Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
There is described: first, the calling of the Magi by a star and the adoration of Christ; second, in verse 13, the flight of Christ into Egypt; third, in verse 16, the massacre of the innocents by Herod; fourth, in verse 20, the return of Christ from Egypt and His withdrawal to Nazareth.
Vulgate Text: Matthew 2:1-23
1. When therefore Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judah, in the days of King Herod, behold, Magi from the East came to Jerusalem, 2. saying: Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East, and we have come to adore Him. 3. Now when King Herod heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. 4. And assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ should be born. 5. And they said to him: In Bethlehem of Judah; for thus it is written through the Prophet: 6. And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means the least among the princes of Judah; for out of you shall come forth a ruler who shall govern My people Israel. 7. Then Herod, having secretly called the Magi, carefully learned from them the time when the star appeared to them; 8. and sending them to Bethlehem, he said: Go, and inquire diligently about the child; and when you have found Him, report back to me, so that I too may come and adore Him. 9. When they had heard the king, they departed; and behold, the star which they had seen in the East went before them, until it came and stood over the place where the child was. 10. And seeing the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy. 11. And entering 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. 12. And having received an answer in a dream not to return to Herod, they went back to their own country by another way. 13. And when they had departed, behold, an Angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying: Arise, and take the child and His mother, and flee into Egypt; and remain there until I tell you. For it is about to happen that Herod will seek the child to destroy Him. 14. And he, rising up, took the child and His mother by night, and withdrew into Egypt. 15. And he was there until the death of Herod, so that what was spoken by the Lord through the Prophet might be fulfilled: Out of Egypt I called My Son. 16. Then Herod, seeing that he had been deceived by the Magi, was exceedingly angry; and he sent and killed all the boys who were in Bethlehem and in all its territory, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had carefully learned from the Magi. 17. Then was fulfilled what was spoken through the Prophet Jeremiah: 18. A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and great lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled, because they are no more. 19. But when Herod was dead, behold, an Angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, 20. saying: Arise and take the child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel; for those who sought the life of the child are dead. 21. And he, rising up, took the child and His mother, and came into the land of Israel. 22. But hearing that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there; and being warned in a dream, he withdrew into the region of Galilee. 23. And coming, he dwelt in a city called Nazareth, so that what was spoken through the Prophets might be fulfilled: He shall be called a Nazarene.
Verse 1: Jesus Born in Bethlehem; The Magi Come from the East
1. WHEN THEREFORE JESUS WAS BORN IN BETHLEHEM OF JUDAH, IN THE DAYS OF KING HEROD. — "Judah" — thus it should be read with the Roman and Greek texts, not "Judae," much less "Judaeae." Judah was the name of the tribe of Judah, to which, after the schism of the ten tribes who chose Jeroboam as their king, the tribe of Benjamin adhered; and this was the kingdom of Judah of two tribes, in which Rehoboam and his other descendants reigned until the Babylonian captivity. St. Matthew adds this to distinguish it from another Bethlehem, which was in Galilee in the tribe of Zebulun, mentioned in Joshua 19:15. So says St. Jerome.
Moreover, this Herod was the first of that name, the son of Antipater, surnamed the Ascalonite and the Great, an Idumean by nation, whom the Roman Senate, on the recommendation of Antony, made the first king of subjugated Judea, as Josephus attests in Antiquities, book 14, chapter 18, or according to another division, chapter 26. Matthew names Herod to indicate that the scepter had now been transferred from Judah to a foreigner, which Herod was, and therefore the Messiah, or Christ, had now come; for Jacob the Patriarch had predicted and prophesied that this would be the sign of His coming, Genesis 49:10. So say St. Chrysostom and Theophylact.
Hearing and considering this, Herod, in order to secure the kingdom for himself, twisted this oracle to refer to himself and wanted to be regarded as the Messiah. For this reason he built a most magnificent temple for the Jews and dedicated it on the anniversary of his coronation day, as Josephus attests in Antiquities, book 15, chapter 14, and book 20, chapter 8.
Furthermore, the son of this Herod the Ascalonite was Herod Antipas, who beheaded John the Baptist, and clothed and mocked Christ during His Passion with a white garment; his grandson through his son Aristobulus was Herod Agrippa, who, having killed the Apostle James the brother of John, was struck by an Angel and perished (Acts 12); and the son of this Agrippa was Herod Agrippa the Younger, before whom Paul, in chains, pleaded his case (Acts 25:23 ff.).
Finally, our Salianus, Scaliger, and others reckon that Christ was born in the 36th year of Herod's reign, that is, the second to last, for he reigned 37 years (more on this at verse 16); although Baronius thinks Christ was born in the 20th year of Herod's reign, Abulensis says the 30th, Bede the 31st, Eusebius the 32nd, Severus Sulpitius the 33rd, Torniellus the 34th, and others assign still other years, so that nothing certain can be established in so uncertain and disputed a matter.
BEHOLD, MAGI FROM THE EAST CAME TO JERUSALEM, SAYING: WHERE IS HE WHO HAS BEEN BORN KING OF THE JEWS? —
From the East — In Greek apo anatolon, that is, from the Easts, as if these Magi came from various regions or provinces of the East. Note: Sheba, Midian, and Ephah, sons of Abraham by Keturah, were given gifts and separated from their father Abraham, from Isaac, the son of Sarah and his heir; hence they departed from him to the eastern region and became inhabitants of Arabia Felix (Genesis 25:6). Whence in Scripture they are called "sons of the East." Accordingly Epiphanius, at the end of the Panarion, says these Magi were successors of Abraham, the father of believers, through Keturah, dwelling in the parts of Arabia, in the region of Magodia.
"Magi" is a name commonly used among the Persians (whence the Persian Gospel has Magusan in this place, that is, Magi, wise men, astrologers), signifying wise men and philosophers. It appears to be of Hebrew origin, as Genebrardus holds in his commentary on Psalm 1, from the Hebrew haga, that is, to meditate; whence magim, as if to say: those who meditate, those who speculate. "For meditation is the key to wisdom," as Ptolemy says in the preface to the Almagest; hence those who are given to meditation either are or become wise. Following the Hebrews, the Chaldeans called their philosophers Magi, as St. Jerome attests in his commentary on Daniel, chapter 2, and Eugubinus in his work On Perennial Philosophy, book 1, chapter 3. From there the Arabs, Syrians, Persians, Ethiopians, and other Easterners (whose languages are either derived from, or related to and cognate with, the Hebrew language) call their wise men and astrologers Magi, as Pliny attests in book 25, chapter 2, and Tertullian in his book Against the Jews. Therefore this natural, astrological magic was lawful and good; but through the abuse of astrologers, both the name and the thing fell into disrepute, just as judicial astrology did (indeed, Origen thought these Magi were judicial astrologers). Hence we now call Magi sorcerers and enchanters. Accordingly, Munster wrongly translates magi in his Hebrew Gospel (which he foists upon us as if it were the autograph of St. Matthew) as mecassephim, that is, tricksters, enchanters. For the Syriac, Arabic, Persian, and Egyptian versions, as well as the Greek and Latin, retain the word Magi; only the Ethiopic version has "adorers" instead of Magi, because these Magi came to adore Christ.
Likewise, in a novel and erroneous manner, Theodore Beza, the Calvinist, thinks these Magi were natives of and named after Magia, a region of Media, which Herodotus mentions in books 1 and 3.
For more on the name of the Magi and the usage of the word, see Baronius and Jansenius here.
THEY CAME TO JERUSALEM. — Both because they thought the King of the Jews should be sought in the royal city, as St. Leo says; and because at Jerusalem there were the Pontiffs, Scribes, and doctors of the Law who could know from the oracles of the Prophets where and when Christ would be born, just as they in fact answered here that He would be born in Bethlehem. For the Magi wisely, although they had the star, also wished to approach those men as living interpreters of God; and therefore the inanimate star withdrew there, to compel the Magi to approach the Scribes. For God wills that human beings be taught the way of salvation by human beings, that is, by the teachers He has appointed.
You will ask: from what region did the Magi come? First, Clement of Alexandria, St. Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, and St. Leo, whom Baronius cites, reckon that they came from Persia, for it lies to the east of Judea. But the excessive distance is an objection. For Persia is three hundred leagues from Judea, a journey that the Magi could scarcely have completed in thirteen days. It is true that with dromedaries, which cover forty leagues a day, this journey could in absolute terms have been completed by couriers in that many days; but kings accustomed to luxuries and their chariots are not couriers, nor are they accustomed — indeed, they are unable — to travel so continuously at speed. For the more common opinion of the Fathers and Doctors is that the Magi came to Bethlehem and adored Christ on the thirteenth day from the rising of the star and from the birth of Christ, which is indicated by the word "behold"; and because they found Christ still dwelling with His parents at Bethlehem among strangers, and shortly afterwards He returned with them to Nazareth, their own city. So hold St. Augustine (sermons 1, 2, and 3 on the Epiphany), and St. Leo (sermon on the same), and the rest; whence the Church also commemorates and celebrates this mystery on the thirteenth day after Christmas.
Second, others more plausibly think the Magi were Chaldeans, both because the Chaldeans were devoted to astrology, just as these Magi recognized Christ from the sight of a star; and because they were descendants of Abraham, who was called by God out of Chaldea into Judea. So hold St. Jerome, the Platonist Chalcidius, writing on Plato's Timaeus, Jansenius, and the Gloss — that is, Strabo, for he was the author of the Gloss.
Third, Abulensis on Numbers, chapter 24, and our Sebastian Barradas here hold that the Magi were Mesopotamians, because Balaam, who predicted this star of the Magi, came from there. Numbers 24:17.
Fourth, Navarrus, in his treatise On Prayer, chapter 21, asserts that he heard from Jerome Osorio, the Bishop of the Algarve and a celebrated writer, that in the most ancient annals of Calicut it is recorded that the king of Calicut was one of the Magi, or at least the chief companion of the three Magi. It is credible that this happened afterwards, when the Magi preached there with St. Thomas the Apostle. See Osorio, book 1 of his work On the Deeds of Emmanuel, King of Portugal, where he asserts, from the tradition of the Indians, that the king of Cranganore, which is not far from Calicut, was one of the Magi; for to two Magi coming from Persia and Carmania with the star as their guide toward Christ, he attached himself as a third companion, and was therefore called Chereperimale, that is, one of the three. He adds that he was of a dark complexion, and like an Ethiopian. Our Maffeius says similar things in book 2 of his History of India, where he calls the same man Pirimal, and asserts that he was king of Culani, and came to Christ at the star's guidance, on the advice of an Indian Sibyl.
Fifth, and most plausibly, these Magi were eastern Arabs. Whence Cornelius Tacitus, in book 5 of his Histories, says that Judea has Arabia to its east. This is proved: First, because this is the view of St. Justin, Tertullian, Cyprian, Epiphanius, and others whom Baronius, Francis Lucas, and Suarez cite and follow. Second, because this properly corresponds to the prophecy of Isaiah, who in chapter 60:6 predicts that the Sabeans, Midian, and Ephah (all of whom are Arabs) would come to Christ with gifts. And the Church seems to understand this prophecy of Isaiah in this way, since it constantly recites it in the ecclesiastical office of the Epiphany. This also plainly corresponds to the oracle of the Psalmist, Psalm 71: "The kings of Tarshish and the islands shall offer gifts; the kings of Arabia and Sheba shall bring tribute." Third, because Arabia is closer to Judea than Chaldea, Persia, India, etc. Fourth, because the type of these Magi was the Queen of Sheba, who came from Arabia with similar gifts to Solomon, the antitype of Christ (3 Kings 10). And although this queen is said to have come from Ethiopia, this Ethiopia was not Abyssinia but a part of Arabia; for she had come from eastern Ethiopia, not western, as St. Anselm says in his book On the Image of the World, chapter 19. Arabia therefore encompasses the regions adjacent to this sea, and especially the neighboring eastern Ethiopia. So the Midianites are called Ethiopians, because they were black or dark-skinned. Hence the wife of Moses, a Midianite, is called an Ethiopian (Numbers 12). For the Red Sea is called the Arabian Gulf, not the Ethiopian Gulf, because Arabia extends on both sides of this sea. Hence again it is likely that one or the other of the Magi was black, or an Ethiopian — both because all people commonly hold this view, and painters so depict the adoration of the Magi; and because the Queen of Sheba is said to have come from Ethiopia; and finally because Psalm 71 says: "The kings of Arabia and Sheba shall bring tribute." And shortly after: "Before Him the Ethiopians shall fall down." The Magi are called "Kings of Tarshish," that is, of the Red Sea.
Fifth, this is evident from the gifts which the Magi offered to Christ. For Arabia abounds in gold, frankincense, and myrrh; hence it is surnamed "Felix" (Happy), as being rich in gold, frankincense, and spices. "Frankincense is found in no other land besides Arabia," says Pliny, book 12, chapter 24.
"The frankincense-bearing branch belongs to the Sabeans alone." And: "India sends ivory; the soft Sabeans send their frankincense."
In this Arabia there is also such an abundance of myrrh and spices that no other wood is used except aromatic wood, not even for making fire, says Pliny, book 12, chapter 17. In the same place there is so much gold that the furniture of the people gleams with gold and silver; indeed, in Sheba of Ethiopia, the chains of the convicted are made of gold. Whence Mela, book 3, chapter 10: "With bronze," he says, "they adorn themselves; with gold they fashion the chains of criminals."
Sixth, because the prophecy of Balaam concerning this star of the Magi was uttered in Moab, which was in Arabia, as St. Jerome teaches in his book On Hebrew Places. See our Pineda, book 5 of his work On the Affairs of Solomon, chapter 14, where he teaches that the Queen of Sheba came to Solomon, and the three Magi came to Christ, from Sheba which is in Arabia Felix, where the Homerites dwell (among whom, accordingly, under King Elysbaam, the Christian religion flourished remarkably, as if ancestral, received from their fathers and kings, namely these Magi), and not from Sheba which is in Ethiopia.
The common voice and sense of the faithful is that these Magi were kings, that is, petty kings or princes, and this (although Calvin ridicules it) is expressly handed down by St. Cyprian, St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Hilary, Tertullian, Isidore, Bede, and Idacius, whom Maldonatus, Baronius, and Barradas cite and follow here. Yet St. Matthew does not call them kings, but Magi, because to recognize Christ from a star was the part of wise men, not of kings. Hence also in Psalm 71 they are called: "Kings of Tarshish, kings of Arabia and Sheba." Again, that they were three in number, corresponding to the three kinds of gifts — namely gold, frankincense, and myrrh — which they offered to Christ, is taught by St. Augustine (sermons 29 and 33 on the seasons), St. Leo (sermons 1, 3, 5, 6 on the Epiphany), and the pious tradition of the faithful maintains this, and the Church implies it in the ecclesiastical office of the Epiphany.
In addition, the Author of the Imperfect Work on St. Matthew (found among the works of St. Chrysostom) asserts that after the resurrection of Christ, the holy Apostle Thomas visited the province of these Magi, baptized them, and made them his companions in preaching.
Moreover, the Venerable Bede (on whose authority this rests), in his Collectanea, not far from the beginning, names and describes them as follows: "The first is said to have been Melchior, an old man with white hair and a long beard; he offered gold to the King and Lord. The second, Gaspar, a young man, beardless and ruddy, honored God with frankincense as an offering worthy of God. The third, Fuscus [i.e. Balthazar], fully bearded, by his myrrh professed that the Son of Man was to die." Others think that each of the Magi offered all three gifts, namely gold, frankincense, and myrrh to Christ, so as to profess that He was at once King, God, and destined to die for the salvation of humanity — and this is more probable, as I shall show below. Nevertheless, it could have been that the first offered more gold, the second more frankincense, and the third more myrrh, and this seems to have been Bede's meaning.
