qu'ils voient en lui le sauveur du monde attendu, issu de Judée. — αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀστέρα... D'après ce qui précède, l’astre qui annonce la naissance. Il n’a pu les renseigner sur tout, mais illes ἃ mis sur la voie, en excitant leur curiosité, satisfaite par l'hypothèse d’un roi né en Judée. Dans le pays même, ils auront plus de détails. ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ pourrait être relatif aux mages, « pendant qu'ils étaient en Orient.». Le singulier peut avoir ce sens (Num. m1, 38 B; Jos. xvmr, 7 B); encore faut-il avouer que c'est surtout pour désigner un point cardinal, non un lieu de séjour. D'ailleurs Mt. ayant employé le pluriel au v. 1, il serait bien étrange qu'il. ait changé ici. Donc il s’agit de la situation de l’astre. Plusieurs y voient un terme astronomique (Weiss, Loisy, Klost.) et traduisent : « à son lever, au moment de son lever ». Assurément les astrologues attachaient une grande importance à ce point; les astres avaient leur maximum d'influence à: leur lever (Vettius Valens, p. 63; p. 182) ; les Mages auraient tiré des conclusions de la coïncidence du lever de l'astre avee la naissance de l'enfant. Mais ils n'en connaissent pas encore le moment, et ils ne s’en informent pas. Dès lors il était oiseux. de dire qu'ils avaient vu l'astre au moment où il se levait, et encore plus inutile de le répéter au v. 9. Il semble d'ailleurs que « à son lever » eût dû se dire normalement ἐπ᾽ ἀνατολῆς (αὐτοῦ) ( Vettius, p. 63; p. 69). Il faut donc l'entendre d'un point cardinal (cf. Apoc. χχι, 13; finale courte de Me. : ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς καὶ ἄχρι δύσεως), donc ici « au levant » dans la région orientale du ciel. On peut rapprocher de Mt. le texte de βαρ. Tebt. τι, 276, 38 (fin du ne ou 1πὸ 5.) parlant de la conjonction de Zeus Hermès et Aphrodite avant le lever du soleil : καὶ ἐὰν [ἐν τῇ ξ]ῴᾳ ἀνατολῇ τυγχάνωσι ἀπὸ ve[drnros τὰς προχοπὰς ἀποτελοῦσιν, signe de bonheur dès la jeunesse. Mais on voit ici la différence entre l'astrologie technique et le vague « au levant » de Mt. — προσχυνῆσαι, le prosternement de rigueur devant un monarque en Orient, mais Mt. emploie souvent ce terme, On ne peut donc rien en déduire sur la pensée des Mages relativement à la nature divine de l'enfant; cf. Gen. xxxvur, 7; XL, 6; xLvin, 12; ἢ Regn. 1x, 8. Rite et expression convenaient à souhait lorsque la nature mystérieuse de la personne ainsi révérée se révélait ensuite comme digne d'un hommage religieux (Gen. xx, 6). Les attiques mettaient l’aceus.; Mt. qui emploie le mot treize fois met toujours le datif (sauf τν, 10 citation) selon l'usage hellénistique.
2:3
Les Mages ont peut-être interrogé le premier venu, mais la police d'Hérode, très vigilante, a dû le prévenir aussitôt. — ἐταράχθη peut signifier fut épouvanté, effrayé (Schanz, Weiss, Holtz. Klost.), mais plus on augmente la terreur d'Hérode, plus il est difficile de comprendre que Jérusalem s'y soit associée. Κη. voit déjà 1à l'accord d’une grande partie du peuple avec un roi impie contre le Messie! Plutôt Mt. a choisi un mot qui marque seulement l'émotion, le trouble excité par un fait insolite; Hérode, qui en avait vu d'autres, ne pouvait être tellement effrayé de cette naissance inconnue, et Jérusalem ne devait, dans l’ensemble, éprouver aucune sympathie pour le vieux roi dont la cruauté s’exaspérait, dépourvue de l’ascendant d'un règne nouveau et fort. Chacun éprouva donc le trouble à sa manière, Hérode pour se mettre en garde, d’autres peut-être pour espérer. Outre que le trouble était de style devant une question aussi inattendue, on peut supposer que l'apparition de la comète y avait disposé les esprits. En 1910, en janvier, beaucoup de personnes passèrent des nuits en plein air pour ne pas être écrasés dans les maisons au passage de la comète. — Ἱεροσόλυμα au sing. comme dans Tob. χιν, 4, et au féminin comme ville, οἵ. ὕλη συνχύννεται Ἰερουσαλήμ. (Act. χχι, 31). πᾶσα est correct, le nom étant déterminé, 6Et toi Bethléem, terre de Juda, tu n'es point la plus petite parmi les princes de Juda. Car de toi sortira un chef, qui doit paître mon peuple, Israël. » — μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ n'exige pas que le trouble fasse naître les mêmes dispositions, mais seulement qu'il est partagé.
2:4
D'après les uns (Holiz. Loisy, Klost. Schan:) Hérode réunit tout le sanhédrin avec ses trois groupes : grands-prêtres, scribes, chefs des principales familles. Ces derniers ne sont pas nommés ici, mais non plus xx, 18 où Jésus parle seulement de ses principaux ennemis. (Dans M. xxvr, 3; XXVIL, 4, les anciens ne sont pas omis, mais les γραμματεῖς). Comme il s’agit d'un point de doctrine, on comprend bien que les anciens n'aient pas été consultés (Weiss, Kn.). Ceux qui voient ici le sanhédrin ne manquent pas d'ajouter (sauf Schanz) que cette réunion est peu vraisemblable. Hérode se débarrassa du sanhédrin qu'il trouva en fonction. Il en constitua un autre à son gré, sur lequel il s'appuya pour faire condamner Hyrcan (Jos. Ant. XV, vr, 1-4) mais en 30 av. J.-C. (Schürer, 1, 365). Depuis ce temps on ne voit pas qu’il ait réuni le sanhédrin, même pour se débarrasser de son fils Antipater. L'opposition grandissait, el il ne se souciait pas de lui donner un organe. Nous pensons donc qu'Hérode convoqua une assemblée spéciale. Longtemps la majorité des Pharisiens lui avait été favorable, et les prêtres étaient à sa discrétion; il fallait bien recourir à ce personnel pour un point d'exégèse des prophéties. M. Loisy assure que « l'opinion était faite sur ce point » (1, 366). — Pas même parmi les doctes, encore moins dans l'esprit d'Hérode. C’est déjà beaucoup qu'il ait compris que ce roi des Juifs était le Messie attendu. Il ne demande pas où il était né, car les docteurs n'avaient aucune chance de le savoir mieux que lui, mais où il naît, absolument, c’est-à-dire de iure, quel est le lieu où il doit naiître. Field compare Dion d'Halic. (Ant. 1v, 59) : συγκαλέσας δὲ (Tarquin) τοὺς ἐπιχωρίους μάντεις, ἐπυνθάνετο παρ᾽ αὐτῶν, τί βούλεται σημαίνειν τὸ τέρας, 5 5.) C'est une opinion courante parmi les critiques indépendants que Bethléem a été faussement désignée comme le lieu de naissance de Jésus pour le faire concorder avec son titre de Messie. Or il n’est pas si facile d'établir que ce fut alors l'opinion des Juifs que le Christ devait naitre à Bethléem. Au temps d'Origène (cont. Cels. 1, 51), les Juifs ne voulaient rien savoir là-dessus. Les critiques ne peuvent s'appuyer que sur Jo. vi, 42, où cette naissance est déduite de ce que le Christ devait être fils de David. Mais une autre opinion enregistrée aussi par saint Jean (vir, 27), et sûrement plus répandue, se tenait sur la réserve à cause de l'origine mystérieuse du Christ. En fait, on ne peut rien citer dans les Apocalypses, et seulement le Targ. de Michée v, 1; ἸΏ 73 ἈΠΙΦῺ ΡῚ". Samuel ben Nakhman dont on citait le dire (Le Messianisme.. p. 222) est un Amora de la troisième génération, donc de la fin du mie siècle. Jérôme ἃ recueilli une tradition appuyée sur Habacue, m1, 3 : Awdivi ego Hebraeum istum locum îta disserere : quod Bethleem sita sit ad austrum, in qua natus est Dominus atque Salvator, et ipsum esse de quo nunc dicatur : Dominus ab austro veniet, h. 6. nascetur in Bethlehem, et inde consurget. On voit que si Jésus était né à Nazareth, les premiers chrétiens n'avaient pas à courir la chance d’un. mensonge pour donner satisfaction à une tradition aussi peu consistante. HN n'en faut que plus admirer la perspicacité des scribes qui ont cité le seul passage vraiment décisif (Mich. v, 4 s.) et qui conciliait l'origine temporelle à Bethléem avec l'origine plus haute de l'enfant promis à Ia maison de David par Isaïe (vn, 14 ss.). Le texte hébreu est ainsi traduit par M. van Hoonacker : « Mais toi, Bethléem d’Ephrata, petit quant à ton rang parmi les clans de Juda, de toi me proviendra [un prince) qui soit souverain en Israël et ses origines [dateront] de l’âge antique, des jours du lointain passé. 211 les livrera donc jusqu'au temps où celle qui doit enfanter ait enfanté. » Mt. n’a cité que le début, omettant la fin du v. 2 et le v. 3, ce qui et si bien coïncidé avec son thème, mais il ἃ ajouté d'après le v. 3 l’idée des pasteurs. Le tout est traité trop librement pour qu'il ait seulement voulu corriger le grec d’après l’hébreu quoiqu'il en ait tenu compte. On s’est demandé si les Juifs avaient cité précisément de cette façon, peut-être d'après une traduction araméenne, mais il est très peu vraisemblable qu'ils se soient tellement écartés du texte dans les mots, contrairement à leur méthode d'exégèse, souvent plus attentive aux mots qu’au sens. Mt. n'a pas dà se croire plus lié aux paroles prononcées par les seribes qu’au texte même de l'Écriture. Il en a rendu le sens général, tout en changeant 18 formule; depuis la naissance du Sauveur il paraissait étrange de ne voir dans Bethléem que son peu d'importance dans les clans de Juda. Donc καὶ σύ, βηθλέεμ comme les LXX; ensuite y Ἰούδα, au lieu de οἶκος (ajouté) ’Egpée, détail obscur et inutile pour les lecteurs. Les LXX ὀλιγοστὸς εἴ τοῦ εἶναι ἐν χιλιάσιν Ἰούδα, littéralement : « tu es trop petite pour faire partie des mille (cités) de Juda », ce qui en somme était un contresens, surtout avec ces « mille » pour 1D0N à prendre au sens de « clans », et non comme un nombre. Mi. ἃ donc corrigé d'après l’hébreu, peut-être en lisant DN, les chefs de tribus, et il ἃ préféré dire que Bethléem n'était pas petite, à cause de l'enfant; la réalisation de la prophétie montre comment il fallait l'entendre. Ensuite μοι est omis après ἐξ οὗ (ou ex σου), et au lieu de τοῦ εἶναι εἰς ἄρχοντα τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, traduction fidèle de l'hébreu, Mt. d’un mot : ἡγούμενος (qu'on lit dans À, mais probablement d'après M£.). D'après Le v. 3 χαὶ ποιμανεῖ τὸ ποίμνιον αὐτοῦ, Mi. ἃ écrit : ὅστις x. τ. À. μι. τ᾿ | assez ressemblant à ΠῚ Regn. v, 2 (de David). Toutes ces différences ont été notées par Jérôme (Ep. Lvur, 8) et il conclut (eod. lac. 10) ex quibus universis perspicuum est apostolos et evangelistas in interpretatione veterum seripturarum sensum quaesisse, non verba, nec mugnopere de ordinatione sermonibusque curasse, cum intellectui res paterent. C’est un recul sensible de l'exégèse de méconnaître la manière habituelle de Mt. sous prétexte qu'il ἃ reproduit telles quelles les paroles des scribes (Knab.). Car on ne peut pas prendre au sérieux cette autre opinion de Jérôme : arbitror Matthaeum volentem arguere Scribarum et sacerdotum erga divinae Scripturae lectionem negligentiam, sic etiam posuisse ut ab eis dictum est (in Mich. M. xxv, 4197). Les seribes n'avaient aucune raison de s'écarter de la lettre.
