Church Fathers Commentary Matthew 2:21-23

"And he arose and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither; and being warned [of God] in a dream, he withdrew into the parts of Galilee, and came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, that he should be called a Nazarene." — Matthew 2:21-23 (ASV)

Glossa Ordinaria: Joseph was not disobedient to the angelic warning, but "he arose, and took the young Child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel."

The Angel had not specified the particular place, so while Joseph hesitated, the Angel returned, and by his frequent visits, confirmed Joseph's obedience.

Josephus: Herod had nine wives, and by seven of them he had numerous children. By Doris, his firstborn was Antipater; by Mariamne, Alexander and Aristobulus; by Malthace, a Samaritan woman, Archelaus; and by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, Herod (who was later tetrarch) and Philip. The first three were put to death by Herod.

After his death, Archelaus seized the throne based on his father's will, and the question of succession was brought before Augustus Caesar. After some delay, and according to the Senate's advice, Augustus distributed all of Herod's dominions. He assigned one half to Archelaus—consisting of Idumea and Judea—with the title of tetrarch and the promise of becoming king if he proved himself worthy. The rest he divided into two tetrarchates, giving Galilee to Herod the tetrarch, and Iturea and Trachonitis to Philip. Thus, after his father's death, Archelaus was a duarch, a type of sovereignty that is here called a kingdom.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Here it may be asked: How then could his parents go up to Jerusalem every year of Christ's childhood, as Luke relates, if the fear of Archelaus now prevented them from approaching it? This difficulty is easily solved. During the festival, they could have escaped notice in the crowd and returned quickly, whereas they might have been afraid to live there at other times. In this way, they neither became irreligious by neglecting the festival nor conspicuous by living continually in Jerusalem.¹

Alternatively, we can understand Luke's statement that they "went up every year" as referring to a time after they no longer had reason to fear Archelaus, who, as Josephus relates, reigned for only nine years.

Another difficulty arises in what follows: "Being warned in a dream, he turned aside into the region of Galilee." If Joseph was afraid to go into Judea because one of Herod's sons, Archelaus, reigned there, how could he go into Galilee, where another of his sons, Herod, was tetrarch, as Luke tells us? This question assumes that the times Luke speaks of were times when there was still a need to fear for the Child. However, by then, things in Judea had changed so much that Archelaus no longer ruled there; Pilate was the governor.

Glossa Ordinaria: But then we might ask, why was he not afraid to go into Galilee, since Archelaus's brother, Herod, ruled there? He could be better concealed in Nazareth than in Jerusalem, which was the capital of the kingdom and where Archelaus was constantly resident.²

St. John Chrysostom: And once he had left the country of His birth, all that had happened was forgotten; the rage of the persecution had been exhausted in Bethlehem and its vicinity. By choosing Nazareth, therefore, Joseph both avoided danger and returned to his own country.

St. Augustine of Hippo: It may occur to some that Matthew says His parents went with the child Jesus to Galilee because they feared Archelaus, when it seems more probable that they chose Galilee because Nazareth was their own city, as Luke did not forget to mention. We must understand that when the angel in the vision in Egypt told Joseph, "Go into the land of Israel," Joseph understood the command to mean that he should go directly into Judea, as that was properly "the land of Israel." But finding Archelaus ruling there, he would not risk the danger, since "the land of Israel" could also be interpreted to include Galilee, which was inhabited by the children of Israel.³

Alternatively, we may suppose His parents believed that Christ should dwell nowhere but in Jerusalem, where the temple of the Lord was, and would have gone there had the fear of Archelaus not hindered them. They had not been commanded by God to dwell specifically in Judea or Jerusalem—in which case they would have had to disregard their fear of Archelaus—but only in the land of Israel generally, which they could understand to include Galilee.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: But the figurative interpretation holds true in any case. Joseph represents the Apostles, to whom Christ is entrusted to be carried about. These Apostles, as though Herod were dead—that is, with his people having been destroyed in the Lord's passion—are commanded to preach the Gospel to the Jews; they are sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But finding the seed of their hereditary unbelief still remaining, they fear and withdraw. Admonished by a vision—namely, seeing the Holy Spirit poured out upon the Gentiles—they carry Christ to them.

Rabanus Maurus: Or, we may apply this to the last days of the Jewish Church, when, after many Jews have turned to the preaching of Enoch and Elijah, the rest, filled with the spirit of the Antichrist, will fight against the faith. Thus, the part of Judea where Archelaus rules signifies the followers of the Antichrist. Nazareth of Galilee, to which Christ is taken, signifies that part of the nation that will embrace the faith. Galilee means "removal," and Nazareth, "the flower of virtues." For the more zealously the Church removes herself from the earthly to the heavenly, the more she abounds in the flower and fruit of virtues.

Glossa Ordinaria: To this he adds the Prophet's testimony, saying, "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophets..."

St. Jerome: Had he meant to quote a particular text, he would not have written "Prophets," but "the Prophet." By using the plural, he evidently does not draw the words from any single passage of Scripture, but rather the collective sense of them all. Nazarene is interpreted as "Holy,"ⁱ and all Scripture testifies that the Lord would be Holy.

Alternatively, we can explain that this is found in Isaiah, rendered according to the strict letter of the Hebrew (Isaiah 11:1).ⁱ "There shall come a Rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall grow out of His roots."ⁱ

Pseudo-Chrysostom: They might have read this in some Prophets who are not in our canon, such as Nathan or Esdras. That there was some prophecy to this effect is clear from what Philip says to Nathanael: "Him of whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth" (John 1:45). For this reason, Christians were at first called Nazarenes; in Antioch, their name was changed to "Christians."

St. Augustine of Hippo: Luke omits this entire history, from the account of the Magi onward. Let it be noted here once and for all that each of the Evangelists writes as if he were giving a full and complete history that omits nothing. When he does pass over something, he continues his narrative as if he had told everything. Yet, by a diligent comparison of their various narratives, we can easily determine where to insert any detail mentioned by one but not by the other.⁴

1. De Con. Evan. ii. 10
2. ord.
3. de Con. Evan., ii, 9
4. de Con. Evan., ii, 5