Finally, several writers hand down that these Magi, preaching Christ, were killed by idolaters and won the crown of martyrdom, and offered themselves, as it were gold, frankincense, and myrrh, as a holocaust to Christ. Among these writers is L. Dexter in his Chronicle, at the year of Christ 70: "In Arabia Felix," he says, "in the city of Sessania of the Adrumetans, occurred the martyrdom of the holy three Kings and Magi, Gaspar, Balthazar, and Melchior, who adored Christ." From there their sacred bodies were translated to Constantinople, then to Milan, and from Milan (when it was destroyed by Frederick Barbarossa) to Cologne, where they are venerated today with a great concourse and devotion of people, and where I myself have often venerated them.
HE WHO HAS BEEN BORN KING OF THE JEWS. — Note here and marvel at the faith and magnanimity of the Magi, who seek another king in the royal city and do not fear the wrath and power of Herod, trusting in God. The word "born" can be taken in two ways: First, materially, as if to say: He who has been born, so that He may be or become King of the Jews. Second, formally, as if to say: He who has been born king, who by nature, or by birth — that is, who is the natural King of the Jews; so that Christ is contrasted with Herod, who was an intruding king imposed by the Romans. Both senses are true: both because to Christ at His birth, by reason of the hypostatic union, every kingdom was owed, not only of Judea but of the whole world; and because Christ, descending as firstborn from David and Solomon, was by right of primogeniture the heir and successor to their kingdom, as I said in chapter 1:16. So say Francis Lucas, Jansenius, Maldonatus, and others. "King of the Jews" par excellence, that is, the Messiah, or Christ. Hence, when Herod heard this, assembling the Scribes, "he inquired of them where the Christ should be born." For the index of Christ was the star, about which the Magi add: "For we have seen His star." As if to say: The King of the Jews has been born — indeed, of the heavens — because the star of the heavens has pointed Him out to us and called us forth; indeed, it has invited all people to visit, honor, and adore Him. For in this new star produced in the sky, heaven displayed, as it were, its own astonishment at so great a King, namely the incarnate Word. Therefore at the birth of Christ, heaven stands in awe, the Angels stand in awe, and, thunderstruck at this philanthropy of their God, they sing jubilantly: "Glory to God in the highest" — to arouse stunned humanity to wonder and veneration at so great a condescension. Just as for the same reason at the Passion of Christ, the sun and moon were darkened, the earth trembled, the rocks were split, and the tombs were opened, to signify that their God was dying, and that they were utterly shaken and indignant at His most unworthy death. This is what Haggai predicted in chapter 2:7: "Yet one little while, and I will move the heavens and the earth, etc. And the Desired of all nations shall come." This also is what Habakkuk, astonished, says in chapter 3:2: "I considered Your works, and I was in awe; in the midst of two animals You shall be known" (in the manger, by the Magi and the shepherds), as the Septuagint translates. Accordingly, Francis the Maronite, in his sermon On the Nativity, teaches that the incarnation of the Word is a greater and more astonishing work of God than the creation of the world, because man is more distant from God than man is from nothing; for man is finite, but God is infinite. Now in the incarnation, God is united to man; but in creation, man is united to nothing, that is, to a body created from nothing.
Finally, from this star that impostor took his name who, shortly after Christ, under the Emperor Hadrian, pretending to be the Messiah, roused the Jews to rebel against the Romans. Having become the leader of the rebels, he called himself Bar Kochba, that is, Son of the Star, saying that "for their salvation a great star had fallen from heaven, to bring the aid of light to sick mortals condemned to long darkness," as Eusebius says in his History, book 4, chapter 6. But this star quickly set, for he and his followers were soon killed by the Romans, as Eusebius adds.
Fittingly, the star led the three Magi-kings to Christ the King of kings, because a star has the appearance of a royal crown, gleaming and radiant, and therefore the star is a symbol of king and kingdom. Whence God, in Genesis 15:5, promises Abraham, saying: "Count the stars of heaven, if you can; so shall your offspring be"; where among other things He designated by stars the kings of Israel and Judah who would be born from Abraham, and especially the King Christ. Hence, in Genesis 17:6, explaining this to the same Abraham, He says expressly: "And kings shall come forth from you." Accordingly St. Fulgentius, in sermon 5 on the Epiphany: "Who is this King of the Jews?" he asks. "Poor and rich, humble and sublime, who is carried as a little child and adored as God, a little one in a manger, immeasurable in heaven, lowly in swaddling clothes, precious in the stars."
Hence arose the venerable and ancient military order of the kings and princes of France, who bore the insignia of a star on their clothing, whose motto was: "The stars show the way to kings." This order was later changed by Louis XI, King of France, into the Order of St. Michael, as Gaguinus reports in book 10, and Genebrardus in his Chronology at the year of our Lord 1496. This order of the star was originally established by Robert, King of France, around the year of Christ 1022, in honor of the Blessed Virgin, to whom the king was wonderfully devoted, on the feast of her Nativity, September 8, because she is the Star of the Sea, beseeching her to be the guide of his kingdom and especially of its nobility, like a star going before them. Therefore he chose thirty knights from the foremost nobility for this order, and placed upon the neck of each a golden chain with a star hanging at the breast. See the Parisian Annals of Jacques Brouilly.
Verse 2: We Have Seen His Star in the East
2. FOR WE HAVE SEEN HIS STAR — Namely, of the King of the Jews, that is, of the Messiah, or Christ, recently born.
Hence it appears that this star extended its rays more brightly and at greater length toward Judea, just as comets extend their tails toward this or that region, so that the Magi would know where they ought to go, namely toward Judea; for there the Messiah, King of the Jews, had been born, because this is what it implied. St. Gregory wisely says, homily 10: "All the elements bore witness that their Author had come: the heavens recognized Him as God, because they immediately sent a star. The sea recognized Him, because it offered itself to be walked upon beneath His feet. The earth recognized Him, because it trembled when He died. The sun recognized Him, because it hid the rays of its light. The rocks and walls recognized Him, because at the time of His death they were split asunder. Hell recognized Him, because it gave back the dead whom it held. And yet Him, whom all insensible elements recognized as Lord, the hearts of unfaithful Jews still refuse to acknowledge as God, and, harder than rocks, refuse to be split open unto repentance."
One asks, first, how did the Magi, having seen the star, know from it that Christ had been born?
First, the Priscillianists, according to the testimony of St. Gregory, homily 10, said that this star was the fate of Christ, so that just as fate signifies and indeed determines future events, so this star signified and determined Christ. But St. Gregory rightly refutes them, homily 10 on the Gospels, saying: "Since not the child ran to the star, but the star ran to the child, if one may say so, the star was not the fate of the child, but the one who appeared as a child was the fate of the star." And St. Augustine, book V of The City of God, chapters 1 and following, refutes those who say that the stars distribute to each person their fates.
To this the astrologers add, such as Albumazar, and from him Albert the Great (if indeed he is the author) in the Speculum, and Peter of Ailly, Cardinal and Archbishop of Cambrai, question XXX on Genesis and the book On Laws and Sects, who hold that God marked and, as it were, inscribed His providence in the stars, and the things He would accomplish through it, with certain signs, so that astrologers could read in them the birth, character, and entire life of Christ. Hence Peter of Ailly says that around the time of Christ's birth there was a conjunction of Jupiter with Saturn in Cancer; and at the very nativity of Christ the horoscope, he says, was the eighth part of Virgo, which signifies changes of religion (and the Virgin's childbirth); at the summit of the heavens was Saturn; and at the lowest point, the Sun. Sixtus of Siena displays this horoscope of Christ in a figure to be examined, book V of the Bibliotheca, chapter X. This about the ascendant of Virgo and the benign aspect of the stars toward the infant Christ does not conflict with faith, says Salmeron. For thus comets are said to portend the death of kings and the change of kingdoms, and specifically when comets appear in the sign of Libra they portend rebellion of the people, as happened with the famous one that appeared in the year of our Lord 1618, and was a harbinger of the rebellions and wars that the heretics in Germany waged against the Emperor and Catholics, and still wage.
But no star could show and signify to the Magi the birth of Christ from a Virgin, and His character, miracles, and individual deeds, especially the supernatural ones, such as the Transfiguration, Resurrection, Ascension into heaven, etc. First, because no natural thing, such as a star, signifies a supernatural thing, such as the Virgin's childbirth, the Resurrection, etc.
Second, the predictions and forecasts of astrologers are based on experience, e.g. astrologers say: In such a year, in the conjunction of Mars with Jupiter in Libra, we experienced that so many rebellions and battles followed; therefore this year in a similar conjunction the same will happen. But here no experience had preceded: for never had a virgin given birth; indeed all considered this absurd and utterly impossible. Therefore in no way could astrologers have foreseen this from the stars. Add that this star bore no letters; for it would have needed to be written in letters: "A Virgin will bear a son; Christ will be born, will be crucified, will rise again, will ascend into heaven," etc., for the entire course of Christ's life could be signified by no marks but only by letters.
Third, astrologers conjecture from the horoscope, that is, from the conjunction of stars that occurs when a child is born, e.g. from the ascent of the star of Jupiter, that the infant born at that time will be jovial and cheerful; from the ascent of Mars, that he will be combative; from the ascent of the moon, that he will be changeable and fickle; from the ascent of Saturn, that he will be suspicious and melancholic, because these stars have a natural order, inclination, and influence toward these temperaments and effects. But no star has an order or influence for performing miracles, for example, for the Virgin's childbirth, for the Incarnation of God; for these surpass all the power of the stars, and can be accomplished only by God's supernatural omnipotence.
Fourth, Christ is the Lord of the stars as of all things: therefore He ought not to be subject to them, but rather should subject them to Himself.
Fifth and finally, "the stars incline, they do not necessitate." Therefore "the wise man will rule over the stars." See St. Augustine, book II Against Faustus, chapter 5, where he refutes the Manichaeans who say that Christ was bound to the stars and was under the fate of the stars, from which he concludes: "And so that star which the Magi saw, when Christ was born according to the flesh, did not rule over Him by decree but served Him as a testimony; it did not subject Him to its power but pointed Him out by its homage." And further: "Christ was not born because that star existed, but that new star arose because Christ was born. Hence, if it must be said, we would say not that the star was the fate of Christ, but that Christ was the fate of the star. For He brought to it, not it to Him, the cause of birth. If therefore there are fates, which are so called from 'fando,' that is, from speaking, since Christ is the Word of God, in whom all things were spoken before they existed, the fate of Christ is not the conjunction of stars, but Christ is even the fate of the stars, who assumed that very flesh created under heaven by the same will by which He also created heaven, and disposed and received it by the same power by which He also commanded the stars."
The second opinion is that of the Author of the Imperfect Work: "This star," he says, "was marked with the image of a child bearing a cross, because the light of faith showed Christ's incarnation and cross." But this is asserted without proof; for no history narrates or attests it, except the books of the Sethian heretics, about which more shortly.
Second, rather they knew it from divine instinct and revelation; for the Magi, moved by a more secret breath of the heavenly divinity, heard this as a kind of tongue of heaven, says St. Augustine, sermon 2 on the Epiphany, speaking (that Christ had been born in Judea), and they followed it all the way to Bethlehem and to the cradle of Christ. For, as St. Leo says, sermon 4 on the Epiphany: "God gave understanding to those who beheld, who had provided the sign (of the star), and what He caused to be understood, He caused to be sought, and offered Himself to be found when He was sought." For so great was the brightness and majesty of the star that the Magi understood it to be divine and to portend something divine, namely that God had become incarnate, as the Holy Spirit was suggesting to them.
Finally, the divine countenance of the child Christ radiated a beam of heavenly light, which struck and illuminated the eyes and even more the minds of the Magi, so that they recognized that this infant was not a mere man, but true God; for, as St. Jerome says, on Matthew chapter 9: "The very splendor and majesty of the hidden divinity, which shone even in His human face, could draw to itself those who saw it from the first glance."
One asks second, what kind and how great was this star? Was it an ordinary one like the rest, or a distinctive one, different from the others? First, the author of On the Marvels of Sacred Scripture, book III, chapter 40, found in tome III of St. Augustine, holds that this star was the Holy Spirit, who, just as He descended upon Christ in the form of a dove, so He directed the Magi through the star. Second, Origen, Theophylact, St. Chrysostom, and Maldonatus think that this star was an Angel, because an Angel was the mover and, as it were, the charioteer of the star. Third, others think it was a true and new celestial body, similar to the one that appeared in Cassiopeia in the year of our Lord 1572. Fourth, others suppose it was a comet. But the answer is: This star was new and unprecedented, plainly different from the rest and surpassing them in nine privileges and, as it were, prodigies, formed for this purpose by Angels, so that it would seize the Magi with admiration of it, and they would recognize that it presaged something new and divine.
For first, this star surpassed the others in creation or production, because the others were created on the fourth day of the world, Genesis 1:14; but this one was produced on the very night of Christ's nativity. It was therefore new, never seen before nor after. So St. Augustine, book II Against Faustus, chapter 5.
Second, in material: for in the other stars the material is celestial, but in this one it was aerial. For Angels formed it from condensed air, imparting splendor to it.
Third, in location: for the others are in the heavens, but this one was in the air; for it went before the Magi on the way from Arabia to Judea.
Fourth, in motion: because the others have circular motion, but this one had rectilinear motion; for it went straight from East to West, namely to Bethlehem.
Fifth, in time: for the others shine only at night, since by day the light of the sun obscures them; but this one shone equally by day with the sun shining as it did by night.
Sixth, in duration: because the others are perpetual, but this one was temporary; for it lasted only during the journey of the Magi, which was thirteen days, and then vanished.
Seventh, in size: for the others are larger than the earth and moon, but this one was smaller than both; yet it appeared larger, because it was very close to the earth and nearer to the Magi; just as the moon appears larger than the fixed stars, because it is nearer to us, even though in reality it is far smaller than they.
Eighth, in variability: for this star sometimes hid itself, as it did in Jerusalem, but at other times showed itself and was the guide of their way. Again, when the Magi walked it moved, when they rested it rested. Finally, it stood over the house where the child was, and there, as if having completed its office of showing Christ, it vanished. The other stars have nothing like this.
Ninth, in brilliance, by which it surpassed all other stars. Hence St. Ignatius, who lived shortly after Christ, epistle 14 to the Ephesians, says of this star: "The star shone, surpassing all that had existed before; for its light was indescribable, and the novelty of the thing struck all who beheld it with amazement; and all the other heavenly bodies together with the sun and moon were a chorus to that star; but it surpassed them all in brightness." Prudentius in the ecclesiastical hymn of the Epiphany: "The star, he says, which surpasses the orb of the sun in beauty and light." St. Chrysostom teaches the same. Hence St. Leo, sermon 1 on the Epiphany: "To the three Magi, he says, in the region of the East a star of new brightness appeared, which, more illustrious and more beautiful than the other heavenly bodies, drew to itself the eyes and minds of those who gazed upon it, so that it was immediately recognized that what appeared so unusual was not without purpose."
