Church Fathers Commentary Matthew 1:22-23

"Now all this is come to pass, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us." — Matthew 1:22-23 (ASV)

Remigius of Auxerre: It is the custom of the Evangelist to confirm what he says from the Old Testament for the sake of those Jews who believed in Christ, so that they might recognize that the things foretold in the Old Testament were fulfilled in the grace of the Gospel. Therefore, he adds, “Now all this was done.”

Here we must inquire why he would say “all this was done,” when he has only related the conception above. It should be known that he says this to show that, in the presence of God, “all this was done” before it was done among men. Or, he says “all this was done” because he is relating past events, for when he wrote, it was all done.

Glossa Ordinaria: Alternatively, he says, “all this was done”—meaning, the Virgin was betrothed, she was kept chaste, she was found with child, and the revelation was made by the angel—so that what was spoken might be fulfilled. The prophecy that the Virgin would conceive and bring forth a Son would never have been fulfilled if she had not been betrothed, which protected her from being stoned. Nor would it have been fulfilled if her secret had not been disclosed by the angel, so that Joseph would take her as his wife and not dismiss her to disgrace and death by stoning. If she had perished before the birth, the prophecy that says, She shall bring forth a Son (Isaiah 7:14), would have been made void.¹

It may also be said that the word “that” does not denote the cause here, for the prophecy was not fulfilled merely because it was destined to be fulfilled. Instead, it is used to show a consequence, as in Genesis: He hung the other on the gallows, that the truth of the interpreter might be proved (Genesis 40:22), since the truth is established by the outcome of one case. Likewise, in this passage, we should understand it to mean that when the foretold event happened, the prophecy was accomplished.

St. John Chrysostom: Alternatively, the angel, seeing the depths of divine mercy, the laws of nature being broken, and reconciliation being made—He who was above all being made lower than all—includes all these wonders in that one saying, “Now all this has happened.” It is as if he had said, “Do not suppose that this is newly devised by God; it was determined of old.” And he rightly cites the prophet not to the Virgin, who as a maiden was untaught in such things, but to Joseph, who was well-versed in the Prophets.

At first, he had spoken of Mary as “your wife,” but now, using the Prophet’s words, he introduces the word “Virgin” so that Joseph might hear this from the Prophet as something determined long ago. Therefore, to confirm what he had said, he introduces Isaiah—or rather, God. For he does not say, “Which was spoken by Isaiah,” but, Which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet.

St. Jerome, on Isaiah 7:14: Since the prophet introduces it with the words, The Lord Himself shall give you a sign, it ought to be something new and wonderful. But if, as the Jews maintain, a young woman or a girl were to give birth, and not a virgin, what kind of wonder would this be? For these words signify age, not purity.

Indeed, the Hebrew word for “virgin” (Bethula) is not used in this place. Instead, the word is “Halma,”ⁱ which all translators except the Septuagint render as “girl.” However, the word “Halma” has a twofold meaning: it signifies both “girl” and “hidden.” Therefore, “Halma” denotes not only a maiden or virgin but also one who is “hidden” or “secret”—that is, one never exposed to the gaze of men but kept under the close protection of her parents.

In the Punic language, which is said to be derived from Hebrew, a virgin is also properly called “Halma.” In our own language, “Halma” can mean holy, and the Hebrews used words from nearly all languages. As far as I can remember, I do not believe I have ever encountered “Halma” used for a married woman, but only for one who is a virgin—and not just any virgin, but one in the prime of her youth, for it is possible for an old woman to be a virgin. This refers to a virgin in her youth, or at least a virgin, and not a child too young for marriage.

What Matthew the Evangelist writes as, shall have in her womb, the Prophet, who is foretelling a future event, writes as, shall receive. The Evangelist, describing the past rather than foretelling the future, changes “shall receive” to “shall have.” For one who already has something cannot afterward receive what she has. He says, Lo, a Virgin shall have in her womb, and shall bear a Son.

St. Leo the Great: The conception was by the Holy Spirit within the womb of the Virgin, who brought forth her Son in the same perfect chastity in which she conceived.²

Pseudo-Augustine: If He could heal the severed limbs of others by a touch, how much more could He, in His own birth, preserve whole that which He found whole? In this birth, the soundness of the mother’s body was strengthened rather than weakened, and her virginity was confirmed rather than lost.³

Theodotus of Ancyra: Since Photinus affirms that the one who was born was a mere man, denying the divine birth and maintaining that the one who issued from the womb was a man separate from God, let him show how it was possible for human nature, born from the Virgin’s womb, to have preserved the virginity of that womb uncorrupted. For the mother of no man has ever remained a virgin.⁴

But because it was God the Word who was born in the flesh, He showed Himself to be the Word by preserving His mother’s virginity. For just as our spoken word, when it is produced, does not destroy the mind, so God the Word, in His birth, did not destroy virginity.

St. John Chrysostom: Just as it is the custom of Scripture to convey knowledge of events through a name, so here, They shall call His name Emmanuel, means nothing other than, “They shall see God among men.” This is why he does not say, “You shall call,” but “They shall call.”

Rabanus Maurus: First, angels hymning; second, apostles preaching; then, holy martyrs; and finally, all believers.