2:7
Hérode ne croyait peut-être pas au Messie, mais il savait déjà par expérience que ses ennemis pouvaient se servir de cette arme contre lui (4nt. XVII, u, 4; Le Messianisme. p. 16). Il adopte donc une double politique. En apparence il feint d'entrer dans les vues des Mages, et c'est pour cela qu'il ἃ réuni les docteurs. Mais déjà il se promet de faire disparaitre l'enfant indésirable. Quand on habite Jérusalem ou Bethléem, si rapprochées, on s'étonne que le vieux roi n'ait pas envoyé ses espions, qui eussent été des bourreaux, sur Les talons des Mages. Mais il arrive que les habiles veulent être plus habiles que ne le suggère le bon sens. Il leur parait très fin de compter sur la simplicité des autres, de facon à ne pas se compromettre. Envoyer ses sbires avec les Mages, c'eùt été prendre l'aventure tout à fait au sérieux, s'exposer à passer pour crédule. Hérode compte déjouer ses adversaires possibles sans paraitre inquiet. C'est pour cela qu'il fait appeler les Mages secrètement. — ἠχριδώσεν non pas demander (Loisy, Klost.) mais diligenter didicit, obtenir une information exacte; cf. τούτων οὕτως κατ᾽ ἐξέτασιν ἠχριδωμένων (Veétius Valens, Ὁ. 265 1. 3), précisément à propos d'observations astrologiques. Cependant τὸν χρόνον n'est pas au sens des astrologues (dans Valens les temps de la vie humaine régis par les astres), mais simplement le moment où les Mages ont vu l'astre. — φαινομένου quoique au présent ne peut guère signifier « l’astre qui paraît encore en ce moment (Weiss, Schanz) mais l'astre qui a apparu au moment dont il s’agit, c'est-à-dire au premier instant de son apparition. Si c’est, comme nous pensons, ἈΠῸ comète, on a dû: noter aussi à Jérusalem ce moment; il fallait savoir si tout concordait; d’ailleurs l'observation des Mages ἃ dû être plus précise, d'où le mot ἠκρίδωσεν et non ἐπύθετο ou tout autre. Hérode parait supposer que l'apparition de l'astre ἃ dù coïncider avec la naissance de l'enfant dont il était le signe.
2:8
Hérode affecte de laisser les Mages libres de poursuivre 18. recherche dont ils ont. eu l'initiative. On peut d’ailleurs estimer que Ml. s’est complu à le montrer pris dans son piège, et qu'il a dans ce but souligné l'expression obséquieuse de ses protestations. C'était d'ailleurs la meilleure manière de gagner Ja confiance de ces étrangers.
2:9
H parait à propos de distinguer ici le phénomène οἱ l'expression qui lui est donnée. L'expression, à la prendre à la lettre, indique un météore qui marche et s'arrête. Je ne puis fraduire avec Patrizi : « l’astre les avait précédés puisqu'il est censé avancer encore, aller, s'arrêter. Le texte le plus semblable est celui de Diodore (x, 66, 3). Timoléon naviguant en Italie, Déméter et Coré l'accompagnent sous la forme d'un flambeau : δι᾿ ὅλης γὰρ τῆς νυχτὸς προηγεῖτο λαμπὰς καιομένη χατὰ τὸν ὀὐρανὸν μέχρι οἵ συνέδη τὸν στόλον εἰς τὴν Ἰταλίαν καταπλεῦσαι, . De même Plutarque (Timol. e. vin), qui emploie le même mot λαμπάς. Clém. d'A. dit que Thrasybule fut guidé par un feu jusqu'à Mounychie τῷ Θρασυδούλῳ νύχτωρ (la nuit étant obscure)... πῦρ ἑωρᾶτο προηγούμενον, ὅπερ αὐτοὺς ἀπταίστως προπέμφαν, χατὰ τὴν Μουνυχίαν ἐξέλιπεν (Strom. 1, 24, 163). Dans ces textes l’idée est rendue tout à fait sensible; le météore est comparé à un homme qui précède portant un flambeau. Mais ne peut-on y voir l'expression trop humainement pittoresque d'un phénomène céleste? Varron entendait autrement qu'une planète pût servir de guide et montrer qu'on était arrivé sans prendre le rôle d'un porte-flambeau. Sur Énéide, 1, 801, Servius écrit : Varra ait hanc stellam Luciferi, quae Veneris dicitur, ab Aenea, donec ad Laurentum agrum veniret, semper visam et postquam pervenit videri desiisse, unde et pervenisse se agnovit, Notez qu'Énée va en général d'est en ouest, et que Lucifer est l'étoile du matin à l’orient. Cependant sa simple présence est un signe. A plus forte raison une étoile filante, comparée à un porte-flambeau (Énéide, u, 694 ss.), et de caelo lapsa per umbras Stella facem ducens multa cum Luce cucurrit. Îllam, summa super labentem culmina tecti, Cernimus Idaea claram se condere silva Signantemque vias… Aussitôt Énée Jamjam nulla mora est : sequor, et, qua ducitis, adsum. Il ya dans Mt. des indices qu'il faut l’entendre ainsi. Il ne parle pas d'une lampe, ni d’un feu, mais de l'astre, assurément brillant, qui avait paru dans la région est du firmament. Les anciens n'étaient pas fixés sur la place des cométes, qu'on n’eût pu mettre dans les cieux crystallins sans risquer de les briser par leurs mouvements irréguliers. Mais enfin l'astre qui annonce la naissance d'un grand roi n’est pas un feu follet qui court presque à hauteur d'homme, Si l'on admet qu'il s’agit d’une comète, on comprend la réflexion qu'ils l'avaient vue (εἶδον sens du plus-que-parf.) à lorient, tandis que maintenant elle apparait à l'occident. Cela n’est pas dit, parce que la narration de Mt. a un caractère populaire et sans précision. Une comète semble parfois surplomber un lieu. Ainsi la comète de l’an 42 av. J.-C. : τότε ἄστρον ὁ κομήτης ὠνομασμένος ἐπὶ πολλὰς ἡμέρας ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἄστεως αἰωρηθεὶς ἐς λαμπάδας διελύθη (Dion Cassius Liv, 29, en 742 de Rome). Les Mages sont partis le soir, dans leur impatience d'arriver. Ils ont pus'informer sur l'endroit où un enfant était né dans le délai qui leur paraissait répondre à l'apparition de l'astre. Cela devait être omis par Mt. dont les termes font de l'astre un guide qui dispense de tout autre. Mais certainement la vue de la comète qui les avait pour ainsi dire devancés en Occident et qui paraissait suspendue au-dessus de Bethléem était un signe plus significatif qu'ils étaient arrivés que la disparition de Vénus au matin quand Énée vint chez les Laurentes. Nous ne saurions prétendre que l'év. du Ps.-Matth. (c. xvr, 1. 2. ed. Tisch., p. 83) donne un texte plus ancien, mais du moins il interprète un peu comme nous le faisons : Euntibus autem magis in via apparuit eis stella, et quasi quae ducatum praestaret illis, ita antecedebat eos, quousque pervenirent, ubi puer eral. I en est de ce signal un peu comme de la voie lactée qui servait de guide aux pèlerins du moyen âge et qu'on nommait pour cela le chemin de saint Jacques. Elle ne dispensait pas de toute autre information; tout cela doit s'entendre positis ponendis, l'écrivain ne mettant en relief que le phénomène céleste qui sert de signe. εἶδον l'aor. pour le plus-que-parfait; προῆγεν impf. transitif au sens de précéder (hell., non classique, Deb. $ 150); ἐστάθη plus probable que ἔστη, mais le sens est le même. — ἐπάνω οὗ ἣν non pas la ville (Weiss) mais l'endroit quel qu'il fat où était l'enfant. D a précisé encore davantage : « au-dessus de l'enfant
2:10
La joie des Mages confirme ce qui résultait déjà de ἰδού : l’astre apparaît de nouveau après avoir disparu. La tournure est hébraïque; ef. Jonas 1v, 6 ἐχάρη Ἰωνᾶς... χαρὰν μεγάλην; [5. ΧΧΣΙΣ, 2 (A etc.). σφόδρα est du style de Mi. (sept fois, une fois Mc. une fois Le.).