This star was therefore a new meteor formed by Angels from the air, endowed with immense light, and moved by an Angel, just like the column of fire and cloud which was the guide of the Hebrews in the desert to the promised land, namely to the same Judea. So St. Chrysostom here; St. Fulgentius, sermon on the Epiphany; St. Basil, homily on the Human Generation of Christ; St. Thomas, III Part, Question 36, article 7, and there Suarez and others. Indeed that column was a type of this star; therefore attribute to this star the many prodigies of that column which I reviewed at Exodus 13:21 and Numbers 9:15 and following. Truly St. Chrysostom, homily 16 from various passages in Matthew: "You Yourself, He says, by Your coming called the Magi from the East, and sent them back as Evangelists to their own lands," so that they themselves might proclaim to the Gentiles that Christ, the Savior of the world, had been born, and that they had seen and worshiped Him in Bethlehem.
I say therefore that the Magi knew Christ had been born from the indication of the star: First, because Balaam had prophesied this, Numbers 24:17: "A star shall rise, he says, out of Jacob." And the Magi were descendants or successors of Balaam. The meaning is therefore, as if to say: Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star, whom indeed, by the prophecy of Balaam and the Sibyl, everyone has hitherto expected would be designated by the indication of a star, and now that it has been seen, we believe He has been born. For this oracle of the Erythraean Sibyl survives in book VIII of the Sibylline Oracles:
"And the Magi honored the divine and recent star,
And the infant, shown to those following God's commands,
Is in the manger."
Thus St. Basil, St. Jerome, Origen, St. Leo, Eusebius, Prosper, St. Cyprian, Procopius, and others whom I cited at Numbers 24:17 hold that the Magi knew from Balaam and the Sibyl that this star was the indicator of Christ. Hence also Suetonius in his Life of Vespasian, and Cicero, book II of On Divination, and Orosius, book V, chapter 6, writes that there was then a common report that a king would come forth from Judea who would rule over all, which the Gentiles falsely attributed to Vespasian. Chalcidius also transmits the same, who, although a pagan and Platonic philosopher, commenting on the Timaeus of Plato, writes thus: "There is another history (besides the Gospel, namely of Matthew), more holy and more venerable, which tells of the rising of a certain star, announcing not diseases and deaths, but the descent of the venerable God for the conversion of the human race and the benefit of mortal affairs; which star, when the wise men of the Chaldeans had observed it during a night journey, and being sufficiently practiced in the consideration of events, they are said to have sought the recent birth of God, and having found that childlike majesty, to have venerated it and made vows befitting so great a God." The Author of the Imperfect Work adds, homily 2, that the successors of Balaam, after his oracle about the star, appointed some persons in each generation to continually observe the heavens, so as to watch for the rising of this star on the mountain called Victorialis; and at last, when these Magi were awaiting its rising there: "It appeared to them, he says, descending over that mountain Victorialis, having in itself the form of a small child, and above itself the likeness of a cross; and it spoke to them, and taught them, and commanded them to set out for Judea. And as they journeyed, the star went before them for two years, and neither food nor drink ran out in their bags. The other things that are reported as done by them are set forth briefly in the Gospel." But these things are of uncertain credibility, and are taken from the apocryphal books of the Sethians, as the Author himself acknowledges.
Moreover, from certain apocryphal books inscribed with the name of Seth, son of Adam, many things are reported about the Magi, and about the star expressing the form of a child bearing a cross, etc. These fictions seem to have been invented by the Sethian heretics. So St. Epiphanius, heresy 26 and 39.
Again, Gregory of Tours, says Haymo, relates that this star fell into a well, and can even now be seen there, but only by virgins: hence "when three men, he says, had come to inspect it, only one, who was a virgin, saw it; but the other two, because they were not virgins, did not see it." But these are trifles and fables, says St. Anselm.
Allegorically, Christ is the bright and morning star, Revelation 22:16. Hence St. Ambrose on Luke, chapter 2, book II: "Christ is the star. For a star shall rise out of Jacob, and a man shall rise from Israel. In short, where Christ is, there also is the star. For He Himself is the bright and morning star; therefore He marks Himself by His own light."
Again, the star of the sea, that is, of this stormy world, which shows us the way through it and goes before us to the port of salvation, is the Blessed Virgin: hence her name is Mary, in Hebrew Mariam, that is, teacher, or mistress and guide of the sea. "Look upon the star, call upon Mary," says St. Bernard. Hence also the Church invokes her, saying: "Hail, star of the sea, nourishing Mother of God."
Tropologically, the star of a faithful person: first is faith; second, prudence; third, the commandments; fourth, the evangelical counsels, and especially obedience and the guidance of a superior; fifth, holy inspirations sent by God to the mind, by which He calls it to a more perfect act or state, e.g. to virginity, to martyrdom, etc. See Barradius and Adam Sasbout, homily on the Star. "God therefore calls you to holiness and heroic virtue, to the state of perfection; He shows you a star to lead the way to heaven; gaze upon it, follow it, lest this star of divine vocation, seen by you but neglected, accuse and condemn you before God on the day of judgment." "Nothing therefore is difficult for the humble," says St. Leo, sermon 5 on the Epiphany, "nothing is harsh for the gentle, and all commandments easily come to fulfillment when grace offers its aid and obedience softens authority."
Hear St. Gregory, homily 39 on the Gospels: "Behold, God calls us through Himself, calls through Angels, calls through the Patriarchs, calls through the Prophets, calls through the Apostles, calls through Pastors, calls even through us, calls through miracles, calls very often through afflictions, calls sometimes through the prosperity of this world, calls sometimes through adversity. Let no one scorn the call, lest while the one called makes excuses, when he wishes to enter he may not be able. Hear what Wisdom says through Solomon: Then they will call upon Me, and I will not hear them; they will rise early, and will not find Me. Hence it is that the foolish virgins, coming late, cry out, saying: Lord, Lord, open to us."
Anagogically, the Doctors and whoever "instruct many unto justice shall shine like stars for perpetual eternities," Daniel 12:3; Revelation 2:28. See what was said there. In this regard St. Leo, sermon 3 on the Epiphany, at the end: "Whoever lives piously and chastely in the Church; who minds the things that are above, not the things that are upon the earth, is in a certain way like a heavenly light. And while he preserves the brightness of a holy life, he shows many the way to the Lord, like a star. In this endeavor you all, dearly beloved, ought to be of service to one another, so that in the kingdom of God, which is reached by right faith and good works, you may shine as children of light."
Finally, the star invites and calls us to heaven, so that through a heavenly life we may press on toward the most blessed fellowship of the Angels and of all the saints in heaven.
WE HAVE SEEN HIS STAR IN THE EAST. — Some refer "in the East" to "we have seen," as if to say: We, being in the East, saw the star in the West hovering over Judea, so that the Magi would know they must go there; for in a similar way the pole star shows sailors the way, and a tower or mountain shows travelers which way to go. So Procopius on Numbers, chapter 24:17. Others more correctly refer "in the East" to the star, as if to say: We, dwelling in the East, saw the star there shining in the East. Both are probable. For first, this star seems to have appeared over Judea, to signify that the King of the Jews had been born there, and was to be sought there by the Magi; otherwise how would the Magi have known from it that Christ was to be sought in Judea rather than in Greece, Italy, Assyria, or India? Hence, at Numbers 24:17, for "shall rise," the Hebrew is darach, that is, "has marched forth," that is, the star marches forth from Jacob; then soon the same star appeared in the East, to summon the Magi from there to Christ. So Barradius.
One asks whether this star remained fixed and stationary in the East, or rather from there accompanied the Magi continuously all the way to Judea. Some probably hold that it remained fixed in the East. So Jansenius, Cajetan, Clarius, Barradius, Francisco Lucas. They prove this first, because the Magi say: "We have seen His star in the East," and St. Matthew 9, when the Magi departed from Jerusalem, says: "And behold, the star which they had seen in the East." Second, because Herod and the Jews, and apparently the rest of the people, did not see it; otherwise they would have followed it and come with the Magi to Christ. Third, because the Magi knew from the prophecy of Balaam that this star portended that the King of the Jews had now been born, and they themselves knew the way to Judea; therefore for undertaking this journey a guiding star was not needed.
On the contrary, that this star accompanied the Magi all the way to Judea is held by St. Chrysostom, St. Leo, Theophylact, St. Thomas, Lyra, Tostado, Suarez, Maldonatus, Pererius, the Coimbra scholars, and Chrysologus, sermon 156, saying: "When the Magus walks, the star walks; when he sits, it stands still; when he sleeps, it keeps watch." And this is the common understanding of the faithful. It is proved first, because the star which they had seen in the East afterward appeared in Bethlehem and stood over the house where the child was. Therefore it traveled there, and not otherwise than with the Magi; unless you say that when the Magi were leaving Jerusalem, the star suddenly transferred itself from the East to Bethlehem, to go before the Magi on the way; for they did not know the stable where Christ was. Second, because the journey from Arabia to Judea was long, uncertain, and difficult. Therefore, in order that the Magi might be encouraged to undertake it, it was necessary for the star to go before them as a guide on the journey. Hence the Church sings in the ecclesiastical hymn: "The Magi went, following the star they had seen as their guide."
What therefore the Magi say, "We have seen His star in the East," signifies only the beginning of the vision of the star, which summoned them to Christ, as if to say: We have seen, that is, we began to see the star in the East, and summoned by this vision we have come, namely with the same star as our guide, following it as it went before us on the journey all the way to Jerusalem; but because the star disappeared there, they went to Herod and the Scribes, and asked them where Christ was to be born.
Both opinions are probable, and it is like a debate, and both can be reconciled by saying that the star which had shone in the East with the brightest light, according to the testimony of St. Ignatius, epistle 14, so as to strike the eyes of the Magi (and therefore the Magi say: "We have seen His star in the East," namely shining and radiating wondrously), when it afterward accompanied them to lead the way, was covered by a cloud and shone less brightly, so that it was visible almost only to the Magi; lest, if other men and peoples saw it shining so brilliantly and leading the way, they would flock to the Magi and follow them in a great multitude into Judea, and thus arouse Herod and the Jews against Christ to destroy Him. For it was entirely fitting that the star summoning the Magi should show them the way to Christ, who was so distant and hidden. In a similar way the column of fire and cloud (which was a type of this star) was the guide of the Hebrew camp, and it went before them, and by night shone before them like fire, but by day was covered by a cloud; indeed it spread from itself a cloud shading the entire camp and protecting it from the heat of the sun, as I said at Exodus 13 and Numbers 9.
That some others besides the Magi saw the star is probable; for the star was great, bright, and visible to the Magi — why not also to others? Because God wished to make Christ known to the whole world; but few or none followed the star with the Magi, both because they did not know its mystery, and because they were occupied with domestic cares. Hence learn how necessary is powerful and efficacious grace for seeking Christ, of which Christ says, John 6:44: "No one can come to Me, unless My Father draws him." Thus in the Passion of Christ, the eclipse of the sun was seen at Athens by St. Dionysius the Areopagite, on account of which he himself was converted by St. Paul, when he learned from him the cause of it, namely that on that same day and hour Christ had been crucified and had died.
Francisco Suarez adds that the star, which during its progress was near the earth, shone only in the places that were near the Magi by day, but at night it was elevated and was less conspicuous, as Nicephorus says, book I of the History, chapter 13.
Finally, fittingly the Magi were called through a star, because they themselves were astrologers: hence they could know that this star was not ordinary, but prodigious and portending something divine; therefore from a new and most beautiful heavenly body they recognized that the Creator and Lord of the stars, whom all stars serve, had now been born. But the shepherds were called through Angels, because they were faithful and upright, being Jews, in whom Angels delight. So St. Gregory, homily 40 on the Gospels. The Magi therefore were the firstfruits of the Gentiles called to Christ through the star; the shepherds were the firstfruits of the Jews, called to Christ through Angels: hence the Church celebrates the feast of the Epiphany with such great solemnity, on which the Magi, having been called, worshiped Christ, because in them and through them the calling and salvation of the Gentiles began. In this regard St. Leo, sermon 2 on the Epiphany: "Let us recognize, dearly beloved, in the Magi who adored Christ the firstfruits of our calling and our faith, and with exulting hearts let us celebrate the blessed beginnings of our hope. For from that time we began to enter into our eternal inheritance." And St. Augustine, sermon 2 on the Epiphany, which is sermon 30 on the Seasons: "For them (the Magi), this day shone for the first time; for us it has returned in its annual celebration. They were the firstfruits of the Gentiles; we are the peoples of the Gentiles. To us this was announced by the tongue of the Apostles; to them the star served as the tongue of the heavens; and to us the same Apostles, as other heavens, have declared the glory of God."
Verse 3: Herod and All Jerusalem Troubled
3. NOW WHEN KING HEROD HEARD THIS, HE WAS TROUBLED, AND ALL JERUSALEM WITH HIM. — Herod is troubled because he feared that, now that the true and legitimate King Messiah of the Jews had been born, he would lose the kingdom, as if the Messiah were going to cast him down from the throne: "What wonder if impiety is troubled when piety is born?" says St. Augustine, sermon 2 on the Holy Innocents.
Jerusalem is troubled, partly because many in it were supporters of Herod, as his clients; partly because the Scribes and chief priests, devoted to their own comforts and sleeping upon them, were not thinking about the coming of the Messiah, namely that He had been born now that the scepter had been transferred from Judah, as Jacob had predicted, Genesis 49:10; partly because the rest, addicted to their own desires and vices, feared the Messiah, lest He should punish those things. St. Gregory wisely says, homily 10 on the Gospels: "When the King of heaven was born, the king of the earth was troubled, because indeed earthly eminence is confounded when heavenly eminence is revealed"; but in vain and to no purpose. For, as St. Fulgentius says, sermon 1 on the Epiphany: "This King did not come to overcome kings by fighting, but to subjugate them wonderfully by dying. Nor was He born to succeed you, but so that the world might faithfully believe in Him." "Your palace cannot contain Christ," says St. Leo, sermon 4, "nor is the Lord of the world content with the narrow confines of your scepter's power; He whom you do not wish to reign in Judea reigns everywhere, and you yourself would reign more happily if you were subject to His rule."
Moreover, Herod, because he was an Idumean, had crept by fraud into the kingdom of Judea which was not his own; hence, in order to retain it, he killed all the legitimate heirs of the kingdom to a man, partly by deceit, partly by open force, and so he raged against everyone who seemed likely to be an obstacle to his securing the kingdom. First, therefore, he killed Hyrcanus, the legitimate heir to the kingdom and High Priest; second, Aristobulus, Hyrcanus' grandson and High Priest; third, Mariamne, Hyrcanus' daughter and his own wife; fourth, Alexandra, Mariamne's mother; fifth, Alexander and Aristobulus, his own sons by Mariamne; sixth, Antipater, his son by another wife — and all this from fear of losing the kingdom, by which Herod was tormented until his death, and therefore he lived a most miserable and most cruel life amid fears, suspicions, and anguish. And this was the reason why he killed so many innocent little ones, namely so that among them he might slay Christ, the King of Judea, who had now been born, lest Christ should take the kingdom from him. Read Josephus.
Verse 4: Herod Assembles the Chief Priests and Scribes
4. AND ASSEMBLING ALL THE CHIEF PRIESTS AND SCRIBES OF THE PEOPLE, HE INQUIRED OF THEM WHERE CHRIST SHOULD BE BORN. — He calls "Scribes" the learned men and doctors of the law, who devoted themselves to the Sacred Letters, namely to copying, reading, and explaining Sacred Scripture: hence elsewhere they are called "lawyers," such as Ezra the scribe.
Verse 5: In Bethlehem of Judea
5. AND THEY SAID TO HIM: IN BETHLEHEM OF JUDEA: FOR SO IT IS WRITTEN BY THE PROPHET (Micah, chapter 5:2).
Verse 6: Bethlehem, by No Means Least Among the Princes of Judah
6. AND YOU, BETHLEHEM, LAND OF JUDAH, ARE BY NO MEANS LEAST AMONG THE PRINCES OF JUDAH; FOR FROM YOU SHALL COME FORTH A RULER WHO SHALL GOVERN MY PEOPLE ISRAEL. — I have explained this testimony at Micah chapter 5, so I will not repeat what was said there.