St. Jerome, on Isaiah 7:14: The Septuagint and three other translators render it, “You shall call.” Instead, we have here, “They shall call,” which is not the case in the Hebrew. For the word, “Charathi,”ⁱ which they all render as “You shall call,” can also mean, “And she shall call.” This would mean that the Virgin who will conceive and bear Christ shall call His name Emmanuel, which is interpreted, “God with us.”

Remigius of Auxerre: A question arises: Who interpreted this name? Was it the Prophet, the Evangelist, or some translator? It should be known that the Prophet did not interpret it. And what need would the holy Evangelist have to do so, since he wrote in the Hebrew language? Perhaps it was a difficult and rare word in Hebrew and therefore needed interpretation. It is more probable that a translator interpreted it so that Latin readers would not be perplexed by an unintelligible word.

This name conveys both substances at once—the Divinity and Humanity in the one Person of the Lord Jesus Christ. He who was begotten by God the Father in an unspeakable manner before all time was, in the end of time, made “Emmanuel”—that is, “God with us”—from a Virgin Mother. This “God with us” can be understood in this way: He was made to be with us—passible, mortal, and in all things like us, yet without sin. It can also mean that He joined our frail human substance, which He took upon Himself, to His divine substance in one Person.

St. Jerome: It should be known that the Hebrews believe this prophecy refers to Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz, because Samaria was captured during his reign; however, this cannot be established. Ahaz, son of Jotham, reigned over Judah and Jerusalem for sixteen years and was succeeded by his son Hezekiah, who was twenty-three years old and reigned over Judah and Jerusalem for twenty-nine years. How, then, can a prophecy made in the first year of Ahaz’s reign refer to the conception and birth of Hezekiah, when he was already nine years old? Perhaps they think that the sixth year of Hezekiah’s reign, when Samaria was captured, is what is called his “infancy” here—that is, the infancy of his reign, not of his age. But even a fool can see that this is a strained and forced interpretation.

One of our interpreters contends that the prophet Isaiah had two sons, Jashub and Emmanuel, and that Emmanuel was born to his wife, the prophetess, as a type of the Lord and Savior. But this is a fabricated story.

Petrus Alfonsus: For we do not know of any man from that time who was called Emmanuel. But a Hebrew might object: How can this be said about Christ and Mary when many centuries passed between Ahaz and Mary? But although the prophet was speaking to Ahaz, the prophecy was not spoken to him alone or only about his time, for it is introduced with the words, Hear, O house of David (Isaiah 7:13), not, “Hear, O Ahaz.”⁵

Again, the text says, The Lord Himself shall give you a sign, meaning He and no other. From this, we may understand that the Lord Himself would be the sign. And the fact that he uses the plural “you” and not the singular shows that this was not spoken to Ahaz or for his sake alone.

St. Jerome: What was spoken to Ahaz, then, should be understood this way. This Child, who will be born of a virgin from the house of David, will now be called Emmanuel, that is, “God with us,” because the events—perhaps deliverance from the two hostile kings—will make it clear that you have God present with you. But afterward, He will be called Jesus, that is, “Savior,” because He will save the entire human race. Therefore, O house of David, do not wonder at the newness of this thing—that a virgin should bring forth a God—seeing that He has such great power that even though He is to be born a long time from now, He delivers you now when you call upon Him.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Who is so mad as to say with Manichaeus that it is a weak faith that cannot believe in Christ without a witness? The Apostle himself says, How shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? (Romans 10:14).⁶

So that the things preached by the Apostle would not be despised or considered fables, they are proven to have been foretold by the prophets. For even though they were attested by miracles, there would still have been men who would ascribe them all to magical power, if such suggestions had not been overcome by the additional testimony of prophecy.

For no one could suppose that, long before He was born, He had magically raised up prophets to prophesy about Him. If we say to a Gentile, “Believe in Christ, that He is God,” and he should answer, “Why should I believe in Him?” we can point to the authority of the prophets. If he refuses to accept this, we establish their credibility by showing that they foretold future events, and those events truly came to pass. I suppose he must know what great persecutions the Christian religion formerly suffered from the kings of this world. Let him now see those very kings submitting to the kingdom of Christ and all nations serving Him—all of which the prophets foretold. Then, hearing these things from the Scriptures of the prophets and seeing them fulfilled throughout the whole earth, he would be moved to faith.

Glossa Ordinaria: This error, then, is barred by the Evangelist saying, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet.⁷

One kind of prophecy comes from the preordination of God and must be fulfilled, without any free choice on our part. The prophecy we are discussing is of this kind, which is why he says, “Lo,” to show its certainty.

A second kind of prophecy comes from the foreknowledge of God, and our free will is involved with it. In this kind, by grace working with us, we obtain a reward; or, if we are justly deserted by grace, we receive torment.

A third kind is not of foreknowledge but is a type of threat made in a human manner, such as, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown (Jonah 3), with the understanding that this will happen unless the Ninevites repent.

1. ap Anselm
2. Serm. 23, 1
3. in App. s. 123
4. Hom. 1 and 2. in Conc. Eph. ap. Hard. t. i. pp. 1643, 1655
5. Dial. tit. 7
6. Cont. Faust., 12, 45, and 13, 7
7. Anselm