3 Sunday after Nativity

Luke is supposed to have mentioned this concerning Peter, recapitulating. For Peter ran to the sepulchre at the same time that John also went, as soon as it had been told to them alone by the women, (especially Mary Magdalene,) that the body was taken away. But the vision of Angels took place afterwards. Luke therefore mentioned Peter only, because to him Mary first told it. It may also strike one, that Luke says that Peter, not entering but stooping down, saw the linen clothes by themselves, and departed wondering, whereas John says, that he himself saw the linen clothes in the same position, and that he entered after Peter. We must understand then that Peter first saw them stooping down, which Luke mentions, John omits, but that he afterwards entered before John came in.

But Peter arose and ran to the tomb, and stooping down, he saw the linen cloths alone, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened. Luke briefly mentions Peter's run; but how this happened is more fully detailed by John, who also says that the disciple whom Jesus loved ran with Peter, thus implying himself. Therefore, it is asked how Luke says of Peter: "And stooping down, he saw the linen cloths alone" (Luke 24), while John signifies that he himself did this, but that Peter, upon entering the tomb, saw not only the linen cloths but also the napkin that had been on his head. It must be understood that Peter, stooping down, saw what Luke records, which John is silent about; but after entering, to more carefully discern the interior, he entered, yet before John entered.

Therefore the doubt arising from hearing incited them to seek certainty through sight; on account of which he adds: But Peter rising up ran to the tomb, and stooping down he saw the linen cloths laid by themselves, and he went away, wondering within himself at what had happened. Now Luke narrates these things specifically about Peter, to show that he had not abandoned his fervor. But John narrates this more expressly in chapter twenty, that not Peter alone went, but also John; and that "they ran together," and that "John ran ahead more quickly than Peter, but did not enter the tomb first." Luke therefore narrates that Peter, stooping down, saw the linen cloths laid; but John pursues more expressly that he not only saw these things, but also "entered the tomb," and yet, as is said here, he went away wondering within himself, not yet believing, because it is said in John chapter twenty: "For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead."

And it should be noted that by the linen cloths laid are understood the mysteries of the humanity, which have been set forth for us to believe and understand through the mystery of the resurrection; hence Revelation chapter five: "Behold, the lion of the tribe of Judah has conquered, to open the book and to loose its seven seals." But because not all things can be comprehended by reason of the united Divinity, therefore it is said that he went away wondering. For it is said in the Psalm: "Your knowledge is become wonderful beyond me." And therefore, in designation of this, it is said in John chapter twenty that "the cloth which had been upon the head of Jesus, he saw not laid with the linen cloths, but separately rolled up in one place." There the Gloss: "The incomprehensible mysteries of the Divinity are removed from the knowledge of our infirmity; for in what is rolled up neither beginning nor end is seen, so the loftiness of the Divinity neither began to be nor ceased to be." And therefore Peter went away wondering; the Psalm: "Wonderful are your works, and my soul knows it exceedingly."

If he left his clothes behind in the tomb, it was so that Adam could enter into paradise without clothing, just as he had been before he had sinned. In place of having to leave paradise clothed, he now had to strip himself before entering there [again]. Or [alternatively], he abandoned them to symbolize the mystery of the resurrection of the dead, for just as [the Lord] rose into glory without clothes, so we also [will rise] with our works and not with our clothes.

For he alone believed the women saying that they had seen Angels; and as he was of more ardent feelings than the rest, he anxiously put himself foremost, looking every where for the Lord; as it follows, And stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves.

However, Peter does not delay, like fire that has taken hold of material, but runs to the tomb and sees only the linen cloths lying there. And from the fact that he reached the tomb, the first benefit is that instead of mocking, he marvels: "and he went away (it says), wondering in himself at what had happened." For how did the linen cloths alone remain, and that when the body had been anointed with myrrh? How much leisure did the thief have, when he left them properly folded, carried out the body, and that when soldiers had been posted? By "Mary, the mother of James," understand the Theotokos, for she was so called as the supposed mother of James, the son of Joseph, who was called the Less; I mean the Brother of God. For there was also James the Greater, one of the Twelve, the son of Zebedee.

Peter, as soon as he heard this, delays not, but runs to the sepulchre; for fire when applied to matter knows no delay; as it follows, Then arose Peter, and ran to the sepulchre.

But now when he was at the tomb, he first of all obtained that he should marvel at those things which had before been derided by himself or the others; as it is said, And departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass; that is, wondering in himself at the way in which it had happened, how the linen clothes had been left behind, since the body was anointed with myrrh; or what opportunity the thief had obtained, that putting away the clothes wrapped up by themselves, he should take away the body with the soldiers standing round.

Or to two of the disciples by themselves our Lord showed Himself in the evening, namely, Ammaon and Cleophas.

Here we are with two others, walking along the road and talking to each other about the things that had been happening in Jerusalem—about the iniquity of the Jews, about the death of Christ. They were walking along, talking the matter over, grieving for him as if he were dead, not knowing he had risen again. He appeared and joined them as a third traveler, and entered into friendly conversation with them. Their eyes were held from recognizing him; their hearts, you see, needed more thorough instruction. Recognition is deferred.

"We," they said, "had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel." O my dear disciples, you had hoped! So now you no longer hope? Look, Christ is alive! Is hope dead in you? Certainly, certainly, Christ is alive! Christ, being alive, found the hearts of his disciples dead, as he appeared and did not appear to their eyes. He was at one and the same time seen and concealed. I mean, if he wasn't seen, how could they have heard him questioning them and answered his questions? He was walking with them along the road like a companion and was himself the leader. Of course he was seen, but he wasn't recognized. For their eyes were restrained, as we heard, so that they wouldn't recognize him. They weren't restrained so that they wouldn't see him, but they were held so that they wouldn't recognize him.Ah yes, brothers and sisters, but where did the Lord wish to be recognized? In the breaking of bread. We're all right, nothing to worry about—we break bread, and we recognize the Lord. It was for our sake that he didn't want to be recognized anywhere but there, because we weren't going to see him in the flesh, and yet we were going to eat his flesh. So if you're a believer, any of you, if you're not called a Christian for nothing, if you don't come to church pointlessly, if you listen to the Word of God in fear and hope, you may take comfort in the breaking of bread. The Lord's absence is not an absence. Have faith, and the one you cannot see is with you. Those two, even when the Lord was talking to them, did not have faith, because they didn't believe he had risen. Nor did they have any hope that he could rise again. They had lost faith, lost hope. They were walking along, dead, with Christ alive. They were walking along, dead, with life itself. Life was walking along with them, but in their hearts life had not yet been restored.

(de Con. Ev. lib. iii. c. 25.) The fortress mentioned here we may not unreasonably take to have been also called according to Mark, a village, He next describes the fortress, saying, which was from Jerusalem about the space of sixty stades, called Emmaus.

And behold, two of them were going that very day to a village named Emmaus, which was about sixty stadia from Jerusalem, and they were talking with each other about all these things which had happened. A stadium, as the Greeks say, with Hercules as the author, is the measure of distances and is an eighth part of a mile; therefore, sixty stadia signify seven thousand and five hundred steps. This distance well suits those who were certain of the death and burial of the Savior, but doubtful of the resurrection. For who could doubt that the resurrection, which happened after the seventh Sabbath, harmonizes with the eighth number? Therefore, the disciples who were speaking of the Lord as they went and had completed the sixth mile of their journey, because they mourned that he had lived without reproach up to his death, which occurred on the sixth Sabbath, also completed the seventh, since they did not doubt that he had rested in the tomb. But of the eighth, they only completed half, because they did not yet fully believe in the glory of the celebrated resurrection. Now Emmaus is the same as Nicopolis, the famous city of Palestine, which after the expulsion of the Jews was restored under Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, having changed both its status and its name.

It is the same as Nicopolis, a remarkable town in Palestine, which after the taking of Judæa under the Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antonius, changed together with its condition its name also. But the stadium which, as the Greeks say, was invented by Hercules to measure the distances of roads, is the eighth part of a mile; therefore sixty stades are equal to seven miles and fifty paces. And this was the length of journey which they were walking, who were certain about our Lord's death and burial, but doubtful concerning His resurrection. For the resurrection which took place after the seventh day of the week, no one doubts is implied in the number eight. The disciples therefore as they walk and converse about the Lord had completed the sixth mile of their journey, for they were grieving that He who had lived without blame, had come at length even to death, which He underwent on the sixth day. They had completed also the seventh mile, for they doubted not that He rested in the grave. But of the eighth mile they had only accomplished half; for the glory of His already triumphant resurrection, they did not believe perfectly.

And behold, two of them were going etc. After having described the revelation of the resurrection, the Evangelist here describes the apparition of the one rising, in which indeed he appeared to two disciples as suitable witnesses. Now the progression and order of this apparition consisted in this, that Christ associated himself with the disciples in a threefold manner: first indeed on the journey; second in conversation; and third in the meal. In the first two he was hidden, but in the third he appeared. Concerning the association on the journey, three things are introduced by the Evangelist, namely the harmonious journey of the disciples, the mutual conversation of the travelers, and the gracious companionship of Christ.

First, therefore, with regard to the concordant journey of the disciples, he says: And behold, two of them were going that same day to a town which was at a distance of sixty stadia from Jerusalem, called Emmaus. In this, Luke expresses the number of those going, namely that they were two, so as to give us to understand their concord. For Ecclesiastes 4: "It is better for two to be together than one." "If one falls, he will be supported by the other," etc.; and therefore above in chapter ten it is said that "he sent them two by two before his face," etc. He also expresses the distance, for the understanding of the mystery. For, as Bede says, "a stadium is the eighth part of a mile, and therefore sixty stadia contain seven thousand five hundred paces," that is, seven and a half miles: in which it is given to understand that "they were certain about the death and burial of the Lord, but doubtful and uncertain about the eighth day of the resurrection." But Ecclesiastes 11 says: "Give portions to seven and also to eight," because not only the death and burial of Christ, but also his resurrection, is established as something to be believed wholly and perfectly. — He also expresses the destination of the journey, saying that it was called Emmaus, and this on account of its significance. For that town was first named Emmaus, as is said here, and afterwards Nicopolis: whence Jerome in the Epitaph of Paula: "Nicopolis, which was formerly called Emmaus, where the Lord was recognized in the breaking of bread; she consecrated the house of Cleophas into a church." For, as is read in the Tripartite History, "the Romans after the destruction of Jerusalem called this city Nicopolis from the occasion of their victory." Now Emmaus is interpreted as hastening mother, and Nicopolis as city of victory; and this is the Church Militant, which hastens toward the fatherland and overcomes the opposing powers. Between this and Jerusalem, that is, the Church Triumphant, one must understand the distance of the seven ages and the eighth already begun in our Head, Christ, so that from the one we may arrive at the other, by hastening toward the good and triumphing against evil; Hebrews 4: "Let us hasten to enter into that rest, lest anyone fall into that same example of unbelief."

As two of the disciples walked to a village called Emmaus, they talked about Christ, regarding him as no longer living but mourning him as dead. As they conversed, Jesus drew near and went with them, without being recognized by them, for their eyes were restrained, so that they should not know him. You must know that these two disciples belonged to the number of the seventy, and that Cleopas's companion was Simon—not Peter or the one of Cana—but another Simon, of the seventy.

(non occ.) After the manifestation of Christ's resurrection made by the Angels to the women, the same resurrection is further manifested by an appearance of Christ Himself to His disciples; as it is said, And behold two of them.

For as two of them were taking a walk, and when the Lord had joined their company, without its appearing that it was He, and whilst He dissembled His knowledge of what had just taken place, they say: "But we trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel," -meaning their own, that is, the Creator's Christ.

Some say that one of these two was Luke himself, which is why the evangelist concealed his name.

Some say that Luke was one of these two, and for this reason concealed his name.

Secondly, regarding the mutual conversation of the travelers, he adds: And they were speaking to one another about all these things that had happened, that is, about those things which had been done concerning Christ. And this conversation was praiseworthy, because it was about good subject matter, namely about Christ: therefore First Peter 4: "If anyone speaks, let it be as the words of God"; and Ephesians 4: "Let no evil speech proceed from your mouth, but that which is good, so that it may give edification to those who hear." They were speaking about this because they were especially thinking about it, and they were thinking about it because they loved: for Matthew 12: "Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." Nor did they only love, but they also doubted: and therefore they also conferred with one another, because, as is said in Proverbs 27, "iron is sharpened by iron, and a man sharpens the face of his friend"; and therefore Sirach 9: "Deal with the wise and prudent"; and after: "And let your thought be upon the sense of God, and let all your discourse be upon the precepts of the Most High." To such words the Spirit of the Lord is present as the origin of all good words; Matthew 10: "It is not you who speak, but the Spirit of my Father, who speaks in you"; but on the contrary, he flees from indiscreet words and thoughts: Wisdom 1: "The holy Spirit of discipline will flee from the deceitful and will withdraw himself from thoughts that are without understanding," etc.

They "were talking with each other about all these events" not as believers, but as people perplexed and amazed by the extraordinary occurrences, and not quickly able to come to terms with such a wondrous phenomenon.

But the disciples above mentioned talked to one another of the things which had happened, not as believing them, but as bewildered at events so extraordinary.

And it happened that while they were conversing and questioning, Jesus himself, approaching, walked with them. The Lord, approaching, accompanied them while they were speaking of him, so that he might both kindle their faith in his resurrection in their minds and always fulfill what he had promised by the hidden presence of his majesty. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there (he says) I am in the midst of them.

And as they spoke of Him, the Lord comes near and joins them, that He may both influence their minds with faith in His resurrection, and fulfil that which He had promised, Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them (Mat. 18:20); as it follows, And it came to pans while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near and went with them.

Thirdly, regarding Christ's gracious companionship, he adds: And it came to pass, while they talked and questioned among themselves, that Jesus himself, drawing near, went with them. They are said to talk in their speaking, because they were speaking words that did not have certainty, so that they could truly say that word of Sirach 43: "We shall say much, and yet shall want words; but the consummation of our words is he himself." And because they were in harmony in their going and were speaking about the good, therefore they were made worthy of the companionship of Christ. For Matthew 18: "Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them"; and this was because they loved Christ. For John 14: "If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him," etc.

At his radiant birth therefore a radiant star appeared, and at his dark death there appeared a dark gloom. … The Lord of the star appeared in his own person to the two who were traveling with him along the road, but his identity was hidden from them. His star too was like this, for its light appeared to all humanity while its pathway was hidden from all humanity.

Jesus, having approached, went with them. For, having a body already spiritual and most Divine, He found no hindrance in distance of places to being with those with whom He wished.

For having now obtained a spiritual body, distance of place is no obstacle to His being present to whom He wished, nor did He any further govern His body by natural laws, but spiritually and supernaturally. Hence as Mark says, He appeared to them in a different form, in which they were not permitted to know Him; for it follows, And their eyes were holden that they should not know him; in order truly that they may reveal their entirely doubtful conceptions, and uncovering their wound may receive a cure; and that they might know that although the same body which suffered, rose again, yet it was no longer such as to be visible to all, but only to those by whom He willed it to be seen; and that they should not wonder why henceforth He walks not among the people, seeing that His conversation was not fit for mankind, but rather divine; which is also the character of the resurrection to come, in which we shall walk as the Angels and the sons of God.

But their eyes were held, so that they might not recognize him. And he said to them: What are these words which you discuss with each other while walking, and are sad? Indeed the Lord appeared, but he did not show them the appearance that they might recognize. Therefore, the Lord externally did in the eyes of the body what was being done among them internally in the eyes of the heart. For among themselves internally they both loved and doubted; but to them the Lord was externally present, and did not show who he was. Thus, to those speaking of him he showed his presence, but to those doubting about him he concealed the appearance of his recognition.

And because these men did not yet perfectly believe, therefore they ought to have his presence but not have knowledge of him: therefore he adds: But their eyes were held, that they should not know him; and this indeed was fitting. Whence Gregory: "Just as they inwardly loved and yet doubted, so he both outwardly is present and yet does not show who he is. Therefore to those speaking about him he presents his presence, but from those doubting about him he withdraws the appearance of recognition." And therefore in the last chapter of Mark it is said that he appeared to them "in another form."

And it should be noted that he says that their eyes were held; from which it is clearly apparent that Christ did not in truth change the likeness or figure of his body, but only according to appearance: for in the eyes of the disciples he appeared otherwise. Hence the Gloss says on Genesis nineteen that the disciples were struck with aorasia, by which indeed it happens that a thing is in some way seen and in some way concealed; just as Augustine also says was done to the Sodomites. Nor was there a change in the glorious body, nor was there deception on the part of the Lord, but by dispensation he veiled their eyes, both because it was thus fitting, and they were not ready to receive the open presence of Christ; and also because they were to be led more orderly to perceiving knowledge of him; and also because they would not have had so familiar a conversation on the road.

Therefore the Lord performed outwardly in the eyes of the body what was happening within them in the eyes of the heart. For they themselves within were both loving and doubting, while the Lord outwardly was both present to them and yet did not reveal who He was. To those speaking about Him He showed His presence, but from those doubting Him He hid the appearance of His recognition.

(23. in Ev.) Rightly also He refrained from manifesting to them a form which they might recognise, doing that outwardly in the eyes of the body, which was done by themselves inwardly in the eyes of the mind. For they in themselves inwardly both loved and doubted. Therefore to them as they talked of Him He exhibited His presence, but as they doubted of Him He concealed the appearance which they knew. He indeed conversed with them, for it follows, And he said to them, What manner of communications, &c.

Therefore also the bodily features with which the Savior then appeared did not allow them to recognize Him. For He appeared to them, as Mark says (Mk. 16:12), "in another form" and with different features. He disposed of His body no longer according to the laws of nature, but supernaturally and spiritually. For this reason their eyes were held back so that they did not recognize Him. But why did He appear in another form, and why were their eyes held back? So that they might disclose all their perplexities, reveal their wound, and then receive the remedy; so that after a long interval He might appear to them more pleasant; so that He might teach them from Moses and the prophets, and only then be recognized; so that they might better believe that His body was no longer such as could be seen by all in general, but that although the very same body that had suffered had risen, it is visible only to those to whom He grants it; so that they might gain from this that great benefit of no longer wavering in their perplexities (concerning, for example) why He no longer goes about among the people, but would reflect within themselves that His manner of life after the resurrection differs greatly from the ordinary — not human, but most Divine — so that it serves as a figure of the future resurrection as well, in which we shall live as Angels and sons of God. So then, this is why their eyes were held back and they did not recognize Him. For He became visible to those for whom He wished.

For having now obtained a spiritual body, distance of place is no obstacle to His being present to whom He wished, nor did He any further govern His body by natural laws, but spiritually and supernaturally. Hence as Mark says, He appeared to them in a different form, in which they were not permitted to know Him; for it follows, And their eyes were holden that they should not know him; in order truly that they may reveal their entirely doubtful conceptions, and uncovering their wound may receive a cure; and that they might know that although the same body which suffered, rose again, yet it was no longer such as to be visible to all, but only to those by whom He willed it to be seen; and that they should not wonder why henceforth He walks not among the people, seeing that His conversation was not fit for mankind, but rather divine; which is also the character of the resurrection to come, in which we shall walk as the Angels and the sons of God.

(Anonm. in Cat. Gr.) They were in truth discoursing among themselves, no longer expecting to see Christ alive, but sorrowing as concerning their Saviour slain. Hence it follows, And one of them whose name was Cleophas, answering him said, Art thou only a stranger?

And one of them, named Cleophas, answering, said to him: Are you alone a stranger in Jerusalem, and do not know the things which have happened there in these days? They thought him to be a stranger, whose face they did not recognize. But truly, he was a stranger to them, from whose perception the glory of the resurrection already obtained was far removed from their frail nature. He was a stranger to them, from whose still uninformed faith, as yet ignorant of his resurrection, he remained a foreigner.

Or he says this, because they thought Him a stranger, whose countenance they did not recognise. But in reality He was a stranger to them, from the infirmity of whose natures, now that He had obtained the glory of the resurrection, He was far removed, and to whose faith, as yet ignorant of His resurrection, He remained foreign.

And because it is not for just anyone to thrust himself into secret conversations, according to that instruction: "Do not approach a council before you are called"; it is shown from the response that this kind of discourse is public and common. And therefore he adds: And one of them, whose name was Cleophas, answering, said to him: Are you alone a stranger in Jerusalem, and have you not known the things that have been done there in these days? It should be noted, however, that although there were two, Luke introduces only one as speaking, as the more eminent: for the younger ought to yield to the elder, according to that passage of Ecclesiasticus thirty-two: "Speak, elder: for it befits you to speak the first word with careful knowledge." Although there were also two, he names only one, because, as some commentators say, Luke was the other of these disciples, and it is the custom of the writer of Sacred Scripture not to make much mention of his own name: just as John too does not name himself but says: "The disciple whom Jesus loved." Ambrose, however, says that it was not Luke. Here therefore Cleophas shows that the matter of his speech was known to all, not only to citizens but also to strangers: and therefore he marvels that he, as a stranger, should be ignorant of it. Therefore he calls him a stranger, either because he appeared in a foreign guise, or because like a stranger he was ignorant of what was most well known.

But rightly he appeared to them as a stranger, because he was a stranger in the world: John 1: "He was in the world, and the world knew him not"; and therefore Jeremiah 14: "Why will you be as a sojourner in the land and as a wayfarer turning aside to lodge?" He was a stranger in the eyes of the disciples who did not believe; Job 19: "I was as a stranger in their eyes"; and therefore the Psalm: "I am become a stranger to my brethren and a pilgrim to the sons of my mother." A stranger also in his members: Hebrews 11: "Confessing that they are strangers and pilgrims upon the earth"; and Second Corinthians 5: "While we are in this body, we are pilgrims away from the Lord." And therefore First Peter 2: "I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims." And for this reason he does not deny himself to be a stranger, but shows it and even inquires of them.

Cleopas makes a reproach to the Lord, who appears in the form of a fellow traveler, and says: "Are you the only one of those who have come," that is, are you the only one of the inhabitants of Jerusalem who does not know what has happened? Others, however, understood the words "of those who have come" ("are you a stranger") in this way: are you the only stranger who lives outside Jerusalem, and are so indifferent to what is happening in it that you do not know about this?

As if he said, "Art thou a mere stranger, and one dwelling beyond the confines of Jerusalem, and therefore unacquainted with what has happened in the midst of it, that thou knowest not these things?

And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to the sentence of death, and crucified him. But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Rightly they walked sorrowfully, for they were also somewhat blaming themselves that they had hoped for redemption in him whom they saw now dead, and did not believe that he would rise again. And they grieved especially that he was killed without guilt, because they knew him to be innocent.

Because therefore Christ Jesus had been perfect in every way, there was therefore great matter for grief concerning his condemnation by the rulers of the Jews; and therefore he adds: And how our chief priests and rulers handed him over to the sentence of death and crucified him. For this was true, although the deed outwardly appeared to have been done by the hand of Pilate; hence John 18: "Your nation and your chief priests have handed you over to me"; and thus there was cause to grieve over so great a sacrilege and so great a crime of the rulers; there was also cause to grieve over the common loss.

As if deceived in their hopes, they speak thus: we hoped that He would save others too, but He did not even save Himself. So faint-hearted and slow to believe were they! Their words resemble what those standing at the cross also said: "He saved others; He cannot save Himself" (Mk. 15:31). Therefore the Lord also calls them foolish and slow to believe. What do the words "to redeem Israel" mean? We have said before that the Jewish people, and especially the less discerning among them, expected in Christ a savior and deliverer from the evils oppressing them and from the yoke of Roman slavery, and they hoped that He would reign on earth. Therefore they also say: we hoped that He would deliver Israel from the Gentiles — the Romans — but He Himself did not even escape the unjust sentence passed upon Him.

(ut sup.) They next assign the cause of their sadness, the betrayal and passion of Christ; and add in the voice of despair, But we hoped it had been he who should have redeemed Israel. We hoped, (he says,) not we hope; as if the death of the Lord were like to the deaths of other men.