2:11
Les Mages entrent dans une maison. Une tradition très ancienne disait une grotte (Justin, Tryph. €. LXxVIII, 5; Protév. Jac. xvin), et Origène s’appuyait même sur cette tradition locale pour prouver la nativité à Bethléem (Contra Cels. 1, 51). Cette grotte était d’ailleurs en parfaite harmonie avec l'étable de Le. τι, 6 5. On peut supposer qu'après la naissance de Jésus, Joseph a pu lui trouver un abri plus commode (Schanz, Kn.) ou simplement que Mt. se sert d'un terme vague, tout naturel si l'on ne voulait rien préciser (JUSTIN, Tryph. l. 1.). Le. ne suggère en aucune manière que l'on ait quitté l'étable avant le quarantième jour. Et ceux qui veulent amener les Mages dans une maison ne se rendent peut-être pas compte de la facilité avec laquelle les Orientaux se logent dans une grotte, à proximité des animaux. En tout cas la tradition ancienne n'a voulu connaître que la grotte. Il faudrait peut-être dire une maison, si les Mages n'étaient venus que deux ans après; cf. sur v. 16. De toute façon, si la conciliation réelle entre Le. et Mt. ne souffre pas difficulté, il faut convenir qu'aucun des deux ne tient compte de l’autre dans le choix des expressions. — « L'enfant avec Marie sa mère » pour nous rappeler la conception virginale. La tradition iconographique des Catacombes ἃ retenu ce trait avec soin, quelquefois en faisant planer l'étoile au-dessus de la tête de l'enfant. ἢ n’est pas dit que les Mages aient été mis au courant de la virginité de Marie, mais elle prenait ainsi sa place privilégiée comme la Mère qui présente aux hommages son Jésus. Le prosternement est fortement exprimé par deux verbes; c’est l'acte le plus important; mais les artistes ont préféré représenter les Mages offrant les présents, scène plus variée et d’une allure plus agréable. θησαυρούς sont les sacoches de voyage (ἀπὸ τῆς πήρας αὐτῶν, Prot. ev. Jac. xxi, Tisch., ce qu'Épiphane a pris pour le texte [περὶ πίστεως vii]) car θησαυρός se dit de tout endroit où l’on met les provisions, et même de boîtes (MM). Des présents étaient l'accompagnement obligé d'un hommage rendu à un grand, surtout à un roi. L'or et l’encens sont réunis dans Is. LX, 6 ἐκ Σαδὰ ἥξουσιν φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίδανον οἴσουσιν, οἵ, Ps. Lxx, 15 l'or d'Arabie, Jér. νι, 20, l'encens de Saba; la myrrhe et l’encens, Cant. m1, 6. — λίδανος (ou plus classique λιδανωτός) était la résine du λίδανος, arbre à encens. — σμύρνα, la résine du Balsamodendron myrrha, en hébreu “19, n’est connu dans l'A. T. que comme un parfum, surtout à propos de vêtements, parfumés par des fumigations (Cant. nr, 6) d’encens et de myrrhe, quoique la myrrhe ait été employée aussi à la confection d’une pâte pour les mains et les lèvres (Cant. v, 5.13). Il est vrai que la myrrhe comme parfum pouvait être employée dans les funérailles (Jo. χιχ, 39), ou être mélée au vin comme stupéfiant (Me. xv, 23); mais, offerte par les Mages avec l'or et l’encens, elle évoque seulement l'image du jeune et brillant monarque entrevu dans l'avenir (Ps. xurv, 8). C'est probablement l'usage de la myrrhe dans Jo. XX, 39 qui ἃ suggéré le beau symbolisme des Pères, élégamment résumé dans les vers de Juvencus Thus, aurum, myrrham, regique, hominique, Deoque Dona ferunt. Mais, on peut bien, comme Schanz, citer l'op. imperf. : haec autem etsi tunc non intellegebant magi, secundum quale myslerium ἰδία gerebantur, vel quid Significaret unumgucdque munus eorum, nihil tamen contrarium est. Rien dans le texte n'indique que les Mages aient connu la nature divine de Jésus, qui ne fut révélée aux Apôtres que.progressivement. Les textes bibliques cités prouvent que dans l’opinion des Hébreux l'or et l'encens (surtout réunis) provenaient ordinairement d'Arabie, οἱ il faut sans doute assigner à la myrrhe la même origine qu'à l'encens. C’est une grave raison de faire venir les Mages d'Arabie, car chacun apporte les présents de son pays (Gen. xzur, 11). Π faudrait alors parler de l'Arabie du sud, aujourd’hui le Yémen. Cependant ces produits .pénétraient plus aisément dans l'Arabie du nord qu’en Perse, et toute l'Arabie passait pour un même pays, surtout grâce aux caravanes de Ma‘an. 19) χρηματίζεσθαι, être instruit, spécialement par Dieu (Jos. .Ant. II, vin, 8). Le renseignement était souvent demandé par une prière (θα. 886, 24). La traduction de la Vg. responso accepto suppose cette prière, peut-être d'après lusage des songes demandés (ὄνειροι airnrixoi), dont l'interprétation était plus facile. Mais le texte n'indique pas que les Mages-aient consulté Dieu. Justin χατ᾿ ἀποχάλυψιν, par une révélation, ce que Syrcur. et sin. ant introduit dans le texte au lieu du songe. — ἀναχωρεῖν (dix fois dans Mt., Mc une fois, jamais Le.) quelquefois « se dérober par la.fuite », d'où les anachorètes (HM). Ge doit être le sens ici. En quelques heures les Mages pouvaient gagner.le pont du Jourdain par le désert et atteindre de là le pays des Nabatéens. Mais le moyen le plus sùr d'échapper à Hérode était d'aller directement au sud de La mer Morte ou de la traverser en barque (mosaïque de Mâdaba). De celte façon les Mages étaient dispensés de rendre compte à Hérode..Le même fait dans ΠῚ Regn. x, 9 et dans l’histoire de Tiridate (Dior 1. 1.}, ne répond pas à une semblable préoccupation.
2:13
Le gén. absolu, ἰδού et le prés. histor. φαίνεται, tout indique que l'apparition suivit de très près le départ des Mages. Aussi ἐγερθείς ne signifie pas quand tu seras éveillé, mais « lève-toi (héb. Op), et prends » etc. — ἕως ἀν εἴπω σοι, non pas : jusqu'à. ce que je te parle .de nouveau, mais, en sous-entendant autre chose, « jusqu'à nouvel avis — ζητεῖν est un des verbes qui ont pour régime l'infinilif avec τοῦ dans le sens final. D'ailleurs cette tournure est assez fréquente : ur, 13; χι, À; χπι, 3; xxiv, 45, et dans l’hellénisme (mais non Paul); cf. Deb. $ 400, ὃ. L'Égypte avait été souvent un lieu de refuge contre le pouvoir qui dominait à Jérusalem, cf. HI Regn. xt, 40 : καὶ ἐζήτησεν Σαλωμὼν θανατῶσαι τὸν ᾿Ιεροδοάμ. "καὶ ἀνέστη ral ἀπέστη καὶ ἀπέδρα els Αἴγυπτον.... καὶ ἦν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ ἕως οὗ ἀπέθανεν Σαλωμών. La ressemblance littéraire est assez étroite, mais la personnalité de Jéroboam ne pouvait être regardée comme le type de Jésus; la coïncidence est donc dans la manière sémitique d'écrire. Sous les Séleucides, Onias, fils du grand-prêtre Onias Il, avait fui en Égypte dans le nome d'Héliopolis et y avait fondé un temple (Jos. Ant. XII, 1x, 7). Depuis ce temps (vers 160 av. J.-C.) les Juifs y étaient très nombreux, allant et venant assez aisément par terre en cinq ou six jours ou en bateau. A la fin du règne d'Hérode, l'Égypte, devenue province romaine, était tout à fait en dehors de son action.
2:14
Exécution de l’ordre en termes parallèles, selon le style épique ou populaire; ef. v. 20. Il semble que Joseph se lève aussitôt et part de nuit sans perdre un instant. Nous ne savons pas dans quel endroit d'Égypte Joseph conduisit l'enfant et sa mère. En faveur de Matarieh près du Caire, on cite d'évangile arabe de l'enfance (éd. Tisch. c. xxiv). Mais le R. P. Peeters, Bollandiste, ἃ montré que c'était d’après un ms. interpolé : « L'arbre de la Vierge, dont le dernier remplaçant vient à peine de disparaître, la source miraculeuse οἱ le célèbre jardin du Baume que l'on vénérait jadis à Matarieh, apparaissent pour la première fois/idans l'histoire, au xmre siècle. D’après la tradition officielle de l’église copte, le souvenir du passage du séjour de la Sainte Famille est localisé dans un certain nombre de sanctuaires dont le plus fameux est le monastère de Koskäm, en Moyenne-Égypte, près d'ASmunaïn, ce qui ne cadre pas mal avec la légende du palmier d'Hermopolis, déjà relatée par Sozomène » (HE. v, 21) (Évangiles apocryphes, Il, p. xxvirs.). D'ailleurs l'interpolation, postérieure au xm° siècle, ne cite Matarieh que comme un lieu de passage, et fixe Le séjour à Misr (6. xxv), c’est-à-dire au Caire, ayant sans doute en vue la crypte de l'église d'Abou Sargah, au centre de la forteresse romaine de Qasr aë-Sam‘a, crypte qui pourrait dater à peu près de la conquête arabe (Peeters, l. 1. p. 28). On accordera encore moins d'importance aux récits des évangiles apocryphes, qui ont multiplié les miracles et les historiettes sur l'itinéraire de la Sainte Famille.
2:15
La tournure ἵνα πληρωθῇ est la même que 1, 22, mais il faut bien tenir compte de ce fait que 16 texte du prophète est au passé, et n'est donc pas une prophétie. Mt. cite Osée σι, 1, d’après l'hébreu (LXX μετεκάλεσα τὰ τέχνα αὐτοῦ), qui entend par le fils de Dieu le peuple d'Israël (Ex. 1v, 22. 23; Jér. xxxr, 9. 20). Mt. n'a pu avoir là-dessus le moindre doute, et n’a pas eu l'intention de donner le change à ses lecteurs, comme le prétendait Julien, puisqu'il n'a pas transposé le passé du verbe en un futur. Mais il a vu une ressemblance entre le fait d'Israël (cf. Num. xx, 22; xx1v, 8) et le fait de Jésus, séjournant en Égypte avant d'accomplir leurs destinées au pays où Dieu les conduirait. Il est exagéré de dire avec Chrys. que si Jésus « n'était venu, la prophétie n'aurait pas eu son terme convenable », puisqu'il n'y a pas de prophétie, mais on peut dire avec Jérôme : quod ea quae τυπικῶς praecedunt in alis, tucta veritatem et adimpletionem referantur ad Christum. À prendre les termes en eux-mêmes, ils sont plus complètement exacts du Christ, puisqu'il était le vrai Fils, mais ce n'était plusla pensée d'Osée, et M. n'a pas prétendu changer son sens. Le peuple d'Israël pouvait étre la figure du Fils de Dieu selon la théorie de Paul (1 Cor. x, 11 et Gal, iv, 24 ss.) sans être envisagé précisément comme roi théocratique (contre Hol!z. Loisy). La pensée de Mt. parait être : Si le prophète ἃ pu parler ainsi d'Israël, combien plus justement pouvons-nous le dire de Jésus! il y a donc perfection et accomplissement d’un cas à l’autre; cf v, 47. — La leçon des LXX ne pouvait comporter ce sens; elle est préférée par de nombreux critiques (Loisy, etc.), mais elle est moins satisfaisante pour le parallélisme, et paraît destinée à faciliter le raccord avec le v. 2. Moins hardie comme image et plus coulante, elle parait assurément moins authentique, même si l'on n'admet pas l’exégèse de van Hoonacker.