Only note that there is a threefold discrepancy here between St. Matthew and Micah. The first is that Matthew names Bethlehem, while Micah calls it Ephrata. The answer is: Bethlehem had two names. For by its founders it was called both Bethlehem and Ephrata, because Ephrata was the father of Bethlehem, 1 Chronicles 4:4. And Ephrata in Hebrew means the same as "fruitful"; Bethlehem means the same, that is, "house of bread." See what was said at Genesis 35:16 and 19. The literal reason why Christ chose to be born in Bethlehem was so that He would be regarded as the son of David, who was born in Bethlehem, promised to him as the future Messiah; the moral reason was to teach us humility, namely to embrace humble birth, a humble homeland, a humble dwelling. Hence St. Leo, sermon 1 on the Epiphany: "He who had taken the form of a servant chose Bethlehem for His nativity (so that in that obscure place He might conceal the glory of His birth), and Jerusalem for His passion," so that the reproach of the cross might be more public. He taught us therefore to hide our honor and to make known our dishonor. He taught us here by His own example the heavenly wisdom, paradoxical to the world, that "the way to glory is the flight from glory." For Christ, who is the star, that is, the light and guide to blessedness and glory, hid Himself and His divinity and the dignity of the Messiah, lying hidden in the manger of Bethlehem, and therefore God the Father points Him out to the whole world and glorifies Him through the star shining from heaven. Therefore if you desire true glory, flee glory, seek disgrace; for if you seek glory, you will lose it; if you despise it, you will be honored even against your will. For most true is that paradox: "Glory follows the one who flees it, flees the one who pursues it, like a shadow follows the body. Humility precedes glory," says the Wise Man, Proverbs 15:33. For God exalts the humble and humbles the proud. Hence Christ emptied Himself and "humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even death on a cross, for which reason God also exalted Him and gave Him the name which is above every name," Philippians 2.
The second discrepancy is that, for "by no means least," as Matthew has it, Micah says the contrary, namely "small," that is, "you are least." The answer is: in Micah an adversative particle is tacitly understood from the context of the speech, as at Psalm 118:141 and 157, as if to say: You are indeed small, O Bethlehem, O Ephrata, if you look at walls, citizens, buildings, or fame; but nevertheless you are by no means least, if you consider the princes given by you and born in you, or to be born. For from you was born King David, and from you will be born Christ, the antitype of David. Some read it as a question in Micah: "Are you small?" as if to say: You are by no means least, but through Christ you will become the greatest and most famous. But the Roman codices lack this interrogation.
The third discrepancy is that, for "among the princes," Micah has "among the thousands." The answer is: the Hebrew eleph signifies both a prince and a thousand; but both versions come to the same thing here. For "among the princes" is the same as "among the leading cities of Judah," or even people, that is, in the production of leading men who have come forth from you, or will come forth; "among the thousands" is the same as among the cities that contain many thousands of people, and therefore are leading cities; and these have their own rulers. For the people of Israel were distributed by Moses into chiliads, that is, by thousands of families, each of which had its own captains and rulers, as is clear from Exodus 18:25 and Judges 6:15.
Verse 7: Herod Secretly Calls the Magi
7. THEN HEROD, HAVING SECRETLY CALLED THE MAGI, CAREFULLY LEARNED FROM THEM THE TIME OF THE STAR THAT HAD APPEARED TO THEM. — He did this secretly, both to avoid rumors and the murmuring and tumult of the people expecting their Messiah, and so that he might more deeply and confidently investigate from the Magi all the circumstances of the star.
HE LEARNED FROM THEM THE TIME OF THE STAR, so that from this he might know at what time Christ had been born, and by killing all the infants born at that time, might kill Christ among them. For he was already planning in his mind the massacre of the innocents, to secure for himself the kingdom of Judea. Hence the Arabic version translates: "He was informed by them about the time at which the star had appeared to them."
Verse 8: Herod Sends the Magi to Bethlehem
8. AND SENDING THEM TO BETHLEHEM, HE SAID: GO AND SEARCH DILIGENTLY FOR THE CHILD; AND WHEN YOU HAVE FOUND HIM, BRING ME WORD, THAT I ALSO MAY COME AND ADORE HIM. — This was the foxy fraud of a fox; for in order to make the Magi obedient and loyal to him, he pretended that he wished to adore Christ, when in fact he was planning to slaughter Him. Thus Antoninus Caracalla, in order to rule alone, killed his brother Geta, his co-ruler, in the year of Christ 214 in his mother's lap, and to mitigate his crime with a show of piety, enrolled his brother among the gods, saying: "Let him be a god, as long as he is not alive." So Spartianus in the Life of Geta. In a similar way Herod tells the Magi that he will adore Christ as God, but in his mind he resolves to kill Him as a man and a king.
Verse 9: The Star Stood Over the Place Where the Child Was
9. AND WHEN THEY HAD HEARD THE KING, THEY DEPARTED (toward Bethlehem, where the Scribes had said the Messiah would be born), AND BEHOLD, THE STAR WHICH THEY HAD SEEN IN THE EAST (shining with great splendor and summoning them, having resumed a similar splendor) WENT BEFORE THEM, UNTIL IT CAME AND STOOD OVER WHERE THE CHILD WAS. — From this it appears that the star shone with greater brilliance in the East; then, accompanying the Magi, it tempered this brilliance, and in Jerusalem completely concealed it, both to compel the Magi to approach the chief priests and Scribes to ask where Christ was to be born, and thus to make it known to them that the Messiah had now been born; and because Herod and his other followers, being impious, were unworthy to see this heavenly star, for they would have abused it to seek and kill Christ. But when the Magi departed from Jerusalem, the star again appeared and shone with its original brightness, so that by its brilliance it might point out Christ, who is the light, indeed the sun of the world, and indicate the certain place, namely the stable in which He had been born and was dwelling, lest the Magi wander through the houses seeking Him, long and in vain.
Verse 10: They Rejoiced with Exceedingly Great Joy
10. AND WHEN THEY SAW THE STAR (thus as at first gleaming), THEY REJOICED WITH EXCEEDINGLY GREAT JOY (that is, with the greatest joy). — For thus the Hebrews say gedola meod, that is, "great exceedingly," or "great beyond measure," that is, "greatest"; because from the star thus shining, as from a certain sign of the Messiah, they recognized that He was near to them, and that they were heading straight toward Him under the guidance of the star.
Verse 11: The Magi Adore Christ and Offer Gold, Frankincense, and Myrrh
11. AND ENTERING THE HOUSE THEY FOUND THE CHILD WITH MARY HIS MOTHER. — Hence some think that Christ, when the crowd that had gathered for the enrollment and census had departed after it was completed, so that many houses in Bethlehem were empty of guests — Christ, I say, had been transferred from the stable in which He was born into a respectable house of some citizen, and was there adored by the Magi, because here it says "entering the house." So St. Epiphanius, Heresies 51; Maldonatus, Francis Lucas, and others.
But others commonly hold that "house" here means the place, namely the stable in which Christ was born; for of it He said in verse 9: "Until coming it stood over where the child was." For the Hebrews call any place in which someone dwells a "house." Thus in Psalm 104:17 it is said: "The house (that is, nest) of the heron is the leader of them," namely of the birds and fowl. For since the census proclaimed by Augustus for all the people was being conducted over many days, indeed weeks and months, with a fresh crowd of the wealthy arriving to be registered each day, there was no room for the Blessed Mary and Christ, being poor, in the inn, up until the thirteenth day from His birth. And God ordained this, both to test the constancy of the Magi, and to teach them and others that the kingdom of Christ is situated in poverty, humility, and contempt of the world, not in wealth, pomp, palaces, and the pageantry of this age. So St. Augustine, Sermons 1 and 2 on the Epiphany; Justin, Against Trypho; St. Chrysostom, Nyssen, Rabanus, Euthymius, St. Bernard; St. Thomas, III, Q. XXXVI, and there Francis Suarez, section 4, who adds: "It is established that Christ and the Blessed Virgin, being in childbed, remained in the stable until the Purification."
Hence St. Jerome, Epistle 17 to Marcella: "Behold, in this small opening of the earth the Creator of the heavens was born; here He was wrapped in swaddling clothes, here found by the shepherds, here adored by the Magi." And St. Augustine, Sermon on the Epiphany: "He lay then in the manger, and was leading the Magi from the East; He was hidden in the stable and recognized in heaven, so that having been recognized in heaven He might be made manifest in the stable." You will reconcile both opinions if you say that in Bethlehem, being a very small town, there was only one public lodging for travelers, whose appendage was a stable for their horses and pack animals: wherefore the Magi are said to have entered the house or inn, because they entered the stable of the inn. This opinion is favored by what Luke says: "And there was no room for Him in the inn" — not, that is, a common one shared with many. And "they found the infant laid in a manger" — one, that is, belonging to that single lodging and stable.
No mention of Joseph is made here, either because he was absent and had gone into the city or the field to procure food and other necessities for the Blessed Virgin and Christ — and this by God's counsel, lest the Magi think him to be Christ's father and Christ to have been begotten from him in the manner of other children of the nations; or if he was present, as caretaker of both Christ and the stable, he is understood under the name of Mary his wife. But by this phrase Matthew signifies that the Blessed Virgin and Joseph conducted themselves before the Magi in such a way that they, by God's prompting, would understand that Christ was born of the Virgin alone, by the power of the Holy Spirit, and that Joseph was merely their attendant. Hence the Author of the Opus Imperfectum says: "You see that Joseph was chosen for the service of Mary." Wherefore there is no doubt that the Magi conversed with the Blessed Virgin in person in Arabic (because the Blessed Virgin excelled in the gift of tongues) or through an interpreter in Hebrew, and from her they learned the manner of the conception, birth, and nativity of Christ, and therefore adored Christ as God and the Son of God, and offered Him three gifts, but received from Him greater spiritual gifts in their minds, namely illuminations, consolations, and heavenly ardors, so that they desired to labor, be tormented, and be slain for Christ even to the point of exhaustion. Therefore, in return for the gold they offered, they received an increase of wisdom and burning love; for the frankincense, the gift of prayer and devotion; for the myrrh, zeal for a pure and incorrupt life.
AND FALLING DOWN THEY ADORED HIM. — The Arabic version: "They fell down adoring Him." Erasmus thinks the Magi did not recognize Christ to be God, and therefore adored Him not with latria but with civil worship as king of the Jews, that is, they venerated Him; but the Fathers and interpreters teach the contrary, namely that the Magi by God's prompting recognized the divinity of Christ, and adored it with latria, and therefore offered Him frankincense, which is owed to God alone. So St. Irenaeus, Book III, chapter 10; St. Leo, Sermon 1 on the Epiphany, and the rest commonly. Hence wisely St. Fulgentius, Sermon on the Epiphany: "Consider what they offered, and recognize what they believed." Hence this day is called by the Greeks Epiphany and Theophany, that is, the manifestation of God, because Christ was on that day declared to the Magi to be God, and was adored by them as God.
AND OPENING THEIR TREASURES, THEY OFFERED HIM GIFTS (native and domestic), GOLD, FRANKINCENSE, AND MYRRH. — For Arabia is rich in these, as Ezekiel 27:22 and Pliny, Book XII, chapter 14, attest, from which land the Magi came. For it was an ancient custom of the Arabs and Easterners not to approach a king or prince except with a gift, as if this were a tributary honor owed to the king, as is clear from Genesis 43:11; 1 Kings 10:27. Hence Seneca, Epistle 17: "No one can greet the Parthian kings without a gift." Furthermore, the law of God states, Exodus 23: "You shall not appear in my sight empty-handed." Finally, the Queen of Sheba gave precious gifts to Solomon, and received greater ones from him, 2 Chronicles 9:12. Similarly it happened with the Magi and Christ, who is the true Solomon.
St. Bernard in his Sentences thinks the Magi offered gold to the Blessed Virgin and Christ to relieve their poverty; myrrh, to strengthen Christ's infant limbs; frankincense, to drive away the stench of the stable and animals. This is the humbler sense, close to the letter's surface. For commonly the Fathers teach more subtly and sublimely that the Magi, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, offered gold to Christ as the wisest King (for wisdom is compared to and preferred over gold; Proverbs 8:19: "Better is my fruit than gold"); frankincense, as to God and as to the supreme Priest and Pontiff, insofar as He was man; myrrh, as to a man who would die for the redemption of the human race, be buried, and on the third day by the power of His divinity rise again to immortality and eternal glory: for myrrh is used to embalm the bodies of the dead so that they remain incorrupt; for myrrh, being dry, dries out moisture and does not allow worms to breed. So St. Leo, Sermon 1 on the Epiphany: "Frankincense they offer to God; myrrh to man; gold to the king, knowingly venerating the divine and human natures in unity; what they believe in their hearts, they profess with their gifts."
And St. Ambrose, Book II on Luke chapter 2: "Gold to the king, frankincense to God, myrrh to the deceased." And St. Gregory, Homily 10: "With gold they proclaim the King, with frankincense God, with myrrh the mortal." "Most beautifully," says St. Jerome here, "the priest Juvencus captured the mystery of the gifts in a single verse:"
Frankincense, gold, and myrrh — to the King, to the Man, and to God
They bear their gifts.
Hence grammarians derive "thus" (frankincense) from the Greek thyo, that is, "I make an odor"; or rather from thyo, that is, "I sacrifice," because those who sacrificed used frankincense — indeed the first sacrifices of the ancients were fumigations of frankincense, and from this the honors of frankincense are called divine honors, which are rendered to God alone. Hence again Saba (Sheba), where frankincense grows, alludes to sebo, that is, "I worship, I venerate," and to the Hebrew zabach, that is, "I sacrifice," although Priscian, Varro, and Servius, writing tus without aspiration, derive it from "pounding" (tundendo), because the lumps are pounded with which the flowing frankincense coalesces.
Bede in his Collectanea, whose words I cited above, asserts that the first of the Magi, named Melchior, gave gold to Christ; the second, named Gaspar, frankincense; the third, named Balthasar, myrrh.
But others more correctly judge that each one offered these three gifts to Christ; for each one by these gifts professed his faith in Christ, namely that he believed Christ to be the king of the whole world, and therefore offered Him gold; that He was also God, and therefore frankincense; and finally that He would die for the salvation of mankind, and therefore they added myrrh; for each one believed Christ to be king and God, and capable of suffering and destined to suffer for mankind. So Juvencus, Ambrose, Gregory in the places already cited, and here Abulensis, Lyranus, Anselm, Remigius, Dionysius the Carthusian, Barradius, and others. Hence the Gloss: "By divine inspiration this was done, to signify in Christ royal power (through gold), divine majesty (through frankincense), and human mortality (through myrrh)."
Allegorically: these three gifts signify Christ, who offered Himself to God the Father on the cross as gold, since out of golden charity, that is, out of love for mankind He immolated Himself; and as the myrrh of the most bitter passion of sorrows and torments; and as the frankincense of the highest religion, submission, veneration, and worship. Hence on the very same Friday on which Christ offered Himself on the cross, the Magi also offered these three gifts to Christ. For tradition holds that Christ was born on a Sunday, from which, if you count thirteen days, you arrive at the Friday of the following week. For the Magi adored Him on the thirteenth day from His birth, on which day the Church commemorates their memory. So Suarez, III, Question 36.