So then, what kind of consideration does the doubting of Moses demand of us?… Moses doubted when the wood came into contact with the rock. …The disciples doubted when they saw the Lord crucified. He came to them after his resurrection, as they were talking to each other about this matter in a sad conversation. He kept their eyes from recognizing him, not in order to remove himself from believers but to put them off while they were still doubters. He joined in their conversation as a third party and asked them what they were talking about. They were astonished that he should be the only person not to know what had happened—to the very man, in fact, who was asking about it. "Are you," they said, "the only stranger in Jerusalem?" And they went over all that had happened to Jesus. Straightaway they proceeded to open up all the depth of their despair and, although unwittingly, they showed the doctor their wounds: "We had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel." The doubt arose because wood had come into contact with the rock. What Moses figuratively stood for was fulfilled.

Recognition, though, happened only when Jesus opened up the Scriptures for them, because they had given up hope and said, "But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel." O my dear disciples, you had hoped, now you don't hope? Come here, robber, give the disciples a lesson. Why have you given up hope, just because you have seen him crucified, because you've looked at him hanging there, because you have thought him weak? He was like that for the robber too, hanging on the cross beside him. The robber was sharing in his punishment but he believed straightaway and acknowledged him, while you on the other hand have forgotten he is the author of life. Cry out, robber, from the cross! You, a criminal, win over the saints! What did they say? "We had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel." What did this man say? "Jesus, remember me, when you come in your kingdom." So you had hoped, had you, that it was he who would redeem Israel? O my dear disciples, if he was the one that was going to redeem Israel, it means you have defected. But he has reinstated you; he didn't abandon you. By becoming your companion on the way, he himself became for you the way.

And now, on top of all this, today is the third day since these things happened. Moreover, some women among us amazed us. They were at the tomb early this morning, and when they did not find His body, they came back saying they had seen a vision of angels who said He was alive. They are said to have rightly terrified those, whose minds, already filled with sorrow over the Lord's body not being found, could not yet see the joy in the announcement of His resurrection by the angels.

Reason had they then for sorrow, because in some sort they blamed themselves for having hoped redemption in Him whom now they saw dead, and believed not that He would rise again, and most of all they bewailed Him put to death without a cause, whom they knew to be innocent.

And therefore he adds: But we were hoping that he would redeem Israel; as if to say that through this the expectation of redemption has now been emptied. This is the word of men falling from their hope and cast down into the greatest sadness; and this is an evil sadness, because, as is said in 2 Corinthians 7, "the sorrow of the world works death." Into this they had fallen by losing confidence; therefore against this, 1 Thessalonians 4: "Do not grieve as the rest who have no hope"; and Ecclesiasticus 14: "Blessed is he who is not stung by the sorrow of sin," "and has not fallen from his hope."

Third, as to the explanation of the cause on account of which there was hesitation of mind, he adds: And now besides all this, today is the third day since these things were done; in which grief and affliction were not taken away, but terror and doubt were added.

For as two of them were taking a walk, and when the Lord had joined their company, without its appearing that it was He, and whilst He dissembled His knowledge of what had just taken place, they say: "But we trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel," -meaning their own, that is, the Creator's Christ.

For they expected that Christ would redeem Israel from the evils that were rising up among them and the Roman slavery. They trusted also that He was an earthly king, whom they thought would be able to escape the sentence of death passed upon Him.

And yet those men seem not to have been altogether without faith, by what follows, And besides all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Whereby they seem to have a recollection of what the Lord had told them that He would rise again on the third day.

The disciples also mention the report of the resurrection which was brought by the women; adding, Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, &c. They say this indeed as if they did not believe it; wherefore they speak of themselves as frightened or astonished. For they did consider as established what was told them, or that there had been an angelic revelation, but derived from it reason for astonishment and alarm. The testimony of Peter also they did not regard as certain, since he did not say that he had seen our Lord, but conjectured His resurrection from the fact that His body was not lying in the sepulchre. Hence it follows, And certain of them that were with us went, &c.

Hence he adds: But certain women also from among us terrified us, who were at the tomb before dawn; because, as Jerome says, "at the report heard about him they were terrified rather than gladdened." The reason for this terror was the recollection of a wondrous thing and one also incredible to them.

"Already the third day now,... and certain women from among us astonished us" and so forth. They say this in a state of perplexity. It seems to me that these two men were in great vacillation of thought, neither too disbelieving nor too believing. For the words "we had hoped that He would redeem Israel" reveal unbelief; while the words "already the third day now" show that the people were already close to recalling the words of the Lord: "on the third day I will rise again" (Matt. 16:21, Mark 8:31, Luke 9:22, Luke 24:7). And the words "astonished us" reveal something similar, that is, the wavering of their unbelief. Taken together, however, these words truly belong to people who are in great doubt, since these people were brought into a state of perplexity and difficulty by the extraordinariness of the resurrection.

(ut sup.) But since Luke has said that Peter ran to the sepulchre, and has himself related the words of Cleophas, that some of them went to the sepulchre, he is understood to confirm the testimony of John, that two went to the sepulchre. He first mentioned Peter only, because to him first Mary had related the news.

Whence he adds: And not having found his body, they came saying that they had also seen a vision of Angels, who say that he is alive. Therefore they were terrified, because it was horrible to them to have lost the body of the Lord, and incredible that he had risen: whence Bede says: "Rightly are they said to have terrified them, to whom they added more sorrow about the body not being found than they brought joy about the announced resurrection, by which we might be restored." And because someone could say that the words of the women ought not to have moved them, therefore he shows that they were not frivolous through the testimony and inspection of the men.

And some of us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but Him they did not see. Although Luke previously mentioned that Peter ran to the tomb, now Cleopas says that some of them ran to the tomb, which suggests that two went to the tomb. But he first mentioned Peter alone because Mary had initially reported to him.

Whence he adds: And certain of our company went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said: but him they did not find. These were Peter and John, as is said in John 20. Luke therefore, who previously expressed this singularly about Peter, now expresses it about the two, so that their testimony for believing that the body had been taken away might be firm. And therefore from this they marveled and were terrified, but were not gladdened, because they did not believe the resurrection, but hesitated about it, and hesitating they conferred together, because they did not yet savor heavenly things, but earthly ones, according to that passage of Isaiah 29: "Your voice shall be as that of a python from the earth, and your speech shall whisper from the ground." Against which, Colossians 3: "If you have risen with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God: savor the things that are above, not the things that are upon the earth." But the brutish man, who does not rise through the spirit, neither believes nor grasps these things; and therefore above in the same chapter it is said that "those words seemed to them as ravings," because, 1 Corinthians 2, "the sensual man does not perceive the things that are of the Spirit of God: for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined."

"And some of our people went," they say, that is, either Peter alone, or Peter and John. And from this it is evident that what some relate at length, others mention briefly and in passing, since John narrates more extensively about Peter and John going to the tomb (John 20:2–8), while this one (Luke), having mentioned a few, omitted their names.

And therefore, for the explanation of this, the Evangelist adds: And beginning from Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things that were about him. For all the Scriptures and prophecies principally have reference to Christ. In designation of whom it is said in Exodus twenty-five that "the two Cherubim looked upon each other with faces turned toward the mercy seat," that is, the two testaments toward Christ. Adam bore the figure of him, from whose side Eve was formed, Genesis two: of him also holy Abel, slain by his brother, Genesis four: of him also bore the figure "Noah stripped naked in his tent," Genesis nine: of him, Isaac offered by his father, Genesis twenty-two: of him, the stone and ladder of Jacob, Genesis twenty-eight; of him, Joseph sold by his brothers, Genesis thirty-seven; of him, Moses with his rod leading the people of the Lord out of Egypt, Exodus fourteen; of him, Joshua leading the people into the land of promise, Joshua four: of him, the fleece of Gideon, and Gideon himself, Judges six: of him also Samson, Judges sixteen: of him also Samuel, asked from the Lord, 1 Kings one: of him also holy David, cast out by Absalom, 2 Kings fifteen: of him, Hezekiah, in whose time the sun went backward, 4 Kings twenty: of him, Josiah, whose death was lamentable to the Jews, 2 Paralipomenon thirty-five: of him, the whole company of the preceding Saints, and especially Job, Tobias, Elijah, Elisha, and Jeremiah: of him, all the sacrifices, and especially the paschal lamb: of him also the tabernacle was a figure, with the things contained in it, and especially the altar, the ark, the lampstand, and the table: of him the temple was a figure: of him the kingdom and the priesthood were a figure. Whence Augustine, Against Faustus: "Who can, I do not say in one brief response, but in any vast volume whatsoever, commemorate all the proclamations of the Prophets concerning our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? Since all things that are contained in those books were either said about him or on account of him. But for the exercise of the seeker and the delight of the finder, many things there through allegories and enigmas are partly intimated by words alone, and partly also narrated as deeds." Therefore what is said here, that he interpreted in all the Scriptures, is not to be referred to all things that are said about Christ, but to those in which the passion and resurrection of Christ are more evidently and more manifestly prophesied.

In this discourse the Lord shows that the law was necessary to make ready the way and the ministry of the prophets to prepare people for faith in this marvelous act, so that when the resurrection really took place, those who were troubled at its greatness might remember what was said of old and be induced to believe. He brings forward, therefore, Moses and the prophets, interpreting their hidden meaning and making plain to the worthy what to the unworthy was obscure. In this way he settles in them the ancient and hereditary faith taught them by the sacred books which they possessed. For nothing which comes from God is without its use, but all have their appointed place and service. In their due place servants were sent to make ready for the presence of the Master. They brought in beforehand prophecy as the necessary preparative for faith, so that, like some royal treasure, what had been foretold might in due season be brought forward from the concealment of its former obscurity, unveiled and made plain by the clearness of the interpretation.

And therefore our Lord goes on to show that all these things did not happen in a common way, but from the predestined purpose of God. Hence it follows, And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, he expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. As if He said, Since ye are slow I will render you quick, by explaining to you the mysteries of the Scriptures. For the sacrifice of Abraham, when releasing Isaac he sacrificed the ram, prefigured Christ's sacrifice. But in the other writings of the Prophets also there are scattered about mysteries of Christ's cross and the resurrection.

After the same fashion, too, (I suppose, ) were they ignorant to whom, after His resurrection also, He vouchsafed, as they were journeying together, "to expound all the Scriptures." No doubt He had once said, "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot hear them now; "but even then He added, "When He, the Spirit of truth, shall come, He will lead you into all truth.

But since, He says, you are "foolish," that is, "slow" (for if they were truly foolish, He would not have said anything to them at all), since you are slow, I will open your mind and make it quick in understanding. Therefore He explained to them from Moses and from all the prophets the things said concerning Him. The mystery of Abraham's sacrifice, when he, leaving Isaac alive, offered a ram as a burnt offering, served as a prefiguration concerning the Lord, as the Lord Himself says that "Abraham saw" His "day and rejoiced" (John 8:56). And this passage: "your life shall hang before you" (Deut. 28:66) points at one and the same time both to the crucifixion by the word "hang" and to the resurrection by the word "life." Scattered throughout the rest of the prophecies are sayings about the cross and the resurrection, especially among the most important prophets. Such passages can be gathered from them as well. Note, if you will, also this: that entrance into glory depends on the endurance of sufferings.

But since the Evangelist said before, Their eyes were holden that they should not know him, until the words of the Lord should move their minds to faith, He fitly affords in addition to their hearing a favourable object to their sight. As it follows, And they drew nigh to the fortress whither they were going, and he feigned as if he was going further.

(de Qu. Ev. lib. ii. c. 51.) Now this relates not to falsehood. For not every thing we feign is a falsehood, but only when we feign that which means nothing. But when our feigning has reference to a certain meaning it is not a falsehood, but a kind of figure of the truth. Otherwise all the things figuratively spoken by wise and holy men, or even by our Lord Himself, must be accounted falsehoods. For to the experienced understanding truth consists not in certain words, but as words so also deeds are feigned without falsehood to signify a particular thing.

(ut sup.) Or because the Lord feigned as if He would go farther, when He was accompanying the disciples, expounding to them the sacred Scriptures, who knew not whether it was He, what does He mean to imply but that through the duty of hospitality men may arrive at a knowledge of Him; that when He has departed from mankind far above the heavens, He is still with those who perform this duty to His servants. He therefore holds to Christ, that He should not go far from him, whoever being taught in the word communicates in all good things to him who teaches. (Gal. 6:6.) For they were taught in the word when He expounded to them the Scriptures. And because they followed hospitality, Him whom they knew not in the expounding of the Scriptures, they know in the breaking of bread. For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. (Rom. 2:13.)

And they drew near to the town etc. After having described the association on the journey and the conversation, here thirdly he describes the association at the meal, where in the breaking of bread Christ appeared. Concerning the description of which, three things are introduced by the Evangelist, namely the affectionate reception of Christ, the clear recognition of him, and the dispensative concealment.

First, therefore, as regards the affectionate reception of Christ, he says: And as they drew near to the village where they were going, he made as though he would go farther. The Lord did this, however, not by dissembling, but rather by giving occasion, so that they might invite him more affectionately and merit more greatly. A similar instance is found in Mark 6: "About the fourth watch of the night he came to them and would have passed by them"; upon which Augustine says: "How did the Apostles understand that the Lord wished to pass by them, unless because he was going in a different direction?" So also now it is to be understood that he made as though, that is, he was preparing to proceed farther, which he would indeed have done had they not affectionately received him in hospitality; therefore he did this to arouse their devotion, not out of dissimulation.

Indeed He exchanged words with them, He rebuked the hardness of their understanding; He opened up the mysteries of Sacred Scripture that pertained to Himself, and yet because He was still a stranger to faith in their hearts, He pretended to go farther. For we say "fingere" means to fashion; hence we also call shapers of clay "figuli" [potters]. Therefore the simple Truth did nothing through duplicity, but showed Himself to them in body such as He was with them in mind. Moreover they were to be tested, whether those who did not yet love Him as God could at least love Him as a stranger.

(Hom. 22 in Ev.) Because then He was still a stranger to faith in their hearts, He feigned as if he would go further. By the word "fingere" we mean to put together or form, and hence formers or preparers of mud we call "figuli." He who was the Truth itself did nothing then by deceit, but exhibited Himself in the body such as He came before them in their minds.

The Lord "makes as if He would go further," without doubt, according to His humanity.

And they approached the village to which they were going, and He made as if He would go further, and they constrained Him, saying: Stay with us, because it is evening, and the day is now far spent. And He went in to stay with them. The truth did nothing simple through duplicity, but what is said: He made as if He would go further, He appeared to the disciples in such a body, as was in their mind. However, they had to be tested to see if those who, even if they did not yet love Him as God, could at least love Him as a stranger. But because those with whom the Truth walked could not be estranged from charity, they invited Him to the lodging as if He were a stranger. Why do we say they invited, when it is written there: And they constrained Him? From which certainly it is understood, that strangers are not only to be invited to lodging, but also to be compelled.

For which reason he adds: And they constrained him, saying: Stay with us, because it is toward evening, and the day is now far spent. And he went in with them. Gregory says: "From this example it is gathered that strangers are not only to be invited to hospitality, but even to be drawn in"; and therefore in Hebrews, the last chapter: "Do not forget hospitality. For by this some have pleased God, having received Angels as guests." Upon which Chrysostom says: "Therefore great is the reward of Abraham, because not knowing them to be Angels, he received them in hospitality; for if he had known, it would have been nothing remarkable." So also the reward was great for these men, because if they had recognized Christ and received him in hospitality, it would not have been great; but they drew him to themselves so forcefully as a stranger and, as it were, a sojourner: Job 31: "The stranger did not remain outside"; and Isaiah 58: "Break your bread for the hungry."

They not only compel Him by their actions, but induce Him by their words; for it follows, saying, Abide with us, for it is towards evening, and the day is far gone, (that is, towards its close.)

But because those with whom Truth walked could not be strangers to charity, they invite Him to lodging as a stranger. But why do we say "invite," when it is written there "And they constrained Him"? From this example indeed it is gathered that strangers should not only be invited to lodging but even compelled.

(Hom. 22 in Ev.) But because they could not be strangers to charity, with whom charity was walking, they invite Him as if a stranger to partake of their hospitality. Hence it follows, And they compelled him. From which example it is gathered that strangers are not only to be invited to hospitality, but even to be taken by force.

(ut sup.) Now behold Christ since He is received through His members, so He seeks His receivers through Himself; for it follows, And he went in with them.

And no one should doubt that his being recognized in the breaking of bread is the sacrament, which brings us together in recognizing him.

Remember, though, dearly beloved, how the Lord Jesus desired to be recognized in the breaking of bread, by those whose eyes had been kept till then from recognizing him. The faithful know what I'm talking about. They know Christ in the breaking of bread. It isn't every loaf of bread, you see, but the one that receives Christ's blessing and becomes the body of Christ. That's where they recognized him. They were overjoyed and went straight to the others. They found whom they already knew. By telling what they had seen, they added to the gospel. It was all said, all done, all written down. And it has reached us.

(de Con. Ev. lib. iii. c. 25.) For they walked not with their eyes shut, but there was something within them which did not permit them to know that which they saw, which a mist, darkness, or some kind of moisture, frequently occasions. Not that the Lord was not able to transform His flesh that it should be really a different form from that which they were accustomed to behold; since in truth also before His passion, He was transfigured in the mount, so that His face was bright as the sun. But it was not so now. For we do not unfitly take this obstacle in the sight to have been caused by Satan, that Jesus might not be known. But still it was so permitted by Christ up to the sacrament of the bread, that by partaking of the unity of His body, the obstacle of the enemy might be understood to be removed, so that Christ might be known.

And it came to pass, as He sat at meat with them, He took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they recognized Him. Whom they did not recognize in the explanation of Holy Scripture, they recognize in the breaking of the bread. They were not enlightened by hearing the commandments of God, but by doing they were enlightened. Because it is written: Not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified (Rom. II). Therefore, whoever wishes to understand what they have heard, let them hasten to fulfill by action what they have already understood.

Second, as regards the open recognition of Christ, he adds: And it came to pass, while he sat at table with them, he took bread and blessed and broke it and gave it to them. For this was the custom of Christ, that he always offered a blessing before eating. For, in First Timothy 4: "God created foods to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful"; and afterward: "Nothing is to be rejected which is received with thanksgiving, for it is sanctified through the word of God and prayer." And therefore it is customary, especially for clerics and religious, to offer a blessing before food. And hence it is that Gregory narrates in the Dialogues about a woman who ate lettuce with greediness, that the devil possessed her. Because, therefore, this stranger conformed himself to Christ in the blessing and also in the manner of breaking bread, they were led by the hand to the recognition of him.

Even when the army surrounded Elisha a voice proved the key to the eyes of the shepherd. When the disciples' eyes were held closed, bread too was the key whereby their eyes were opened to recognize the omniscient: saddened eyes beheld a vision of joy and were instantly filled with happiness.

They set the table, they offer food, and the God whom they had not recognized in the exposition of Sacred Scripture, they recognize in the breaking of bread.

(ut sup.) They lay out a table, they bring food. And God whom they had not known in the expounding of Scriptures, they knew in the breaking of bread; for it follows, And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave it to them.

The Lord Jesus was made known, and after being made known he appeared no more. He withdrew from them in the body, since he was held by them in faith. That indeed is why the Lord absented himself in the body from the whole church, and ascended into heaven, for the building up of faith.

He blessed the bread, broke it, and they recognized him. That's how you recognize Christ—those of you who believe he is the Christ. But your graces should consider what all the disciples were like before the Lord's resurrection. I beg their pardon for saying so, but they weren't yet believers. They became great believers later on, but before that they were even inferior to us. We, I mean to say, believe that Christ has risen again, which they didn't yet believe. But afterward they saw, they touched, they went over him with eyes and hands, and in that way they believed, and their hearts were given strength from the holy Scriptures. So they drank, they burst forth, and they filled us up too.

And he vanished from their sight. And they said to one another, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he spoke to us on the way and opened the Scriptures to us?" "I have come to cast fire upon the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled (Luke 12:49)." The Lord indeed sent fire upon the earth when he kindled the hearts of the carnal with the breath of the Holy Spirit. And the earth burns when the hearts of the carnal, previously cold in their own pleasures, abandon the desires of the present age and are set aflame with the love of God. "Were not our hearts burning within us while he spoke to us on the way and opened the Scriptures to us?" they ask. For indeed, upon hearing the word, the mind ignites, the coldness of the body recedes, the mind becomes anxious with a desire for the heavenly, alien to earthly desires. True love which has filled this mind torments in tears. But while it is tormented with such ardor, it is fed by its very torments, it delights in hearing heavenly precepts, and as it is instructed by each commandment, it is as if it is set on fire by so many torches.

And therefore he adds: And their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. Now the Lord opened their eyes rather in the breaking of bread than in the exposition of the Scriptures, to show that not "hearers of the law, but doers are just before God," according to that passage in Romans 2: "Not hearers of the law, but doers shall be justified"; whence Gregory says: "Truth is better understood by doing than by hearing." Whence the Psalm says: "From your commandments I have understood," and again the Psalm says: "I have understood above all who teach me, because I have sought your commandments." Or he did this on account of the mystery. Whence Bede says: "He did this so that all might understand that they do not know Christ unless they become partakers of his body, that is, of the Church, whose unity the Apostle commends in the Sacrament of bread, saying: We being many are one bread, one body," 1 Corinthians 10. And as a figure of this, it is said in 1 Kings 14 that Jonathan ate, "and his eyes were enlightened"; because no one arrives at the true contemplation and beholding of Christ unless he sits at his table, according to that passage in Revelation 2: "To him who conquers I will give the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, and on the stone a name written, which no one knows except he who receives it." And for this reason it is said of wisdom in Proverbs 9 that "she set forth her table, mixed wine, and sent her servants to call to the citadel and to the walls of the city."

Third, as regards the dispensative concealment, there is added: And he vanished from their eyes. Bede says: "The appearance of weakness is withdrawn from carnal eyes, so that the glory of the resurrection might begin to appear to their minds." For in the withdrawal of his bodily presence he stirs up a desire for spiritual presence, which arises from the enkindling of desire through the remembrance of Christ.

Therefore, by hearing the precepts of God they were not enlightened; by doing them they were enlightened, because it is written: "Not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." Whoever therefore wishes to understand what he has heard, let him hasten to fulfill in deed those things which he has already been able to understand. Behold, the Lord was not recognized while He was speaking, and He deigned to be recognized while He was being fed.

(ut sup.) And their eyes were opened, and they knew him.

(ut sup.) Whoever then wishes to understand what he has heard, let him hasten to fulfil in work what he can now understand. Behold the Lord was not known when He was speaking, and He vouchsafed to be known when He is eating. It follows, And he vanished out of their sight.

This was said not of their bodily eyes, but of their mental sight.

When He wills it, then their eyes are opened, and they recognize Him. This also signifies something else, namely: that those who partake of the blessed bread have their eyes opened to behold Him. For the flesh of the Lord possesses great and ineffable power. He becomes invisible to them, because He no longer had such a body as to remain with them bodily for a long time, and also in order that by such an action He might strengthen their love even more.

But He also implies another thing, that the eyes of those who receive the sacred bread are opened that they should know Christ. For the Lord's flesh has in it a great and ineffable power.

For He had not such a body as that He was able to abide longer with them, that thereby likewise He might increase their affections.

Therefore, good charity having the wings of a burning fire, which flies through the chests and hearts of the saints, and consumes whatever is material and earthly: it tests whatever is sincere, and improves whatever it touches with its fire. This fire the Lord Jesus sent upon the earth, and faith shone forth, devotion was kindled, charity was illuminated, justice shone brightly. With this fire, he inflamed the hearts of his apostles, as Cleophas testifies, saying: Was not our heart burning within us, while he opened the Scriptures? Therefore, the flames of the scriptures are divine.

Just as we are distinguished from others by faith, so let us also be distinguished by morals and by works. Let us be on fire with charity, which the demons never had. It is the fire those two also were burning with on the road. When Christ, you see, had been recognized and had left them, they said to each other, "Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?" Burn then, in order not to burn with the fire the demons are going to burn with.Be on fire with the fervor of charity, in order to differentiate yourselves from demons. This fervor whirls you upward, takes you upward, lifts you up to heaven. Whatever vexations you suffer on earth, however much the enemy may humiliate Christian hearts and press them downward, the fervor of love seeks the heights.

And therefore there is added: And they said to one another: Was not our heart burning within us, while he spoke on the way and opened to us the Scriptures? For the word of Christ had set their hearts aflame, because the word of God has a fiery nature on account of the enkindling of love. Whence Jeremiah 23: "Are not my words as a fire and as a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?" And the Psalm says: "Your word is exceedingly refined by fire, and your servant has loved it." Now the Word does this by sending the Holy Spirit; whence Bede says: "From the heard discourse, the heart, previously cold with the torpor of unbelief and fear, was kindled by the fire of the Holy Spirit, so that it now burns with heavenly desire. For by as many precepts as a man is instructed, by so many torches, as it were, is he set aflame."