2:16
C'était se jouer d'Hérode, du point de vue du yran, que de se dérober par la fuite au lieu de répondre à son invitation et d’obéir à ses ordres. Il n'attendit guère pour s'informer des mages et appri qu’ils avaient disparu. Assurément, selon les usages orientaux de la vie au grand air, tout Bethléem avait su où les mages étaient entrés. Mais la sainte Famille n'était plus là. On pouvait croire qu'elle n’était guère éloignée. Plutôt que de s’enquérir, Hérode fait tuer tous les enfants mâles dans la petite ville et dans ses limites. — ἀπὸ διετοῦς, au masc., ὦ bienni ou a bimo, sous-entendu παῖδος, cf. 1 Par. xxvu, 23 ἀπὸ elrogaetoës xal χάτω, et Num. τ, 3.20 ἀπὸ εἰχοσαετοῦς καὶ ἐπάνω, plutôt qu'au neutre α bimatu (Va); cf. Rufin, hist. 1, vur, 1 α bimis et infra. Pourquoi ce chiffre? Si l’astre était apparu deux ans auparavant, il était inutile de descendre si bas. S'il était apparu depuis peu, pourquoi remonter si haut? De toute façon, Hérode fait bonne mesure. Il s'était informé exactement, mais il ne s’en tient pas là, ne sachant pas en somme la valeur exacte du présage. On estime à une vingtaine le nombre des victimes. Il n’y a pas lieu de franchir les bornes de la petite cité, bornes qui étaient parfaitement connues par l'usage. Les ὅρια se disaient surtout des tribus, mais aussi des villes (1 Regn. νι, 42), ÉVANCILE SELON SAINT MATTHIEU. 3 l'intétieur des limites constituant le territoire (cf. ΒΒ. 1899, p. 422 ss.; 1900, p. 435 s.). Holtzmann a prétendu que cette cruauté dépasse tout ce que Josèphe a raconté du vieux roi. C'est méconnaître 16 peu de cas que faisait l'antiquité païenne des enfants nouveau-nés. Chacun d'eux risquait d'être condamné à périr par la volonté du père, et l'autorité publique pouvait les condamner en bloc. Suétone, dans la vie d'Auguste (τοῖν, 3) : Aucéor est Tulius Marathus, ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romae factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populo Romano naturam parturire; Senatum exterritum censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur; eos qui gravidas uores haberent, quod ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse ne senatus consultum ad aerarium deferretur. On peut douter de l'exactitude du fait, mais l'historien ne s'en étonne ni ne s’en indigne, et si les futurs pères détournent le coup, c’est par ambition. Le massacre eût été combien plus horrible à Rome! Autre cas non moins significatif, Une comète ayant apparu sous Néron (Suér. Nero, xxxvi), anœius ea re, ut ex Balbillo astrologo didicit, solere reges talia ostenta coede aliqua üllustri expiaré aique a semet in capita procerum depellere, nobilissimo cuique exitium destinavit. Les enfants furent compris dans ces exécutions : damnatorum liberi urbe pulsi enectique veneno aut fame; constat quosdam cuin paedagogis et capsaris (esclaves qui portaient le matériel scolaire) uno prandio pariter necafos, alios diurnum victum prohibitos quaerere. Pesez le solere reges, et le massacre de Bethléem devient la précaution normale d’un despote oriental, tel qu'Hérode Fétait réellement. Si l’astre fut une comète, Hérode ne craignit pas seulement pour le trône de ses fils, mais pour le sien. 1 fallait verser du sang pour éloigner de lui le fléau; la visite des Mages indiquait un objet à sa fureur. D'ailleurs nous ne saurions regarder comme une allusion distincte et positive le texte de Macrobe (Sat. IL, iv, 11), au ve siècle : cum audisset inter pueros, quos in Syria Herodes, rex Iudaeorun, intra bimatum iussit interfici, flium quoque eius occisum ait, melius est Herodis porcum (ᾧν) esse quam filium (υἱόν). Le jeu de mots d'Auguste s'explique par la mort d'Antipater (Ant. XVII, vu, 1), et c'est par suite d'une confusion que Macrobe ἃ mis Antipater parmi les enfants dont il connaissait le massacre par Mt., comme l'indique intra bimatum, bimatus étant un ierme rare.
2:17
Au lieu de ἵνα, Mt. écrit τότε, sans doute pour éviter qu'on n’entende le massacre comme un fait directement voulu de Dieu (Klost.). Mais le mal luimême est ramené à ses desseins. Cette fois le prophète est nommé, c'est Jérémie, tandis qu'Isaïe, Michée et Osée avaient été cités sans nom propre. Condamin αὐ Jer, xxx1, 435 : « Ce n'est pas une simple accommodation des Mages. {Alors fut accompli ce qui avait été dit par le prophète Jérémie 18Une voix ἃ été entendue dans Rama, lamentation, et maint gémissement Rachel pleure ses enfants et n'a pas voulu être consolée, car ils ne sont plus. paroles de Jérémie à un événement tout différent. Si Jérémie a pu représenter Rachel inconsolable au départ de ses fils pour l'exil, cette figure trouve une application réelle, et plus vive encore, pour peindre la douleur des mères israélites dont Hérode avait fait massacrer 165 enfants. » Cette pensée empruntée à Maldonat est plus judicieuse que le verbiage de Kn. qui introduit ici le deuil sur la ruine religieuse d'Israël par le rejet du Messie, ete. Mais si la ressemblance du deuil suffit, il est inutile d'ajouter avec Condamin que la citation de Mt. ἃ été suggérée par la tradition qui plaçait le tombeau de Rachel près de Bethléem (Gen. xxxv, 19). Dans ce cas Mt. n’eût pas écrit ἐν Paué, qui rappelait le voisinage de Béthel et la tribu de Benjamin (1 Sam. x, 2.3), où était le tombeau de Rachel. Son texte fait abstraction de la topographie, Mais il devait naturellement être interprété en faveur de la tradition juive qui, ne connaissant d'autre Éphrata que Bethléem, ἃ glosé avant les LXX le texte de Gen. XXXV, 19; xiint, 7, et qui ἃ abouti au tombeau de Rachel actuel, près de Bethléem, un peu avant la bifurcation Hébron — Bethléem. Jérôme l’entendait ainsi : qui sepulta sit iurta Bethleem in Ephrala, ea ex materno corpusculi hospitio matris nomen acceperit. Mais pour être logique, il commentait in Rama par in eæcelso, ce qui est un simple coniresens dans la traduction de Jérémie, mais serait un non-sens dans la traduction de Mt. qui n’écrivait pas en hébreu. Le texte de Jérémie parlait de la déportation d'Éphraïim; mais déjà le Targum l’entendait de la prise de Jérusalem par Nabuchodonosor (cf. Jér. x, 1), On pouvait faire un pas de plus vers le sud sans abuser de l'élasticité de ces applications.
2:18
On dispute si ML. ἃ cité d’après l'hébreu ou d'après les LXX, et il faut bien convenir que dans les deux cas c'eût été librement. Le doute passe pour insoluble, d'autant que ni le texte hébreu ni celui des LXX ne sont assurés. Il semble bien que l'hébreu doive être corrigé d'après les LXX οἱ pour une raison de rythme, en supprimant : « sur ses enfants », et en changeant « il n'est plus », en «ils ne sont plus » de façon à aboutir au texte de Condamin : « On entend une voix à Rama, lamentations, larmes amèrès : c'est Rachel qui pleure ses enfants, et ne veut pas se consoler [}, car ‘ils ne sont’ plus »! Le texte de B est (xxxvin, 45) : Φωνὴ ἐν Ῥαμὰ ἠκούσθη θρήνου καὶ κλαυθμοῦ καὶ ὀδυρμοῦ. ῬῬαχὴλ ἀποχλαιομένη οὐχ ἤθελεν παύσασθαι ἐπὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτῆς, ὅτι οὐκ εἰσίν. De sorte que Mt. est plus rapproché de l’hébreu, ayant seulement changé amérement en πολύς et ajouté καί avant ὀδυρμός. S'il existait alors un ms. des LXX semblable à À qui ἃ MIS ἐπὶ των υἱων αὐτῆς καὶ aVant οὐχ n0ekev, puis παραχληθηναι au lieu de παύσασθαι, et omis ext τοις υἱοῖς αὐτῆς, on dirait que Mt. l'a suivi en remplaçant θρήνου par πολύς. Mais les mss. Α et Q ont probablement été corrigés d’après les Bexaples. Nous pensons que Mt. n'aurait pas abouti à son texte s’il n’avait voulu conserver quelque chose de l’hébreu, ne füt-ce qu'en remplaçant le génitif (des lamenta- tions) par le nominatif, et en faisant de xhafousa une apposition (comme dans l'hébreu), suivie de la copule. Le retour aux quatre hémistiches au lieu des deux périodes des LXX ne peut êlre fortuit. On ne sait comment expliquer le changement de amérement en πολύς : Mi. aurait-il écrit rtxpée, mal lu à une date très ancienne?
2:19
D'après Schürer (Geschichte. τ, p. 418, note 467), Hérode est mort entre le 97 mars et le 44 avril de l’an 4 av. J.-C., 750 de la fondation de Rome, peu de jours avant la Pâque, qui tombait cette année le 11 avril (Ant. XVII, 1x, ὃ; Bell. NI, 1, 2). Schanz note avec raison la simplicité de Mt. qui avait une si bonne occasion de montrer dans la mort du tyran un châtiment divin ou tout au moins eût pu rappeler les exécutions qui ensanglantèrent ses derniers jours et qui auraient même suivi sa mort, si on lui eût obéi (Ané. XVII, vi, 5). C'était cinq jours après qu'il eut fait exécuter Antipater. IL avait essayé de se rétablir aux bains de Callirrhoé au bord de la Mer morte, un peu au sud du Zerka- Mayin, et vint mourir à Jéricho. Entre la visite des Mages et sa mort il faut donc mettre au moins un mois, mais rien n'indique que la fuite en Égypte ait duré plus longtemps. La phrase est conçue sur le type du v. 13.
2:20
Même tournure que v. 14, mais de plus il est difficile de contester du moins une réminiscence de Ex. 1v, 19 τεθνήκασιν γὰρ πάντες οἱ Enrobvtée σου τὴν ψυχήν. Le pluriel dans Ex. est tout naturel et justifié par πάντες. Dans ML. il ne peut s'entendre que d'Hérode, qui vient de mourir; peut-être suppose-t-il que d'autres seraient entrés dans son dessein. Ζητεῖν τὴν ψυχήν, tournure hébraïque très fréquente; cf. Rom. x1, 8, citant ΠῚ Regn. xx, 18. Enlever le principe vital, c'est enlever la vie. — « Le pays d'Israël » est le nom qu'ont repris les Sionistes, ΝΎ VIN; il pouvait s'entendre de la Judée et de la Galilée.
2:21
L’exécution sur le rythme du v. 44. Si Mt. avait sous les yeux Ex. 1v, 20, il s'en est donc écarté délibérément en évitant de dire sa femme et son fils. Plusieurs touristes voyant les hommes sur leurs ânes et les femmes marchant à pied, même en portant un enfant, prétendent y voir l'image de la Ste Famille. Mais sans parler des sentiments de Joseph, on peut rappeler que dans l’Exode Moïse fitmonter sa femme et ses enfants sur les bêtes de somme : ἀναλαδὼν δὲ Μωυσῆς τὴν γυναῖχα χαὶ τὰ παιδία ἀνεδίδασεν αὐτὰ ἐπὶ τὰ ὑποζύγια, χαὶ ἐπέστρεψεν εἰς Αἴγυπτον.