Furthermore, Christ offered three gifts to the Holy Trinity, namely His flesh, His soul, and His divinity, just as Christians likewise offer to the same Trinity acts of faith, hope, and charity.
Tropologically: First, gold is charity, likewise wisdom; frankincense is prayer and devotion; myrrh is mortification. Hence St. Gregory, Homily 10: "We offer gold if we shine with the light of wisdom; frankincense, if we are fragrant with zeal for prayer; myrrh, if we mortify the vices of the flesh." Hence, Song of Songs 5:14, the bride says of Christ the bridegroom: "His hands are turned on a lathe, golden, full of hyacinths." As if to say: His hands, that is, the works of Christ were so perfect, as if they had been fashioned on a lathe. Again, "turned on a lathe," that is, versatile and agile for every good; "golden," because adorned with charity; "full of hyacinths," because breathing the love of heavenly things: therefore golden works of charity make golden hands; wherefore as many works of charity as you perform, so many golden rings, as it were, you place on your fingers and on those of Christ. "Good works," says St. Bernard, in his book On Conversion to Clerics, chapter 15, "are the seeds of eternity" and of eternal glory. Zeuxis, the most celebrated painter, painted slowly and painstakingly; when asked the reason, he replied: I paint for eternity. So also you, O faithful one, work, live, paint for eternity, so that your works may shine in heaven before God, the Angels, and the blessed through all eternity. Furthermore, that frankincense denotes prayer and myrrh mortification is clear from Song of Songs 4:6: "I will go to the mountain of myrrh and to the hill of frankincense." And chapter 1:13: "A bundle of myrrh is my beloved to me." And chapter 4:14: "The fragrance of your garments is like the fragrance of frankincense" — that is, breathing forth prayer and sighs to God: "Because in all his works he prays, when with the intention of reaching heavenly things, he performs whatever good works he can," says St. Gregory in the same place. Likewise on Chapter III of the Song of Songs: "The holy soul makes its heart a censer for God." Noteworthy is the saying of St. Gregory of Nyssa: "The cause of sin is not imploring the help of God through prayer."
Second, gold is voluntary poverty; for this is the richest and most pleasing to God above all gold. Hence the Apostle says: "As having nothing, and yet possessing all things" (2 Cor. 6:10). Frankincense is obedience, by which a man offers his will and intellect, indeed his entire self, to God as frankincense in a burnt offering. Myrrh is fasting, the mortification of the flesh, and the chastity that is born from it. Wherefore many think the three religious vows are mystically signified here, namely by frankincense the vow of obedience, by myrrh the vow of chastity, and by gold the vow of poverty.
Third, by these three gifts are denoted the three kinds of good works, namely almsgiving, prayer, and fasting, to which all works of virtue are referred. For almsgiving helps one's neighbor; prayer worships and invokes God; fasting composes a person within himself. By these three things we offer to God three things, that is, all our goods: namely by almsgiving our works, by prayer our soul, and by fasting our body.
Anagogically: St. Maximus, homily 3 on the Epiphany, considers that by gold is designated the redemption of mankind; by frankincense, the Christian religion; by myrrh, the resurrection: "By gold is shown the precious redemption of our captivity; in frankincense, both the cessation of the superstition of demons and the future worship of true religion are revealed; in myrrh, by which lifeless bodies are customarily preserved, is prefigured the restoration of our flesh and the resurrection of the dead," etc.
Verse 12: Warned in a Dream, They Return by Another Way
12. AND HAVING RECEIVED AN ANSWER (that is, an oracle from God; for chresmoi are oracles. The word "answer" implies that the Magi in their uncertain situation had first implored the light and divine will of God, and had received this response from God) IN A DREAM, NOT TO RETURN TO HEROD, THEY WENT BACK TO THEIR OWN COUNTRY BY ANOTHER WAY.
Cyril the monk, in the Life of St. Theodosius the cenobiarch, relates that the Magi, fleeing Herod, avoided the public roads and public inns, and lodged in mountains and caves, and that St. Theodosius lived in those same places; because, he says, since they had resolved not to enter Jerusalem, it would have been difficult for them to return home by another route, just as we still see that those who travel from Bethlehem pass through Jerusalem. The Author of the Imperfect Work, admiring here the faith and constancy of the Magi, exclaims: "O faith of the Magi! They did not contradict the angel who admonished them, saying: 'We came such a long way, and upon arriving we did not fear the multitude of cities, but stood firm, and confidently proclaimed as King the One who had been born, and as though we were servants You now bid us flee secretly, so that having come by one way, we return by another!' But being established in fidelity, they neither feared to be recognized then, nor were they now ashamed to depart secretly."
Tropologically: Herod is the devil, the world, and the flesh; the way to him is pleasure and desire; those who therefore cross over from him to Christ must walk by another way, that of the cross and mortification, and return to their homeland, namely to the heavenly paradise. Hear the Author of the Imperfect Work, homily 2: "He who comes from the devil to God must never walk by the way by which he came to the devil. You came by the way of fornication; walk henceforth by the way of chastity. You came by the way of avarice; walk henceforth by the way of almsgiving. But if you return by the same way, you fall again under the kingdom of Herod, and you become a betrayer of Christ." And St. Gregory, homily 10: "Our homeland is paradise, to which, having come to know Jesus, we are forbidden to return by the way we came. For from our homeland we departed by being proud, by disobeying, by following visible things, by tasting the forbidden food; but to return to it we must do so by weeping, by obeying, by despising visible things, and by restraining the appetite of the flesh. Therefore by another way we return to our homeland, because we who departed from the joys of paradise through pleasures are recalled to them through lamentations."
Verse 13: The Flight into Egypt
13. AND WHEN THEY HAD DEPARTED, BEHOLD, AN ANGEL OF THE LORD APPEARED IN A DREAM TO JOSEPH, SAYING: ARISE, AND TAKE THE CHILD AND HIS MOTHER, AND FLEE INTO EGYPT, AND REMAIN THERE UNTIL I TELL YOU: 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; therefore some events must be supplied here and inserted from Luke, chapter 2:22, namely that after the departure of the Magi, or after January 6th, Christ was brought to Jerusalem and there presented in the temple on February 2nd, and from there returned to Nazareth, His homeland, which was in Galilee, as St. Luke says in chapter 2:39, and from there at last He fled into Egypt. So say Euthymius and Maldonatus here, as well as Ammonius and Tatian in the Harmony of the Gospels, although St. Augustine, and following him Jansenius, maintain that Christ fled into Egypt from Judea, not from Galilee, because Matthew here in verse 22 says that Joseph, returning from Egypt, thought to go into Judea; therefore, they say, it was from there that he had fled into Egypt. But Matthew does not expressly say this; he only says: "But hearing that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of Herod his father, he was afraid to go there." He implies, however, that Joseph thought to go into Judea in order to visit Jerusalem and the temple, and there give thanks to God for a safe return, as is the custom of pious men when they arrive at some place, to first go to the temple, give thanks to God, and commend themselves and their affairs to Him; on which more at verse 22.
Why did Christ flee into Egypt rather than into Assyria or some other region? The first reason is that Egypt is close to Judea, and at that time it was free from Herod and the other Tetrarchs, and because of the channels of the Nile by which it is surrounded and the sea by which it is washed, it was secure from hostile invasion. Hence the Jews, when fleeing the Chaldeans and Assyrians, would go into Egypt.
Second, because Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph, and consequently all the children of Israel, from whom Christ descended, lived in Egypt for two hundred years, and were called out from there by God through Moses, which was a figure and type of the recall of Christ from Egypt, according to what Matthew adds: "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the Prophet (Hosea, chapter 11), saying: Out of Egypt I called My Son"; especially because the Hebrews were liberated from Egypt through the blood of the Paschal lamb, which was a type of Christ (Exodus 12). "Lest the sacrament of that unique sacrifice should be prepared without that region, in which the saving sign of the cross had first been prefigured by the slaying of the Lamb, and the Passover of the Lord had been foreshadowed," says St. Leo, sermon 3 on the Epiphany.
Third, because Egypt was full of idols and superstitions. For it worshipped the dog, the crocodile, the cat, the calf, the ram, the goat, and what not? Christ therefore enters it in order to purge it of these filthy things and dedicate it to the true God. Hear St. Leo, sermon 2 on the Epiphany: "Then also the Savior was brought into Egypt, so that the nation addicted to ancient errors might now be marked for approaching salvation through hidden grace; and she who had not yet cast superstition from her mind might now receive truth as her guest."
Hence Isaiah, prophesying this very thing in the mystical sense, says in chapter 19:1: "Behold, the Lord will ascend upon a light cloud, and will enter Egypt, and the idols will be shaken at His presence." And indeed that the idols in Egypt fell at the entrance of Christ is written by St. Jerome in that passage, as well as by Palladius and Rufinus, whom I cited at Isaiah 19:1-2, so that this ancient tradition may deservedly seem credible.
Sozomen, book 5, chapter 20, relates that there was an ancient tradition that when Christ entered Hermopolis, a city of Egypt, a tall tree bowed down and venerated Him as Lord. Many other things are narrated; but since they are taken from an apocryphal book entitled "The Infancy of the Savior" and from the Quran, they seem to be rejected as of suspect faith and fabulous.
FOR IT WILL COME TO PASS THAT HEROD WILL SEEK THE CHILD TO DESTROY HIM. — The angel knew this from the revelation of God, who by His foreknowledge, by which with the infinite keenness and power of His mind He certainly knows every truth, even what is hidden and future, though contingent and free, foresaw that this would indeed certainly come to pass. The angel also conjectured this on his own from Herod's character and ambition for the kingdom. Josephus describes Herod's suspicious, cruel, and savage character thus, in book 2 of The Jewish War, chapter 19: "He was fearful and timorous, and was aroused at every suspicion, and out of fear lest he should overlook any guilty person, he led many innocent people to torture." Hence he also killed his closest friends, namely Dositheus, Lysimachus, Antipater, and Costobarus, as Josephus testifies, book 15 of Antiquities, chapter 1. The same author, book 17 of Antiquities, chapter 10: "He was savage toward all, a slave to anger, a master of the law."
Verse 14: Joseph Takes the Child and His Mother by Night
14. WHO AROSE AND TOOK THE CHILD AND HIS MOTHER BY NIGHT (note here the prompt obedience of Joseph), AND WITHDREW INTO EGYPT — so that Christ might sanctify and bless it by His entrance. Hence in Egypt faith and holiness so flourished that it produced Anthonys, Pauls, Macariuses, and very many swarms of Essenes, monks, and anchorites who emulated the angelic life on earth, as is evident from Eusebius, Palladius, St. Jerome, St. Athanasius, and the Lives of the Fathers. Hence St. Chrysostom here, homily 8, says that Egypt was converted into a paradise by Christ: "Not so does heaven shine with the varied choirs of stars, as Egypt is adorned and illuminated by the innumerable dwellings of monks and virgins." And Trismegistus, as cited by St. Augustine, book 8 of The City of God, chapter 14: "Egypt is the image of heaven and the temple of the whole world."
Adrichomius, drawing from Brocardus and Saligniacus, adds in his Description of the Holy Land, page 7, number 116, regarding the crossing at Engedi, that Jesus, fleeing from Judea into Egypt, carried balsam with Him. For Cleopatra, the companion of Antony, envying Herod, king of Judea, such great good fortune, obtained from Antony the permission to transfer balsam plants from Judea into Egypt, over which she herself presided as queen, as Josephus testifies, book 1 of The Jewish War, chapter 13. This was a just judgment of God the avenger, that because Herod, formerly the possessor of balsam, was persecuting the child Jesus, Jesus fleeing into Egypt drew, as it were, the balsam garden after Himself; for Jesus is the true and pure balsam of the mind, according to that saying: "Your name is ointment poured out" (Song of Songs 1). Adrichomius adds: "This garden in Egypt is watered by a small spring, yet one flowing most abundantly, in which tradition holds that the child Jesus was often bathed by the Blessed Virgin, and that from it St. Joseph prepared drink for himself and his spouse when they were in Egypt; and for this reason it is held by the inhabitants in the greatest veneration and devotion."
Furthermore, Anselm asserts that Christ lived in Egypt in a city whose name was Heliopolis, that is, the city of the sun. Finally, this flight of Christ was not one of fear, but of prudence and fortitude. Hear Chrysologus, sermon 150: "Just as Christ was born to restore man, so He fled in order to recall those who flee. And if He Himself wanders in the mountains to recall the wandering sheep, how shall He not flee to bring back the fleeing peoples?" And shortly after: "The refuge of the guilty flees, the help of all hides, the fortitude of all trembles, the defense of all does not defend itself." And a little further: "The warlike soldier who flees in battle does so by skill, not by fear; when God flees from man, it is a mystery, not terror; when the Powerful One withdraws from the weak, He does not fear His pursuer but casts him out; for He who desires to claim a public victory over the enemy wills to conquer in the open; He who wishes to entrust His triumph to the ages does not allow Himself to enter a hidden conflict."
Tropologically: Christ fled into Egypt to teach us to despise exile, and thus, as pilgrims and exiles on earth, to continually long and strive for heaven as our homeland. Hence St. Chrysologus, sermon 115: "Christ fled so that He might moderate our flights in persecutions." St. Gregory Nazianzen, oration 28: "For me, every land and no land is my homeland." No land was Gregory's homeland, because his homeland was heaven; every land equally was his homeland, because he regarded the whole world as his homeland. So Socrates, when asked where he was from, answered: I am a cosmopolitan, that is, a citizen of the world. St. Basil said the same, as Nazianzen testifies, oration 20, namely: Every soil is a homeland to the brave, as the sea is to fish.
Verse 15: Out of Egypt I Called My Son
15. AND HE WAS THERE UNTIL THE DEATH OF HEROD, THAT IT MIGHT BE FULFILLED WHICH WAS SPOKEN BY THE PROPHET, SAYING: OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON. — He cites Hosea, chapter 11:2, where I have expounded this prophecy: you, reader, if you please, consult the notes there.
Tropologically: Chrysostom here, homily 8, teaches that God beautifully weaves and variegates the life of Christ and of Christians like a crown from adversities and prosperities. "For St. Joseph saw his spouse pregnant, and fell into the greatest disturbance; but suddenly an angel appeared, dissolving his suspicion and banishing his fear; then followed the joyful adoration of the Magi, but this was succeeded by the persecution of Herod and the flight into Egypt."
Moreover, there is no doubt that many Egyptians, having witnessed the holiness of the Blessed Virgin and Joseph, and from frequent association and conversation with them, came to know, worship, and love the true God. The Roman Martyrology records the return of Christ from Egypt on January 7th; as to the year, some assign the third from the departure, others the fifth, others the seventh, others the eighth, and still others assign another year. Therefore nothing can be established here regarding the year. See Suarez, part III, question 87, disputation 17, section 2.
Verse 16: Herod Slays the Innocents
16. THEN HEROD, SEEING THAT HE HAD BEEN DECEIVED BY THE MAGI (for they had promised to return to him; but having learned of his treachery by divine warning, they did not return), WAS EXCEEDINGLY ANGRY, AND SENDING FORTH, HE KILLED ALL THE BOYS WHO WERE IN BETHLEHEM AND IN ALL ITS BORDERS.
When Herod saw that the Magi had not returned, he thought that they had perhaps been disappointed and had not found Christ, and therefore out of shame had not dared to return to him; but when he heard what had happened at the presentation of Christ in the temple on February 2nd, namely how Simeon and Anna had publicly professed that He was the Messiah, that is, "a light for the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of His people Israel," he saw that he had been deceived by the Magi, and therefore, blazing with fury, he poured out his wrath upon all the infants. For as St. Chrysostom says: "The anger which zeal for the kingdom kindles is inextinguishable, etc., as a wounded beast tears apart whatever comes before its eyes, as though it were the author of its wound."