And note that the word of the Lord enkindles to the ardor of zeal: on account of which, Proverbs 30: "Every word of God is a fiery shield to all who hope in him"; Jeremiah 20: "The word of the Lord became in my heart like a raging fire shut up in my bones." And concerning this ardor it is said in Zephaniah, the last chapter: "In the fire of my zeal all the earth shall be devoured." — It also enkindles to the ardor of desire: above in chapter 12: "I came to cast fire upon the earth, and what do I will but that it be kindled," etc. Whence also the supreme order of Angels, into which the illumination of the divine utterances first descends, is called Seraphim, that is, burning; therefore the Psalm: "The sharp arrows of the mighty one with desolating coals." This ardor is accompanied by a liquefaction of the sweetest affections; therefore Ecclesiasticus 18: "Shall not the dew cool the heat?" and Song of Songs 5: "My soul melted when my beloved spoke"; and the Psalm: "He shall send forth his word and shall melt them."

Those who said had conceived this fire of teaching from the very mouth of Truth: "Was not our heart burning within us while He spoke on the way and opened the Scriptures to us?" For from the word heard the soul is set ablaze, the cold of torpor recedes, the mind becomes anxious with heavenly desire, estranged from earthly concupiscences. True love, when it has filled the soul, torments it with tears; but while it is tormented by such burning, it is fed by its very torments. It delights to hear heavenly precepts, and by as many commandments as it is instructed, it is inflamed as if by so many torches; and the soul that was formerly torpid through desires afterward burns through words.

(Hom. 10. in Ev.) By the word which is heard the spirit is kindled, the chill of dulness departs, the mind becomes awakened with heavenly desire. It rejoices to hear heavenly precepts, and every command in which it is instructed, is as it were adding a faggot to the fire.

Why did He rise in the flesh in which He suffered, unless to show the resurrection of the flesh? And wishing to confirm this, when His disciples did not know whether to believe He had truly risen in the body, and were looking upon Him and doubting, He said to them, "Ye have not yet faith, see that it is I;" and He let them handle Him, and showed them the prints of the nails in His hands.

Do you want me to show you how the fire goes out from the words of the Holy Spirit and ignites the fire the hearts of believers?… And again in the Gospel it was written, after the Lord spoke to Cleopas, "Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?" Where will your burning come from? What "coals of fire" will be found in you who are never set on fire by the declaration of the Lord, never inflamed by the words of the Holy Spirit? Hear also in another place David himself saying, "My heart became hot within me. As I mused, the fire burned."

This shows that we must not only employ zeal to learn the sacred literature but also pray to the Lord and entreat "day and night" that the lamb "of the tribe of Judah" may come and, himself taking "the sealed book," may deign to open it. For it is he who "opening the Scriptures" kindles the hearts of the disciples so that they say, "Did not our hearts burn within us while he opened to us the scriptures?"

By which is implied, that the words uttered by the Saviour inflamed the hearts of the hearers to the love of God.

Their "heart" was "burning" either from the fire of the Lord's words, when through the Lord's explanation they were inwardly inflamed and agreed with His words as true, or, when He explained the Scriptures to them, their heart was beating and inwardly saying: This very One Who is explaining to us is the Lord.

And they said one to another, Did not our hearts burn, within us while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

Their hearts then were turned either by the fire of our Lord's words, to which they listened as the truth, or because as He expounded the Scriptures, their hearts wore greatly struck within them, that He who was speaking was the Lord.

(de Con. Ev. l. iii. c. 25.) It had been already reported that Jesus had risen by the women, and by Simon Peter, to whom He had appeared. For these two disciples found them talking of these things when they came to Jerusalem; as it follows, And they found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.

(ut sup.) But with respect to what Mark says, that they told the rest, and they did not believe them, whereas Luke says, that they had already begun to say, The Lord is risen indeed, what must we understand, except that there were some even then who refused to believe this?

And rising up the same hour, etc. After the described revelation of the resurrection and the apparition of the one rising, in this part he describes the certainty of the apparition. Now this part is divided into three. In the first of which is set forth the plurality of apparitions as testimony; in the second, the probability of the apparition as argument, at the place: Why are you troubled? in the third, the infallibility of the apparition as a foundation of faith, at the place: And he said to them: These are the words. Concerning the indication of the plurality of apparitions, two things are introduced, namely the narration of the special apparition of Christ and the common one, in which he appeared to all the disciples.

First therefore, as regards the special apparition, he says: And rising up the same hour, they returned to Jerusalem, to announce what they had seen, according to that passage of 4 Kings 7: "This is a day of good tidings; if we remain silent and do not wish to announce it until morning, we shall be charged with wickedness." From which the fervor of the disciples is apparent, because, since it was already night, as was evident from the preceding, neither the length of the journey nor the darkness of the night held them back; for so great was their love for the apostolic college which was in Jerusalem.

They were so overjoyed that "in the same hour, they rose and returned to Jerusalem," though they did not return in the same hour, for they rose in that very hour, but returned after as much time as they needed to cover the distance of sixty stadia.

Therefore were they so rejoiced, that without delay they returned to Jerusalem. And hence what follows, And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem. They rose up indeed the same hour, but they arrived after many hours, as they had to travel sixty stades.

And they got up that very hour, returned to Jerusalem, and found gathered the eleven and those who were with them, saying that the Lord has truly risen and has appeared to Simon. By now, there was a report that Jesus had risen, made by those women, and by Simon Peter to whom He had already appeared. For indeed, these two found them speaking when they arrived in Jerusalem. Therefore, it could be that out of fear they did not want to say on the way that they had heard He had risen, when they only said that the women had seen angels. For they did not know with whom they were speaking, and rightly could be anxious that, by carelessly proclaiming Christ's resurrection, they might fall into the hands of the Jews. Therefore, it is understood that the Lord first appeared to Peter among all the men, at least from all those whom the four evangelists and the apostle Paul have mentioned. For Paul speaks to the Corinthians about the Lord, saying that He was buried, and that He rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, and then to the eleven.

It seems that our Lord appeared to Peter first of all those whom the four Evangelists and the Apostle mention.

And therefore he adds: And they found the eleven gathered together and those who were with them, saying: The Lord has truly risen and has appeared to Simon; and through this they found them rejoicing, so that it can truly be said: "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!" For all were partakers of the joy from the apparition which was made to Peter. Now the Lord appeared to Peter before the others; whence the Gloss: "He appeared first of all men to Peter; which, even though the Evangelist does not say when or where it happened, nevertheless, because it happened, he does not pass over in silence."

Cleopas, it says, and his companions rose up that same hour, the same of course in which Jesus had vanished out of their sight, and returned to Jerusalem. But it does not say that they found the Eleven gathered together that same hour and told them what had happened concerning Jesus. This took place on the fortieth day after his resurrection—the day on which he was also taken up. The Evangelist therefore has omitted the events which took place in the intervening time. It was then that Cleopas and his companion found the Eleven discussing in private and saying that the Lord was risen and had been seen by Simon. Regarding this appearance, there is no mention where or when or how this took place. It was during these days that the events in Galilee also took place, which Matthew has recorded.

For He did not show Himself to all at the same time, in order that He might sow the seeds of faith. For he who had first seen and was sure, told it to the rest. Afterwards the word going forth prepared the mind of the hearer for the sight, and therefore He appeared first to him who was of all the most worthy and faithful. For He had need of the most faithful soul to first receive this sight, that it might be least disturbed by the unexpected appearance. And therefore He is first seen by Peter, that he who first confessed Christ should first deserve to see His resurrection, and also because he had denied Him He wished to see him first, to console him, lest he should despair. But after Peter, He appeared to the rest, at one time fewer in number, at another more, which the two disciples attest; for it follows, And they told what things were done by the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.

During these hours, of course, the Lord also appeared to Simon, while these two men were making their way back to Jerusalem.

And they recounted what had happened on the road, and how they recognized him in the breaking of the bread. Besides the fact that because of their still ignorant understanding, it was necessary for Christ to die and to rise again, their eyes experienced something similar, not because truth was deceiving, but because they themselves were unable to perceive the truth, and thought something different from reality. Also, for the reason of a certain mystery, it happened that another form was shown to them in him, so that they would not recognize him except in the breaking of the bread, lest anyone suppose that he recognized Christ if he is not a partaker of his body, that is, of the Church, whose unity in the sacrament of the bread the Apostle commends, saying: One bread, one body, we are many (Rom. 12), so that when he gave them the blessed bread, their eyes would be opened, and they would recognize him. Their eyes were indeed opened to his recognition, the hindrance by which they were held being removed, so that they did not recognize him. However, we may not unreasonably consider that this hindrance in their eyes was from Satan so that Jesus would not be recognized, yet Christ permitted it up to the sacrament of the bread, so that by sharing in the unity of his body, it may be understood that the enemy's hindrance is removed, so that Christ may be recognized.

And because the joys of the just ought to be shared in common, he therefore adds: And they narrated the things that had been done on the way, and how they recognized him in the breaking of bread. From this therefore it appears that Christ appeared several times on the same day, namely five times: because first to Mary Magdalene, John 20; second to the women, the last chapter of Matthew; third to Peter, as it says here; fourth to the disciples going to Emmaus, above in the same chapter; fifth to the disciples gathered without Thomas, John 20 and here. And therefore in commemoration of this the priest turns five times to the people in the Mass; but the third turning is in silence, which signifies the appearance made to Peter, which is not narrated as to when and how it occurred.

He also appeared before the ascension five other times: first, namely after eight days, with Thomas present, John 20; seventh he appeared at the Sea of Tiberias, the last chapter of John; he appeared eighth on the mountain of Galilee, the last chapter of Matthew: "The eleven disciples went into Galilee"; he appeared ninth in the upper room in Jerusalem, the last chapter of Mark; he appeared tenth on the Mount of Olivet, when he ascended, Acts 1: "And eating together with them, he commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem." And thus at intervals he appeared ten times in forty days, after which, ten days having passed, he sent the Holy Spirit.

Of these ten appearances, John records four, Luke three, Matthew two, and Mark one, so that from his manner of narrating the mystery and sufficiency of the appearances might be apparent.

He soon explained that He had been speaking of the synagogue, showing, that He truly came to it, who preached in it, as it is said, And he was teaching in one of the synagogues.

Now He was teaching in one of their synagogues on the Sabbaths, and behold, there was a woman who had had a spirit of infirmity for eighteen years. After the parable of the fig tree was spoken, the Lord is narrated to have been teaching in the synagogue, to intimate that the parable was not referring to anything else but indicating seeking fruit on the fig tree and not finding it, meaning the word was given to the synagogue and not received. However, so that you might not think she would be entirely cut off due to the fault of barrenness but know the remnant is to be saved through the choice of grace, immediately following there is the healing of the primitive Church under the image of a curved woman. This woman had been bent over for eighteen years, a number which is completed by the sixfold multiplication of three, showing that she languished in weak works in the testimony of the law, the prophecy of the prophets, and the revelation of grace. For the number six, in which the world's creation is perfected, signifies the perfection of works. There are three times (as I have said) of the Lord's visitation, in which Judea, knowing more earthly than heavenly things: to work, was bent over for eighteen years from the uprightness of her mind.

Second, those who calumniate the miracles are refuted on the part of the circumstance of time according to a twofold occasion.

Now he was teaching in the synagogue, etc. That part, in which the Savior refutes the deceitfulness of the calumniating Jews, was divided into two parts according to the twofold manner of calumniating the miracles of Christ, namely on the part of the efficient cause and on the part of the circumstance of time. The first part having been treated, here begins the second. And this part is divided into two according to a twofold occasion of time: in the first, he refutes those calumniating the miracles of Christ, because they were performed on the Sabbath, in an assembly; in the second, he refutes at a banquet, there: And it came to pass, when he entered, in the fourteenth chapter.

The refutation which takes place in the assembly, concerning which two things. The first part is divided into two. For first he refutes those who said that miracles ought not to be performed on the Sabbath; second, however, having taken the occasion, he shows that good works must be done without intermission, there: He said: To what is the kingdom of God like?

Concerning the refutation of those calumniating the miracles on account of the Sabbath, he proceeds in this manner. First, the working of a wondrous healing is set forth. Second, a rebuke of Jewish superstition is added, there: But the ruler of the synagogue answering, etc. Third, a refutation of the proposed objection is subjoined, there: But the Lord answering him. Fourth, the attainment of a glorious victory is inferred, there: When he said these things, they were ashamed, etc.

Concerning the working of a wondrous healing, three things are introduced, namely the solemnity of the day and the gravity of the long-standing illness and the power of the hastened miracle.

First, therefore, as to the solemnity of the sacred day, he says: Now he was teaching in their synagogue on the Sabbaths. Note that the Lord taught on the Sabbaths either for the sake of preserving the custom of the Jews: Acts 15: "Moses from ancient times has in every city those who preach him in the synagogues, where he is read every Sabbath."

Or also for the sake of the publication of doctrine, because then, as on a solemn day, they were more commonly attentive to the word of God: John 18: "I always taught in the synagogues, where all the Jews come together."

Or because the Sabbath was a day of rest, and he had come to announce peace and rest; whence Ephesians 2: "Coming, he preached peace to you who were far off, and peace to those who were near."

Or also because the precept concerning the Sabbath, which pertained to charity, was especially a figure of the time of grace, in which it is commanded: "This is my commandment, that you love one another," John 15.

Or also for the sake of preserving the order: because restoration ought to have begun where creation was completed: in Genesis 2 it is said that "God completed on the seventh day His work which He had made." "And He blessed the seventh day," etc.

Or for giving instruction, that one intent upon wisdom ought to cease from all occupations, according to that saying in Sirach 38: "Write wisdom in a time of leisure." — Or also for a seventh reason, that He might show Himself Lord of the Law and of the Sabbath by working miracles on the Sabbath: John 5: "My Father works even until now, and I work. For this reason therefore the Jews sought to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath but also called God His own Father, making Himself equal to God."

He was teaching in their synagogue on the Sabbaths. And behold, a woman who had a spirit of infirmity for eighteen years. A little earlier we have already said that the threefold coming of the Lord to the unfruitful fig tree is what the number of eighteen years signifies in relation to the bent woman. For on the sixth day man was made, and on that same sixth day all the works of the Lord were completed. Moreover, the number six multiplied in a triangle makes eighteen. Therefore, because man, who was made on the sixth day, did not wish to have perfect works, but stood weak before the law, under the law, and at the beginning of dawning grace, the bent woman was eighteen years.

He teaches indeed not separately, but in the synagogues; calmly, neither wavering in any thing, nor determining aught against the law of Moses; on the Sabbath also, because the Jews were then engaged in the hearing of the law.

The members of the church are similar to this vine. They are planted with the root of faith and held in check by the shoots of humility.… He placed in the church a tower of apostles, prophets and doctors who are ready to defend the peace of the church. He dug around it when he had freed it from the burden of earthly anxieties. Nothing burdens the mind more than concern for the world and lust for either wealth or power.An example of this is in the Gospel. We can read the story of the woman "who had sickness caused by a spirit, and she was bent over so that she was unable to look upwards." In fact, her soul was bent over. It inclined to earthly rewards and did not possess heavenly grace. Jesus saw her and addressed her. She immediately laid aside her earthly burdens. These people also were burdened with lusts. He addressed them in these words, "Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest." The soul of that woman breathed once more and stood up like a vine around which the soil has been dug and cleared.

(Serm. 110.) That which the three years signified in the tree, the eighteen did in the woman, for three times six is eighteen. But she was crooked and could not look up, for in vain she heard the words, lift up your hearts.

(Hom. 9. in Hex.) Because the head of the brutes is bent down towards the ground and looks upon the earth, but the head of man was made erect towards the heaven, his eyes tending upward. For it becomes us to seek what is above, and with our sight to pierce beyond earthly things.

And she was bent over, unable to straighten up at all. Because she was wise to earthly matters, seeking weakness, and not yet driven to think of heavenly ones, hearing through the prophet: "If you are willing and obedient, you will eat the best from the land." To whom, in contrast, the Apostle says to the members of the Church: "Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things." (Colossians 3).

Second, as to the severity of the long-standing disease, he adds: And behold, a woman who had a spirit of infirmity for eighteen years, as to the prolonged duration of the infirmity: Sirach 10: "A prolonged illness burdens the physician; a brief illness the physician cuts short."

And she was bent over, as to the severity of the infirmity, according to what he lamented: "I am made wretched and bent down even to the end," etc.

Nor could she at all look upward, on account of the unceasing nature of the infirmity, according to that passage in Lamentations 1: "He has given me into a hand from which I cannot rise."

Moreover, by this long-standing curvature can be understood the disease of avarice and cupidity, which bends the heart toward temporal things; the Psalm: "They set their eyes to turn toward the earth." And this is what the demons seek; Isaiah 51: "Bow down, that we may pass over."

This bending infirmity lasts for eighteen years, that is, through a threefold six, that is, through the whole time of life; because, as Jerome says, while other vices grow old in the elderly, avarice alone grows young; and in Ecclesiastes 2 it is said of the miser: "All his days are full of sorrows and afflictions, nor does his mind rest at night"; and Hosea 7: "Strangers have devoured his strength, and he knew it not; gray hairs also are sprinkled upon him, and he knew it not."

This infirmity also does not allow one to look upward: whence it is said in Matthew 6: "Where your treasure is, there is your heart also"; and the Psalm: "Fire fell upon them," namely of cupidity, "and they did not see the sun," lest they should remember, etc.

"There was in the synagogue a woman who for eighteen years was bowed down by infirmity." Her case may prove to be of great benefit to those who have understanding. We must gather what is to our advantage from every quarter. By what happened to her, we may see that Satan often receives authority over certain persons who fall into sin and have grown lax in their efforts toward piety. Whomever he gets into his power, he may involve in bodily diseases since he delights in punishment and is merciless.… The accursed Satan is the cause of disease to the human bodies, just we affirm that Adam's transgression was his doing, and by means of it our bodily frames have become liable to infirmity and decay.

Now that the Incarnation of the Word was manifested to destroy corruption and death, and the hatred of the devil against us, is plain from the actual events; for it follows, And behold there was a woman which had a spirit of infirmity, &c. He says spirit of infirmity, because the woman suffered from the cruelty of the devil, forsaken by God because of her own crimes or for the transgression of Adam, on account of which the bodies of men incur infirmity and death. But God gives this power to the Devil, to the end that men when pressed down by the weight of their adversity might betake them to better things. He points out the nature of her infirmity, saying, And was bowed together, and could in no wise lift up herself.

He was teaching in their synagogue on the Sabbaths. And behold, a woman who had a spirit of infirmity for eighteen years. A little earlier we have already said that the threefold coming of the Lord to the unfruitful fig tree is what the number of eighteen years signifies in relation to the bent woman. For on the sixth day man was made, and on that same sixth day all the works of the Lord were completed. Moreover, the number six multiplied in a triangle makes eighteen. Therefore, because man, who was made on the sixth day, did not wish to have perfect works, but stood weak before the law, under the law, and at the beginning of dawning grace, the bent woman was eighteen years.

(ut sup.) Or else; man was made on the sixth day, and on the same sixth day were all the works of the Lord finished, but the number six multiplied three times makes eighteen. Because then man who was made on the sixth day was unwilling to do perfect works, but before the law, under the law, and at the beginning of grace, was weak, the woman was bowed down eighteen years.

(Hom. 31. in Evang.) Mystically the unfruitful fig tree signifies the woman that was bowed down. For human nature of its own will rushes into sin, and as it would not bring forth the fruit of obedience, has lost the state of uprightness. The same fig tree preserved signifies the woman made upright.

(up sup.) For every sinner who thinketh earthly things, not seeking those that are in heaven, is unable to look up. For while pursuing his baser desires, he declines from the uprightness of his state; or his heart is bent crooked, and he ever looks upon that which he unceasingly thinks about. The Lord called her and made her upright, for He enlightened her and succoured her. He sometimes calls but does not make upright, for when we are enlightened by grace, we ofttimes see what should be done, but because of sin do not practise it. For habitual sin binds down the mind, so that it cannot rise to uprightness. It makes attempts and fails, because when it has long stood by its own will, when the will is lacking, it falls.

Now, if someone does not wish, whether like the sinful woman to embrace the feet of Christ [Luke 7:38], or like the prodigal son to run back to Him with burning repentance [Luke 15:11ff], or like the woman with a hemorrhage and bowed with infirmity (Luke 8:43 and 13:11) even to approach Him, why does he then make excuses for his sins by saying, "Those whom He foreknew, them also"-and them alone!-"He called"?

One may perhaps reasonably reply to the person so disposed that "God, Who is before eternity and Who knows all things before creating them, also knew you beforehand, knew that you would not obey Him when He called, that you would not believe in His promises and in His words, yet still, even while knowing this, He "bowed the heavens and came down" [Psalm 18:19] and became man, and for your sake has come to the place where you lie prone. Indeed, visiting you many times every day, sometimes in His own Person and sometimes as well through His servants, He exhorts you to get up from the calamity in which you lie and to follow Him Who ascends to the Kingdom of Heaven and enter it together with Him. But you, you still refuse to do it. - "Second Ethical Discourse"

This illness befell the aforementioned woman through the violence of the devil, as the Lord Himself says: "whom Satan has bound for eighteen years" (Luke 13:16). Perhaps Satan tormented her because she had been forsaken by God for some transgressions, for he, when permitted from above by God, inflicts all manner of afflictions upon the bodies of people (Job 2:6–7). He was also the cause from the beginning of our losing the incorruption in which we were created (Wisdom 2:23), and of our being united now with a body subject to pain and susceptible to illness. For this is what we understand by the garments of skin (Genesis 3:21).

And he laid his hands upon her, and immediately she was made straight and glorified God, as regards the effect of power: Ecclesiastes eight: "Whatsoever he wills, he shall do, and his word is full of power." Moreover, he lays on hands to show that he himself is the hand through which the Almighty works all things and through which he restores all things: Isaiah fifty-nine: "Behold, the hand of the Lord is not shortened, that it cannot save"; and in Numbers eleven the Lord said to Moses: "Is the hand of the Lord weak? Now you shall see whether my word shall be fulfilled in deed." And therefore Sirach thirty-six: "Renew signs and change wonders, glorify the hand and the right arm."

And note that here he says four things about the bowing down of this woman, which the Lord exercises in the salvation of any faithful soul. For first he sees by predestining: Wisdom four: "His regard is upon his elect."

Second, he calls by drawing outwardly: Matthew nine: "I came not to call the just, but sinners"; and Proverbs nine: "She sent her handmaids to call to the citadel and to the walls of the city." — Third, he lays on his hand by justifying: Ezekiel three: "I went away bitter in the indignation of my spirit, for the hand of the Lord was with me, strengthening me"; and above in chapter one: "For indeed the hand of the Lord was with him." — Fourth, he raises up by glorifying: First Kings two: "He raises up the needy from the dust and lifts the poor from the dunghill, that he may sit with princes and hold the throne of glory."

Concerning these four things it is similarly said in Romans eight: "Those whom he predestined, these he also called; and those whom he called, these he also justified; and those whom he justified, these he also glorified."

Well is it said of this our crookedness, as a type of the human race, through the Psalmist: I am bowed down and humiliated utterly. For having contemplated that man was created for gazing upon the heavenly light, but having been cast out on account of his sins, he carries the darkness of his own mind, does not seek heavenly things, attends to the lowest things, by no means desires celestial things, always turns earthly things over in his mind, and what he grieved concerning his race, he cried out in himself, saying: I am bowed down and humiliated utterly. For losing the contemplation of heavenly things, if man thought only of the necessities of the flesh, he would be bowed down and humiliated, but nevertheless not utterly. Therefore he whom not only necessity casts down from higher thoughts, but also illicit pleasure prostrates, is not only bowed down but utterly bowed down. Hence another prophet says concerning unclean spirits: Who said to your soul, Bow down that we may pass over. For the soul stands upright when it desires heavenly things, and is by no means bent toward the lowest things. But when malign spirits see it standing in its uprightness, they cannot pass through it. For their passing through is to scatter unclean desires upon it. Therefore they say, Bow down that we may pass over, because if the soul does not cast itself down to desiring the lowest things, their perversity by no means prevails against it; and they cannot pass through her whom they fear standing rigid against them in heavenly intention.