2:22
του πατρὸς αὐτοῦ Ἡρώδου (TH) où H. τ. x. a. (SV).
Mélange d’impressions humaines et d'assistance surnaturelle. Hérode avait désigné Antipas pour son successeur. Peu de jours avant sa mort, il fit un nouveau testament, et donna la Judée et la Samarie à Archélaüs avec le titre de roi, la Galilée et la Pérée à Antipas, avec le titre de tétrarque (Ant. XVII, vur, 1). Auguste refusa à Archélaüs le titre de τοὶ, n’en faisant qu'un ethnarque. Mais Archélaüs n'en avait pas moins pris le pouvoir dès la mort de son père, et avait été salué du titre de roi (Ant. XVII, vin, 2), qu’il espérait voir confirmer. L'expression de Mt. βασιλεύει n’est donc point inexacte. Il eut pour ses débuts une guerre civile à dompter, et passait pour un tyran cruel (Ant. XVIT, x, 2). D'après Schürer (τ, 451), il ἃ la plus mauvaise réputation parmi les fils d'Hérode. Si l'on joint à cela le sinistre souvenir du massacre des Innocents, on comprend les craintes de Joseph, et qu'il y ait eu lieu de préférer un autre séjour, fût-il sous La domination d'un autre fils d’Hérode. — L'avertissement n’est pas donné par un ange (cf. v. 12), mais toujours en songe.
2:23
Ναζαρεθ (T) où Ναζαρετ (HSV).
Nous arrivons enfin à Nazareth. Le scepticisme moderne est allé jusqu'à nier l'existence de ce bourg. Jésus ayant été nommé Ναζαρηνός ou Ναζωραῖος, on en aurait conclu à un bourg nommé Nazareth, mais peut-être était-il de Chorazin (Burkirr, The syriac forms of New Testament Proper Names, p. 17ss.). On objecte en effet que ni Josèphe, ni le Talmud ne nomment cette bourgade ou cette ville. Sans se prononcer sur l'existence de Nazareth, Lidzbarski ἃ essayé de donner une explication cohérente de tous les noms en question (Mandäische Liturgien, 1920, p. xvi ss.). Jésus a été nommé 1x par le Talmud. C'était le désigner comme membre d'une secte des observants, D. Ce mot a été transporté tel quel en araméen (où la racine héb. 533 est représentée par Mai), sous la forme Ν᾿} et NYTIS2 d'où les Νασαραῖοι et les Ναζωραῖοι, Les Mandéens se nommaient NONYISNI, qui n’a pu être emprunté au grec, mais à une forme syriaque, désignant une ancienne secte, et non les chrétiens, telle que les Nasapatot d'Épiphane (Haer. XVII, τ, 4) antérieurs au christianisme. Les épithètes de Nazaréen et de Nazaréens n’ont donc rien à voir avec Nazareth. Mais on voit que Lidzbarski ne s'étonne pas du changement de sadé en zéta, qui est le principal obstacle signalé par Burkitt. Zimmern (Zeitschrift der d. morg. Gesellschaft, 1920, p. 430) remonte aux Babyloniens, et prend la racine « garder » non pas pour garder des observances (ce qui serait un nom bien étrange pour les chrétiens), maisrde garder des mystères, alléguant ndsir piristi « gardien de mystère » et même nisirtu, mys- C'est, sous une forme philologique plus exacte, la thèse de Benj. Smith (cf. RB., 1906, p. 645 ss.). On cite aussi, pour prouver l'existence des Nazaréens avant Jésus, la Nazerinorum tetrarchia près d’'Apamée sur l'Oronte (Pline, A. N. ν, 81). Nier l’existence de Naareth est puéril. La bourgade ou la ville — la différence n'importe pas beaucoup dans la nomenclature biblique — est nommée Ναζαρεθ ou Naïaper, deux formes qui supposent une terminaison n, avec plus ou moins d’altention au son un peu sifflant qui était la prononciation correcte. La forme Ναζαρα (seulement dans Le. τν, 46 et dans quelques témoins de Mi. iv, 13) est en soi une forme grecque au pluriel, comme ‘Ieposéloua, les deux pouvant s’employer au singulier. Mt. ἃ le singulier féminin pour “Ἱεροσόλυμα (1, 43) comme pour Nefape. Jules Africain écrivait : ἀπό τε Ναζάρων καὶ Κωχαδὰ χωμῶν ᾿Ιουδαϊχῶν, ce qui est une attestation de l'existence de Nazareth au commencement du troisième siècle, au plus tard, par quelqu'un qui connaissait très bien le pays. D'ailleurs si le nom avait été inventé d’après l'évangile, on l'eûl écrit avec un zaïn, comme a fait la syriaque palestinienne, et non avec un sadé, restitué par syreur. sin. et pes. d’après le nom du lieu. Ces Syriens ont toujours ΠΝ, et les Arabes (premier témoignage connu vers l'an 730 d'après Noeinre, Zeitschrift für Assyriol. xxx, 73 note 2) 5..-L5. Ordinairement καὶ a été rendu par o, mais on trouve le © par exemple dans Ζωαρά pour «23 (Eusèse, Onom. V. βαλά). Ce changement admis, Ναζαρηνός était le gentilice normal de Ναζαρεθ ou Ναζαρα; c’est la seule forme que Mec. ait employée; Le. Va deux fois (ιν, 34 et xxiv, 19). Elle ne se dit jamais au pluriel dans le N. T. Tandis que Ναζωραῖος, qui se dit de Jésus dans Mt. (1, 23; xxvi, 71) dans Le. (xvur, 37), dans Jo. (xvur, 5. 7; xix, 49) et six fois dans les Actes, se dit aussi des disciples de Jésus : Act. xxiv, 5 πρωτοστάτην τε τῆς τῶν Ναζωραίων αἱρέσεως. L'origine de cette forme est la seule difficulté du sujet, car le talmudique nôsri pour désus, et nôsrim pour les chrétiens, comme le syriaque nôsrôy5 ou räsräyä, viennent très naturellement de Nâsrat, le syriaque ayant vocalisé le scheva, ensuite allongé. D'où vient donc Ναζωραῖος, qui n'a pas d'équivalent spécial en syriaque? Dans le Comm. de Le, Ὁ. 486, j'ai postulé avec Dalman une forme secondaire du nom de la ville, ΓΝ, mais elle n’a comme appui que le syr. paleslinien nv sur Le. 1, 26, pour le seul ms. ἃ, ce qui est négligeable. Peut-être Ναζωραῖος n'a-t-il été dit de Jésus qu'après que ses fidèles ont élé appelés Ναζωραῖοι, Il serait étonnant qu'on ait tout d’abord employé simultanément Ναζαρηνός et Ναζωραῖος. Le premier nom était un gentilice tout indiqué, comme Μαγδαληνή, mais le second convenait mieux pour désigner une secte; οἵ. Σαδδουκαῖοι etc. Les chrétiens n'ont jamais pris eux-mêmes ce nom; ils l'ont peut-être reeu de leurs adversaires dans la circonstance indiquée aux Actes (zxrv, 5). On comprendrait très bien que pour les disciples on ait employé en araméen la forme kafol, comme on disait ΝΞ ΤΠ un scribe, ΝΥΝ un parleur, ete. de sorte que nasiraya eùt été en même temps un nomen agentis et un gentilice indiquant le lieu d'origine. Le second nom des Mandéens s'expliquerait bien de cette façon, comme le pluriel arabe nasära (d'où est venu le singulier nasräni). Les Nazerint de Pline, d'où sont peut-être venus 165 Nosairis n'ont rien à voir dans cette affaire. En parlant des Νασαραῖοι Épiphane les distingue des Ναζωφαῖοι (xxx, 6, 4). Il n'y ἃ pas de raison de déduire la seconde forme de la première, ni par conséquent de rattacher les Ναζωραῖοι à une secte juive préexistante. Nous ne verrions aucun inconvénient à admettre que des ennemis aient risqué cette assimilation dans une intention de dénigrement, mais il n'y en a vraiment pas de trace. D'autant que peut-être Épiphane, qui est le seul à parler des Νασαραῖοι, s'est trompé en les croyant antérieurs au christianisme (Bousset, Zimmern etce.). Mais sûrement l'épithète de Ναζωραῖοι qui rattachait les disciples de Jésus à la Galilée et à une bourgade qui n'avait pas d'histoire, était bien un sobriquet dans la pensée des Juifs. C'est ce qui va nous expliquer la pensée de Mt. Î est constant que rien dans l’Écriture ne désigne le Christ comme devant être Nazaréen. D'anciens Pères supposaient un passage perdu; des critiques modernes supposent un apocryphe disparu. Mais Jérôme avait déjà parfaitement compris que dans ce cas, à la différence des autres, Mt. ne visait pas un texte déterminé ; nunc autem pluraliter prophetas vocans, ostendit se non verba de: scripturis summpsisse sed sensum. Cependant plusieurs (Schanz, Knab. Holtz.) supposent plus ou moins nettement une allusion à 15. xt, 1, où le Messie est nommé nésér, rejeton. Ce serait un jeu de mots assez bizarre, entre ce nésèr et la ville de Nazareth. Jérôme avait admis ce sens dans le Comm. de Mt. (en l'an 398), mais dans le Comm. d'Isaïe (en l'an 407-408) il objecte : sed sciendum quod hic NESER, per sade litteram scribatur.… Porro Nazaraei, quos LXX sanctificatos, Symmachus separatos, transtulerunt, per zain semper scribantur elementum. Mt. aurait donc fait allusion au nazir qui consacrait à Dieu sa chevelure pour sauver son peuple (Jud. xur, 5). On peut dire que les prophètes désiznaient le Messie comme saint, (MeNeile), mais quel rapport entre la sainteté et Nazareth? Il faut donc (Zahn) prendre Ναζωραῖοι pour une épithète à la fois géographique et qualificative, dans la bouche des Juifs un terme peu reluisant. Chrys. : καὶ γὰρ ἦν εὐτελὲς τὸ χωρίον" μᾶλλον δὲ οὐ τὸ χωρίον μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἅπαν τὸ μέρος τῆς Γαλιλαίας. C’est quelque chose à Jérusalem comme un Béotien à Athènes ou un Philistin dans une université allemande. Or les prophètes avaient annoncé que le serviteur de Iahvé serait méconnu, méprisé (Is. un; Ps. rxvi, 9 ete.). Mt. a donc voulu montrer comment les origines de Jésus répondaient à deux données de la prophétie. I était bien né à Bethléem, comme l'avait annoncé le Seigneur, et se rattachait ainsi à la maison de David, mais c'était aussi par une volonté du ciel, indiquée par les prophètes, qu'il avail paru dans un pays dont on n’attendait rien de bon (Jo. 1, 46). en a été, en est encore mise en doute, même par ceux qui reconnaissent celle des faïts du ministère de Jésus et qui s'inclinent devant la conception surnaturelle comme devant un dogme. On peut indiquer trois chefs de difficultés. a) C'est précisément parce que Jésus a été reconnu pour le Messie d'Israël à cause de ses miracles et de sa résurrection, qu'on a entouré son enfance d’une auréole qui assimilait ses destinées à celles d'Israël et de son roi. Le roi attendu était figuré par une étoile, et c'est une étoile qui guide les Mages; Israël avait été appelé d'Égypte, de même Jésus; Rachel