The boundless desire and ambition to preserve and increase the kingdom of Judea drove Herod to so barbarous an infanticide: wherefore, since he understood from the Scribes that the time of the Messiah was at hand, inasmuch as the scepter had already been transferred from Judah to himself, a foreigner, he himself sought for himself the title of Messiah, and said that he was the Messiah promised to the Jews, and for this reason he built for them a most magnificent temple, after the manner of Solomon, about which the Jews said to Christ: "Forty-six years was this temple in building, and will You raise it up in three days?" (John 2:20). But in vain and to no purpose did he seek the title of Messiah. For the Messiah was to be born from Judah, and had been promised to David and the Jews as their son and heir: but Herod was descended not from the Jews, but from the Idumeans, who were perpetual enemies of the Jews. Knowing this, Herod, aware that the true Messiah had been born and had been indicated to the Magi by the sign of the star, marked Him for death, and since he had learned from the Scribes that the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem, but did not know from which family or house, he therefore killed all the infants in Bethlehem; but see here the just judgment of God, by which He brought it about that Herod, by this very act, established the kingdom for Christ and took it away from himself. For as punishment for this crime, Herod himself killed his own sons who were to succeed him in the kingdom, and in that same year, shortly after the slaughter of the infants and of his son Antipater, he himself was consumed by worms and killed shortly before Passover.
For when, because of his cruelty, his brother Pheroras and his wife Mariamne, and her father Hyrcanus the high priest, and her mother Alexandra, and his three sons Alexander, Aristobulus, and Antipater, had conspired to kill him, he killed them all, having first obtained from Augustus Caesar the permission to execute them — Augustus, summing up Herod's savagery with this remark: "I would rather be Herod's pig than his son"; about which more shortly.
Furthermore, Christ escaped Herod's infanticide by fleeing into Egypt, and from there His name, kingdom, and glory gradually grew; indeed, the infants killed by Herod out of hatred for the Messiah testified by their death that the Messiah had already been born, namely the One whom Herod impiously sought to kill; for in order to kill Him, he killed all the infants. Josephus narrates all these events at length in book 15 of Antiquities and the following books.
Tropologically: Herod is the devil, who eagerly seeks to crush infants, that is, those who are tender in faith and virtue, and likewise the first inspirations of God and good thoughts, before they are strengthened and grow: "Hence if he kills the little ones," says St. Leo, sermon 2 on the Epiphany, "he seems to himself to be killing Jesus, which indeed he strives to do without ceasing, when he attempts to snatch the Holy Spirit from the first beginnings of the reborn, and to extinguish, as it were, a certain infancy of tender faith."
FROM TWO YEARS OLD AND UNDER, ACCORDING TO THE TIME WHICH HE HAD ASCERTAINED FROM THE MAGI. — In Greek it is apo dietous, that is, from two years of age, or from a two-year-old; the Syriac, following the latter sense, along with the Arabic, translates: "From a son of two years"; the Egyptian version: "From two years and under," and so too the Persian. For "had ascertained" the Greek is ekribose, that is, he had exactly investigated. Hence our translator, at verse 7, renders it: "he carefully learned."
One asks why he killed infants from two years of age, that is, two-year-old children, especially since many believe that Herod killed the infants immediately after the departure of the Magi, when he heard that Christ had been proclaimed as the Messiah by Simeon and Anna at His presentation in the temple, around Passover, when Christ was only three months old. First, Jansenius, Maldonatus, Baronius, and others answer that he did this out of immense fear of losing the kingdom through the Messiah; for from this fear he extended the time from three months since Christ's birth up to two years. If you object that Matthew says this slaughter was carried out "from two years old and under, according to the time which he had ascertained from the Magi," they answer that the phrase "according to the time which he had ascertained from the Magi" should be referred not to "from two years old" but to "and under," so as to signify that Herod set not the beginning but only the terminus of the children to be slain according to the time he had ascertained from the Magi, namely that he would not further kill infants who had been born within those thirteen days after the rising of the star indicating that Christ had already been born. In other words: Herod killed all infants from two years of age, because he was exceedingly shrewd and cruel; and under two years, according to the time he had ascertained from the Magi, because he exempted from the slaughter only those who had been born after the time when the star, appearing to the Magi, signified to them that Christ had already been born; for from that it was certainly clear that none of them, having been born after the rising of the star, was the Messiah, whom Herod feared; for He had already been born with the rising of the star.
But it scarcely seems credible that Herod, so ambitious and fearful, would have wanted to kill infants born two years before the rising of the star, yet would have neglected and spared those born shortly after the rising of the star; for there was equal, or even greater, reason to suspect — especially for Herod, who was most timid and most suspicious — that Christ could have been born among the latter as well as the former. Hence Bede, the Gloss, Dionysius, and Barradius hold that Herod killed infants born both after and before the rising of the star. And to what purpose would he have killed infants born nearly two years before the star? For there could be no suspicion that Christ was born among them, inasmuch as the star indicated that He was born simultaneously with it, two years later. Therefore to kill them would have been not only inhumane, but also irrational, foolish, and brutish, and would have gained for Herod nothing but the infamy of the utmost cruelty, and the immense hatred and execration of all; indeed, all would have rushed upon him as an intolerable tyrant who was a wild beast rather than a man.
Second, I say therefore that Herod did not kill the infants immediately, nor in the same year in which the Magi came and departed, but in the following year, which was the second from Christ's birth, and therefore he killed two-year-old infants. The meaning therefore is, as if to say: Herod killed infants from two years of age, that is, those who were two years old, and under, that is, those who had not yet reached two years, but were one year old, or only some months or days old — that is, he killed all who had been born within two years of the rising of the star, according to the time which he had ascertained from the Magi, corresponding to the second year running from the rising of the star, when Herod killed the infants born within this two-year period.
Again, more strictly and precisely the phrase "according to the time which," etc., could be taken thus, as if to say: Herod did not take this two-year period as a full period, but computed it from the time when the star appeared to the Magi, which was the time of a two-year period begun but not completed. For Herod killed the children in the second year from the rising of the star and of Christ, around Passover, namely when Christ was one year and three months old; for from the rising of the star only fifteen months had elapsed: therefore he did not kill those who had been born long before the rising of the star, more than fifteen months earlier. This is implied by the word ekribose, that is, he had exactly investigated the time of the star, so as to kill only those who had been born around the time of the star, but not those born long before or long after the time of the star, lest he kill by excessively barbarous cruelty more people than was necessary for killing Christ, who was born with the star. Therefore.
This is the same as saying those born from fifteen months; for this is the time when the star arose, which lasted for thirteen days, during which it went before the Magi on their journey to Bethlehem. Therefore Herod seems to have killed only infants of about fifteen months, that is, those born shortly before fifteen months or shortly after fifteen months, around the rising of the star. For he believed, along with the Magi, that Christ was born simultaneously with the star that was His sign, not long before it, nor would He be born long after it; therefore he did not trouble to have killed any except those who were born, as it were, at the same time as the star. From this it is gathered that the phrase "from two years old and under" should not be taken distributively but conjointly, just as when we say: Two and three are five; all the planets are seven; the elements are four, etc.
That this infanticide occurred not in the third month, but at the beginning of the second year, namely in the fifteenth month from Christ's birth, is handed down by Eusebius in the Chronicle; St. Epiphanius, heresy 30; St. Augustine, sermon on the Epiphany; Eucherius, Cedrenus, St. Anselm, Haymo, Hugh of St. Victor, St. Thomas, Lyranus, Abulensis, St. Antoninus, Dionysius the Carthusian, Barradius, and others generally — although some of these have not correctly distinguished either the rising of the star from the birth of Christ, saying that the star appeared to the Magi two years before Christ was born (so St. Augustine, Chrysostom); or the birth of Christ and the star from the adoration of the Magi, saying that the Magi, because of the length of the journey, arrived in Bethlehem two years after Christ was born and there adored Christ (so St. Epiphanius, book 2, heresy 30 against the Ebionites, and the Author of the Imperfect Work here). For it is far more true that the star arose simultaneously with the birth of Christ, to be His sign and, as it were, standard-bearer and morning star; and that the Magi came to Bethlehem in the same year in which Christ was born, namely on the thirteenth day after His birth: for it is not likely that the Magi, having seen the star and being so powerfully called and stirred by God, would have completed or delayed this journey for two years, says Francisco Suarez, Baronius, and others; but rather that Herod delayed this infanticide, which he had determined upon in his mind, until the following year, for the reasons I shall shortly present.
This sense is required by the plain narrative of St. Matthew, especially the phrase "from two years old," likewise by the accumulation of events that took place after the adoration of the Magi and before Christ's flight into Egypt, which could not have been accomplished in a few days or months. For after the departure of the Magi, Christ was presented in the temple at Jerusalem on the fortieth day from His birth, namely on the second of February, when the Church commemorates this mystery through the feast of the Purification. From there Christ returned to Galilee and lived in Nazareth, from which He at last fled into Egypt, as is evident from Luke chapter 2:22 and 39 — all of which events required many weeks, indeed months.
This opinion is supported by the fact that Nicephorus, book 1, chapter 14, and Cedrenus in the Compendium of History, write that St. John the Baptist, because of this persecution of Herod, fled into the desert when he was a two-year-old, that is, when he was in his second year of age but had not yet completed it; for the Baptist was born six months before Christ, and therefore at the time of the infanticide he was twenty-one months old. Hence Nicephorus, book 1 of the History, chapter 14, says: "John was a year and a half old, and was safely preserved with his mother Elizabeth in a certain mountain cave, perhaps escaping the bloody hand of Herod."
Again, Macrobius says not "from two years old" but "within two years" infants were killed by Herod; and within two years includes those who are fifteen months old. In addition, Lucius Dexter in the Chronicle says: "In the third year of Christ, the year 754 of the city of Rome, Herod slaughters all the boys in the region of Bethlehem." For it was the third year from Christ's birth, counting the year from the first of January: for thus it happens that the nativity of Christ, which occurred in December of the preceding year, makes it the third year, whereas otherwise a full two years had not elapsed from Christ's birth to the infanticide.
One asks why Herod delayed the infanticide until the second year from the rising of the star and Christ's birth. The answer is: First, so that he might gradually learn more about Christ's birth, person, parents, and location. So the Gloss. Again, because he sought every means of avoiding the odium of cruelty, so that he might find and kill Christ alone, as Matthew implies here, verse 13. So St. Augustine, book 2 of On the Harmony of the Gospels, chapter 12, and Abulensis here.
Second, because, as Euthymius, St. Thomas, and Lyranus teach, Herod near the end of his life was accused by the Arabs before Augustus Caesar and incurred his displeasure, to such a degree that Augustus refused to admit his envoys to an audience the first, second, and third time; at last, however, Herod by remarkable skill appeased Caesar, as Josephus narrates, book 17 of Antiquities, chapter 7 and following, and then he seems to have sought and obtained from him permission to kill the infants — in which matter Augustus is not a little blameworthy for having granted this permission. So Rupertus, book 1 of On Victory, chapter 2.
Third, he delayed the slaughter so that he might find a sure method of killing all the infants, lest any should be hidden by his mother and escape death. Hence Abulensis holds that Herod first ordered the children to be enrolled with each one's name and age, and summoned each one according to the register, and when all who had been summoned were assembled together, he killed them all: assembled, I say, not in one place, for example in the forum of Bethlehem, but in each of its villages and hamlets; hence to each he sent executioners to seek out, gather, and kill the infants, as St. Matthew teaches here. Moreover, this was easy among the Jews, who kept most exact genealogical records, so that it might be known that the Messiah whom they expected would be born from the tribe of Judah, according to the oracle of Jacob, Genesis 48. Hence at the circumcision of each infant, they recorded his name, date of birth, and parents in these books, just as nowadays parish priests record the same at the baptism of children.
St. Antoninus holds that Herod instituted a feast for children and ordered that all mothers bring their two-year-old children to him, as if they were to receive a reward. However, Herod, through this slaughter, though unwittingly, conferred the greatest benefit upon the infants, because while he strove to destroy them, he procured for them a better life, as St. Chrysostom teaches, though this was beyond his mind and intention.
Moreover, Herod obtained from Augustus the permission to kill his three sons, namely Alexander, Aristobulus, and Antipater: hence he killed the first two earlier; but Antipater only a few, namely five, days before his own death, which occurred around Passover in the thirty-seventh year of his reign, says Josephus, book 17 of Antiquities, chapters 10-11, when he also killed the infants. We learn this from Macrobius, who, in book 2 of the Saturnalia, chapter 10, records this among the witticisms of Augustus: "When he heard that among the boys whom Herod, king of the Jews, in Syria had ordered to be killed within two years of age, his own son had also been killed, he said: It is better to be Herod's pig than his son"; because the Jews did not slaughter pigs, for the eating of them as unclean animals was forbidden to them (Leviticus 11). For Josephus teaches that this son of Herod was Antipater; for if he had been a small child and a two-year-old, Herod certainly would not have killed him, but being now an old man, would have wished him to be the heir and successor of his kingdom.
From what has been said, it follows that the infants were killed by Herod around Passover, approximately in the fifteenth month from the rising of the star and Christ's birth; the Church, however, celebrates their feast shortly after Christmas, because they were killed on account of Christ, so as to adorn and embellish the Nativity of Christ with their feast, although our Barradius and Emmanuel Sa believe that they were killed on that very day of the year on which the Church celebrates their feast. Therefore the infants were killed by Herod when Christ was in His second year of age, in spring and in March: at which time Rachel, their ancestress, had also formerly died (Genesis 35:16). Around the same time, namely five days before his own death, Herod ordered his son Antipater to be killed, as though plotting against himself and his kingdom.
At the same time he abolished the great council of the Jews, which was called the Sanhedrin; and he killed several Pharisees because they refused to acknowledge him as king; the rest were compelled to swear an oath to him. In this his father-in-law Simon, son of Boethus, whom he had made High Priest, assisted him, and these things were done with the knowledge of Quintilius Varus, governor of Syria and Herod's friend. Hence he did not hesitate to cast all the leading men of the Jews into prison, and would have killed them had he lived longer. But when death was imminent, he ordered his sister Salome and her husband Alexas to kill them all: "So that the Jews, even unwillingly, may be forced to mourn my death, when they mourn their own slain." But Salome, being more merciful, after his death released the leading men from their chains and sent them home free. So Josephus, Hegesippus, Eusebius, and others. See Josephus, book 17 of Antiquities, chapter 8 and following, and Eusebius, book 1 of the History, chapter 9.
Some think, from Revelation 14:1, that the infants killed by Herod numbered 144,000; for that many were seen there by John. But St. John is speaking of virgins who will resist the lust and persecution of the Antichrist even unto death and martyrdom, not of our infants killed by Herod: nor is it credible that in so small a place as Bethlehem was, there were 144,000 two-year-old children in Herod's time. More probable is what the Abyssinians have in their canon of the Mass, that the infants killed by Herod numbered 14,000. So our Salmeron, Francisco Lucas, and Genebrardus, book 2 of the Chronology, at the third year of Christ, who also adds that the Greeks express the same number in their Calendar.
For it is probable that Herod, most suspicious as he was, ordered the executioners to extend both the place indicated by the Scribes (namely Bethlehem) and the time of the star's rising, and therefore the executioners killed more than the place or the time of the star precisely required, lest Christ should escape in any way — although even so, in so small a place it is difficult to find 14,000 infants; for not even that many are found in Rome, Naples, Milan, and other great cities.