Therefore, brothers most dear, we do not give way to malign spirits within us when we desire earthly things, when we bend down toward temporal appetites. Let it shame us, then, to desire earthly things and to offer the backs of our minds to ascending adversaries. He who is bent always gazes upon the earth, and he who seeks the lowest things does not remember by what price he was redeemed. Hence also it is said through Moses that whoever is burdened with a hump should by no means be advanced to the priesthood. And all of us who have been redeemed by the blood of Christ are made members of that same high priest. Whence also it is said to us through Peter: "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood." But he who bears a hump always gazes at the lowest things. Therefore he is driven from the priesthood, because whoever is intent only on earthly things is himself a witness to himself that he is not a member of the high priest. Hence again, fish that do not have fins are forbidden from being eaten by the faithful people. For fish that have scale-fins are also accustomed to leap above the waters. What therefore is figured by finned fish except elect souls? These alone indeed pass into the body of the heavenly Church, who, supported by the fins of virtues, know how to leap through heavenly desire, so that they may reach toward things above through contemplation, although they fall back again into themselves from mortal flesh. If therefore we have now recognized the goods of the heavenly homeland, let it displease us, brothers most dear, that we are bent. Let the bent woman be placed before our eyes, and the unfruitful tree. Let us remember the evils we have done, let us send to the root of the heart a basket of dung, so that what was foul to us here through penance may then grow rich in the fruit of retribution. And if we cannot perform the highest works of virtue, God himself rejoices in our lamentation. For from the very beginning of justice we will please him, we who punish the unjust things we have done. Nor will there be delay in weeping, because enduring joys will quickly wipe away passing tears.

Not understanding this, the ruler of the synagogue commanded that no one should be healed on the sabbath since the sabbath is an image of a future day of rest, days of rest from evil deeds, not from good works. It is commanded that, neither bearing the burden of offenses nor being devoid of good works, we shall celebrate future sabbaths after death. The Lord then is seen to reply spiritually when he says, "You hypocrites, does not every one of you on the sabbath day untie his ox or his donkey and lead them to water?" Why did Jesus mention another creature? He showed the future to his opponents, the rulers of the synagogue. The Jewish and the Gentile peoples would lay aside the thirst of the body and the world's heat through the abundance of the Lord's fountain. "The ox knows his owner, and the ass his master's feeding trough." The people who were fed on the food of common hay, which before it is plucked up is withered away, received the Bread that came down from heaven.

But the ruler of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, said to the crowd, "There are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath." Jesus healed on the Sabbath, showing that it was now time, according to the prophecy of the Song of Songs, for the day to breathe and the shadows to be removed. But the ruler of the synagogue did not understand this much more excellent sacrament, that by healing on the Sabbath the Lord was intimating, that after the six ages of this world, he would grant the eternal joys of immortal life. In whose figure Moses commanded rest on the Sabbath not from good but from servile, that is harmful, actions, thus prefiguring that time when our secular works would cease, but not the religious works of praising God. Therefore, the ruler of the synagogue is mistaken and misleads, because the law prohibited burdening oneself on the Sabbath, that is being weighed down by sins, not healing a person.

But the ruler of the synagogue answering, etc. Here secondly is added the rebuke of Jewish superstition. Concerning which, first is introduced the stirring of disordered zeal in the mind; second, the pretense of ordered zeal in word.

First, therefore, as regards the stirring up of disordered zeal in the soul, he says: But the ruler of the synagogue, being indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, as if to say that his response drew its origin from indignation of soul. This indignation, moreover, arose from a presumption of justice; whence only "true justice has compassion, but false justice has indignation." This false justice, moreover, was zealous for the Law with respect to the observance of the Sabbath, but with a foolish zeal: Romans ten: "They have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge; for being ignorant of the justice of God and seeking to establish their own, they have not submitted to the justice of God." Whence foolish presumption begets zeal, and zeal begets indignation, and indignation begets transgression of the divine law, according to that saying in Proverbs twenty-nine: "He who is quick to indignation will be more prone to sin." Whence the foolish zealot of the law is a destroyer of the law itself; on account of which, Galatians one: "Beyond measure I persecuted the Church of God and laid waste to it"; "being more abundantly a zealot for the traditions of my fathers," etc.

Second, as regards the simulation of ordered zeal in word, he adds: He said to the crowd: There are six days in which one ought to work: behold, an allegation of truth: Exodus twenty: "Six days you shall do all your works. But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord." — Come therefore on these days and be healed: behold, a simulation of piety, whence what is said in Second Timothy three concerning dissemblers applies to him: "Having an appearance of piety, but denying its power." When he says: And not on the day of the Sabbath: behold, an ostentation of holiness, because as a holy man he was showing that he wished the Sabbath day to be kept as holy, according to that saying in Leviticus twenty-three: "Six days you shall work; the seventh day, because it is the Sabbath of rest, shall be called holy." Whence the Jews said in John nine: "This man is not from God, who does not keep the Sabbath"; but the observance of the holy day in the ruler of the synagogue was rather for the simulation of justice than for its fulfillment, according to that saying in Isaiah one: "New moon and Sabbath and other solemnities I will not endure." "Your new moons and your solemnities my soul has hated." And the reason for this is that they kept them rather for superstition than out of devotion; whence Lamentations one: "Her enemies saw her and mocked her Sabbaths."

"But he says that you are loosed from your infirmity, and she is loosed." Well, do you not also unloose your belt on the sabbath?… Did she that very day begin weaving or working at the loom? No, he says that she was made straight. The healing was a labor. No, you are not angry because of the sabbath. Since you see Christ honored and worshiped as God, you are frantic, choked with rage, and waste away with envy. You have one thing concealed in your heart and profess and make pretext of another. For this reason you are most excellently convicted by the Lord, who knows your vain reasoning. You receive the title that fits you, being called hypocrite, pretender, and insincere.

But the ungrateful ruler of the synagogue, when he saw the woman, who before was creeping on the ground, now by Christ's single touch made upright, and relating the mighty works of God, sullies his zeal for the glory of the Lord with envy, and condemns the miracle, that he might appear to be jealous for the Sabbath. As it follows, And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath-day, and said unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work, and not on the sabbath-day. He would have those who are dispersed about on the other days, and engaged in their own works, not come on the Sabbath to see and admire our Lord's miracles, lest by chance they should believe. But the law has not forbidden all manual work on the Sabbath-day, and has it forbidden that which is done by a word or the mouth? Cease then both to eat and drink and speak and sing. And if thou readest not the law, how is it a Sabbath to thee? But supposing the law has forbidden manual works, how is it a manual work to raise a woman upright by a word?

Well then does he call the ruler of the synagogue a hypocrite, for he had the appearance of an observer of the law, but in his heart was a crafty and envious man. For it troubles him not that the Sabbath is broken, but that Christ is glorified. Now observe, that whenever Christ orders a work to be done, (as when He ordered the man sick of the palsy to take up his bed,) He raises His words to something higher, convincing men by the majesty of the Father, as He says, My Father worketh until now, and I work. (John 5:17.) But in this place, as doing every thing by word, He adds nothing further, refuting their calumny by the very things which they themselves did.

Satan, having first bound the woman, was vexed at her liberation, since he desired to inflict even more evil upon her, and so he binds the ruler of the synagogue with envy and through his mouth blasphemes the miracle. Thus he everywhere opposes what is good! This man is indignant that the healing was performed on the Sabbath, but the Lord reproves him with the excellent example of irrational animals.

And as He said these things, all His adversaries were put to shame, and all the people rejoiced at all the glorious things that were done by Him. Those who are ashamed of the sayings of the Savior show that they are rightly to be compared to the barren fig tree. Those who rejoice in His miracles declare that they belong to the daughter of Abraham, giving glory to God for her uplifting, that is, to the Church by the piety of faith.

And when he said these things, etc. Here fourthly he subjoins the attainment of glorious victory with respect to two things that are introduced here, namely the confusion of the rebellious and the rejoicing of the faithful.

First, therefore, as regards the confusion of the rebellious, he says: And when he said these things, all his adversaries were put to shame; the Gloss: "The adversaries, the scribes and Pharisees, who can neither contradict the manifest truth nor are willing to believe on account of envy." Concerning such people, Job twenty-four: "They were rebellious against the light and did not know its ways." Such people are not instructed but confounded when the truth is made manifest; Isaiah forty-one: "Behold, all who fight against you shall be confounded and put to shame; they shall be as nothing, and the men who oppose you shall perish. You shall seek them, and you shall not find the men who rebel against you," etc.

Second, as regards the rejoicing of the faithful, he adds: And all the people rejoiced in all the glorious things that were done by him: Bede: "The people, that is, the simple and humble, who love the words of truth and miracles." These rejoice in the manifestation of divine glory; whence Isaiah twenty-nine: "The poor among men shall exult in the Holy One of Israel"; they shall exult, I say, in all the glorious things that were done by him: Sirach forty-two: "The work of the Lord is full of his glory."

And note that the works of Christ were gracious with respect to the condescension of divine favor, and for these one must give thanks: Tobit twelve: "Bless the God of heaven, and before all the living give praise to him, because he has shown his mercy to you." They were also glorious with respect to the operation of power and the manifestation of majesty, and over these one must rejoice and exult; the Psalm: "Shout joyfully to God, all the earth; sing a psalm to his name; give glory to his praise. Say to God: How terrible are your works! In the greatness of your power your enemies shall lie to you."

Moreover, these things can be explained allegorically concerning the Church gathered from the nations, which through a threefold set of six years was bent over: that is, under the rule of the law of nature, the Mosaic law, and also of prophecy; in each of which the works performed pertained to the six days, that is, servile works, which were done out of fear. And these cannot raise the soul upward, because fear weighs it down, and love alone raises it upward; whence above in chapter one: "He has raised up for us a horn of salvation in the house of David"; and this is accomplished through the spirit of charity; Ezekiel two: "And the spirit entered into me and set me upon my feet."

This one is loosed on the Sabbath day, just as an ox and a donkey that are led to be watered, because this Church has been gathered from the Jewish and Gentile people, who are to be understood by the ox and the donkey, according to that passage of Isaiah 1: "The ox knows its owner, and the donkey the manger of its master"; and 32: "Blessed are you who sow beside all waters, sending forth the foot of the ox and the donkey." But the Lord loosed both, both the Jews coming to the Church from the burden of legal servitude, and the Gentiles from the bond of idolatrous servitude: Ephesians 2: "He himself is our peace, who made both one and, breaking down the middle wall of partition, the enmities in his flesh, abolishing the Law of commandments by decrees, that he might create the two in himself into one new man, making peace," etc.

By this loosing, however, the people of the Jews opposing Christ are confounded, and the people of the Gentiles rejoices, according to that passage of Matthew 8: "Many shall come from the east and the west and shall recline with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob," etc. "But the children of the kingdom shall be cast into the outer darkness," and this on account of their rebellion. Whence Acts 13: "It was necessary to speak the word of God to you first; but since you reject it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles; for so the Lord has commanded us."

Shame fell then on those who had uttered these corrupt opinions, stumbled against the chief cornerstone, and had been broken. When busied in straightening his crooked vessels, they clashed against the wise Potter and resisted the Physician. They could make no reply. They had unanswerably convicted themselves. They were put to silence, doubting what they should say. The Lord closed their bold mouths. The crowds who reaped the benefit of the miracles were glad. The glory and splendor of his works solved all inquiry and doubt in those who sought him without ill will.

But they had nothing to answer; they themselves unanswerably condemned themselves. Hence it follows, And when he had said these things, all his adversaries were ashamed. But the people, reaping great good from His miracles, rejoiced at the signs which they saw, as it follows, And all the people rejoiced. For the glory of His works vanquished every scruple in them who sought Him not with corrupt hearts.

(Serm. 218. App.) Hear the sacrament of a great mystery. Moses before had shut up the light of day from the traitors the Egyptians; Christ by going down thither brought back light to them that sate in darkness. He fled that he might enlighten them, not that he might escape his foes.

The miserable tyrant supposed that by the Saviour's coming he should be thrust from his royal throne. But it was not so; Christ came not to hurt others' dignity, but to bestow His own on others.

(Hom. in. Nat. Innocent.) The flight into Egypt signifies that the elect are often by the wickedness of the bad driven from their homes, or sentenced to banishment. Thus He, who, we shall see below, gave the command to His own, When they shall persecute you in one city, flee ye to another, first practised what He enjoined, as a man flying before the face of man on earth. He whom but a little before a star had proclaimed to the Magi to be worshipped as from heaven.

The first time when he would teach Joseph that she was lawfully espoused, the Angel called the Virgin his espoused wife; but after the birth she is only spoken of as the Mother of Jesus. As wedlock was rightfully imputed to her in her virginity, so virginity is esteemed venerable in her as the mother of Jesus.

(Vers. 13, 14.) Behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying: Rise and take the child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and stay there until I tell you. For it will come to pass that Herod will seek the child to destroy him. So Joseph rose and took the child and his mother by night, and went to Egypt; and he stayed there until the death of Herod. When he takes the child and his mother to go to Egypt, he takes them by night and in darkness; but when he returns to Judea, neither night nor darkness are mentioned in the Gospel.

When he takes the Child and His mother to go into Egypt, it is in the night and darkness, when to return into Judæa, the Gospel speaks of no light, no darkness.

"And when they were departed, behold, an angel appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and flee into Egypt."

There is something here worth inquiring into, both touching the magi, and touching the Child; for if even they were not troubled, but received all with faith, it is worthy of examination on our part, why they and the young Child are not preserved, continuing there, but they as fugitives go into Persia, He with His mother into Egypt. But what? should He have fallen into the hands of Herod, and having fallen, not have been cut off? Nay, He would not have been thought to have taken flesh upon Him; the greatness of the Economy would not have been believed.

For if, while these things are taking place, and many circumstances are being ordered mysteriously after the manner of men, some have dared to say that His assumption of our flesh is a fable; in what degree of impiety would they not have been wrecked, had He done all in a manner becoming His Godhead, and according to His own power?

As to the wise men, He sends them off quickly, at once both commissioning them as teachers to the land of the Persians, and at the same time intercepting the madness of the king, that he might learn that he was attempting things impossible, and might quench his wrath, and desist from this his vain labor. For not alone openly to subdue His enemies, but also to deceive them with ease, is worthy of His power.

And besides what I have said, there is another lesson also, which we are hereby taught, tending not slightly to true self-command in us. Of what kind then is it? To look from the beginning for temptations and plots. See, for instance, how this was the case even at once from His swaddling clothes. Thus you see at His birth, first a tyrant raging, then flight ensuing, and departure beyond the border; and for no crime His mother is exiled into the land of the barbarians: that thou, hearing these things (supposing thee thought worthy to minister to any spiritual matter, and then to see thyself suffering incurable ills, and enduring countless dangers), shouldest not be greatly troubled, nor say, "What can this be? yet surely I ought to be crowned and celebrated, and be glorious and illustrious for fulfilling the Lord's commandment:" but that having this example, thou mightest bear all things nobly, knowing that this especially is the order of all things spiritual, to have everywhere temptations in the same lot with them.

Now the angel having thus appeared, talks not with Mary, but with Joseph; and what saith he? "Arise, and take the young Child and His mother." Here, he saith not any more, "thy wife," but "His mother." For after that the birth had taken place, and the suspicion was done away, and the husband appeased, thenceforth the angel talks openly, calling neither child nor wife his, but "take the young Child and His mother, and flee into Egypt;" and he mentions the cause of the flight: "For Herod," saith he, "will seek the young Child's life."

Joseph, when he had heard these things, was not offended, neither did he say, "The thing is hard to understand: Didst thou not say just now, that He should 'save His people?' and now He saves not even Himself: but we must fly, and go far from home, and be a long time away: the facts are contrary to the promise." Nay, none of these things doth he say (for the man was faithful): neither is he curious about the time of his return; and this though the angel had put it indefinitely thus: "Be thou there until I tell thee." But nevertheless, not even at this did he shudder, but submits and obeys, undergoing all the trials with joy.

And this because God, who is full of love to man, did with these hardships mingle things pleasant also; which indeed is His way with regard to all the saints, making neither their dangers nor their refreshment continual, but weaving the life of all righteous men, out of both the one and the other. This very thing He did here also: for consider, Joseph saw the Virgin with child; this cast him into agitation and the utmost trouble, for he was suspecting the damsel of adultery. But straightway the angel was at hand to do away his suspicion, and remove his fears; and seeing the young child born, he reaped the greatest joy. Again, this joy no trifling danger succeeds, the city being troubled, and the king in his madness seeking after Him that was born. But this trouble was again succeeded by another joy; the star, and the adoration of the wise men. Again, after this pleasure, fear and danger; "For Herod," saith he, "is seeking the young Child's life," and He must needs fly and withdraw Himself as any mortal might: the working of miracles not being seasonable as yet. For if from His earliest infancy He had shown forth wonders, He would not have been accounted a Man.

Because of this, let me add, neither is a temple framed at once; but a regular conception takes place, and a time of nine months, and pangs, and a delivery, and giving suck, and silence for so long a space, and He awaits the age proper to manhood; that by all means acceptance might be won for the mystery of His Economy.

Rather, however, both the people and the patriarch, going down thither, and coming up thence, were together completing the type of this His return. Thus, as they went down to avoid death by famine, so He death by conspiracy. But whereas they on their arrival were for the time delivered from the famine, this man, when He had gone down, sanctified the whole land, by setting His foot thereon.

At least it is observable how, in the midst of His humiliations, the tokens of His Godhead are disclosed. Thus, first of all, the angel saying, "Flee into Egypt," did not promise to journey with them, either in their descent or return; intimating that they have a great fellow-traveller, the Child that had been born; such an one as actually changed all things immediately on His appearing, and wrought so that His enemies should minister in many ways to this Economy. Thus magi and barbarians, leaving the superstition of their fathers, are come to worship: thus Augustus ministers to the birth at Bethlehem by the decree for the taxing; Egypt receives and preserves Him, driven from His home, and plotted against, and obtains a sort of first impulse towards her union unto Him; so that when in after-time she should hear Him preached by the apostles, she might have this at least to glory of, as having received Him first. And yet this privilege did belong unto Palestine alone; but the second proved more fervent than the first.

His flight then was not occasioned by fear but by what had come through the mystery of prophecy. The Evangelist planted the seed when he thus spoke: "Take the boy and his mother and flee into Egypt." And later, "that what was written might be fulfilled: 'From Egypt have I summoned my son.' " Christ fled so that he might establish the truth of the law, faith in prophecy and the testimony of the psalter. The Lord himself says, "It was needful that what was written in the law and the prophets and the psalms be fulfilled by me." Christ fled for us, not for himself. Christ fled so that at the right time he might serve as a steward of the sacraments [the divine mysteries]. Christ fled so that by granting absolution he might take away the source of abuses to come and that he might give proof of faith to those who would believe. And finally, Christ fled so that he might bestow on us faith even when we have to flee, because in the face of persecution it is better to flee than to deny the faith. For Peter, because he was unwilling to flee, denied the Lord. John, lest he deny the Lord, fled.

Was it Herod seeking the child, or the devil working through Herod? When Herod saw the magi for himself, he imagined in his fantasy that they had fled their governors. For Christ, though bound in swaddling clothes, though busy at his mother's breast, though keeping quiet, concealing his words, unable to walk, nevertheless transformed the magi (who had been standard-bearers of the devil) into his most faithful servants. The devil instantly realized what Christ could do when he came of age. So he spurred the Jews against him and, clever contriver that he was, impelled Herod that he might get the jump on Christ in his infancy. He hoped to deprive him of the coming emblem of his virtue, the cross, the banner of the greatest victory for us. The devil perceived that Christ would soon be restoring life to all the world with his teaching and his virtue. Even while still whimpering as a baby, Jesus was taking possession of this world from top to bottom. It was as the prophet said: "Before the child knows to cry to his father and mother he shall take the pride of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria." The Jews themselves attest to this when they say, "You see how the whole world hastens after him."

He says not, 'the Mother and her young Child,' but, the young Child and His mother; for the Child was not born for the mother, but the mother prepared for the Child. How is this that the Son of God flies from the face of man? or who shall deliver from the enemy's hand, if He Himself fears His enemies? First; He ought to observe, even in this, the law of that human nature which He took on Him; and human nature and infancy must flee before threatening power. Next, that Christians when persecution makes it necessary should not be ashamed to fly.

Here Matthew omits the day of purification when the first-born must be presented in the Temple with a lamb, or a pair of turtle doves, or pigeons. Their fear of Herod did not make them bold to transgress the Law, that they should not present the Child in the temple. As soon then as the rumour concerning the Child begins to be spread abroad, the Angel is sent to bid Joseph carry Him into Egypt.

For when the true light withdraws, they who hate the light are in darkness, when it returns they are again enlightened.

By this that the Angel appears always to Joseph in sleep, is mystically signified that they who rest from mundane cares and secular pursuits, deserve angelic visitations.

In Joseph is figured the order of preachers, in Mary Holy Scripture; by the Child the knowledge of the Saviour; by the cruelty of Herod the persecution which the Church suffered in Jerusalem; by Joseph's flight into Egypt the passing of the preachers to the unbelieving Gentiles, (for Egypt signifies darkness;) by the time that he abode in Egypt the space of time between the ascension of the Lord and the coming of Anti Christ; by Herod's death the extinction of jealousy in the hearts of the Jews.

And when they had departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother. Do you see now the reason why God permitted the Virgin to be betrothed? It is revealed to you here: that Joseph might care for her and watch over her. The angel did not say, "take thy wife," but "take the mother of the Child." For once his suspicion had been allayed, and the righteous man had understood from the miracles attendant at His birth that everything was of the Holy Spirit, the angel no longer calls her Joseph's "wife." And flee into Egypt. Even the Lord flees, to confirm that He was truly man. For if He had fallen into the hands of Herod and had not been slain, it would have seemed that He had been made flesh only in appearance. He flees into Egypt to sanctify even that place. For there were two lands that were the workshops of every iniquity: Babylon and Egypt. By means of the Magi He accepted the adoration of Babylon, and Egypt He sanctified by His own presence. And be thou there until I bring thee word. Remain there until you receive God's command. So we, too, should do nothing apart from the will of God. For Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him. Behold the foolishness of a man who labors to prevail against the will of God. For if it is not of God, what do you fear? But if it is of God, how can you destroy the Child?

Having showed how the Magi bore witness to the newborn Christ, the evangelist now shows how the Innocents gave testimony, not by speaking but by dying. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows how Christ was concealed; secondly, the murder of the children (v. 16); thirdly, Christ's return (v. 19).

In regard to the first he does three things: first, he mentions the angel's warning; secondly, Joseph's obedience (v. 14); thirdly, the fulfillment of a prophecy (v. 15).

In regard to the first, three things are mentioned: first, the time of the appearance; secondly, the appearance itself and the manner of the appearance (v. 13b); thirdly, the warning given by the angel (v. 13c).

(13) The time is described at When they had departed. And it should be noted that the appearance did not occur immediately after the departure of the Magi, because everything mentioned in Luke (2:22), namely, the purification, should be interposed: "And when the time came for their purification..." For the thought of killing the child did not come to Herod right away. Hence, when he says Behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph..., he is said to have appeared in sleep, because that is when men cease their external activities, and a revelation can be made by angels: "In peace I will both lie down and sleep" (Ps 4:8); "When you lie down, your sleep will be sweet" (Pr 3:24).

In the warning the angel does two things: first, the angel persuades him to flee; secondly, he gives the reason. He says, therefore Rise. And note that, as Hilary says, the Blessed Virgin is called "wife" by the angel before the birth (Mt 1:5) but not after for two reasons: first to commend the Virgin, for as a virgin she gave birth. Secondly, on account of her dignity, for she was the mother of God, than which there is no greater dignity. Also because, as Chrysostom says, the child had not come on account of the mother, but rather conversely. Therefore, he says Take the child and its mother. But why flee into Egypt? Does it not say in Ps 18 (v. 3): "The Lord is my helper and my redeemer." But he fled for three reasons: first, to manifest his humanity; for as the divinity appeared in the star, so in flight the humanity: "Made in the likeness of men" (Phil 2:7). Secondly, as an example: "When they persecute you in one city, flee into another" (Mt 10:23). Thirdly, on account of the mystery; for just as he willed to die in order to call us back from death, so he willed to flee in order to call back those who flee from his face through sin: "Where shall I flee from your spirit?" (Ps 139:7).