avait pleuré sur la déportation d'Israël : elle pleure encore sur le massacre des innocents. Le caractère fictif des événements, imaginés pour donner à Jésus le caraclère messianique, même dans son enfance, est souligné par la citation répétée des prophéties. Secondairement l’adoration des Mages est une réponse à l'incrédulité d'Israël. ὃ) Les faits se rangent aisément dans une catégorie bien connue du folklore, les dangers courus par un grand homme, et auxquels il échappe comme par miracle, ou par miracle. On cite Sargon, Cyrus, Romulus, etc. Chez les Juifs il suffisait de rappeler Moïse sauvé des eaux, dont l'histoire est racontée par Josèphe en termes qui se rapprochent de ceux de Mt. précisément parce qu'il introduit le thème de l'enfant menaçant pour le tyran, qui recourt en vain à des mesures cruelles (Ant. I], 1x, 2) : τῶν ἱερογραμματέων τις,.. ἀγγέλει τῷ βασιλεῖ τεχθήσεσθαξ τινα κατ᾽ ἐχεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις, ὃς ταπεινώσει μὲν τὴν Αἰγυπτίων ἡγεμονίαν... δείσας δ᾽ ὁ βασιλεὺς κατὰ γνώμην τὴν ἐκείνου χελεύει πᾶν τὸ γεννηθὲν ἄρσεν ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰσραηλιτῶν εἰς τὸν ποταμὸν ῥιπτοῦντας διαφθείρειν... Une tradition rabbinique alléguée par Nestle (ZnTW, vin, p. 74 ss.) met en scène les conseillers de Nemrod; ils ont vu une étoile qui annonce un conquérant. Il faudrait le tuer. C'est le petit Abraham que Tharé cache durant trois ans. La ressemblance avec Mt. est très étroite, puisque l'étoile est jointe au thème du péril de l'enfant. . €) Si ces objections sont surtout modernes, les anciens se sont déjà préoccupés de concilier Le. et Mt. D'après Le., Joseph est de Nazareth et y retourne aussitôt après la présentation de l'enfant au Temple: il n’est question ni des Mages, ni de fuite en Égypte. D'après Mt., Joseph parait être chez lui à Bethléem, et s’il s'installe à Nazareth, c’est à la suite d’un avertissement divin et de faits qui l’empêchent de regagner son domicile. La difficulté n’est pas seulement de faire entrer ces deux ordres de faits dans le cadre de la réalité : ce sont deux conceptions distinctes des origines de Jésus. On ne saurait nier que ces difficultés sont impressionnantes. La critique historique pourrait incliner à reconnaitre à ces récits un caractère légendaire sans rien sacrifier de la carrière surnaturelle de Jésus. C'est, dirait-on, parce qu’il s'est fait reconnaître pour le Messie d'après ses miracles, que Jésus a été sur ce point assimilé aux héros les plus illustres de l'histoire, Si cela était nécessaire, on verrait dans ces récits un genre littéraire, ayant ses lois propres, qu'il faudrait interpréter d'après ces lois, méme dans une histoire inspirée, comme un hors-d'œuvre, une introduction symbolique à l'action de Jésus, sauveur d'Israël et des Gentils, méconnu par Israël, reconnu par les Gentils. Mais il ne faudrait en venir là que si les récits avaient vraiment un caractère d’invraisemblanee qui les classerait dans une des deux catégories : du folk-lore, ou d'une création littéraire artificielle permettant d'v reconnaître un symbole intentionnel. Les critiques ne distinguent pas nettement ces deux hypothèses. 115 n’osent prétendré que Mt. a créé ces histoires. Elles existaient donc dans la tradition. Mais une tradition populaire leur aurait-elle donné ce cachet scripturaire? Assurément non. Il faut donc que Mt. ait tablé sur une tradition reçue, sa part consistant à montrer le rapport de ces histoires avec le plan divin. On ne peut donc objecter contre leur réalité cet aspect de démonstration providentielle, et il reste seulement à constater si elles sont en elles-mêmes invraisemblables, ou si elles peuvent avoir été transmises par une tradition authentique. Venons au détail. Les objections a) insistent sur le caractère artificiel scripturaire. Mais si le fait évangélique avait été imaginé pour réaliser la prophétie de Balaam (Num. xuiv, 17) ou d’Isaïe (1x, 6) ou d’un psaume messianique (LxxI, 45), comment se fait-il que ces endroits ne soient pas cités? Beaucoup de Pères, ilest vrai, ont vu dans l’astre un accomplissement de la prophétie de Balaam, mais ce fut à la condition de s’écarter de son texte, car elle parlait seulement par métaphore, l'étoile étant le roi fulur, non son signe. C’est l'unique interprétation des trois Targums dits d'Onkelos, de Jonathan et de Jérusalem. De même dans le Testament de Juda, xxiv, 1. Dans le Testament de Lévi, xviu, 3, l'astre n’est plus le roi, mais le signe du roi, seulement l'interpolation est manifeste, καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ ἐν οὐρανῷ ὡς βασιλέως vient mal après que le grand-prètre nouveau ἃ déjà exercé la justice, et avant la comparaison : οὗτος ἀναλάμψει ὡς 6 ἥλιος. La prophétie de Balaam pouvait aboutir à Barkokébas, non à un astre, signe de la naissance d’un enfant. Ce trait, nous l'avons vu, était courant dans la gentilité, mais précisément pour cela la démarche des Mages est plausible. Si les premiers chrétiens avaient pensé aux rois de Saba et d'Arabie de la Bible, ils n'auraient pas mis en scène des Mages qui ne sont pas des rois. L’exégèse subséquente montre ce qu'eût été le récit primitif, s’il eût été créé d’après l’A.T. Jésus n’a pas été qualifié d'astre, ce qui convenait au Messie. Il est vrai que la fuite en Égypte l'assimile à Israël, mais où était la nécessité pour le Messie de suivre les” mêmes destinées? Le messianisme du temps ne s’en doutait pas. Et si l'on voulait créer une réalisation aux prophéties, il n'en manquait pas d'assez précises et glorieuses. Pourquoi Mt. a-t-il été chercher des textes s'appliquant au passé? Que ses applications à lui aient quelque chose de subtil, on le lui a reproché. C’est donc que les faits étaient là, et qu'il leur cherchait des analogies dans le passé qui pussent projeter leur lumière sur eux. L'adoration des Mages était bien un reproche pour Israël, mais un reproche muet, qui suppose Israël en possession de la vérité prophétique. Son aveuglement actuel n’est point autrement relevé. Ὁ) Les récits ne sont donc point une œuvre littéraire de polémique où d’apologie,.mais une tradition qui a pris sous la plume de Mt. une teinte d'histoire providentielle. La tradition a-t-elle été plus créatrice? Si elle tenait du folk-lore, on le reconnaîtrait à un cachet d’invraisemblance, comme dans la légende de Romulus et de Rémus nourris par une louve, ou dans l’historiette de Nestle, tirée du Séfer hayyächdr, du xne siècle de notre ère d'après M. Fraenkel (ZnTW, vin, p. 2). Π n'est point rare que des enfants échappent à la mort comme par miracle. On le note des grands hommes, mais ce n'est point une raison pour le nier à leur propos. Le fait de Joas n'est pas invraisemblable. mais il croyait sûrement que Moïse avait échappé à une proscription générale. Dans le cas de Mt., l’histoire de Moïse s'est reflétée dans le style, mais elle est trop différente pour avoir suggéré celle de Jésus. Les autres analogies indiquées par les critiques ne sont pas moins éloignées. La naissance de Jésus s'étant produite dans un milieu obscur, l'idée du péril ne pouvait naître à son propos qu'après le fait de l'hommage rendu. Mais si l’on concède le fait principal de cel hommage, le péril en découle si naturellement et sans la moindre invraisemblance, qu'on ne saurait rien lui opposer. Tout se réduit donc à l'épisode des Mages, que l'A. T. ne suggère pas, et qu'on prétend être un décalque du voyage de Tiridate. Or cette difficulté-là n'est pas sérieuse à cause de la date de ce voyage et de son caractère beaucoup plus politique que religieux. 6) La véritable difficulté est de concilier Le. et Mt. Mais notons d’abord que Mt. s'est imposé aussi bien que Lc. à la conscience chrétienne, ce qui eût été bien difficile si son récit eût été dépourvu de réalité, précisément à cause du thème de Le. De sorte que, à s’en tenir aux règles ordinaires de la critique, on répondrait que chaque auteur avait un dessein différent. Luc écrivait en historien qui devait expliquer pourquoi Jésus, conçu à Nazareth, était né à Bethléem; ensuite il a suivi le cours des événements qui se présentaient nécessairement dans l'existence d'un jeune Israélite, circoncision, présentation, visites au Temple. Matthieu, lui, a voulu expliquer comment Jésus, né à Bethléem où il devait naître d’après les Écritures et d’après son origine davidique, a cependant été amené à passer pour Nazaréen dans son ministère. Joseph appartenait à Bethléem de iure, et c’est pourquoi Mt. ne se préoccupe pas d'expliquer comment il y est venu. De son côté Le. n’ayant rien à dire de la fuite en Égypte raconte le retour à Nazareth comme si les parents de Jésus étaient venus de Jérusalem. On ne refuserait pas pour si peu d'admettre la conciliation de récits de physionomie aussi différente. Nous avons seulement à nous demander si ce procédé est compatible avec l'inspiration? 5, Augustin (de cons. ev., 11, v, 16) a répondu déjà : hic proinde cognoscendum 681... sic unumquemque evangelistam contexere narrationem suam, ut tanquam nihil praetermüittentis series digesta videatur (ainsi il se donne l'apparence d’avoir tout dit); acitis enim quae non vult dicere sic ea quae vult dicere illis quae dicebat adiungüt, ut ipsa continuo sequi videantur (ainsi il se donne l'apparence d’une narration continue, sans que les faits se soient suivis en réalité). C'est d’après ces principes qu'Augustin a rangé les fails dans le seul ordre convenable en gros, si l'on veut à tout prix ne faire qu'une histoire de deux histoires qui ne se contredisent pas, mais qui n'ont pas été faites pour être emboitées dans un récit continu. Il place très naturellement la fuite en Égypte après la Présentation. Mais l’adoration des mages doit, elle aussi, être placée après la Présentation, car elle ἃ dû être suivie immédiatement de la fuite en Égypte. Il est déjà assez difficile à expliquer que le iyrau n'ait pas envoyé ses sbires avec les mages. 