Note first that these infants, killed by Herod out of hatred for Christ, are truly martyrs, and as such are venerated and celebrated with a feast by the Church, and this is common to all infants who are slaughtered out of hatred for the faith, by the gracious and generous ordination of God.
Hence it follows that martyrdom justifies by the work performed (for by it those little ones who had not yet been circumcised were purified from original sin and justified) and accomplishes the same thing that Baptism accomplishes. So hold the Fathers and Doctors generally in book 4 of the Sentences, distinction 4, indeed the whole Church, as I said. See St. Bernard, sermon on the Holy Innocents.
Hence the Doctors establish three classes of martyrs: The first is of those who are martyrs in both deed and will, such as adults who voluntarily accept death inflicted by a tyrant for Christ's sake. The second is of those who are martyrs in deed alone, such as infants who are killed for Christ's sake. The third is of those who are martyrs in will alone, such as those who desire martyrdom, as St. Francis desired it, who for this reason went to the Sultan of Egypt; but the Sultan, seeing him to be a holy man, did not wish to kill him. Hence he himself lacked the laurel of actual martyrdom. These infants therefore were washed in milky blood, says St. Cyprian. Wherefore St. Augustine, in his Sermon on the Innocents, says: "O little ones, let him doubt your crown who does not believe that baptism profits little children."
Note secondly the wonderful providence of God, by which: first, He punished the Bethlehemites with the slaughter of their children, because they had not received the Blessed Virgin in childbirth and the child Jesus into their hospitality, but had compelled them to go to a stable and give birth there; second, by which He adorned the children through this slaughter with the laurel of martyrdom; third, by which He brought it about that Christ should escape through flight into Egypt, and through this slaughter become more widely known to the world — by which it was foreshadowed that "the Church of God would be increased through the fury of cruelty (of persecutors)," says St. Leo, Sermon 6 on the Epiphany, "since in the torments and deaths of the blessed martyrs, who were thought to be diminished in number, they were multiplied by example." Wherefore "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of Christians," as Tertullian notes at the end of his Apologeticum.
Moreover, Christ as man, although an infant, nevertheless used reason; wherefore, with the Word united to Him revealing it, He grieved with an intimate affection of piety over this slaughter of little children on His account, and He felt compassion for them and their parents, but in spirit He exulted over their martyrdom and glory; therefore He offered them to God the Father as the first-fruits of His coming and the first victims of His grace.
Note thirdly the just vengeance of God upon Herod the child-killer, and, as far as in him lay, Christ-killer. For five days after the infanticide, he was struck with fever, cough, dysentery, dropsy, gout, phthiriasis (the disease of lice), putrefaction of the genitals, asthma, and intolerable stench, and breathed out his savage soul, so that he even attempted to kill himself. His sons were admitted not to the kingdom, but only to a portion of the kingdom as tetrarchs, and they perished miserably. His entire posterity also, though very numerous, within the space of a hundred years, with few exceptions, was consumed and perished, as Josephus narrates, Book XVII of the Antiquities, chapter viii and following, who also adds that all considered this to be the just vengeance of the Deity. So also from Josephus, Eusebius, Book I of the History, chapter viii.
Allegorically: the infants killed by Herod at Passover time, like Paschal lambs, were a type of Christ, who after 32 years was mocked by Herod, the son of this child-killing Herod, and crucified by Pilate at Passover, offering Himself as the Paschal lamb and victim to God the Father for the salvation of the world. Hear St. Augustine, Sermon 8 on the Saints, which is the first on the Innocents: "When Christ was born, mourning began — not for heaven, but for the world. Lamentation is decreed for mothers, exultation for Angels, and migration for infants. He who was born is God; innocent victims are owed to Him, because He came to condemn the wickedness of the world. Little lambs must be sacrificed, because the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world is destined to be crucified; but the mother-ewes howl, because they lose their lambs bleating without a voice. A great martyrdom, a cruel spectacle." And Prudentius in his Hymn on the Epiphany:
You, the first victims of Christ,
Tender flock of the sacrificed,
Before the very altar, simple ones,
You play with palm and crown.
These same children shone forth and gave an example to all martyrs who in every age would nobly contend for Christ even unto death. Whence St. Leo, Sermon 8 on the Epiphany: "In the splendor of the star, the grace of God; and in the three men (the Magi), the calling of the Gentiles; and in the impious king, the cruelty of the Pagans; and in the slaying of the infants, the pattern of all martyrs went before." For if tender infants suffer slaughter for Christ, why should not faithful adults, strong and robust, suffer the same for Him? For what some think — that the use of reason was accelerated in the infants, and that they elicited an act of faith by believing in Christ and an act of martyrdom by accepting death for Christ — is said rashly and frivolously. Nevertheless this very thing is found in a certain sermon on the Innocents which is attributed to St. Chrysostom; for he says thus: "Meanwhile the children become eloquent without a teacher, learned without an instructor, skilled without education. They recognize Christ, they proclaim the Lord — not one whom human persuasion had taught, but whom divinity inspired in the innocent." But this sermon is falsely attributed to St. Chrysostom; for St. Chrysostom here, in Homily 4, expressly asserts the contrary; I shall presently cite his words. Now if in little children involuntary suffering for Christ — and, so to speak, unwilling, with the little ones certainly resisting — was so acceptable to God that He esteemed it as martyrdom and crowned the suffering infants with the laurel of martyrdom, what will voluntary suffering do, by which one desires, indeed eagerly seeks, to suffer much and to die for Christ?
Symbolically: the children killed by Herod in spring were like spring flowers, produced from the earth of Bethlehem warmed by the rays of the Sun of Justice, and offered to Christ of Nazareth, that is, to the Flowering One. Whence Prudentius in his Hymn on the Epiphany, and from him the Church in the Office:
Hail, flowers of the martyrs,
Whom on the very threshold of light
Christ's persecutor cut down,
As a whirlwind does budding roses.
And St. Augustine, Sermon 2 on the Innocents: "How happily born are those for whom eternal life came to meet them on the very threshold of birth!" And Sermon 3: "Rightly are the Innocents called flowers of the martyrs, who, having sprung up in the midst of the frost of unbelief, like the first buds of the Church bursting forth, a certain frost of persecution cut down." And St. Chrysostom, Sermon 4: "Infancy, ignorant of suffering, snatched the palms and crowns of martyrdom. These are the true martyrs of grace: they confess while silent, they fight without knowing, they conquer unknowing, they die unconscious, they take up palms in ignorance, they seize crowns without awareness." God therefore causes these little ones to triumph, as it were, before they live; He adorns them with crowns before He adorns them with limbs.
Tropologically: Christ loves infants, that is, the little and humble, and raises such to the highest grace, indeed to martyrdom. Hence He Himself says: "Whoever humbles himself like this little child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 18:4). Hear St. Leo, Sermon 7 on the Epiphany: "Hence, most beloved, the whole discipline of Christian wisdom consists not in abundance of speech, not in cleverness of disputation, nor in the appetite for praise and glory, but in true and voluntary humility, which the Lord Jesus Christ chose and taught as all His strength from His mother's womb to the torment of the cross." And shortly after: "He loves the infancy that He first assumed both in soul and body. Christ loves infancy, the teacher of humility, the rule of innocence, the form of meekness. Christ loves infancy, which directs the conduct of elders, to which He reduces the ages of the old, and inclines to His own example those whom He raises to the eternal kingdom." And earlier: "The entire victory of the Savior, which overcame both the devil and the world, was conceived in humility and accomplished in humility."
Verses 17 and 18: A Voice Was Heard in Rama; Rachel Weeping for Her Children
17 AND 18. THEN WAS FULFILLED WHAT WAS SPOKEN THROUGH JEREMIAH THE PROPHET, SAYING: 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. — Because, namely, those killed by Herod perished as to the body, for as to the soul "they were being carried into eternity," says St. Hilary. I explained this passage at Jeremiah chapter 31, verse 15. See what was said there. St. Augustine, Sermon 1 on the Innocents, graphically depicts these weepings of the mothers, and finally concludes: "The lamentation of the mothers was mingled together, and the offering of the little ones was passing to heaven."
Tropologically: Rachel, that is, the ewe, mourns the slaying of the lambs (for Rachel in Hebrew means "ewe"), but the Angels applaud, and indeed the little ones too, because the souls of the little ones, like lambs, were passing over to the company of the Angels. Whence St. Augustine, Sermon 3 on the Innocents: "Behold, the profane enemy could never have benefited the blessed little ones as much by service as he benefited them by hatred." He adds the reason: "Since they obtained the dignity of perpetual life before they received the enjoyment of the present one, etc., because at the very beginnings of their commencing life, he who imposed the end of their present life gave them the beginning of glory by their death." By being born, therefore, they died to the world, and by dying they began to live in heaven. To these infants, therefore, properly applies that saying of St. Paul: "We have been made a spectacle (in Greek theatron, that is, a theater) to the world, and to Angels, and to men" (1 Cor. 4:9). As if to say: Therefore, in the amphitheater, we are watched by all as those condemned to death, thrown to gladiators, beasts, and wild animals.
Here note: by this infanticide God wished, as on a stage, to teach us that the entire life of a Christian from childhood to death is a continuous persecution, cross, and death, and that the fortitude and virtue of a Christian consists more in enduring hard things than in doing them — that is, in steadfast patience more than in fighting; for it is more difficult to suffer than to act and fight: "To do brave things is Roman; to suffer brave things is Christian." Christ, suffering for us, said: "I gave My body to those who struck Me, and My cheeks to those who plucked them; I did not turn My face from those who rebuked and spat upon Me" (Isaiah 50:5). The little ones in turn gave their limbs to be torn by executioners for Christ. Let the Christian do the same, so as to give his body as spoil to God, and for God's sake to diseases, labors, and any torments whatsoever. This St. Eusebius, Bishop of Vercelli, did, who writes to his people: "I gave my body as spoil to the Arians." Whence, torn apart by them, he fell as a glorious martyr of Christ and a defender of the Homoousios unto death. The Church celebrates this champion and hero of the faith on December 15.
Truly St. Fulgentius on the Epiphany says: "For this reason God permitted Herod to kill the infants, so that He might make them triumph over Herod." St. Cyprian, Book IV, Letter 6 to Thibaris: "An age not yet fit for battle, proved fit for the crown." And shortly after: "The Son of God suffered, that He might make us sons of God; and does a son of man refuse to suffer, in order to remain a son of God?"
Verse 19: An Angel Appears to Joseph in Egypt
19. BUT WHEN HEROD WAS DEAD, BEHOLD, AN ANGEL OF THE LORD APPEARED IN A DREAM TO JOSEPH IN EGYPT.
Herod died a few days after the killing of Antipater, says Josephus, and consequently also after the killing of the infants, as is clear from Macrobius; therefore Christ does not seem to have remained in Egypt beyond two years; for He did not go there except one year before Herod's death, and after it, when Archelaus, Herod's son, had immediately set out for Rome and soon returned from there and began to reign, He returned, as is stated here. So Onuphrius Panvinius in his Fasti, and before him St. Epiphanius, Heresy 78; Nicephorus, Book I, chapter xiv, although Baronius thinks Christ returned from Egypt in His ninth year of age, Ammonius in His seventh, Jansenius in His fifth. See Pererius, Book XII on Daniel, Question V.
Verse 20: Those Who Sought the Life of the Child Are Dead
20. SAYING: ARISE, AND TAKE THE CHILD AND HIS MOTHER, AND GO INTO THE LAND OF ISRAEL; FOR THEY ARE DEAD WHO SOUGHT THE LIFE OF THE CHILD.
WHO SOUGHT THE LIFE OF THE CHILD. — Namely Herod, and his sons Aristobulus, Alexander, and Antipater, who, aspiring to the kingdom, and therefore conspiring against their father (and consequently also against the Messiah, as it seems) together with the Scribes and Pharisees who favored them, were killed by Herod, as Josephus testifies, Book XVII of the Antiquities, chapter viii and following.
Verse 21: Joseph Returns to the Land of Israel
21. WHO, RISING UP, TOOK THE CHILD AND HIS MOTHER, AND CAME INTO THE LAND OF ISRAEL.
Verse 22: Archelaus Reigning in Judea; Withdrawal to Galilee
22. BUT HEARING THAT ARCHELAUS WAS REIGNING (not as king, but as tetrarch) IN JUDEA IN PLACE OF HEROD HIS FATHER, HE WAS AFRAID TO GO THERE; AND BEING WARNED IN A DREAM, HE WITHDREW INTO THE REGION OF GALILEE.
The Angel had said to Joseph: "Go into the land of Israel." Joseph understood this as Judea, because this was the more important part of the land of Israel, and in it was the temple: he was therefore planning to go there, to give thanks to God for his safe return, especially because by God's command all Hebrew males were required to go to the temple three times each year (Exodus 23:17). Whence St. Augustine, Book II of On the Harmony of the Gospels, chapter ix, and from him the Gloss: "He (the Angel) does not specify to which region, so that he may return again to the one who is in doubt; but because he had not made a distinction, Joseph understood Judea, which is the more worthy part of the kingdom; for he thought that such a child should dwell nowhere but in Jerusalem. But the Angel meant Galilee."
Moreover, Joseph withdrew into Galilee, although he knew that Herod Antipas, Archelaus's brother, governed there; both because Archelaus was more ambitious and more cruel than Antipas, and therefore was driven into exile by Augustus; and because the infanticide of Herod the Ascalonite, who was the father of both Archelaus and Antipas, had occurred in Judea, namely in Bethlehem. Hence Archelaus remembered it, and would easily have understood that Christ, having returned to Judea, had escaped the infanticide, and therefore would have summoned Him to death.
ARCHELAUS.
That you may fully understand this history from the beginning, as the saying goes, note from Josephus, Book X of the Antiquities, chapter x and following: When Herod died in the 37th year of his reign, and his two surviving sons, Archelaus and Herod Antipas (who mocked Christ clothed in a white garment during His Passion), were contending between themselves over the succession to the kingdom, Augustus Caesar committed this dispute to be decided by Gaius Caesar, his grandson through his daughter Julia, who decided the dispute in such a way that he awarded the kingdom to neither, but divided it into four tetrarchies and assigned them to be administered by four tetrarchs, not kings: namely, he gave Judea to Archelaus; Galilee to Antipas; Trachonitis to their third brother Philip; and Abilene to Lysanias, as is clear from Luke 3:1. Therefore when St. Matthew says "that Archelaus was reigning," understand this not as king, or as having the title of king, but as tetrarch or toparch, with the hope however of the kingdom and royal title, given and promised to him by Augustus Caesar if he governed well.
Moreover Archelaus, after nine years of his tetrarchy, was driven into exile on account of his bad governance in the year 37 from the Battle of Actium, and seven years before the death of Augustus. So say Josephus, Eusebius, Zonaras, Bede, Haymo, Abulensis, Marianus, Scotus, Salmeron, Scaliger, Toletus, Barradius, and others. When Archelaus was driven into exile, Augustus gave Judea governors who would rule it in his name.
These three governed Judea for seven years, namely until the death of Augustus. The first was Coponius, who together with Quirinius, the governor of Syria, confiscated the wealth of Archelaus. The second was M. Ambivius. The third was Annius Rufus. When Augustus died after seven years, Tiberius Caesar, succeeding him, created Valerius Gratus as the fourth governor of Syria, and after him Pontius Pilate, who crucified Christ. After Pilate, in order, succeeded Marcellus, Cumanus, Claudius, Felix, Porcius, Festus, Albinus, and Florus, under whom in the 12th year of Nero, 35 years after the death of Christ, the Jews began to rebel against the Romans, and were soon destroyed by Titus and Vespasian; for five years later, on the eighth day of September, Jerusalem was captured and devastated by Titus. Josephus narrates these events at length.