And remain there. But why to Egypt rather than some other region? For two reasons: first, because it is distinctive of God to be mindful of mercy in his anger (Hab 3:2). For the Lord had been angry at the Egyptians pursuing the sons of Israel, because the sons of Israel were God's firstborn. Therefore, the Egyptians were granted the privilege of serving the Lord: "Behold, the Lord, riding on a swift cloud, comes to Egypt" (Is 19:1); "We have seen his glory, the glory, as it were, of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth" (Jn 1:14). Secondly, because he had brought forth darkness in Egypt, he willed to enlighten it first. Therefore, it was well that he fled there: "The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, on them has light shined" (Is 9:2).

Note that when anyone wills to flee sin, the first thing to do is shake off laziness: "Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead and Christ shall enlighten you" (Eph 5:14). Secondly, he should take trust from the mother and from the Son, namely, Christ: "In me all hope of life and virtue" (Sir 24:18). Thirdly, he ought to flee from sin with the help of the mother and child: "Yes, I have wandered far, I have lodged in the wilderness" (Ps 55:7).

He adds the cause of the flight. For Herod is about to search for the child to destroy him. Herod was deceived, because he wanted to destroy the one who would come to share his kingdom: "As my father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint one for you" (Lk 22:29); secondly, because he wanted to destroy him who sought no worldly glory: "Who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross" (Heb 12:2).

Egypt full of idols; for after this enquiry for Him among the Jews, Christ leaving Judæa goes to be cherished among nations given to the vainest superstitions.

Christ promised that he would come incarnate, that he would go through the phases of life, that he would announce the glory of the kingdom of heaven, that he would proclaim the way of faith and that by the power of his word alone he would put demons to flight. He promised that he would give sight to the blind, gait to the lame, speech to the mute, hearing to the deaf, remission for sinners and life to the dead. All these things he promised through the law and the prophets. Thus it was that Christ, when he was to become a man, was not to flee the death he escaped as an infant.

But why into Egypt? The Lord, who keepeth not His anger for ever, remembered the woes He had brought upon Egypt, and therefore sent His Son thither, and gives it this sign of great reconciliation, that with this one remedy He might heal the ten plagues of Egypt, and the nation that had been the persecutor of this first-born people, might be the guardian of His first-born Son. As formerly they had cruelly tyrannized, now they might devoutly serve; nor go to the Red Sea to be drowned, but be called to the waters of baptism to receive life.

The straitness of every persecution may be called night—the relief from it in like manner, day.

And he arose and took the young Child and His mother by night, and departed into Egypt; and was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, "Out of Egypt have I called My Son" (Hosea 11:1).

The Jews say that this was said of the people whom Moses led out of Egypt. We reply, is it anything remarkable that something which was spoken of the people in type as a foreshadowing, was realized by Christ in truth? Furthermore, who is the Son of God? The Hebrew people who worshipped the idols and carvings of Beelphegor, or He Who truly is the Son of God?

(14) And he rose. Here is mentioned the execution of the angel's command both as to the flight and the length of the stay. He rose and took the child and his mother. The time is mentioned, when he says at night, on account of the fear and distress: "My soul desired you at night," i.e., in distress (Is 26:9); for in times of distress one must have recourse to God: "In the morning, they will come to me in their trouble" (Hos 10:1). He rose. Then was fulfilled the word of Is (19:1): "Behold, the Lord is riding on a swift cloud and comes to Egypt," which was fulfilled to the letter.

Joseph therefore was commanded to accept this boy about whom Isaiah had said, "For a boy has been born to you; a son has been given to you, whose rule has extended over his shoulders." Now he said "a son has been given to you" because Christ the Lord was born as a boy and was counted a son of Joseph and Mary. As to his going down into Egypt, Isaiah predicted this long before the fact when he said, "Behold, the Lord sits atop a swift cloud and will come into Egypt." By this statement the promise of the Lord's incarnation was clearly revealed. Since the Lord himself is invoked as "arising from on high, the sunlight of justice," it is right that he would come on a swift cloud. By this Isaiah means he would come in a hallowed body, a body weighed down by no sin and through which he covered the light of his own majesty with the envelope of the cloud of his body. Hosea as well points to this very fact when he says, "The king of Israel has been thrown down. Because Israel was small, I took delight in him. And I called my son from Egypt."19After Egypt's ancient, grave sin, after many blows had been divinely inflicted upon it, God the omnipotent Father, moved by devotion, sent his Son into Egypt. He did so that Egypt, which had long ago paid back the penalty of wickedness owed under Moses, might now receive Christ, the hope for salvation. How great was God's compassion as shown in the advent of his Son! Egypt, which of old under Pharaoh stood stubborn against God, now became a witness to and home for Christ. God's compassion toward Egypt was like that shown toward the magi, who deserved to know Christ the Lord. For, although the magi had for a long time dared resist the divine goodness under Moses, they now, having seen but a single star in heaven, believed in the Son of God. The cavalier magicians were handed over to punishment for their lack of faith. Others were brought to glory through faith, since they believed that God had been born in the flesh—God whom the Egyptian magicians were unwilling to recognize in all his divine excellence.

Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt have I called my son," and "for he shall be called a Nazarene."

(Verse 15, 16.) So that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying: Out of Egypt I called my son. Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men. Let those who deny the truth of the Hebrew scriptures answer where this is read in the Septuagint translators. But since they did not find it, we will tell them it is written in the prophet Hosea (Chapter 11), as they can also confirm with the copies we recently published. However, we can reconcile (or console) this passage differently for the contentious, whose behavior the Apostle Paul denies having. And we present the testimony from Numbers, with Balaam saying: God has called him out of Egypt; His glory is like a unicorn (Numbers 23:22).

(Epist. 57.7.) This is not in the LXX; but in Osee according to the genuine Hebrew text we read; Israel is my child, and I have loved him, and, from Egypt have I called my Son; where the LXX render, Israel is my child, and I have loved him, and called my sons out of Egypt.

(In Osee 11:2.) The Evangelist cites this text, because it refers to Christ typically. For it is to be observed, that in this Prophet and in others, the coming of Christ and the call of the Gentiles are foreshewn in such a manner, that the thread of history is never broken.

Let those who deny the authenticity of the Hebrew copies, show us this passage in the LXX, and when they have failed to find it, we will show it them in the Hebrew. We may also explain it in another way, by considering it as quoted from Numbers, God brought him out of Egypt; his glory is as it were that of a unicorn. (Num. 23:22.)

But wherefore, it may be said, is the young Child sent into Egypt? In the first place, the evangelist himself hath mentioned the cause, saying, "That it might be fulfilled, Out of Egypt have I called my Son." And at the same time beginnings of fair hopes were thenceforth proclaimed before to the world. That is, since Babylon and Egypt, most in the whole earth, were burnt up with the flame of ungodliness, He, signifying from the first that He means to correct and amend both, and inducing men hereby to expect His bounties in regard of the whole world likewise, sent to the one the wise men, the other He Himself visited with His mother.

And if the Jews should raise a question touching the prophecy, and say, that the words, "Out of Egypt have I called my Son," were uttered concerning themselves; we would tell them, This is a law of prophecy, that in many cases much that is spoken of one set of persons is fulfilled in another; of which kind is that which is said touching Simeon and Levi, "I will divide them," saith He, "in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel." And yet not in themselves did this come to pass, but in their descendants; and Noah's saying again about Canaan, came to pass in the Gibeonites, Canaan's descendants. And that concerning Jacob one may see to have so come to pass; for those blessings which say, "Be lord over thy brother, and let thy father's sons worship thee," had no accomplishment in himself (how could they, he being in fear and trembling, and worshipping his brother over and over again?), but in his offspring they had. The very same may be said in this case also. For which may be called the truer son of God, he that worships a calf, and is joined to Baalpeor and sacrifices his sons to devils? or He that is a Son by nature, and honors Him that begat Him? So that, except this man had come, the prophecy would not have received its due fulfillment. It is worth observing, too, that the evangelist intimates the same by the phrase, "that it might be fulfilled;" implying that it would not have been fulfilled, unless He had come.

And this makes the Virgin also in no common degree glorious and distinguished; that the very thing which was the whole people's supreme endowment in the way of praise, she also might thenceforth have for her own. I mean, that whereas they were proud of their coming up from Egypt, and used to boast of it (which indeed the prophet also was hinting at, when he said, "Have I not brought up the strangers from Cappadocia, and the Assyrians from the pit"), He makes this pre-eminence belong to the Virgin likewise.

Isaiah had foretold this flight into Egypt. Lo! the Lord shall ascend on a light cloud, and shall come into Egypt, and shall scatter the idols of Egypt. (Is. 19:1.) It is the practice of this Evangelist to confirm all he says; and that because he is writing to the Jews, therefore he adds, that it might be fulfilled, &c.

(15) And remained there. It is said that he was there seven years and lived in the city of Heliopolis. In regard to the mystery, by Joseph is signified preachers, i.e., the apostles, whose task is to replace the darkness with doctrine—they left the Jews and turned to the gentiles: "It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it from you and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the gentiles" (Acts 13:46).

And remain there till I tell you, i.e. until the unbelief of the Jews is ended: "Blindness has come upon part of Israel" (Rom 11:25). Then he applies the testimony of the prophet; hence he says, This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, "Out of Egypt I have called my son." The Septuagint is not the same, for it says: "Out of Egypt I have called his son."

There seems to be a question here, because this text does not appear to apply, in as much as it is preceded by the words: "When Israel was a child, I loved him"; hence, it seems to speak of Israel's call from Egypt. But it must be noted that in all the texts presented in the Old or New Testaments about Christ a certain distinction must be made: because some refer specifically to Christ, as Is (53:7): "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter"; but some are said of certain ones accordingly as they are a figure of Christ, such as the text in question. For they were called sons of Israel, because they possessed a likeness to the true only-begotten Son. And this is the meaning of "Out of Egypt I have called my son," i.e., special.

(non occ.) And while he thus persecutes Christ, he furnished an army (of martyrs) clothed in white robes of the same age as the Lord.

(Serm. 220. App.) Behold how this unrighteous enemy never could have so much profited these infants by his love, as he did by his hate; for as much as iniquity abounded against them, so much did the grace of blessing abound on them.

(Serm. 373. 3.) O blessed infants! He only will doubt of your crown in this your passion for Christ, who doubts that the baptism of Christ has a benefit for infants. He who at His birth had Angels to proclaim Him, the heavens to testify, and Magi to worship Him, could surely have prevented that these should not have died for Him, had He not known that they died not in that death, but rather lived in higher bliss. Far be the thought, that Christ who came to set men free, did nothing to reward those who died in His behalf, when hanging on the cross He prayed for those who put Him to death.

(Serm. 132. App.) The Magi had seen this unknown star in the heavens, not a few days, but two years before, as they had informed Herod when he enquired. This caused him to fix two years old and under; as it follows, according to the time he had enquired of the Magi.

(Gloss. ord.) Or because he feared that the Child to whom even stars ministered, might transform His appearance to greater or under that of His own age, or might conceal all those of that age: hence it seems to be that he slew all from one day to two years old.

(de Cons. Ev. ii. 11.) Or, disturbed by pressure of still more imminent dangers, Herod's thoughts are drawn to other thoughts than the slaughter of children, he might suppose that the Magi, unable to find Him whom they had supposed born, were ashamed to return to him. So the days of purification being accomplished, they might go up in safety to Jerusalem. And who does not see that that one day they may have escaped the attention of a King occupied with so many cares, and that afterwards when the things done in the Temple came to be spread abroad, then Herod discovered that he had been deceived by the Magi, and then sent and slew the children.

(Hom. in Nat. Innocent.) In this death of the children the precious death of all Christ's martyrs is figured; that they were infants signifies, that by the merit of humility alone can we come to the glory of martyrdom; that they were slain in Bethlehem and the coasts thereof, that the persecution shall be both in Jerusalem whence the Church originated, and throughout the world; in those of two years old are figured the perfect in doctrine and works; those under that age the neophytes; that they were slain while Christ escaped, signifies that the bodies of the martyrs may be destroyed by the wicked, but that Christ cannot be taken from them.

For Herod, as we have said, in his desire to destroy the Savior of the world, sent word to Bethlehem and commanded that all children two years of age and under be killed, figuring the age according to the time that he had learned from the magi. He thought that his edict would reach even to the Lord himself, the source of life. The Holy Spirit had already foreseen his wickedness beforehand. Solomon, speaking for the church, had said, "Who will give to you my brother, the one who nurses at the breast of his mother?" Moreover, by saying, "Who will give to you?" he was demonstrating that Herod would have no power over him who is the Lord and Prince of all powers. Thus the Lord spoke rightly when he bore witness about himself through the same Solomon: "Evil men will seek and not find me. For they hate wisdom and moreover have not partaken of the Word of God and have had no desire for it." The Spirit also said through David: "Since you are the one who gave birth to me, you are my hope, my mother, from the time I nursed at your breast … you are my protector." The blessed Moses also relates that Christ the Lord, an infant, could not have been killed while still nursing. He gave witness to this with his words, "You will not cook a lamb in the milk of its own mother." In this exact statement Moses revealed the expectation that Christ our Lord would be the true Lamb of God who was to suffer at the appointed time.

In Bethlehem therefore all the babies were slain. These innocents who died then on Christ's behalf became the first martyrs of Christ. David refers to them when he says, "From the mouths of nursing babies you have perfected praise because of your enemies, that you might bring ruin to the enemy." … For in this persecution even tiny infants and nursing babies were killed on Christ's behalf and attained to the consummate praise of martyrs. Meanwhile the wicked king Herod was destroyed, he who had usurped the realm to defend himself against the king of the heavens. Thus it is that those blessed babes have deservedly lasted beyond others. They were the first who were worthy to die on Christ's behalf.

"Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth."

Yet surely it was a case not for anger, but for fear and awe: he ought to have perceived that he was attempting impossible things. But he is not refrained. For when a soul is insensible and incurable, it yields to none of the medicines given by God. See for example this man following up his former efforts, and adding many murders to one, and hurried down the steep any whither. For driven wild by this anger, and envy, as by some demon, he takes account of nothing, but rages even against nature herself, and his anger against the wise men who had mocked him he vents upon the children that had done no wrong: venturing then in Palestine upon a deed akin to the things that had been done in Egypt. For he "sent forth," it is said, "and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men."

Here attend to me carefully. Because many things are uttered by many very idly touching these children, and the course of events is charged with injustice, and some of these express their perplexity about it in a more moderate way, others with more of audaciousness and frenzy. In order then that we may free these of their madness and those of their perplexity, suffer us to discourse a little upon this topic. Plainly, then, if this be their charge, that the children were left to be slain, they should find fault likewise with the slaughter of the soldiers that kept Peter. For as here, when the young child had fled, other children are massacred in the place of Him who was sought; even so then, too, Peter having been delivered from his prison and chains by the angel, one of like name with this tyrant, and like temper too, when he had sought him, and found him not, slew instead of him the soldiers that kept him.

"But what is this? it may be said; "why this is not a solution, but an enhancement of our difficulty." I know it too, and for this intent I bring forward all such cases, that to all I may adduce one and the same solution. What then is the solution of these things? or what fair account of them can we give? That Christ was not the cause of their slaughter, but the king's cruelty; as indeed neither was Peter to those others, but the madness of Herod. For if he had seen the wall broken through, or the doors overthrown, he might, perhaps, have had ground to accuse the soldiers that kept the apostle, of neglect; but now when all things continued in due form, and the doors were thrown wide open, and the chains fastened to the hands of them that kept him (for in fact they were bound unto him), he might have inferred from these things (that is, if he had been strictly doing a judge's office on the matters before him), that the event was not of human power or craft, but of some divine and wonder-working power; he might have adored the doer of these things, instead of waging war with the sentinels. For God had so done all that He did, that so far from exposing the keepers, He was by their means leading the king unto the truth. But if he proved senseless, what signifies to the skillful Physician of Souls, managing all things to do good, the insubordination of him that is diseased?

Wherefore art thou wroth, O Herod, at being mocked of the wise men? didst thou not know that the birth was divine? didst thou not summon the chief priests? didst thou not gather together the scribes? did not they, being called, bring the prophet also with them into thy court of judgment, proclaiming these things beforehand from of old? Didst thou not see how the old things agreed with the new? Didst thou not hear that a star also ministered to these men? Didst thou not reverence the zeal of the barbarians? Didst thou not marvel at their boldness? Wast thou not horror-struck at the truth of the prophet? Didst thou not from the former things perceive the very last also? Wherefore didst thou not reason with thyself from all these things, that this event was not of the craft of the wise men, but of a Divine Power, duly dispensing all things? And even if thou wert deceived by the wise men, what is that to the young children, who have done no wrong?

"Yea," saith one, "Herod thou hast full well deprived of excuse, and proved him blood-thirsty; but thou hast not yet solved the question about the injustice of what took place. For if he did unjustly, wherefore did God permit it?" Now, what should we say to this? That which I do not cease to say continually, in church, in the market-place and everywhere; that which I also wish you carefully to keep in mind, for it is a sort of rule for us, suited to every such perplexity. What then is our rule, and what our saying? That although there be many that injure, yet is there not so much as one that is injured. And in order that the riddle may not disturb you too much, I add the solution too with all speed. I mean, that what we may suffer unjustly from any one, it tells either to the doing away of our sins, God so putting that wrong to our account; or unto the recompense of rewards.

"But what kind of sin had these children," it may be said, "that they should do it away? for touching those who are of full age, and have been guilty of many negligences, one might with show of reason speak thus: but they who so underwent premature death, what sort of sins did they by their sufferings put away?" Didst thou not hear me say, that though there were no sins, there is a recompense of rewards hereafter for them that suffer ill here? Wherein then were the young children hurt in being slain for such a cause, and borne away speedily into that waveless harbor? "Because," sayest thou, "they would in many instances have achieved, had they lived, many and great deeds of goodness" Why, for this cause He lays up for them beforehand no small reward, the ending their lives for such a cause. Besides, if the children were to have been any great persons, He would not have suffered them to be snatched away beforehand. For if they that eventually will live in continual wickedness are endured by Him with so great long-sufferings, much more would He not have suffered these to be so taken off had He foreknown they would accomplish any great things.

And these are the reasons we have to give; yet these are not all; but there are also others more mysterious than these, which He knoweth perfectly, who Himself ordereth these things. Let us then give up unto Him the more perfect understanding of this matter, and apply ourselves to what follows, and in the calamities of others let us learn to bear all things nobly. Yea, for it was no little scene of woe, which then befell Bethlehem, the children were snatched from their mother's breast, and dragged unto this unjust slaughter.

And if thou art yet faint-hearted, and not equal to controlling thyself in these things, learn the end of him who dared all this, and recover thyself a little. For very quickly was he overtaken by punishment for these things; and he paid the due penalty of such an abominable act, ending his life by a grievous death, and more pitiable than that which he now dared inflict; suffering also countless additional ills, which ye may know of by perusing Josephus' account of these events.

Why did Christ do this? Christ is the judge of thoughts and the examiner of minds. Why did he desert those whom he knew were being sought because of himself and whom he knew would be killed for his sake? He was born a king, the king of heaven—why did he neglect the standard-bearers of his own innocence? Why did he disdain an army of the same age as himself? Why did he thus abandon those who were cut down as plunder from the same cradle as himself? Was it so that he, who would become the one king, might proceed against the forces of all his enemies? Brothers, Christ did not despise his own soldiers but promoted them and granted that they might walk in victory before they lived. He enabled them to participate in a victory without struggle. He gave to them the gift of the crown even before their bodies had grown. It was Christ's will that they pass over vice for virtue, attain heaven before earth and share in the divine life immediately. Thus it was that Christ sent his soldiers ahead. He did not abandon them. He gathered up his ranks. He did not leave them behind.

When the infant Jesus had subdued the Magi, not by the might of His flesh, but the grace of His Spirit, Herod was exceeding wrath, that they whom he sitting on his throne had no power to move, were obedient to an Infant lying in a manger. Then by their contempt of him the Magi gave further cause of wrath. For when kings' wrath is stirred by fear for their crowns, it is a great and inextinguishable wrath. But what did he? He sent and slew all the children. As a wounded beast rends whatsoever meeteth it as if the cause of its smart, so he mocked by the Magi spent his fury on children. He said to himself in his fury, 'Surely the Magi have found the Child whom they said should be King;' for a king in fear for his crown fears all things, suspects all. Then he sent and slew all those infants, that he might secure one among so many.

He is not satisfied with the massacre at Bethlehem, but extends it to the adjacent villages; sparing no age from the child of one night old, to that of two years.

In Joseph is figured the order of preachers, in Mary Holy Scripture; by the Child the knowledge of the Saviour; by the cruelty of Herod the persecution which the Church suffered in Jerusalem; by Joseph's flight into Egypt the passing of the preachers to the unbelieving Gentiles, (for Egypt signifies darkness;) by the time that he abode in Egypt the space of time between the ascension of the Lord and the coming of Anti Christ; by Herod's death the extinction of jealousy in the hearts of the Jews.

But (we hold the contrary): for Christ, by "accepting praise out of the mouth of babes and sucklings," has declared that neither childhood nor infancy is without sensibility, -the former of which states, when meeting Him with approving shouts, proved its ability to offer Him testimony; while the other, by being slaughtered, for His sake of course, knew what violence meant.

He gave orders that not only the children in Bethlehem but even those in the outlying districts of the town be killed, thinking that amid the multitude of those killed would be the one he was seeking. Herod ordered those who were two years old and under to be slaughtered. He had calculated such was the time that had passed from the incarnation of Christ, taking into account the time the magi had spent on their journey and that which he had spent on the throne. But Christ was taken out of Bethlehem once night had arrived. It is not possible that the birth of Christ be the cause of the killing of the children. But the disclosure of Herod's child-killing marked the beginning of a long string of wickedness. Even those who crucified Christ were not wicked at the time when they arrested Christ. Rather, they became wicked at the time when they undertook his murder. Yet for Christ's sake the children will receive a good reward, fitting to their martyrdom.

Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the Magi, was exceedingly wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem. As God used Moses to trick Pharaoh, so, too, He used the Magi to trick Herod. For both Herod and Pharaoh were child slayers: Pharaoh slew the male children of the Hebrews in Egypt, and Herod slew the male children of the Hebrews in Bethlehem. Herod vents his wrath against the Magi upon those who had wronged him in nothing. Why were the children allowed to be slaughtered? So that Herod's wickedness might be revealed. But perhaps you will ask me, "Why did the children suffer wrong to show Herod's wickedness?" Listen then. They were not wronged but were made worthy of crowns. For anyone who suffers some evil here, suffers either so that his sins might be absolved, or so that his crowns might be multiplied. So it is with these children; for their suffering they will receive a greater crown in heaven. And in all the region thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had carefully ascertained of the Magi.

(16) Then Herod... Here he tells of the slaughter of the infants. In regard to this he does three things: first, the occasion of the slaughter is mentioned; secondly, the slaying (v. 16b); thirdly, the prophecies are quoted (v. 17).

The occasion was Herod's anger; hence Herod was in a furious rage: "Man's anger does not work the justice of God" (Jas 1:20). And it should be noted that when a king suspects the loss of his kingdom, he quickly becomes inflamed with anger.

Then Herod, seeing that he had been tricked by the wise men, was in a furious rage. He is said to have been in a furious rage for two reasons: because when one is angry, he becomes furious at the slightest provocation. Hence, because he suspected the loss of his kingdom and had been tricked by the wise men, he went into a furious rage: "From a spark of fire come many burning coals" (Sir 11:32). And he sent... In that fury was cruelty in regard to three things: the place, the multitude and the time. In regard to the multitude, because to find the one he kills all. Hence it says, He sent and killed all the male children. And note that Augustine says: "He would never have benefited them as much by paying homage, as he benefited them by his hatred." But one might ask, since they did not have free will, how they are said to die for Christ? But, as it says in John (3:17): "God did not send his son into the world to judge the world, but that the world be saved by him." For God would never permit them to be killed, unless it were useful for them. Hence Augustine says that it is the same thing to doubt whether their killing profited them as to doubt whether baptism would have profited them: for they suffered as martyrs, and by dying confessed Christ, though not by speech: "I saw under the altar the souls of those slain for the word of God" (Rev 6:9). The second cruelty is that he killed in all that region, for he feared that he might flee to another city. He acted like a wounded beast, which does not care whom it injures: "Like a roaring lion or a charging bear, a wicked ruler over a poor people" (Pr 28:15). The third was in regard to time. Hence those who were two years old and under. And note that Augustine says that "the Innocents were killed in the year Christ was born."