1 n'y avail pas un instant à perdre pour leur échapper. Une fois admis, avec Auguslin, que le retour à Nazareth n'a pas suivi immédiatement la Présentation — quelle que soit l'apparence de Le. —, on pourrait supposer que la Sainte Famille ἃ prolongé son stjour à Bethléem, et que l’arrivée des mages n'a eu lieu que près de deux ans après la Nativité. C'est Mopsueste, Hippolyte de Thèbes (Diekamp, p. 57 ss.), fondée sur ΜΙ. u, 46. I semble qu'on ait disputé sur ce point à Rome en l'an 119, très exactement repéré d'après les consuls dans un apocryphe syriaque du ve siècle, publié par W. Wright (Journal of sacred litterature, oct. 1866). . Mais précisément au début du n° siècle, dans la plus ancienne peinture des catacombes, l'enfant est « tout emmailloté » (Wicrgrt, Fractio panis, Ὁ. 25), et si cette disposition a été changée, il est probable que c'est pour obtenir un effet artistique meilleur contre la tradition primitive, très fermement attestée par Justin, ἅμα γὰρ τῷ γεννηθῆναι αὐτὸν μάγοι … παραγενόμενοι (Dial. LXXVIL, et dans les mêmes termes c. LXXXVIL, CIE, CVI). Dans le même sens, ou à peu près, Chrys. Aug. Hil. etc. D'ailleurs la date de Le. ur, 23 oblige à placer la naissance de Jésus très peu avant la mort d’'Hérode. On objecte encore : si les faits peuvent se compléter et s’ordonner, à tout le moins Le. qui s’est informé auprès du cercle intime de l'enfance n'aurait pu ignorer les faits racontés par Mt., et s’il les ἃ omis, n'est-ce pas une preuve qu'ils n’ont pas eu lieu? — Non, car il ne serait pas difficile d'indiquer les raisons qui auraient pu guider Le., d’après ce que nous avons cru reconnaître de sa méthode. Très aisément les gentils auraient pu être tentés de voir dans les Mages des Chaldéens astrologues, comme ont fait plusieurs Pères, et le séjour en Égypte a donné lieu de fait à de malignes insinuations de la part des Juifs, qui ont prétendu que Jésus y avait appris la sorcellerie (One. contra Cels. 1, 28 : οὗτος διὰ πενίαν εἰς Αἴγυπτον μισθαρνήσας xäxet δυνάμεών τινων πεῖρα-- θείς, ἐφ᾽ αἷς Αἰγύπτιοι σεμνύνονται, οἵ. Chabbat bab. 104. b), insinuations qui pouvaient trouver crédit auprès des gentils. Et l'avantage de citer à ce propos l'Écriture n’entrait pas dans le dessein de Le. Nous avons vu que le thème de Mt. était de conduire Jésus de Bethléem à Nazareth en conformité avec les Écritures. Luc ayant préféré montrer comment Jésus étail venu de Nazareth à Bethléem par une disposition humaine des choses, les deux plans, sans s’exclure, avaient leur raison d'être distincte d'après le cercle des lecteurs. Toutefois il demeure plus probable que Lc. n’a pas connu Mt., du moins comme une œuvre faisant autorité, car il eût pris soin de ne pas paraître le contredire, à moins qu'il n’en ait eu au contraire l'intention formelle. Ge sont: donc précisément ceux qui croient à l'inspiration qui doivent admettre l'indépendance des deux Nous concluons donc, non pas précisément que le ch. πὶ de Mt., s'il était isolé, se présenterait avec cet aspect historique qui défie la critique, mais du moins qu'il doit b‘néficier du caractère de l'ouvrage entier. Tite-Live manifeste clairement qu'il ne croit pas à l’histoire de Romulus et de Rémus; Hérodote lui-mème a retranché des origines de Cyrus la chienne qui l'avait allaité. Si Mt, qui est dans tout le cours de son évangile un rapporteur sérieux οἱ consciencieux des faits, ἃ exposé ceux de l’enfance comme ayant la même réalité que le reste, nous n'avons pas le droit de lui donner un démenti. La critique ne saurait même pas alléguer l'impossiblité des miracles, car sauf l'aspect de guide humain donné à l’astre (nr, 1), il n'y a de miraculeux dans ces récits que les avertissements donnés par Dieu en songe. Rien n'indique que l'astre ait été créé par Dieu dans un but spécial, et il n’est même pas dit que son apparition ait réellement coïncidé avec la naissance de Jésus. L'évangile approuve la bonne volonté des Mages; il ne se fait pas garant de leurs opinions astronomiques, et l'on peut dire qu’il n'encourage pas plus leur goût pour la consultation des astres que la Genèse ne canonise les ruses de Jacob. Tout rentre dans les desseins de Dieu, qui a pu se servir de dispositions d'esprit contestables, et d’une incontestable bonne volonté, pour amener les Mages aux pieds de l'Enfant, tandis que la science parfaitement correcte des docteurs d'Israël ne leur a servi de rien. Quant aux récits de naissances sans la participation du mari, on pourra voir RB. 1914, p. 60 ss. Récemment Ed. Meyer (Ursprung und Anfänge des Christentums, 1, p, 56) a déclaré que «le parallélisme entre Matthieu et la légende de la naissance de Platon ne pouvait être plus parfait ». Or le seul point semblable est qu'Ariston pas plus que Joseph n'aurait été pour quelque chose dans la conception. Le mythe athénien suppose une union ordinaire, tout en remplaçant le mari par Apollon, ou selon des esprits plus, délicats (Olympiodore) par un fantôme d'Apolion. Tous les mythes païens en sont là. Mais entre Ariston et Joseph il y a cette opposition plus marquée pour Ariston que pour d'autres, qu’Ariston voulait même faire violence à sa femme, οἱ qu'il en est empêché par l'apparition, tandis que l'ange engage Joseph à ne pas éloiguer sa femme et à la prendre auprès de lui. L'ange n'a même pas à lui faire de recommandations, qui seraient inutiles envers celui qui est associé à la confidence d’un mystère auguste. Il n'y a donc entre les deux récits que le raccord négatif indispensable. Du reste ce qui est unique dans la conception sumnaturelle, c’est qu’elle exclut l'action maritale que les légendes païennes supposent toujours. Quant aux idées que se font certains Australiens ete. que la conception n'est nullement causée par l'union, on nous permettra de dire qu'elles n’ont rien à faire ici. Voici les textes relatifs à Platon : PLur. Quaest. conv. vur, 1, 2 : ἅμα δὲ τῆς λεγομένης ᾿Αρίστωνι τῷ Πλάτωνος πατρὶ γινέσθαι χαθ᾽ ὕπνον ὄψεως χαὶ φωνῆς ἀπαγορευούσης μὴ συγγενέσθαι τῇ γυναικὶ μηδ᾽ ἅψασθαι δέκα μηνῶν ἐμνημόνευσεν. Diogène Laërce m, 1, 2 cite Speusippe, Cléarque, Anaxilaïdès…. φασὶν ὡς ᾿Αθήνησιν ἦν λόγος, ὡραίαν οὖσαν τὴν Περιχτιόνην βιάζεσθαι τὸν ᾿Αρίστωνα χαὶ μὴ ἐπιτυγχάνειν" παυόμενόν τε τῆς βίας ἰδεῖν τὴν τοῦ ᾿Απόλλωνος ὄψιν, ὅθεν χαθαρὰν γάμου φυλάξαι ἕως τῆς ἀποχνήσεως, Cf. Apul. in Plat. 1, 1, et Origène, contre Celse 1, 37. CHAPITRE I 1 Ἔν δὲ ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐχείναις παραγίνεται ᾿Ιωάνης ὁ βαπτιστὴς κηρύσ: 4. ὃε a. ταῖς (THV) plutôt que om. (8). DEUXIÈME PARTIE : L'INVESTITURE DE JÉSUS (nt, τιν, 11). Dans cette partie, le parallélisme est assez étroit entre Mt. Le. et Mc., surtout entre Mt. et Le. Il y ἃ deux actes principaux : le bapième de Jésus (ur) et la tentation (ιν, 1-11). . Le ch. πὶ ἃ pour but de rattacher la mission de Jésus à celle de Jean, et en même temps de subordonner le Baptiste de la pénitence à celui qui baptisera dans l'Esprit. Tout est parfaitement coordonné. Dès le début, lorsque Jean apparaît, comme une très grande figure, on voit que son rôle est préparaioire (v. 3). Sa prédication passe du baptême de la pénitence à l’autre baptème, et la valeur de chacun d'eux résulte de l'attitude des deux personnes. Si donc Mt. a fait plus de part que Mc. à la prédication personnelle du Baptiste, il ne l'a pas isolée comme ἃ fait Le., et le ch. ne comprend que trois sections.
2:1
… shoot will one day spring up, and from its root a branch will blossom, and in that day the root of Jesse will be as a banner to the peoples" (Is. 11, 1, 10), and in B., according to the oracle of Mic. 5, 2 ff., the Savior of the world will be born (cf. Mt. 2, 1, 5 ff.; Lk. 2, 4 ff., 15; Jn. 7, 42): the glory of having given birth to the Messiah will be imperishable, and its name will never be erased from history.
The essential elements of the Book of Hours are: 1) The calendar, often enriched by the copyist's fancy; 2) the fragments of the four Gospels (Jn. 1, 1-14; Lk. 1, 26-38; Mt. 2, 1-12; Mk. 16, 14-20); 3) the prayers to the Virgin Obsecro te and O Intemerata, found in almost
the Messiah, Herod asked the doctors of the law "where the C. was to be born," not whether the C. was to come (Mt. 2:1-4). The prophetess Anna, who was in the temple at the moment of the presentation of the child J., "spoke of him to all who were awaiting the redemption of Jerusalem" (Lk. 2:38). The …
… After this event he probably returned to Nazareth, perhaps to settle his affairs (ibid. 2:39). After some months he is again in Bethlehem, at the time of the coming of the Magi: although the Gospel account (Mt. 2:1 ff.) makes no mention of J., it is beyond doubt that he was present at the adoration and received in his hands the gifts of those wise men. Immediately afterward, warned in a dream by …
Testament (Mt. 2:1, 5, 12, etc.; Lk. 1:65; etc.), to indicate the region west of the Jordan, comprising the territories of the ancient tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Dan and part of Ephraim (cf. Pliny, Hist. …
… Sent by Herod to Bethlehem, they find the Child Jesus, offer him gold, frankincense and myrrh; then, warned by an angel, they return by another way to their own regions (Mt. 2, 1-12). It appears that here it has the primitive sense of followers of Zarathustra.