But to Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee, the title of king was at length granted by Caesar, together with a diadem and other royal insignia. The same was granted to Herod Agrippa, who was the grandson of Herod Antipas (through his brother Aristobulus, whom their father Herod the Ascalonite had once killed), and to his son Agrippa the Younger, who remained king until the destruction of Jerusalem. Hence these three are frequently mentioned in the Gospels and Acts. For Antipas killed John the Baptist and mocked Christ. Agrippa the Elder killed the Apostle James and cast St. Peter into chains (Acts 12). Agrippa the Younger was the hearer and judge of Paul (Acts 25 and following).
From what has been said, great light is shed on Saints Matthew and Luke, and above all it is clearly apparent why Matthew says Joseph withdrew into Galilee out of fear of Archelaus reigning in Judea — lest he, just like his father Herod, should seek Christ as King of the Jews in order to put Him to death. Again, why Christ did not go up to Judea to the temple until He was twelve years old: because by then Archelaus had already been deprived of the tetrarchy of Judea by Caesar and driven into exile. In Archelaus, moreover, the line of Herod ceased to reign in Judea, from whom Christ had reason to fear; and Roman governors succeeded him, from whom Christ had nothing to fear, since they did not know Christ, indeed had not even heard His name.
Verse 23: He Shall Be Called a Nazarene
23. AND COMING, HE DWELT IN A CITY CALLED NAZARETH, THAT WHAT WAS SPOKEN THROUGH THE PROPHETS MIGHT BE FULFILLED: THAT HE WOULD BE CALLED A NAZARENE (St. Mark, following the Latin form, at chapter 1:24, has Nazarenos; but the other Evangelists write Nazoraios).
The city of Nazareth is thus described by Adrichomius in his Description of the Holy Land, page 241, number 73, following Jerome, Eusebius, Brocardus, and Salignac: "Nazareth, which is interpreted 'flower,' is a beautiful and flourishing city of Galilee, lying below the city of Capernaum, built upon a mountain which it encircles like a crown, two leagues from Mount Tabor, and at a distance of three days' journey from Jerusalem. Here the Blessed Mary, the radiant flower of virgins, was born. Here Christ our Lord and Savior, our glory and crown, that He might be born as a flower of the field (says Jerome) in the flower that was to come, was conceived and raised, and dwelt for twenty-four years. Hence this city is both His city and His homeland; and He Himself was called the Nazarene, or Nazarean and Galilean. And we who are now called Christians from Christ, among the ancients were called, as if in reproach, Nazareans from the Nazarene, and Galileans from the Galilean."
Moreover, "Galilee," says Rabanus, "is interpreted 'migration'; Nazareth, 'flower'; for the more ardently the Church migrates toward heavenly things, the more abundantly it abounds in the flower of virtues."
THAT WHAT WAS SPOKEN THROUGH THE PROPHETS MIGHT BE FULFILLED: THAT (that is, "that") HE WOULD BE CALLED A NAZARENE. — Because Christ was surnamed Nazarene from Nazareth, where He was conceived and raised, or, as Mark has it, Nazarenus. Now the word Nazareth is not mentioned in the entire Old Testament; hence we do not know whether it was written with the letter zayin or with tsade. If written with zayin, in Hebrew it means the same as "sanctified, separated, consecrated"; if with tsade, it means the same as "flourishing" or "guarded."
You will ask: from which Prophet, where, and why was Christ called Nazarene? Various authors offer various answers. Two are more probable.
NAZARAEUS.
First, that Christ was called Nazarene, in Hebrew nazir or nozeri with the letter zayin, that is, separated, holy, consecrated, crowned, religious — because Christ as man, separated from everything else, was hypostatically wholly united to the Word; for the root nazar means to separate, consecrate, crown. Hence the religious of the old law, who separated themselves from wine and the world and consecrated themselves to God, were called Nazarites, as is clear from Numbers 6:2 and following. See what was said there. But that Christ would be holy and consecrated to God, all the Prophets foretold, and above all Daniel, chapter 9:24: The Holy of Holies shall be anointed, namely Christ; and so Samson, who was a type of Christ, was a Nazarite (Judges 13:7), as was Joseph (Genesis 49:2). For just as Joseph after prison became the prince of Egypt, so Christ after death became the prince of the world. So St. Ambrose and Rupert, whom I cited at Genesis 49:2. It is true, however, that these Nazarites are called in Greek Nazaraioi with an alpha, but Christ is everywhere called Nazoraios with an omega, to distinguish Him from the Nazarites, because He was called Nazarene not from a vow, as they were, but from His homeland Nazareth. For Christ drank wine, which was forbidden to Nazarites by their vow. So St. Jerome here and Eusebius, Book VII of the Demonstration, chapter II, demonstration v, where he cites that passage from Leviticus 21:12, spoken of the Aaronic High Priest, who was a type of Christ: "He shall not go out from the Sanctuary, because the oil of the holy anointing of his God is upon him." For "holy" the Hebrew has nezer, that is, consecration or sanctification — the oil of the anointing of his God is upon him. So also Leo of Castro on Isaiah chapter 11, verses 1 and following. The index of Hebrew words which is usually appended at the end of Bibles, and Paul of Burgos here, who thinks the passage properly cited here is Psalm 131:18: "But upon Him shall My sanctification flourish," in Hebrew nizri, which St. Jerome translates as "his diadem." Whence also the golden plate affixed to the Pontiff's tiara, on which was engraved "Holiness to the Lord," is called nezer, that is, a crown or diadem of holiness (Exodus 29:6). And it was a type, indeed an indicator, of Christ the Nazarene, holy and crowned. Wherefore the Apostle, alluding to this, says at Hebrews 2:8: "We see Jesus, on account of the honor of His suffering, crowned with glory and honor." See what was said there, verses 9 and 10.
Hear Eusebius: "Nazer, the Septuagint translates as 'holy'; Aquila, 'separation'; Symmachus, 'untouched.' Thus from these the name Nazarene will signify either 'holy,' or 'set apart,' or 'untouched.' But the ancient priests, when they were anointed with the prepared oil which is called Nazer in the law of Moses, were called Nazareans by derivation from Nazer. But our Savior and Lord, having by His very nature in Himself both holiness and untouchedness and separateness, and needing no human anointing, nevertheless obtained the title of Nazarene among men — not because He was a Nazarene from the oil called Nazer, but because, although He was indeed such by nature, He was nevertheless called Nazarene among men from the city of Nazareth, where He received a childhood upbringing among His parents as man." Christ, therefore, was the Nazarene, that is, separated from all other men, sanctified, consecrated, and crowned — the supreme pontiff, lawgiver, teacher, redeemer, and sanctifier of the world.
This opinion is favored by the letter form; for everywhere the Evangelists write Nazarene or Nazarean with the letter z, which corresponds to the Hebrew nezir and nazir. For if Nazarene were derived from neser with tsade, meaning "flourishing," it should be written Nasarene with the letter s. For in all other proper names the Hebrew letter tsade is rendered by the letter s, as is evident in Bosra, Asor (concerning which see Joshua chapters 11 and 15, which some think is Nazareth), Melchisedech, Sabaoth, Sion, Sephora, Sadoch, Sadducees. Conversely, the Hebrew zayin is always rendered as zeta, as is evident in Zare, Zabulon, Zacharias, Beelzebub, etc.
Add this: it is more worthy for Christ to be called Nazarene with zayin, that is, "holy," than Nasarene with tsade, that is, "flourishing"; for the nezer, that is, the holiness, consecration, and crown of Christ as man, was the hypostatic union, or rather the very divinity of the Word, which crowned, sanctified, separated to itself, united, and consecrated the entire humanity of Christ. Finally, this opinion is supported by the fact that St. Matthew says: "What was spoken through the Prophets" — not "through the Prophet" — by which he shows that he has given "not the words of one Scripture, but the sense of many," says St. Jerome, because, namely, many Scriptures say that Christ would be the Holy One par excellence.
Second, others generally think that Christ is called Nazarene from neser with tsade, as if to say: "flourishing" from flower, or rather "sprouting" from sprout; for Theodotion and Aquila, as St. Jerome testifies at Isaiah 11:2, translated neser as "sprout." For by this name Christ is properly called, Isaiah 11:2: "And a flower shall rise from his root"; where for "flower" the Hebrew has neser with tsade. The Nazarene therefore means the same as "flourishing" or "sprouting," growing up into a great and glorious tree producing many precious fruits.
The first reason is that elsewhere Christ is called tsemach, that is, "sprout," which our translator renders as "rising," namely sprouting from the earth (Zechariah 6:12 and chapter 3:8) — because Christ from the Virgin, like a sprout from the earth, undefiled and pure from every stain of sin, flourished green with every virtue, and spread the sweetness of His fragrance and fame far and wide. Whence St. Ambrose, Book II of On the Holy Spirit, chapter v: "A flower, when plucked does not lose its fragrance; when crushed, it increases it." So too Christ, crushed and slain in His Passion, showed forth more greatly the power of His divinity and grace.
The second reason is that on the title of Christ's cross, which is preserved and displayed in Rome in the Basilica of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem, notseri is written with tsade, not with zayin, says the eyewitness Pagninus in his Explanation of Hebrew Words under the entry Nazareth and Nazarenus. Similarly the Syriac along with the Arabic writes Nazarenus with tsade, and modern Rabbis call Christians notserim from Christ the notseri, that is, the Nazarene, with tsade, that is, Nazarenes. Hence it should precisely have been written Nasarenus with s, not Nazarenus with z; but because the letter tsade among the Hebrews has a double sound, being equivalent to ds or ts, just as the letter zeta has the same value among the Greeks and Latins, therefore they wrote Nazarenus with it. I too have often seen the title of Christ's Holy Cross in Rome and studied it carefully; but I found the letters so worn away that I could not discern whether Nazarenus in the Hebrew was written with tsade or with zayin — indeed it seemed rather to be written with zayin than with tsade. Jacobus Bosius, Book I of On the Triumphant Cross, chapter 11, has printed an exact image of this title: examine it, and you will judge it to be as I have said. Add that this title was written by Pilate, the Roman governor, and his Roman officials, who, being little skilled in Hebrew, did not know whether Christ was called Nazarenus with tsade or with zayin, or at any rate did not care to distinguish these letters, since they are of practically the same sound. Moreover, those who write Nazarene with tsade and explain it as "flourishing" include Rabanus, Lyra, Abulensis, Pagninus, Jansenius, Cajetan, Barradius, Franciscus Lucas, and Salmeron; but many of these followed Pagninus, and believed him as an eyewitness when he said that notseri is written with tsade on the Cross of Christ.
But both opinions can be reconciled and combined, if you say that Christ is called Nazarene, if you look precisely at the letters, from nezer with zayin, that is, holiness, consecration, crown; but that it also alludes to neser with tsade, that is, sprout, flower — because these two letters tsade and zayin are similar both in form and in sound, and are interchanged with each other and with other letters they contain, as is evident in the Hitpael conjugation. See the Hebrew Grammar of Bellarmine and others. Wherefore the Psalmist combined both, Psalm 131:18, saying: "But upon Him shall My sanctification flourish" (behold "Nazarene," that is, flourishing) — behold nezer, that is, holiness. So also St. Jerome here: "Nazarene is interpreted 'holy.' And that the Lord would be holy, all Scripture testifies. We can also say otherwise, that in the same words according to the Hebrew truth it is written in Isaiah: 'A rod shall come forth from the root of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall ascend from his root.'" Finally, just as in their letters, so also in their meaning these two names are closely related to each other; for he who is a Nazarene, that is, separated from earthly pleasures, is certainly also a Nazarean, that is, flourishing in virtues. Hence some derive the Greek hagios, that is, "holy," from alpha privative and ge, that is, "earth" — as if to say, "without earth"; for he who is removed from earth and seeks heavenly things is heavenly and holy.
Moreover, Matthew adds this because Nazareth was a small and lowly town, and hence the name Nazarene seemed equally lowly and contemptible to both Jews and Gentiles; indeed on account of it many were deterred from Christ, lest they believe He was the Messiah. Whence Nathanael said to Philip, who was pointing out Christ from Nazareth to him: "Can anything good come from Nazareth?" (John 1:46). And Julian the Apostate contemptuously called Christ the Galilean and the Nazarene (for Nazareth was in lower Galilee), and so, struck by a heavenly dart from Christ and dying, he said: "You have conquered, Galilean, you have conquered." Matthew therefore shows the contrary here, namely that the name Nazarene is glorious, as having been foretold by the Prophets so many centuries before and attributed to Christ.
The meaning therefore is as if to say: Although Christ was born in Bethlehem, nevertheless He was conceived and raised in Nazareth, namely in a small and obscure city, so that there He might more easily hide from Herod the child-killer and his descendants, and so that He might give us an example of humility and contempt for the pomps of the world. Hence He was called Nazarene from the city of Nazareth; but in such a way that not only the name Nazarene, but also the reality — namely the holiness signified by the name Nazarene — befits Him, and so that this might be signified, God willed that Christ be conceived and raised in Nazareth; and so in reality what Isaiah and the prophets predicted about Him was fulfilled, namely that Christ would be nazir, that is, the Nazarene, that is, the Holy One; and notseri, that is, the Nazarene, that is, flourishing in every virtue and grace — as He truly is, so also He would be called. And consequently the name Nazarene, which the Jews and others gave to Christ and Christians as a reproach, is illustrious, indeed a mark and indicator of the true Messiah; for by this title the Prophets indicated and designated the Messiah. Moreover, the first to give Christ the surname Nazarene were the demons (Luke 4:34; Mark 1:24). Then the crowds (Mark 10:47; Luke 18:37).
Tropologically: Christ the Nazarene, that is, separated from the world and consecrated to God, and therefore flourishing in every virtue, was the origin, father, and prince of the Nazareans, that is, of the Religious who, despising the world, dedicate themselves wholly to God, so that they may flourish in virtues, according to Lamentations 4:7: "Her Nazarites were whiter than snow, brighter than milk, ruddier than ancient ivory, more beautiful than sapphire." See what was said there, and Numbers 6. See also our Jerome Plati, Book II of On the Good of the Religious State, chapter 19.
Salmeron adds: Nazarene means the same as Samaritan, that is, "guardian" (for natsar means "to preserve, to guard"), namely of men, or "guarded," namely by the divinity, according to Job 7: "What shall I do to You, O guardian of men?" And Psalm 120: "He who guards Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep." So also Franciscus Lucas: "Nazarene means guardian, savior, defender." In Nazareth therefore the Blessed Virgin is represented, from whom Christ the Nazarene was born, because she was guarded from original sin, from the shame of conception, from the burden of pregnancy, from the corruption and pain of childbirth, from the troublesome subjection to a husband in life, and from incineration in death. For the body of the Virgin after death was not dissolved into ashes, as happens with the bodies of other human beings, but was assumed into heaven with her soul unto glory. So Salmeron. These things are true, but more symbolic than literal.
Less correctly, Isidorus Clarius takes "the Prophets" to mean the interpreters of Sacred Scripture, namely the Scribes and Pharisees, who from Isaiah 11:1 understood and said that Christ would be the neser and Nazarene, that is, the flower and the flourishing one, and therefore His homeland was fittingly called Nazareth, that is, "flower," because it was destined to produce this flower, namely Christ.