But why does he say from two years old and under? Some say that the star appeared for two years previously. Hence, Herod was not sure that he was not born as soon as the star appeared. Hence, he says, according to the time which he had ascertained from the wise men. But others say that they were not killed in the same year but two years later. But why did he wait so long? Three reasons are given by different persons. One is that in the beginning he thought that the Magi had been deceived and would find nothing, but after he heard many things about Christ from Zechariah and Simeon and Anna, he felt it was necessary to make inquiries. Others say that he did this out of wariness, for he feared that the parents would conceal the child he sought. Hence, at first he wished to follow them. Others say that he was prevented by his business, because he sent after the Magi as far as Tharsus of Cilicia and burned their ships. He was also occupied, because he had been summoned to Rome, where his sons had accused him. And so, after his return he began to vent his rage.

He says or under, because he knew that he had such power that he could change his features.

By that killing is signified the killing of the martyrs, because they were children in humility and innocence: "Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not" (Mt 19:14); likewise below (18:3): "Unless you be converted and become as little children, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven."

In Bethlehem and in all that region, because they are killed through the whole world: "You will be witnesses to me," namely, by dying (Acts 1:8). The two years are the two loves—of God and of neighbor, because "faith without works is dead" (Jas 2:20). And note that after Christ was born, a persecution at once rages: because as soon as one is converted to Christ, he begins to be tempted: "Son, coming to the service of God, stand in justice and in fear, and prepare your soul for temptation" (Sir 2:1).

(ord.) She will not be comforted in this present life, for that they are not, but transfers all her hope and comfort to the life to come.

It could not be that they were not who seemed now dead, but by glorious martyrdom they were advanced to eternal life; and consolation is for those who have suffered loss, not for those who have reaped a gain. Rachel affords a type of the Church long barren now at length fruitful. She is heard weeping for her children, not because she mourned them dead, but because they were slaughtered by those whom she would have retained as her first-born sons.

(Vers. 17 seqq.) Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying: A voice was heard in Ramah, sobbing and loud lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled, since they are no more (Jerem. XXXI, 15). From Rachel was born Benjamin, in whose tribe Bethlehem is not (Genes. XXXV). Therefore, it is asked how Rachel mourns the sons of Judah, that is, Bethlehem, as if they were her own. We will answer briefly, because she is buried near Bethlehem in Ephrath, and from the maternal womb, she received the name of the mother's lodging. Whether because Judah and Benjamin were two joined tribes, and Herod had ordered not only the killing of children in Bethlehem, but also in all its borders. By the slaughter of Bethlehem, we understand that many from Benjamin were also killed. But she wept for her children, and she did not receive consolation, according to a twofold interpretation. Either because she considered them dead for eternity, or because she did not want to console herself about those whom she knew would survive. But what is said in Rama, let us not think that this is the name of a place, near Gabaa, but 'rama' is interpreted as 'an elevated place', so the meaning is: A voice was heard in an elevated place, that is, far and wide dispersed.

(In Hierem. 31:15.) This passage of Jeremiah has been quoted by Matthew neither according to the Hebrew nor the LXX version. This shows that the Evangelists and Apostles did not follow any one's translation, but according to the Hebrew manner expressed in their own words what they had read in Hebrew.

By Ramah we need not suppose that the town of that name near Gibeah is meant; but take it as signifying 'high.' A voice was heard 'aloft,' that is, spread far and wide.'

Rachel's son was Benjamin, in which tribe Bethlehem is not situated. How then does Rachel weep for the children of Judah as if they were her own? We answer briefly. She was buried near Bethlehem in Ephrata, and was regarded as the mother, because her body was there entertained. Or, as the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin were contiguous, and Herod's command extended to the coasts of Bethlehem as well as to the town itself, we may suppose that many were slain in Benjamin.

This may be understood in two ways; either she thought them dead for all eternity, so that no consolation could comfort her; or, she desired not to receive any comfort for those who she knew had gone into life eternal.

"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not."

Thus having filled the hearer with horror by relating these things: the slaughter so violent and unjust, so extremely cruel and lawless; he comforts him again, by saying, Not from God's wanting power to prevent it did all this take place, nor from any ignorance of His, but when He both knew it, and foretold it, and that loudly by His prophet. Be not troubled then, neither despond, looking unto His unspeakable providence, which one may most clearly see, alike by what He works, and by what He permits.

But what, it may be said, hath Rachel to do with Bethlehem? For it saith, "Rachel weeping for her children." And what hath Rama to do with Rachel? Rachel was the mother of Benjamin, and on his death, they buried her in the horse-course that was near this place. The tomb then being near, and the portion pertaining unto Benjamin her infant (for Rama was of the tribe of Benjamin), from the head of the tribe first, and next from the place of her sepulture, He naturally denominates her young children who were massacred. Then to show that the wound that befell her was incurable and cruel, He saith, "she would not be comforted because they are not."

Hence again we are taught this, which I mentioned before, never to be confounded when what is happening is contrary to the promise of God. Behold, for instance, when He was come for the salvation of the people, or rather for the salvation of the world, of what kind were His beginnings. His mother, first, in flight; His birth-place is involved in irremediable calamities, and a murder is perpetrated of all murders the bitterest, and there is lamentation and great mourning, and wailings everywhere. But be not troubled for He is wont ever to accomplish His own dispensations by their contraries, affording us from thence a very great demonstration of His power.

(Hil. Quæst. N. and V. Test. 9. 62.) Or, The sons of Benjamin, who were akin to Rachel, were formerly cut off by the other tribes, and so extinct both then and ever after. (see Judg. 20.) Then therefore Rachel began to mourn her sons, when she saw those of her sister cut off in such a cause, that they should be heirs of eternal life; for he who has experienced any misfortune, is made more sensible of his losses by the good fortune of a neighbour.

Or, it was heard on high, because uttered for the death of the innocent, according to that, The voice of the poor entereth into the heavens. (Ecclus. 35:21.) The 'weeping' means the cries of the children; 'lamentation,' refers to the mothers. In the infants themselves their death ends their cries, in the mothers it is continually renewed by the remembrance of their loss.

Or, The Church weeps the removal of the saints from this earth, but wishes not to be comforted as though they should return again to the struggles of life, for they are not to be recalled into life.

Rachel is well set for a type of the Church, as the word signifies 'a sheep' or 'seeing;' (vid. note i, p. 19.) her whole thought being to fix her eye in contemplation of God; and she is the hundredth sheep that the shepherd layeth on his shoulder.

The sacred Evangelist adds, to show the greatness of the mourning, that even the dead Rachel was roused to mourn her sons, and would not be comforted because they were not.

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying. Lest anyone think that the slaying of the children took place against the will of God, the evangelist shows that God both knew of it beforehand and foretold it.

(17) Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah. Having mentioned the slaughter of the infants, the evangelist according to custom now mentions the prophecy foretelling this: (18) A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled, because they were not (Jer 31:15). And it should be noted that, as Jerome says, wherever any text is introduced by the apostles and evangelists, it is not necessary to present it always word for word, but as the Holy Spirit gave it to them, sometimes sense for sense in our use. Thus we have in Jeremiah (31:15): "A voice is heard on high of lamentation and weeping and mourning. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are not." The sense is the same.

We should notice that as far as this text is concerned, it is one of those which are brought into the gospel, but which has a literal sense that is a figure of something in the New Testament. Hence, to understand it one must consider a bit of history, which is recorded in Judges, where it says that almost the whole tribe of Benjamin was wiped out on account of a sin committed against the wife of a Levite. It also states that there was greatest mourning there, so great, indeed, that it was heard from Gabsa to Ramah, a distance of 12,000 paces. Rachel is said to mourn this, because she was the mother of Benjamin; and it is a figure of speech used to express how great was the pain. But this is a prophecy about the past. In another way it is about the future in two ways: in one way it can refer to the captivity of Israel who, when they were led into captivity, are said to have wept on the road near Bethlehem; and then Rachel is said to have mourned, because she had been buried there (Gen 35:19). And this is said in the same manner of speaking as a place is said to weep over the evils which happen in the place. The prophet, therefore, desires to say that just as there was the greatest pain and grief when the tribe of Benjamin was destroyed, so in the future would be another excruciating pain in the time of the captivity. It is explained in a second way thus: the evangelist accepts the fact of the killing of the Innocents and amplifies the pain in four ways: first, from its extent; secondly, from the amount; thirdly, what the pain concerned; fourthly, its inconsolability.

He says, therefore: A voice in Ramah. This is a city in the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:25) and can be taken as the city of Liah. But here it is taken for the heights and can be interpreted in two ways: first, a voice uttered on high was heard, because a voice in a lofty place is spread far and wide: "Go up in a high mountain, O Zion, herald of good tidings; lift up your voice with strength" (Is 40:9). Or was heard in Ramah, i.e., in heaven before God (Sir 35:21): "The prayer of the humble pierces the clouds, and he will not be consoled until it reaches the Lord"; "Do not the tears of the widow run down her cheek, as she cries out against him who has caused them to fall?" (Sir 35:15).

Wailing: This can refer to the weeping of the infants who were slaughtered. And loud lamentation: This refers to the weeping of the mothers. Or both can refer to the infants: wailing, in as much as they were lifted up by the soldiers; lamentations, in as much as they were slain. The pain of the mothers is greater than that of the infants. Again, the mothers' pain was continual, that of the infants, brief. For this reason Zechariah (12:10) says: "They shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a first-born." Also from the source of the pain, because it was concerned with the death of the infants. Hence, Rachel laments. But it might be objected that Bethlehem was not in the tribe of Benjamin but in the tribe of Judah, who was Liah's son.

This is answered in three ways: first, because Rachel was buried near Bethlehem (Gen 35:19). Accordingly, she wept for the infants in the way in which any place is said to weep: "Be appalled, O heavens, at this, be shocked, be utterly desolate, says the Lord" (Jer 2:12). Or in another way: it was stated above that Herod killed the infants in Bethlehem and in all its surrounding territory. But Bethlehem lay within the confines of two tribes, namely, Judah and Benjamin. Hence, some infants from the tribe of Benjamin were killed. Thus the objection ceases, as Jerome explains. But Augustine explains it another way and says that it is customary, when one is habituated to prosperity, that he becomes sadder when adversities come. Liah and Rachel were sisters, and the ones killed were among the children of Liah. Thus they were killed bodily, lest they be punished eternally, as in the case of Gabaa. Therefore, she is said to weep, when she sees her children killed or damned. Or the Church is signified by Rachel, because it means "seeing God," and the Church sees by faith. She weeps over her slain children, not because they were slain, but because through them she could obtain others. Or she weeps not for the slain but for the slayers.

Then he mentions the inconsolable pain: she refused... This is explained in a number of ways: first, as referring to the people who existed then. For consolation should be forthcoming, as long as a remedy is hoped for; but when there is no hope for it, there is no consolation, as in the case of the hopelessly infirm. Therefore, he says in regard to the mothers' opinion, because they were no more, i.e., no longer visible: "The lad is gone" (Gen 37:30). Or she refused to be consoled, because they were no more, i.e., as if they were no more: for consolation is expected only for evil things. Hence, according to this it is referred to the opinion of the Church, which regards them as reigning; hence, it rejoices over them as reigning: "But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope" (1 Thes 4:13). Or she refused to be consoled at present but awaited consolation in the future: "Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted" (Mt 5:5).

Hil. Quaest. N. and N. Test.9. 62: Or, The sons of Benjamin, who were akin to Rachel, were formerly cut off by the other tribes, and so extinct both then and ever after. Then therefore Rachel began to mourn her sons, when she saw those of her sister cut off in such a cause, that they should be heirs of eternal life; for he who has experienced any misfortune, is made more sensible of his losses by the good fortune of aneighbour.

In Rama was there a voice heard. Rama is a place in Palestine of high elevation, for the name itself means "high." This place fell by lot to the inheritance of the tribe of Benjamin, who was the son of Rachel, and Rachel was buried in Bethlehem. By "Rachel," therefore, the prophet Jeremiah means "Bethlehem," for Rachel was buried in Bethlehem (Gen. 35:19). He is saying that weeping and lamentation will be heard from on high. Listen to what the prophet says: Lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, that is, Bethlehem weeping for its children, and would not be comforted, because they are not. In this life they are no more, but their souls are immortal.

(Hom. in Nat. Innoc.) This slaughter of the infants for the Lord's sake, the death of Herod soon after, and Joseph's return with the Lord and his mother to the land of Israel, is a figure showing that all the persecutions moved against the Church will be avenged by the death of the persecutor, peace restored to the Church, and the saints who had concealed themselves return to their own places. Or the return of Jesus to the land of Israel on the death of Herod shows, that, at the preaching of Enoch and Elijahc, the Jews, when the fire of modern jealousy shall be extinguished, shall receive the true faith.

(Eccles. Hist. i. 8.) For the sacrilege which Herod had committed against the Saviour, and his wicked slaughter of the infants of the same age, the Divine vengeance hastened his end; and his body, as Josephus relates, was attacked by a strange disease; so that the prophets declared that they were not human ailments, but visitations of Divine vengeance. Filled with mad fury, he gives command to seize and imprison the heads and nobles out of all parts of Judæa; ordering that as soon as ever he should breathe his last, they should be all put to death, that so Judæa though unwillingly might mourn at his decease. Just before he died he murdered his son Antipater, (besides two boys put to death before, Alexander and Aristobulus.) Such was the end of Herod, noticed in those words of the Evangelist, when Herod was dead, and such the punishment inflicted.

After the death of Herod, Joseph was advised by the angel to return to Judea with the boy and his mother. When he returned he heard that Archelaeus, son of Herod, was king. So he was afraid to go, but the angel admonished him to cross over into the region of Galilee, and they lived in the city of Nazareth.… Joseph resembles the apostles to whom Christ entrusted the spreading of the news about him. Similar to what happened with Joseph after the death of Herod, they must deal with the same people who caused the Lord to suffer. The apostles are commanded to preach to the Jews, for they were sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But when they saw that the power remained in the hands of inherited faithlessness, they became afraid and retreated.

But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying: Rise, take the child and his mother, and go to the land of Israel.

Many here err from ignorance of history, supposing the Herod who mocked our Lord on the day of His passion, and the Herod whose death is here related, were the same. But the Herod who was then made friends with Pilate was son of this Herod and brother to Archelaus; for Archelaus was banished to Lyons in Gaul, and his father Herod made king in his room, as we read in Josephus.

From this we see that not Herod only, but also the Priests and Scribes had sought the Lord's death at that time.

"But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel."

He no more saith "fly," but "go." Seest thou again after the temptation refreshment? then after the refreshment danger again? in that he was freed indeed from his banishment, and came back again to his own country; and beheld the murderer of the children brought to the slaughter; but when he hath set foot on his own country, he finds again a remnant of the former perils, the son of the tyrant living, and being king.

See how Joseph was set for ministering to Mary; when she went into Egypt and returned, who would have fulfilled to her this so needful ministry, had she not been betrothed? For to outward view Mary nourished and Joseph defended the Child; but in truth the Child supported His mother and protected Joseph. Return into the land of Israel; for He went down into Egypt as a physician, not to abide there, but to succour it sick with error. But the reason of the return is given in the words, They are dead, &c.

And that is said to have been done by the counsel of God for their conspiring with Herod against the Lord; as it is said, Herod was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.

(De Cæl. Hierarch. 4.) See how Jesus Himself, though far above all celestial beings, and coming unchanged to our nature, shunned not that ordinance of humanity which He had taken on Him, but was obedient to the dispositions of His Father made known by Angels. For even by Angels is declared to Joseph the retreat of the Son into Egypt, so ordained of the Father, and His return again to Judæa.

Rachel is well set for a type of the Church, as the word signifies 'a sheep' or 'seeing;' (vid. note i, p. 19.) her whole thought being to fix her eye in contemplation of God; and she is the hundredth sheep that the shepherd layeth on his shoulder.

But if they were many who sought his destruction, how came they all to have died in so short a time? As we have related above, all the great men among the Jews were slain at Herod's death.

Or the Evangelist uses a figure of speech, by which the plural is used for the singular. These words, the Child's life, (or soul, i. e. the Apollinarians.) overthrow those heretics who taught that Christ did not take a soul, but had His Divinity in place of a soul.

But when Herod was dead. Herod came to a bitter end. For with fever, torment of the bowels, itching, swelling of the feet, rotting of the private parts, breeding of worms, difficulty in breathing, trembling and spasms in every member, he cast off his evil soul.

Behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel. He did not say "flee" but "go," for there was no longer any need for fear. For they are dead which sought the young Child's soul. Where is Apollinarius, who said that the Lord did not have the soul of a man? For here he is reproved.

(19) Then he deals with Christ's being called back; hence, when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph. First, he mentions that the angel appeared; secondly, the angel's command; thirdly, the execution of the angel's command.

In regard to the first, three things are done: first, the time is described; secondly, the person; thirdly, the manner of the appearance.

He says, therefore, But when Herod died: not the one involved in Christ's death, because that was his son; behold an angel appeared.

It should be noted that all trouble in the Church is terminated by the death of the persecutors: "When the wicked perish, there are shouts of gladness" (Pr 11:10). Note, also, that when the unbelief of the Jews has ended, Christ will return to them: "And then all Israel will be saved" (Rom 11:26).

Behold... appeared. It should be noted that the order between men and angels is such that divine illuminations are produced in us only by angels: "Are they not administering spirits sent forth to serve for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?" (Heb 1:14). Hence, even Christ as man willed to be announced by angels.

The manner: in a dream to Joseph in Egypt.

(Verse 20) For those who sought the child's life are dead. From this we understand that not only Herod, but also the priests and scribes at the same time had planned the death of the Lord.

(20) The command: Rise, take the child and his mother. He does not say, "son" or "wife", but child, in order to designate the dignity of the child and the purity of the mother. In this is shown that Joseph was not given to her for the purpose of carnal intercourse but to minister and guard. And he assigns the cause: for those who sought the child's life are dead.

But one might ask why he says, are, for Herod alone had died. This is answered in two ways: first, because he had done so much evil that the Jews rejoiced in his death. When he had a foreboding of his death, he commanded his sister to kill the nobler Jews when he died. These had sought the life of the child with Herod: for those who sought the child's life are dead. Or another way: It is the custom of Sacred Scripture to use the plural for the singular: hence, they are dead, i.e. he is dead. Hence, the statement that those who sought the child's life destroys Apollinaris' error, that the godhead was in Christ in place of a soul.

Joseph was not disobedient to the angelic warning, but he arose, and took the young Child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. The Angel had not fixed the particular place, so that while Joseph hesitates, the Angel returns, and by the often visiting him confirms his obedience.

But the figurative interpretation holds good any way. Joseph represents the Apostles, to whom Christ is entrusted to be borne about. These, as though Herod were dead, that is, his people being destroyed in the Lord's passion, are commanded to preach the Gospel to the Jews; they are sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

(Verse 21.) He rose and took the child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. He did not say, 'I took my son and my wife,' but the child and his mother, as if a foster father, not a husband.

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 in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither. Herod left three sons: Philip, Antipas, and Archelaus. He had directed Archelaus to be king, and the other two, tetrarchs. Joseph was afraid to go into the land of Israel, that is, Judea, because Archelaus was similar to Herod, his father. Antipas was the young Herod who slew the Forerunner. And being warned by God in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee. Galilee was not of the land of Israel, but of the Gentiles, and for this reason the Jews considered the Galileans an abomination.

(21) Then he mentions the execution of the command: and he rose and took the child and his mother. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows how he returned to the land of Israel (v. 21); secondly, the section he avoided (v. 22); thirdly, the section he chose (v. 22b). He says, therefore, and he rose. Note that the angel did not say: "Go into the land of Judah," or "into Jerusalem," but universally, to the land of Israel, under which even Galilee can be included. Hence, it can be said that Joseph entered the boundaries of the land which Judah inhabited.

(De Con. Evan. ii. 10.) Here it may be asked, How then could his parents go up every year of Christ's childhood to Jerusalem, as Luke relates, if fear of Archelaus now prevented them from approaching it? This difficulty is easily solved. At the festival they might escape notice in the crowd, and by returning soon, where in ordinary times they might be afraid to live. So they neither became irreligious by neglecting the festival, nor notorious by dwelling continually in Jerusalem. Or it is open to us to understand Luke when he says, they went up every year, as speaking of a time when they had nothing to fear from Archelaus, who, as Josephus relates, reigned only nine years. There is yet a difficulty in what follows; Being warned in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee. If Joseph was afraid to go into Judaea because one of Herod's sons, Archelaus, reigned there, how could he go into Galilee, where another of his sons Herod was tetrarch, as Luke tells us? As if the times of which Luke is speaking were times in which there was any longer need to fear for the Child, when even in Judaea things were so changed, that Archelaus no longer ruled there, but Pilate was governor.

(De Con. Evan. ii. 9.) This may perhaps occur to some, that Matthew says His parents went with the Child Jesus to Galilee because they feared Archelaus, when it should seem most probable that they chose Galilee because Nazareth was their own city, as Luke has not forgot to mention. We must understand, that when the Angel in the vision in Egypt said to Joseph, Go into the land of Israel, Joseph understood the command to be that he should go straight into Judaea, that being properly the land of Israel. But finding Archelaus ruling there, he would not court the danger, as the land of Israel might be interpreted to extend to Galilee, which was inhabited by children of Israel. Or we may suppose His parents supposed that Christ should dwell no where but in Jerusalem, where was the temple of the Lord, and would have gone thither had not the fear of Archelaus hindered them. And they had not been commanded from God to dwell positively in Judaea, or Jerusalem, so as that they should have despised the fear of Archelaus, but only in the land of Israel generally, which they might understand of Galilee.

(De Con. Evan. ii. 5.) The whole of this history, from the account of the Magi inclusively, Luke omits. Let it be here noticed once for all, that each of the Evangelists writes as if he were giving a full and complete history, which omits nothing; where he really passes over any thing, he continues his thread of history as if he had told all. Yet by a diligent comparison of their several narratives, we can be at no loss to know where to insert any particular that is mentioned by one and not by the other.

(ord.) But then we might ask, why was he not afraid to go into Galilee, seeing Archelaus ruled there also? He could be better concealed in Nazareth than in Jerusalem, which was the capital of the kingdom, and where Archelaus was constantly resident.

But finding the seed of their hereditary unbelief still abiding, they fear and withdraw; admonished by a vision, to wit, seeing the Holy Ghost poured upon the Gentiles, they carry Christ to them.

(Verse 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 to the region of Galilee. Many fall into error due to ignorance of history, thinking that he is the same Herod who mocked the Lord in his passion, and who is reported to be dead now. Therefore, this Herod, who later became friends with Pilate, is the son of that Herod, the brother of Archelaus; and Tiberius Caesar himself, the city of Lugdunum, which is in Gaul, banished him, and made his brother Herod successor to the kingdom. Read the story of Joseph.

But how did Archelaus reign over Judaea, when Pontius Pilate was governor? Herod's death had recently taken place, and the kingdom had not yet been divided into many parts; but as he had only just ended his life, the son for a while kept possession of the kingdom "in the room of his father Herod;" his brother also bearing this name, which is the reason why the evangelist added, "in the room of his father Herod."

It may be said, however, "if he was afraid to settle in Judaea on account of Archelaus, he had cause to fear Galilee also on account of Herod." I answer, By his changing the place, the whole matter was thenceforward thrown into shade; for the whole assault was upon "Bethlehem and the coasts thereof." Therefore now that the slaughter had taken place, the youth Archelaus had no other thought, but that the whole was come to an end, and that amongst the many, He that was sought had been destroyed. And besides, his father having come to such an end of his life before his eyes, he became for the future more cautious about further proceedings, and about urging on that course of iniquity.