2:2
… As for the Star of the Magi, it is enough to pause for a moment on the particulars of the Gospel account (Mt. 2, 2, 9, 10) to understand that this account intends to present an absolutely miraculous phenomenon, which cannot in any way be brought within the stable laws of a natural meteor however …
Χριστός is explicitly equivalent to "king (of the Jews)" in Mt. 2:2 and 4; 27:11 and 22; Lc. 23:2 and 37, 39; Mc. 15:32. This primitive meaning remains underlying elsewhere. …
… The four figures surrounding him are also in tunic and pallium; the first on the left points to a star, and so Wilpert recognizes in him St. Matthew, who speaks of its appearance (Mt. 2:2 ff.); then would come St. Mark, and on the other side Luke and John (Wilpert, Pitture, p. 230, pl. 162, 2).
… answered: in Bethlehem (in the [tribe] of Judah, because thus it is written by the prophet: "and you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are not the least among the princes of Judah, for from you shall come forth one who is to rule my people Israel" (Mic. 5:2; Mt. 2:2 ff.). …
2:4
… From the Nativity (Mt. 2:4) to the confession of Peter (Mt. 16:16, 20; Mc. 8:29; Io. 6:69) and of Nathanael (with the synonym "King of Israel": Io. 1:49), of Martha (Io. 11:27), of the demons (Lc. …
2:6
… was part of the territory of E. with Kiriath-jearim and Beth-gader and was colonized by the Ephrathite clan, whence it was named E. In Gen. 35:16 and Ruth 4:11 it is called simply E.; in Gen. 35:19 and 48:7: "E. which is Bethlehem." In Mic. 5:2 (cf. Mt. 2:6) the birthplace of the Messiah is called Bethlehem of E.
The characteristics of the M. will be: a) he is of the stock of David: Is. 11, 1; Jer. 23, 5; 33, 15; Ez. 17, 22 (cf. Lk. 1, 32); b) he will be born in Bethlehem: Mic. 5, 1 = Mt. 2, 6; c) of a Virgin: Is. 7, 14 b = Mt. 1, 23; cf. Mic. 5, 2 (the pearl of the messianic prophecies; the sign offered to Ahaz is the son of Is. 7, 3, 16 [Sē'ār jātiūb], like the other son …
2:7
Massacre of the Holy Innocents
… all the male children who were in Bethlehem, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had carefully ascertained from the Magi" (Mt. 2:16). He had in fact "inquired diligently of them about the time of the appearance of the star" (ibid. 2:7). From his diligent inquiries Herod had concluded that the Child had not yet passed the age of two. Apparently, however, he supposed that He had reached at least the age of one, otherwise …
2:8
promised, albeit falsely, that he would go to Bethlehem (Mt. 2, 8). But in the last six months of his life he fell ill, and resided almost continuously at Jericho. …
2:9
… It is better to discern in the "star" a miraculous meteor, not very high in the atmosphere, which guided the m. until it stopped over a house (Mt. 2, 9-10). Besides the exterior star there was the interior star that called the m.
2:11
Divine Maternity of Mary, Blessed
… In Sacred Scripture Mary is presented as the mother of Jesus, conceived by her and brought forth (Is. 7, 14; Mt. 2, 11; Lk. 1, 31; 2, 7; Jn. 2, 1, 3, 5, 12; 19, 25-26; Gal. 4, 4). Jesus, moreover, is presented as God. Mary therefore, being the mother of Jesus, true God, is in a true and proper sense …
… The Magi offer gold, frankincense and myrrh (Mt. 2, 11). Ever since the time of St. Irenaeus, in this threefold offering is recognized the attestation of Him who was being adored: "myrrh because He was coming to die and to be buried for …
John, Apostle, Evangelist, Saint
… It is declared that the Mother of Christ is the Synagogue, from which the Church had its origin (W. Bauer, p. 224). The Biblical Commission rejected this system (29 May 1907). The Synoptics, moreover, also have such symbolic intentions: the three gifts of the Magi (Mt. 2:11); "put out into the deep and let down your nets for a catch" (Lk. 5:4); the three languages in which the title of the Cross is written (Lk. 23:38).
In the episode of the visit of the Magi (v.), whose chronology is not easy to determine, M. alone is in prominence (Mt. 2, 11). Having fled to Egypt to escape Herod's persecution, the three from Bethlehem finally return to their homeland, withdrawing into Galilee, to Nazareth (ibid. 2, 19-23; Lk. 2, 39).
Myrrh (Heb. Môr; LXX Αὐωρία; Lat. Myrrha)
… At the court of Ahasuerus the women purified themselves for six months with the oil of myrrh (Esth. 2:12). The Magi presented it to the child Jesus (Mt. 2:11). At the Crucifixion it was offered, together with wine, to alleviate the pains (Mk. 15:23), but Our Lord refused it in order to bear them in full consciousness. …
… Holy Scripture speaks of it (Gen. 42:6; 43:26, 28; Jos. 5:15). Thus the Magi venerated the Infant Jesus (Mt. 2:11); thus Jesus himself prayed in the garden (Mt. 26:39); thus the Apocalypse presents the elders in adoration (Apoc. 5:14; 19:4). Prostration, very much in vogue in the ancient …
2:13
… JAMNIEH; TROFANIA) or by the angels; the angel Raphael appears to Tobit and accompanies him on the journey (Tob. 5, 5-12, 22); Gabriel appears to Zechariah (Lk. 1, 8-22), and to Mary (Lk. 1, 26-38); an angel appears several times to St. Joseph (Mt. 1, 20; 2, 13); the angels announce to the shepherds the birth of Jesus (Lk. 2, 8-15); an angel comforts Jesus in the agony of Gethsemane (Lk. 22, 43); an angel announces to the pious women the …
FLIGHT INTO EGYPT. - Episode in the life of Jesus, which occurred after the visit of the Magi and is briefly narrated in Mt. 2:13. Herod, angered because the Magi had not returned to report news of the king of the Jews, gave orders to kill all the children under two years of age who were in Bethlehem and its surroundings.
… mention of J., it is beyond doubt that he was present at the adoration and received in his hands the gifts of those wise men. Immediately afterward, warned in a dream by the Angel, he had to save the Child from Herod's snares, taking refuge in Egypt (ibid. 2:13 ff.), where he stayed with the Holy Family until the death of the King, probably a year. …
Primacy of Saint Peter and of the Roman Pontiff
… Several times the prophets had spoken of the Messiah as shepherd of his people (Mt. 2:13; 4:6-7; 5:3; Soph. 3:19;
… Sometimes, for His communications, God makes use of dreams; thus with the Patriarchs (cf., for St. Joseph, Mt. 1:20; 2:13). In His action, finally, God adapts Himself to the mentality of the prophet; He chooses images familiar to him. The divine suggestions were associated with the ideas and sentiments …
2:15
… Palestinian rabbis on various Fathers who came into contact with them, particularly on St. Jerome), Christians already discerned in the inspired authors of the New Testament a tendency toward free interpretations, and even toward mere accommodations (cf. Mt. 2:15; 3:3; 13:14, 15; Rom. 10:18; II Cor. 8:15 etc.). …
… For example, in Mt. 1:22 God "through" (βίᾳ) the prophet Isaiah (8:8; cf. Mt. 2:15) foretells of the Virgin who will give birth; in Lk. 1:70 He speaks "through the mouth (βίᾳ στόματος) of the holy prophets"; in Mt. 22:43, David "in the Spirit" (ἐν πνεύματι) composed …
2:16
… He established, on the basis of what he had learned from the Magi (Mt. 2, 16), that the age of the children to be killed was that of "two years". …
The date of the coming of the m. is indicated with a certain approximation by the fact that Herod had all the Bethlehemite children "from two years old and under" put to death, according to the time he had inquired of the m. (Mt. 2, 16). The two-year period of the Child's life had not yet passed, but probably the year (v. INNOCENTI, STRAGE degli).
Massacre of the Holy Innocents
INNOCENTS, MASSACRE OF THE HOLY. - I. SACRED SCRIPTURE. - After the flight into Egypt, Mt. 2:16-18 describes the vengeance of Herod the Great, which fulfilled a prophecy of Jer. 31:15. "Herod, seeing himself mocked by the Magi," who, obedient to the voice of the angel, had returned …
2:17
Massacre of the Holy Innocents
The first Gospel continues: "Then was fulfilled the word of the prophet Jeremiah which says: A voice was heard in Rama, weeping and great lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled, because they are no more" (Mt. 2:17-18; cf. Jer. 31:15). In the literal transferred sense, using the rhetorical figure called prosopopoeia, Jeremiah imagined that Rachel (v.), one of the great mothers
2:18
The episodes narrated by Matthew and by Luke can easily be reconciled by admitting that the anxiety of St. Joseph (Mt. 2:18-25) took place after the Virgin's return from the house of Elizabeth (Lk. 1:50) and that the return to Nazareth, after the presentation in the Temple, of which Lk. 2:39 speaks, may …
… not at Bethlehem, as the current text has it following a very ancient gloss (Gen. 35, 19). This gloss, together with the tradition of a tomb near Bethlehem, led the Evangelist to apply to the massacre of the Innocents the poignant verse of Jeremiah (Mt. 2, 18). Angelo Penna
2:19
… Warned again by the Angel, he returned to the land of Israel (ibid. 2:19 ff.). …
In the episode of the visit of the Magi (v.), whose chronology is not easy to determine, M. alone is in prominence (Mt. 2, 11). Having fled to Egypt to escape Herod's persecution, the three from Bethlehem finally return to their homeland, withdrawing into Galilee, to Nazareth (ibid. 2, 19-23; Lk. 2, 39).
2:20
… of the Virgin Mary with Jesus to escape Herod the Great's decree against the newborn children of Bethlehem (Mt. 1, 13): it was probably 3 B.C., but the stay in Egypt cannot have lasted more than a few months, we do not know where, because the Angel (Mt. 2, 20) ordered Joseph to return to the land of Israel.
2:22
… This time he thought of settling in Bethlehem, but, admonished by the Angel, he left Judea, which was governed by Archelaus, and returned to Nazareth, where he stably dwelt with Jesus and with Mary (ibid. 2:22 ff.), seeing the Son of God grow under his eyes, in wisdom and grace (Lk. 2:40, 52), who was subject to him (ibid. 2:51).
2:23
… have been either a provisional return of the Holy Family for the purpose of taking the household goods in order to settle at Bethlehem (where the magi find them), or the definitive return, which coincides with the return from Egypt to Nazareth, of which Mt. 2:23 speaks.
… The form N. (Ναζαρηνός) is read in Mk. 1:24; 10:47; 14:67; 16:6; Lk. 4:34; 24:19; the form Nazorean (Ναζωραῖος) in Mt. 2:23 (Vulg. …
NAZIRITE. - The profession of "nazirite" (Heb. nāzīr, from nāzar, in the passive "to set oneself apart" and "to abstain"), translated ναζιραῖος and nazaraeus (under the influence of "Nazareth," from Mt. 2:23).
2:26
… For the exception of I Sam. 21:1-6, in view of the grave necessity of David and his followers (cf. Mt. 12:4; Mt. 2:26; Lc. 6:4), Achimelech requires a minimum of legal purity. …
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · original Douay-Rheims (Rheims 1582), transcription by EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Public domain.