Joseph therefore comes to Nazareth, partly to avoid the danger, partly also delighting to abide in his native place. To give him the more courage, he receives also an oracle from the angel touching this matter. Luke, however, doth not say that he came there by Divine warning, but that when they had fulfilled all the purification, they returned to Nazareth. What then may one say? That Luke is giving an account of the time before the going down to Egypt, when he saith these things. For He would not have brought them down thither before the purification, in order that nothing should be done contrary to the law, but he waited for her to be purified, and to go to Nazareth, and that then they should go down to Egypt. Then, after their return, He bids them go to Nazareth. But before this they were not warned of God to go thither, but yearning after their native place, they did so of their own accord. For since they had gone up for no other cause but on account of the taxing, and had not so much as a place where to stay, when they had fulfilled that for which they had come up, they went down to Nazareth.

Herod had nine wives, by seven of whom he had a numerous issue. By Josida, his first born Antipater—by Mariamine, Alexander and Aristobulus—by Mathuca, a Samaritan woman, Archelaus—by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, Herod, who was afterwards tetrarch, and Philip. The three first were put to death by Herod; and after his death, Archelaus seized the throne by occasion of his father's will, and the question of the succession was carried before Augustus Cæsar. After some delay, he made a distribution of the whole of Herod's dominions in accordance with the Senate's advice. To Archelaus he assigned one half, consisting of Idumæa and Judæa, with the title of tetrarch, and a promise of that of king if he showed himself deserving of it. The rest he divided into two tetrarchates, giving Galilee to Herod the tetrarch, Ituræa and Trachonitis to Philip. Thus Archelaus was after his father's death a duarch, which kind of sovereignty is here called a kingdom.

Or, we may apply it to the last times of the Jewish Church, when many Jews having turned to the preaching of Enoch and Elijah, the rest filled with the spirit of Antichrist shall fight against the faith. So that part of Judæa where Archelaus rules, signifies the followers of Antichrist; Nazareth of Galilee, whither Christ is conveyed, that part of the nation that shall embrace the faith. Galilee means 'removal;' Nazareth, 'the flower of virtues;' for the Church the more zealously she removes from the earthly to the heavenly, the more she abounds in the flower and fruit of virtues.

(22) Then he mentions the area he avoided: when he heard that Archelaus reigned in Judea. Here the history of Herod should be noted. For he had six sons, and before his death he killed Alexander and Aristobulus; at his death he commanded that Antipater be killed. Thus three remained, among whom Archelaus was the firstborn and usurped the kingdom; but he was later accused before Caesar Augustus by the Jews and his kingdom was taken away. It was then divided into four parts. Two were given to Archelaus and one each to Herod and Philip, as Luke (3:1) says. Archelaus himself was sent into exile after reigning for nine years.

Being warned in a dream. First the angel had said that he should go to the land of Israel, but because Joseph had not yet understood, the angel's message made explicit what was previously implicit. And this is indicated, when he says, being warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee.

But on the other hand, just as Archelaus ruled in Judea, so Philip in Galilee. But one must answer that this was immediately after the death of Herod, when Archelaus had the entire kingdom, because the division was made later. But then why did he not fear Archelaus? The answer is that Jerusalem was the seat of the kingdom; hence, he practically stayed there always. But why does Luke (2:41) state that they brought the child to Jerusalem every year? Augustine answers that it was safe to bring him on account of the vast throng that came there at that time; but it would have been dangerous, if he had tarried there for a long time. But why does the evangelist suggest that it was by accident that Joseph came to Nazareth, whereas Luke (2:39) says that he had his personal domicile in Nazareth. The answer is that the angel had told him to go into the land of Israel which, strictly speaking, did not include Galilee or Nazareth. That is the way Joseph understood it; therefore, he made no decision to go to Nazareth.

But if "the Nazarene" is interpreted to mean "holy" or, according to some, as "flower," this is the designation found in many instances. For Daniel calls him "holy" or "of the holy ones." Likewise we find in Isaiah: "A branch from the stock of Jesse and its flower." Even the Lord says of himself in the Song of Songs, "I am the bloom of the plain, the lily of the valleys."

To this he adds the Prophet's testimony, saying, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophets, &c.

Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt have I called my son," and "for he shall be called a Nazarene."

(Verse 23) And coming, he lived in a city called Nazareth, so that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, that he would be called a Nazarene. If he had set a fixed example from the Scriptures, he would never have said, what was spoken by the prophets; but simply, what was spoken by the prophet: but now, calling them prophets in the plural, he shows that he did not take words from the Scriptures, but the meaning. Nazarene, interprets as holy. But all Scripture testifies that the Lord would be holy. We can also say in another way, that even in the same words, according to the Hebrew truth, it is written in Isaiah: There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall rise out of his roots (Isa. 11:1).

Had he meant to quote a particular text, he would not have written 'Prophets,' but 'the Prophet.' By thus using the plural he evidently does not take the words of any one passage in Scripture, but the sense of the whole. Nazarene is interpreted 'Holyd,' and that the Lord would be Holy, all Scripture testifies. Otherwise we may explain that it is found in Isaiah (c. 11:1.) rendered to the strict letter of the Hebrew. There shall come a Rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall grow out of His rootse.

We see here the cause why the angel also, putting them at ease for the future, restores them to their home. And not even this simply, but he adds to it a prophecy, "That it might be fulfilled," saith he, "which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene."

And what manner of prophet said this? Be not curious, nor overbusy. For many of the prophetic writings have been lost; and this one may see from the history of the Chronicles. For being negligent, and continually falling into ungodliness, some they suffered to perish, others they themselves burnt up and cut to pieces. The latter fact Jeremiah relates; the former, he who composed the fourth book of Kings, saying, that after a long time the book of Deuteronomy was hardly found, buried somewhere and lost. But if, when there was no barbarian there, they so betrayed their books, much more when the barbarians had overrun them. For as to the fact, that the prophet had foretold it, the apostles themselves in many places call Him a Nazarene.

"Was not this then," one may say, "casting a shade over the prophecy touching Bethlehem?" By no means: rather this very fact was sure greatly to stir up men, and to awaken them to the search of what was said of Him. Thus, for example, Nathanael too enters on the inquiry concerning Him, saying, "Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?" For the place was of little esteem; or rather not that place only, but also the whole district of Galilee. Therefore the Pharisees said, "Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet." Nevertheless, He is not ashamed to be named even from thence, signifying that He needs not ought of the things of men; and His disciples also He chose out of Galilee; everywhere cutting off the pretexts of them who are disposed to be remiss, and giving tokens that we have no need of outward things, if we practice virtue. For this cause He doth not choose for Himself so much as a house; for "the Son of Man," saith He, "hath not where to lay His head;" and when Herod is plotting against Him, He fleeth, and at His birth is laid in a manger, and abides in an inn, and takes a mother of low estate; teaching us to think no such thing a disgrace, and from the first outset trampling under foot the haughtiness of man, and bidding us give ourselves up to virtue only.

They might have read this in some Prophets who are not in our canon, as Nathan or Esdras. That there was some prophecy to this purport is clear from what Philip says to Nathanael. Him of whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth. Hence the Christians were at first called Nazarenes, at Antioch their name was changed to that of 'Christians.'

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth. How is it that Luke says that after the Lord was born, He completed the forty days, was held in the arms of Simeon, and then went down to Nazareth (Lk. 2:22-40)? But here Matthew says that after the return from Egypt He went to Nazareth? Learn, therefore, that Luke spoke those things on which Matthew was silent. I will give an example: after the birth, He completed the forty days, and then went down to Nazareth. This is what Luke says. Matthew speaks of what took place afterwards, that He fled into Egypt, and then returned from Egypt to Nazareth, which took place later. They do not contradict each other. One of them, Luke, speaks of the descent from Bethlehem to Nazareth, while the other, Matthew, speaks of the return from Egypt to Nazareth, which took place later. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. Which prophet said this? It is not to be found now. For many books have been lost, because of both the carelessness of the Hebrews and the frequent captivities. But perhaps this was an unwritten prophecy among the Jews. "Nazarene" means "sanctified" and as the Christ is holy, it is right that He is called "a Nazarene." For by many prophets the Lord was called "The Holy One of Israel" (Ps. 88:18, Is. 1:4, etc.)

(23) That what was spoken by the prophet might be fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazarene." This is not found written, but it can be said that it was gathered from many passages. For Nazarene means holy; and because Christ is called holy: "Until the holy one is anointed" (Dan 9:24), therefore, he is said to be so called by the prophet. Or it can be said that by Nazarene is meant abounding with flowers, as in Is (11:1): "There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse and a flower shall grow out of his roots." This agrees with Song of Songs (2:1): "I am a rose of Sharon, a lily of the valleys."

(Serm. 218. App.) Hear the sacrament of a great mystery. Moses before had shut up the light of day from the traitors the Egyptians; Christ by going down thither brought back light to them that sate in darkness. He fled that he might enlighten them, not that he might escape his foes.

The miserable tyrant supposed that by the Saviour's coming he should be thrust from his royal throne. But it was not so; Christ came not to hurt others' dignity, but to bestow His own on others.

(Hom. in. Nat. Innocent.) The flight into Egypt signifies that the elect are often by the wickedness of the bad driven from their homes, or sentenced to banishment. Thus He, who, we shall see below, gave the command to His own, When they shall persecute you in one city, flee ye to another, first practised what He enjoined, as a man flying before the face of man on earth. He whom but a little before a star had proclaimed to the Magi to be worshipped as from heaven.

The first time when he would teach Joseph that she was lawfully espoused, the Angel called the Virgin his espoused wife; but after the birth she is only spoken of as the Mother of Jesus. As wedlock was rightfully imputed to her in her virginity, so virginity is esteemed venerable in her as the mother of Jesus.

(Vers. 13, 14.) Behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying: Rise and take the child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and stay there until I tell you. For it will come to pass that Herod will seek the child to destroy him. So Joseph rose and took the child and his mother by night, and went to Egypt; and he stayed there until the death of Herod. When he takes the child and his mother to go to Egypt, he takes them by night and in darkness; but when he returns to Judea, neither night nor darkness are mentioned in the Gospel.

When he takes the Child and His mother to go into Egypt, it is in the night and darkness, when to return into Judæa, the Gospel speaks of no light, no darkness.

"And when they were departed, behold, an angel appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and flee into Egypt."

There is something here worth inquiring into, both touching the magi, and touching the Child; for if even they were not troubled, but received all with faith, it is worthy of examination on our part, why they and the young Child are not preserved, continuing there, but they as fugitives go into Persia, He with His mother into Egypt. But what? should He have fallen into the hands of Herod, and having fallen, not have been cut off? Nay, He would not have been thought to have taken flesh upon Him; the greatness of the Economy would not have been believed.

For if, while these things are taking place, and many circumstances are being ordered mysteriously after the manner of men, some have dared to say that His assumption of our flesh is a fable; in what degree of impiety would they not have been wrecked, had He done all in a manner becoming His Godhead, and according to His own power?

As to the wise men, He sends them off quickly, at once both commissioning them as teachers to the land of the Persians, and at the same time intercepting the madness of the king, that he might learn that he was attempting things impossible, and might quench his wrath, and desist from this his vain labor. For not alone openly to subdue His enemies, but also to deceive them with ease, is worthy of His power.

And besides what I have said, there is another lesson also, which we are hereby taught, tending not slightly to true self-command in us. Of what kind then is it? To look from the beginning for temptations and plots. See, for instance, how this was the case even at once from His swaddling clothes. Thus you see at His birth, first a tyrant raging, then flight ensuing, and departure beyond the border; and for no crime His mother is exiled into the land of the barbarians: that thou, hearing these things (supposing thee thought worthy to minister to any spiritual matter, and then to see thyself suffering incurable ills, and enduring countless dangers), shouldest not be greatly troubled, nor say, "What can this be? yet surely I ought to be crowned and celebrated, and be glorious and illustrious for fulfilling the Lord's commandment:" but that having this example, thou mightest bear all things nobly, knowing that this especially is the order of all things spiritual, to have everywhere temptations in the same lot with them.

Now the angel having thus appeared, talks not with Mary, but with Joseph; and what saith he? "Arise, and take the young Child and His mother." Here, he saith not any more, "thy wife," but "His mother." For after that the birth had taken place, and the suspicion was done away, and the husband appeased, thenceforth the angel talks openly, calling neither child nor wife his, but "take the young Child and His mother, and flee into Egypt;" and he mentions the cause of the flight: "For Herod," saith he, "will seek the young Child's life."

Joseph, when he had heard these things, was not offended, neither did he say, "The thing is hard to understand: Didst thou not say just now, that He should 'save His people?' and now He saves not even Himself: but we must fly, and go far from home, and be a long time away: the facts are contrary to the promise." Nay, none of these things doth he say (for the man was faithful): neither is he curious about the time of his return; and this though the angel had put it indefinitely thus: "Be thou there until I tell thee." But nevertheless, not even at this did he shudder, but submits and obeys, undergoing all the trials with joy.

And this because God, who is full of love to man, did with these hardships mingle things pleasant also; which indeed is His way with regard to all the saints, making neither their dangers nor their refreshment continual, but weaving the life of all righteous men, out of both the one and the other. This very thing He did here also: for consider, Joseph saw the Virgin with child; this cast him into agitation and the utmost trouble, for he was suspecting the damsel of adultery. But straightway the angel was at hand to do away his suspicion, and remove his fears; and seeing the young child born, he reaped the greatest joy. Again, this joy no trifling danger succeeds, the city being troubled, and the king in his madness seeking after Him that was born. But this trouble was again succeeded by another joy; the star, and the adoration of the wise men. Again, after this pleasure, fear and danger; "For Herod," saith he, "is seeking the young Child's life," and He must needs fly and withdraw Himself as any mortal might: the working of miracles not being seasonable as yet. For if from His earliest infancy He had shown forth wonders, He would not have been accounted a Man.

Because of this, let me add, neither is a temple framed at once; but a regular conception takes place, and a time of nine months, and pangs, and a delivery, and giving suck, and silence for so long a space, and He awaits the age proper to manhood; that by all means acceptance might be won for the mystery of His Economy.

Rather, however, both the people and the patriarch, going down thither, and coming up thence, were together completing the type of this His return. Thus, as they went down to avoid death by famine, so He death by conspiracy. But whereas they on their arrival were for the time delivered from the famine, this man, when He had gone down, sanctified the whole land, by setting His foot thereon.

At least it is observable how, in the midst of His humiliations, the tokens of His Godhead are disclosed. Thus, first of all, the angel saying, "Flee into Egypt," did not promise to journey with them, either in their descent or return; intimating that they have a great fellow-traveller, the Child that had been born; such an one as actually changed all things immediately on His appearing, and wrought so that His enemies should minister in many ways to this Economy. Thus magi and barbarians, leaving the superstition of their fathers, are come to worship: thus Augustus ministers to the birth at Bethlehem by the decree for the taxing; Egypt receives and preserves Him, driven from His home, and plotted against, and obtains a sort of first impulse towards her union unto Him; so that when in after-time she should hear Him preached by the apostles, she might have this at least to glory of, as having received Him first. And yet this privilege did belong unto Palestine alone; but the second proved more fervent than the first.

His flight then was not occasioned by fear but by what had come through the mystery of prophecy. The Evangelist planted the seed when he thus spoke: "Take the boy and his mother and flee into Egypt." And later, "that what was written might be fulfilled: 'From Egypt have I summoned my son.' " Christ fled so that he might establish the truth of the law, faith in prophecy and the testimony of the psalter. The Lord himself says, "It was needful that what was written in the law and the prophets and the psalms be fulfilled by me." Christ fled for us, not for himself. Christ fled so that at the right time he might serve as a steward of the sacraments [the divine mysteries]. Christ fled so that by granting absolution he might take away the source of abuses to come and that he might give proof of faith to those who would believe. And finally, Christ fled so that he might bestow on us faith even when we have to flee, because in the face of persecution it is better to flee than to deny the faith. For Peter, because he was unwilling to flee, denied the Lord. John, lest he deny the Lord, fled.

Was it Herod seeking the child, or the devil working through Herod? When Herod saw the magi for himself, he imagined in his fantasy that they had fled their governors. For Christ, though bound in swaddling clothes, though busy at his mother's breast, though keeping quiet, concealing his words, unable to walk, nevertheless transformed the magi (who had been standard-bearers of the devil) into his most faithful servants. The devil instantly realized what Christ could do when he came of age. So he spurred the Jews against him and, clever contriver that he was, impelled Herod that he might get the jump on Christ in his infancy. He hoped to deprive him of the coming emblem of his virtue, the cross, the banner of the greatest victory for us. The devil perceived that Christ would soon be restoring life to all the world with his teaching and his virtue. Even while still whimpering as a baby, Jesus was taking possession of this world from top to bottom. It was as the prophet said: "Before the child knows to cry to his father and mother he shall take the pride of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria." The Jews themselves attest to this when they say, "You see how the whole world hastens after him."

He says not, 'the Mother and her young Child,' but, the young Child and His mother; for the Child was not born for the mother, but the mother prepared for the Child. How is this that the Son of God flies from the face of man? or who shall deliver from the enemy's hand, if He Himself fears His enemies? First; He ought to observe, even in this, the law of that human nature which He took on Him; and human nature and infancy must flee before threatening power. Next, that Christians when persecution makes it necessary should not be ashamed to fly.

Here Matthew omits the day of purification when the first-born must be presented in the Temple with a lamb, or a pair of turtle doves, or pigeons. Their fear of Herod did not make them bold to transgress the Law, that they should not present the Child in the temple. As soon then as the rumour concerning the Child begins to be spread abroad, the Angel is sent to bid Joseph carry Him into Egypt.

For when the true light withdraws, they who hate the light are in darkness, when it returns they are again enlightened.

By this that the Angel appears always to Joseph in sleep, is mystically signified that they who rest from mundane cares and secular pursuits, deserve angelic visitations.

In Joseph is figured the order of preachers, in Mary Holy Scripture; by the Child the knowledge of the Saviour; by the cruelty of Herod the persecution which the Church suffered in Jerusalem; by Joseph's flight into Egypt the passing of the preachers to the unbelieving Gentiles, (for Egypt signifies darkness;) by the time that he abode in Egypt the space of time between the ascension of the Lord and the coming of Anti Christ; by Herod's death the extinction of jealousy in the hearts of the Jews.

And when they had departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother. Do you see now the reason why God permitted the Virgin to be betrothed? It is revealed to you here: that Joseph might care for her and watch over her. The angel did not say, "take thy wife," but "take the mother of the Child." For once his suspicion had been allayed, and the righteous man had understood from the miracles attendant at His birth that everything was of the Holy Spirit, the angel no longer calls her Joseph's "wife." And flee into Egypt. Even the Lord flees, to confirm that He was truly man. For if He had fallen into the hands of Herod and had not been slain, it would have seemed that He had been made flesh only in appearance. He flees into Egypt to sanctify even that place. For there were two lands that were the workshops of every iniquity: Babylon and Egypt. By means of the Magi He accepted the adoration of Babylon, and Egypt He sanctified by His own presence. And be thou there until I bring thee word. Remain there until you receive God's command. So we, too, should do nothing apart from the will of God. For Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him. Behold the foolishness of a man who labors to prevail against the will of God. For if it is not of God, what do you fear? But if it is of God, how can you destroy the Child?

Having showed how the Magi bore witness to the newborn Christ, the evangelist now shows how the Innocents gave testimony, not by speaking but by dying. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows how Christ was concealed; secondly, the murder of the children (v. 16); thirdly, Christ's return (v. 19).

In regard to the first he does three things: first, he mentions the angel's warning; secondly, Joseph's obedience (v. 14); thirdly, the fulfillment of a prophecy (v. 15).

In regard to the first, three things are mentioned: first, the time of the appearance; secondly, the appearance itself and the manner of the appearance (v. 13b); thirdly, the warning given by the angel (v. 13c).

(13) The time is described at When they had departed. And it should be noted that the appearance did not occur immediately after the departure of the Magi, because everything mentioned in Luke (2:22), namely, the purification, should be interposed: "And when the time came for their purification..." For the thought of killing the child did not come to Herod right away. Hence, when he says Behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph..., he is said to have appeared in sleep, because that is when men cease their external activities, and a revelation can be made by angels: "In peace I will both lie down and sleep" (Ps 4:8); "When you lie down, your sleep will be sweet" (Pr 3:24).

In the warning the angel does two things: first, the angel persuades him to flee; secondly, he gives the reason. He says, therefore Rise. And note that, as Hilary says, the Blessed Virgin is called "wife" by the angel before the birth (Mt 1:5) but not after for two reasons: first to commend the Virgin, for as a virgin she gave birth. Secondly, on account of her dignity, for she was the mother of God, than which there is no greater dignity. Also because, as Chrysostom says, the child had not come on account of the mother, but rather conversely. Therefore, he says Take the child and its mother. But why flee into Egypt? Does it not say in Ps 18 (v. 3): "The Lord is my helper and my redeemer." But he fled for three reasons: first, to manifest his humanity; for as the divinity appeared in the star, so in flight the humanity: "Made in the likeness of men" (Phil 2:7). Secondly, as an example: "When they persecute you in one city, flee into another" (Mt 10:23). Thirdly, on account of the mystery; for just as he willed to die in order to call us back from death, so he willed to flee in order to call back those who flee from his face through sin: "Where shall I flee from your spirit?" (Ps 139:7).

And remain there. But why to Egypt rather than some other region? For two reasons: first, because it is distinctive of God to be mindful of mercy in his anger (Hab 3:2). For the Lord had been angry at the Egyptians pursuing the sons of Israel, because the sons of Israel were God's firstborn. Therefore, the Egyptians were granted the privilege of serving the Lord: "Behold, the Lord, riding on a swift cloud, comes to Egypt" (Is 19:1); "We have seen his glory, the glory, as it were, of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth" (Jn 1:14). Secondly, because he had brought forth darkness in Egypt, he willed to enlighten it first. Therefore, it was well that he fled there: "The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, on them has light shined" (Is 9:2).

Note that when anyone wills to flee sin, the first thing to do is shake off laziness: "Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead and Christ shall enlighten you" (Eph 5:14). Secondly, he should take trust from the mother and from the Son, namely, Christ: "In me all hope of life and virtue" (Sir 24:18). Thirdly, he ought to flee from sin with the help of the mother and child: "Yes, I have wandered far, I have lodged in the wilderness" (Ps 55:7).

He adds the cause of the flight. For Herod is about to search for the child to destroy him. Herod was deceived, because he wanted to destroy the one who would come to share his kingdom: "As my father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint one for you" (Lk 22:29); secondly, because he wanted to destroy him who sought no worldly glory: "Who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross" (Heb 12:2).

Egypt full of idols; for after this enquiry for Him among the Jews, Christ leaving Judæa goes to be cherished among nations given to the vainest superstitions.

Christ promised that he would come incarnate, that he would go through the phases of life, that he would announce the glory of the kingdom of heaven, that he would proclaim the way of faith and that by the power of his word alone he would put demons to flight. He promised that he would give sight to the blind, gait to the lame, speech to the mute, hearing to the deaf, remission for sinners and life to the dead. All these things he promised through the law and the prophets. Thus it was that Christ, when he was to become a man, was not to flee the death he escaped as an infant.

But why into Egypt? The Lord, who keepeth not His anger for ever, remembered the woes He had brought upon Egypt, and therefore sent His Son thither, and gives it this sign of great reconciliation, that with this one remedy He might heal the ten plagues of Egypt, and the nation that had been the persecutor of this first-born people, might be the guardian of His first-born Son. As formerly they had cruelly tyrannized, now they might devoutly serve; nor go to the Red Sea to be drowned, but be called to the waters of baptism to receive life.

The straitness of every persecution may be called night—the relief from it in like manner, day.

And he arose and took the young Child and His mother by night, and departed into Egypt; and was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, "Out of Egypt have I called My Son" (Hosea 11:1).

The Jews say that this was said of the people whom Moses led out of Egypt. We reply, is it anything remarkable that something which was spoken of the people in type as a foreshadowing, was realized by Christ in truth? Furthermore, who is the Son of God? The Hebrew people who worshipped the idols and carvings of Beelphegor, or He Who truly is the Son of God?

(14) And he rose. Here is mentioned the execution of the angel's command both as to the flight and the length of the stay. He rose and took the child and his mother. The time is mentioned, when he says at night, on account of the fear and distress: "My soul desired you at night," i.e., in distress (Is 26:9); for in times of distress one must have recourse to God: "In the morning, they will come to me in their trouble" (Hos 10:1). He rose. Then was fulfilled the word of Is (19:1): "Behold, the Lord is riding on a swift cloud and comes to Egypt," which was fulfilled to the letter.

Joseph therefore was commanded to accept this boy about whom Isaiah had said, "For a boy has been born to you; a son has been given to you, whose rule has extended over his shoulders." Now he said "a son has been given to you" because Christ the Lord was born as a boy and was counted a son of Joseph and Mary. As to his going down into Egypt, Isaiah predicted this long before the fact when he said, "Behold, the Lord sits atop a swift cloud and will come into Egypt." By this statement the promise of the Lord's incarnation was clearly revealed. Since the Lord himself is invoked as "arising from on high, the sunlight of justice," it is right that he would come on a swift cloud. By this Isaiah means he would come in a hallowed body, a body weighed down by no sin and through which he covered the light of his own majesty with the envelope of the cloud of his body. Hosea as well points to this very fact when he says, "The king of Israel has been thrown down. Because Israel was small, I took delight in him. And I called my son from Egypt."19After Egypt's ancient, grave sin, after many blows had been divinely inflicted upon it, God the omnipotent Father, moved by devotion, sent his Son into Egypt. He did so that Egypt, which had long ago paid back the penalty of wickedness owed under Moses, might now receive Christ, the hope for salvation. How great was God's compassion as shown in the advent of his Son! Egypt, which of old under Pharaoh stood stubborn against God, now became a witness to and home for Christ. God's compassion toward Egypt was like that shown toward the magi, who deserved to know Christ the Lord. For, although the magi had for a long time dared resist the divine goodness under Moses, they now, having seen but a single star in heaven, believed in the Son of God. The cavalier magicians were handed over to punishment for their lack of faith. Others were brought to glory through faith, since they believed that God had been born in the flesh—God whom the Egyptian magicians were unwilling to recognize in all his divine excellence.

Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt have I called my son," and "for he shall be called a Nazarene."

(Verse 15, 16.) So that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying: Out of Egypt I called my son. Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men. Let those who deny the truth of the Hebrew scriptures answer where this is read in the Septuagint translators. But since they did not find it, we will tell them it is written in the prophet Hosea (Chapter 11), as they can also confirm with the copies we recently published. However, we can reconcile (or console) this passage differently for the contentious, whose behavior the Apostle Paul denies having. And we present the testimony from Numbers, with Balaam saying: God has called him out of Egypt; His glory is like a unicorn (Numbers 23:22).

(Epist. 57.7.) This is not in the LXX; but in Osee according to the genuine Hebrew text we read; Israel is my child, and I have loved him, and, from Egypt have I called my Son; where the LXX render, Israel is my child, and I have loved him, and called my sons out of Egypt.

(In Osee 11:2.) The Evangelist cites this text, because it refers to Christ typically. For it is to be observed, that in this Prophet and in others, the coming of Christ and the call of the Gentiles are foreshewn in such a manner, that the thread of history is never broken.

Let those who deny the authenticity of the Hebrew copies, show us this passage in the LXX, and when they have failed to find it, we will show it them in the Hebrew. We may also explain it in another way, by considering it as quoted from Numbers, God brought him out of Egypt; his glory is as it were that of a unicorn. (Num. 23:22.)

But wherefore, it may be said, is the young Child sent into Egypt? In the first place, the evangelist himself hath mentioned the cause, saying, "That it might be fulfilled, Out of Egypt have I called my Son." And at the same time beginnings of fair hopes were thenceforth proclaimed before to the world. That is, since Babylon and Egypt, most in the whole earth, were burnt up with the flame of ungodliness, He, signifying from the first that He means to correct and amend both, and inducing men hereby to expect His bounties in regard of the whole world likewise, sent to the one the wise men, the other He Himself visited with His mother.

And if the Jews should raise a question touching the prophecy, and say, that the words, "Out of Egypt have I called my Son," were uttered concerning themselves; we would tell them, This is a law of prophecy, that in many cases much that is spoken of one set of persons is fulfilled in another; of which kind is that which is said touching Simeon and Levi, "I will divide them," saith He, "in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel." And yet not in themselves did this come to pass, but in their descendants; and Noah's saying again about Canaan, came to pass in the Gibeonites, Canaan's descendants. And that concerning Jacob one may see to have so come to pass; for those blessings which say, "Be lord over thy brother, and let thy father's sons worship thee," had no accomplishment in himself (how could they, he being in fear and trembling, and worshipping his brother over and over again?), but in his offspring they had. The very same may be said in this case also. For which may be called the truer son of God, he that worships a calf, and is joined to Baalpeor and sacrifices his sons to devils? or He that is a Son by nature, and honors Him that begat Him? So that, except this man had come, the prophecy would not have received its due fulfillment. It is worth observing, too, that the evangelist intimates the same by the phrase, "that it might be fulfilled;" implying that it would not have been fulfilled, unless He had come.

And this makes the Virgin also in no common degree glorious and distinguished; that the very thing which was the whole people's supreme endowment in the way of praise, she also might thenceforth have for her own. I mean, that whereas they were proud of their coming up from Egypt, and used to boast of it (which indeed the prophet also was hinting at, when he said, "Have I not brought up the strangers from Cappadocia, and the Assyrians from the pit"), He makes this pre-eminence belong to the Virgin likewise.

Isaiah had foretold this flight into Egypt. Lo! the Lord shall ascend on a light cloud, and shall come into Egypt, and shall scatter the idols of Egypt. (Is. 19:1.) It is the practice of this Evangelist to confirm all he says; and that because he is writing to the Jews, therefore he adds, that it might be fulfilled, &c.

(15) And remained there. It is said that he was there seven years and lived in the city of Heliopolis. In regard to the mystery, by Joseph is signified preachers, i.e., the apostles, whose task is to replace the darkness with doctrine—they left the Jews and turned to the gentiles: "It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it from you and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the gentiles" (Acts 13:46).

And remain there till I tell you, i.e. until the unbelief of the Jews is ended: "Blindness has come upon part of Israel" (Rom 11:25). Then he applies the testimony of the prophet; hence he says, This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, "Out of Egypt I have called my son." The Septuagint is not the same, for it says: "Out of Egypt I have called his son."

There seems to be a question here, because this text does not appear to apply, in as much as it is preceded by the words: "When Israel was a child, I loved him"; hence, it seems to speak of Israel's call from Egypt. But it must be noted that in all the texts presented in the Old or New Testaments about Christ a certain distinction must be made: because some refer specifically to Christ, as Is (53:7): "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter"; but some are said of certain ones accordingly as they are a figure of Christ, such as the text in question. For they were called sons of Israel, because they possessed a likeness to the true only-begotten Son. And this is the meaning of "Out of Egypt I have called my son," i.e., special.

(non occ.) And while he thus persecutes Christ, he furnished an army (of martyrs) clothed in white robes of the same age as the Lord.

(Serm. 220. App.) Behold how this unrighteous enemy never could have so much profited these infants by his love, as he did by his hate; for as much as iniquity abounded against them, so much did the grace of blessing abound on them.

(Serm. 373. 3.) O blessed infants! He only will doubt of your crown in this your passion for Christ, who doubts that the baptism of Christ has a benefit for infants. He who at His birth had Angels to proclaim Him, the heavens to testify, and Magi to worship Him, could surely have prevented that these should not have died for Him, had He not known that they died not in that death, but rather lived in higher bliss. Far be the thought, that Christ who came to set men free, did nothing to reward those who died in His behalf, when hanging on the cross He prayed for those who put Him to death.

(Serm. 132. App.) The Magi had seen this unknown star in the heavens, not a few days, but two years before, as they had informed Herod when he enquired. This caused him to fix two years old and under; as it follows, according to the time he had enquired of the Magi.

(Gloss. ord.) Or because he feared that the Child to whom even stars ministered, might transform His appearance to greater or under that of His own age, or might conceal all those of that age: hence it seems to be that he slew all from one day to two years old.

(de Cons. Ev. ii. 11.) Or, disturbed by pressure of still more imminent dangers, Herod's thoughts are drawn to other thoughts than the slaughter of children, he might suppose that the Magi, unable to find Him whom they had supposed born, were ashamed to return to him. So the days of purification being accomplished, they might go up in safety to Jerusalem. And who does not see that that one day they may have escaped the attention of a King occupied with so many cares, and that afterwards when the things done in the Temple came to be spread abroad, then Herod discovered that he had been deceived by the Magi, and then sent and slew the children.

(Hom. in Nat. Innocent.) In this death of the children the precious death of all Christ's martyrs is figured; that they were infants signifies, that by the merit of humility alone can we come to the glory of martyrdom; that they were slain in Bethlehem and the coasts thereof, that the persecution shall be both in Jerusalem whence the Church originated, and throughout the world; in those of two years old are figured the perfect in doctrine and works; those under that age the neophytes; that they were slain while Christ escaped, signifies that the bodies of the martyrs may be destroyed by the wicked, but that Christ cannot be taken from them.

For Herod, as we have said, in his desire to destroy the Savior of the world, sent word to Bethlehem and commanded that all children two years of age and under be killed, figuring the age according to the time that he had learned from the magi. He thought that his edict would reach even to the Lord himself, the source of life. The Holy Spirit had already foreseen his wickedness beforehand. Solomon, speaking for the church, had said, "Who will give to you my brother, the one who nurses at the breast of his mother?" Moreover, by saying, "Who will give to you?" he was demonstrating that Herod would have no power over him who is the Lord and Prince of all powers. Thus the Lord spoke rightly when he bore witness about himself through the same Solomon: "Evil men will seek and not find me. For they hate wisdom and moreover have not partaken of the Word of God and have had no desire for it." The Spirit also said through David: "Since you are the one who gave birth to me, you are my hope, my mother, from the time I nursed at your breast … you are my protector." The blessed Moses also relates that Christ the Lord, an infant, could not have been killed while still nursing. He gave witness to this with his words, "You will not cook a lamb in the milk of its own mother." In this exact statement Moses revealed the expectation that Christ our Lord would be the true Lamb of God who was to suffer at the appointed time.

In Bethlehem therefore all the babies were slain. These innocents who died then on Christ's behalf became the first martyrs of Christ. David refers to them when he says, "From the mouths of nursing babies you have perfected praise because of your enemies, that you might bring ruin to the enemy." … For in this persecution even tiny infants and nursing babies were killed on Christ's behalf and attained to the consummate praise of martyrs. Meanwhile the wicked king Herod was destroyed, he who had usurped the realm to defend himself against the king of the heavens. Thus it is that those blessed babes have deservedly lasted beyond others. They were the first who were worthy to die on Christ's behalf.

"Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth."

Yet surely it was a case not for anger, but for fear and awe: he ought to have perceived that he was attempting impossible things. But he is not refrained. For when a soul is insensible and incurable, it yields to none of the medicines given by God. See for example this man following up his former efforts, and adding many murders to one, and hurried down the steep any whither. For driven wild by this anger, and envy, as by some demon, he takes account of nothing, but rages even against nature herself, and his anger against the wise men who had mocked him he vents upon the children that had done no wrong: venturing then in Palestine upon a deed akin to the things that had been done in Egypt. For he "sent forth," it is said, "and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men."

Here attend to me carefully. Because many things are uttered by many very idly touching these children, and the course of events is charged with injustice, and some of these express their perplexity about it in a more moderate way, others with more of audaciousness and frenzy. In order then that we may free these of their madness and those of their perplexity, suffer us to discourse a little upon this topic. Plainly, then, if this be their charge, that the children were left to be slain, they should find fault likewise with the slaughter of the soldiers that kept Peter. For as here, when the young child had fled, other children are massacred in the place of Him who was sought; even so then, too, Peter having been delivered from his prison and chains by the angel, one of like name with this tyrant, and like temper too, when he had sought him, and found him not, slew instead of him the soldiers that kept him.

"But what is this? it may be said; "why this is not a solution, but an enhancement of our difficulty." I know it too, and for this intent I bring forward all such cases, that to all I may adduce one and the same solution. What then is the solution of these things? or what fair account of them can we give? That Christ was not the cause of their slaughter, but the king's cruelty; as indeed neither was Peter to those others, but the madness of Herod. For if he had seen the wall broken through, or the doors overthrown, he might, perhaps, have had ground to accuse the soldiers that kept the apostle, of neglect; but now when all things continued in due form, and the doors were thrown wide open, and the chains fastened to the hands of them that kept him (for in fact they were bound unto him), he might have inferred from these things (that is, if he had been strictly doing a judge's office on the matters before him), that the event was not of human power or craft, but of some divine and wonder-working power; he might have adored the doer of these things, instead of waging war with the sentinels. For God had so done all that He did, that so far from exposing the keepers, He was by their means leading the king unto the truth. But if he proved senseless, what signifies to the skillful Physician of Souls, managing all things to do good, the insubordination of him that is diseased?

Wherefore art thou wroth, O Herod, at being mocked of the wise men? didst thou not know that the birth was divine? didst thou not summon the chief priests? didst thou not gather together the scribes? did not they, being called, bring the prophet also with them into thy court of judgment, proclaiming these things beforehand from of old? Didst thou not see how the old things agreed with the new? Didst thou not hear that a star also ministered to these men? Didst thou not reverence the zeal of the barbarians? Didst thou not marvel at their boldness? Wast thou not horror-struck at the truth of the prophet? Didst thou not from the former things perceive the very last also? Wherefore didst thou not reason with thyself from all these things, that this event was not of the craft of the wise men, but of a Divine Power, duly dispensing all things? And even if thou wert deceived by the wise men, what is that to the young children, who have done no wrong?

"Yea," saith one, "Herod thou hast full well deprived of excuse, and proved him blood-thirsty; but thou hast not yet solved the question about the injustice of what took place. For if he did unjustly, wherefore did God permit it?" Now, what should we say to this? That which I do not cease to say continually, in church, in the market-place and everywhere; that which I also wish you carefully to keep in mind, for it is a sort of rule for us, suited to every such perplexity. What then is our rule, and what our saying? That although there be many that injure, yet is there not so much as one that is injured. And in order that the riddle may not disturb you too much, I add the solution too with all speed. I mean, that what we may suffer unjustly from any one, it tells either to the doing away of our sins, God so putting that wrong to our account; or unto the recompense of rewards.

"But what kind of sin had these children," it may be said, "that they should do it away? for touching those who are of full age, and have been guilty of many negligences, one might with show of reason speak thus: but they who so underwent premature death, what sort of sins did they by their sufferings put away?" Didst thou not hear me say, that though there were no sins, there is a recompense of rewards hereafter for them that suffer ill here? Wherein then were the young children hurt in being slain for such a cause, and borne away speedily into that waveless harbor? "Because," sayest thou, "they would in many instances have achieved, had they lived, many and great deeds of goodness" Why, for this cause He lays up for them beforehand no small reward, the ending their lives for such a cause. Besides, if the children were to have been any great persons, He would not have suffered them to be snatched away beforehand. For if they that eventually will live in continual wickedness are endured by Him with so great long-sufferings, much more would He not have suffered these to be so taken off had He foreknown they would accomplish any great things.

And these are the reasons we have to give; yet these are not all; but there are also others more mysterious than these, which He knoweth perfectly, who Himself ordereth these things. Let us then give up unto Him the more perfect understanding of this matter, and apply ourselves to what follows, and in the calamities of others let us learn to bear all things nobly. Yea, for it was no little scene of woe, which then befell Bethlehem, the children were snatched from their mother's breast, and dragged unto this unjust slaughter.

And if thou art yet faint-hearted, and not equal to controlling thyself in these things, learn the end of him who dared all this, and recover thyself a little. For very quickly was he overtaken by punishment for these things; and he paid the due penalty of such an abominable act, ending his life by a grievous death, and more pitiable than that which he now dared inflict; suffering also countless additional ills, which ye may know of by perusing Josephus' account of these events.

Why did Christ do this? Christ is the judge of thoughts and the examiner of minds. Why did he desert those whom he knew were being sought because of himself and whom he knew would be killed for his sake? He was born a king, the king of heaven—why did he neglect the standard-bearers of his own innocence? Why did he disdain an army of the same age as himself? Why did he thus abandon those who were cut down as plunder from the same cradle as himself? Was it so that he, who would become the one king, might proceed against the forces of all his enemies? Brothers, Christ did not despise his own soldiers but promoted them and granted that they might walk in victory before they lived. He enabled them to participate in a victory without struggle. He gave to them the gift of the crown even before their bodies had grown. It was Christ's will that they pass over vice for virtue, attain heaven before earth and share in the divine life immediately. Thus it was that Christ sent his soldiers ahead. He did not abandon them. He gathered up his ranks. He did not leave them behind.

When the infant Jesus had subdued the Magi, not by the might of His flesh, but the grace of His Spirit, Herod was exceeding wrath, that they whom he sitting on his throne had no power to move, were obedient to an Infant lying in a manger. Then by their contempt of him the Magi gave further cause of wrath. For when kings' wrath is stirred by fear for their crowns, it is a great and inextinguishable wrath. But what did he? He sent and slew all the children. As a wounded beast rends whatsoever meeteth it as if the cause of its smart, so he mocked by the Magi spent his fury on children. He said to himself in his fury, 'Surely the Magi have found the Child whom they said should be King;' for a king in fear for his crown fears all things, suspects all. Then he sent and slew all those infants, that he might secure one among so many.

He is not satisfied with the massacre at Bethlehem, but extends it to the adjacent villages; sparing no age from the child of one night old, to that of two years.

In Joseph is figured the order of preachers, in Mary Holy Scripture; by the Child the knowledge of the Saviour; by the cruelty of Herod the persecution which the Church suffered in Jerusalem; by Joseph's flight into Egypt the passing of the preachers to the unbelieving Gentiles, (for Egypt signifies darkness;) by the time that he abode in Egypt the space of time between the ascension of the Lord and the coming of Anti Christ; by Herod's death the extinction of jealousy in the hearts of the Jews.

But (we hold the contrary): for Christ, by "accepting praise out of the mouth of babes and sucklings," has declared that neither childhood nor infancy is without sensibility, -the former of which states, when meeting Him with approving shouts, proved its ability to offer Him testimony; while the other, by being slaughtered, for His sake of course, knew what violence meant.

He gave orders that not only the children in Bethlehem but even those in the outlying districts of the town be killed, thinking that amid the multitude of those killed would be the one he was seeking. Herod ordered those who were two years old and under to be slaughtered. He had calculated such was the time that had passed from the incarnation of Christ, taking into account the time the magi had spent on their journey and that which he had spent on the throne. But Christ was taken out of Bethlehem once night had arrived. It is not possible that the birth of Christ be the cause of the killing of the children. But the disclosure of Herod's child-killing marked the beginning of a long string of wickedness. Even those who crucified Christ were not wicked at the time when they arrested Christ. Rather, they became wicked at the time when they undertook his murder. Yet for Christ's sake the children will receive a good reward, fitting to their martyrdom.

Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the Magi, was exceedingly wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem. As God used Moses to trick Pharaoh, so, too, He used the Magi to trick Herod. For both Herod and Pharaoh were child slayers: Pharaoh slew the male children of the Hebrews in Egypt, and Herod slew the male children of the Hebrews in Bethlehem. Herod vents his wrath against the Magi upon those who had wronged him in nothing. Why were the children allowed to be slaughtered? So that Herod's wickedness might be revealed. But perhaps you will ask me, "Why did the children suffer wrong to show Herod's wickedness?" Listen then. They were not wronged but were made worthy of crowns. For anyone who suffers some evil here, suffers either so that his sins might be absolved, or so that his crowns might be multiplied. So it is with these children; for their suffering they will receive a greater crown in heaven. And in all the region thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had carefully ascertained of the Magi.

(16) Then Herod... Here he tells of the slaughter of the infants. In regard to this he does three things: first, the occasion of the slaughter is mentioned; secondly, the slaying (v. 16b); thirdly, the prophecies are quoted (v. 17).

The occasion was Herod's anger; hence Herod was in a furious rage: "Man's anger does not work the justice of God" (Jas 1:20). And it should be noted that when a king suspects the loss of his kingdom, he quickly becomes inflamed with anger.

Then Herod, seeing that he had been tricked by the wise men, was in a furious rage. He is said to have been in a furious rage for two reasons: because when one is angry, he becomes furious at the slightest provocation. Hence, because he suspected the loss of his kingdom and had been tricked by the wise men, he went into a furious rage: "From a spark of fire come many burning coals" (Sir 11:32). And he sent... In that fury was cruelty in regard to three things: the place, the multitude and the time. In regard to the multitude, because to find the one he kills all. Hence it says, He sent and killed all the male children. And note that Augustine says: "He would never have benefited them as much by paying homage, as he benefited them by his hatred." But one might ask, since they did not have free will, how they are said to die for Christ? But, as it says in John (3:17): "God did not send his son into the world to judge the world, but that the world be saved by him." For God would never permit them to be killed, unless it were useful for them. Hence Augustine says that it is the same thing to doubt whether their killing profited them as to doubt whether baptism would have profited them: for they suffered as martyrs, and by dying confessed Christ, though not by speech: "I saw under the altar the souls of those slain for the word of God" (Rev 6:9). The second cruelty is that he killed in all that region, for he feared that he might flee to another city. He acted like a wounded beast, which does not care whom it injures: "Like a roaring lion or a charging bear, a wicked ruler over a poor people" (Pr 28:15). The third was in regard to time. Hence those who were two years old and under. And note that Augustine says that "the Innocents were killed in the year Christ was born."

But why does he say from two years old and under? Some say that the star appeared for two years previously. Hence, Herod was not sure that he was not born as soon as the star appeared. Hence, he says, according to the time which he had ascertained from the wise men. But others say that they were not killed in the same year but two years later. But why did he wait so long? Three reasons are given by different persons. One is that in the beginning he thought that the Magi had been deceived and would find nothing, but after he heard many things about Christ from Zechariah and Simeon and Anna, he felt it was necessary to make inquiries. Others say that he did this out of wariness, for he feared that the parents would conceal the child he sought. Hence, at first he wished to follow them. Others say that he was prevented by his business, because he sent after the Magi as far as Tharsus of Cilicia and burned their ships. He was also occupied, because he had been summoned to Rome, where his sons had accused him. And so, after his return he began to vent his rage.

He says or under, because he knew that he had such power that he could change his features.

By that killing is signified the killing of the martyrs, because they were children in humility and innocence: "Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not" (Mt 19:14); likewise below (18:3): "Unless you be converted and become as little children, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven."

In Bethlehem and in all that region, because they are killed through the whole world: "You will be witnesses to me," namely, by dying (Acts 1:8). The two years are the two loves—of God and of neighbor, because "faith without works is dead" (Jas 2:20). And note that after Christ was born, a persecution at once rages: because as soon as one is converted to Christ, he begins to be tempted: "Son, coming to the service of God, stand in justice and in fear, and prepare your soul for temptation" (Sir 2:1).

(ord.) She will not be comforted in this present life, for that they are not, but transfers all her hope and comfort to the life to come.

It could not be that they were not who seemed now dead, but by glorious martyrdom they were advanced to eternal life; and consolation is for those who have suffered loss, not for those who have reaped a gain. Rachel affords a type of the Church long barren now at length fruitful. She is heard weeping for her children, not because she mourned them dead, but because they were slaughtered by those whom she would have retained as her first-born sons.

(Vers. 17 seqq.) Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying: A voice was heard in Ramah, sobbing and loud lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled, since they are no more (Jerem. XXXI, 15). From Rachel was born Benjamin, in whose tribe Bethlehem is not (Genes. XXXV). Therefore, it is asked how Rachel mourns the sons of Judah, that is, Bethlehem, as if they were her own. We will answer briefly, because she is buried near Bethlehem in Ephrath, and from the maternal womb, she received the name of the mother's lodging. Whether because Judah and Benjamin were two joined tribes, and Herod had ordered not only the killing of children in Bethlehem, but also in all its borders. By the slaughter of Bethlehem, we understand that many from Benjamin were also killed. But she wept for her children, and she did not receive consolation, according to a twofold interpretation. Either because she considered them dead for eternity, or because she did not want to console herself about those whom she knew would survive. But what is said in Rama, let us not think that this is the name of a place, near Gabaa, but 'rama' is interpreted as 'an elevated place', so the meaning is: A voice was heard in an elevated place, that is, far and wide dispersed.

(In Hierem. 31:15.) This passage of Jeremiah has been quoted by Matthew neither according to the Hebrew nor the LXX version. This shows that the Evangelists and Apostles did not follow any one's translation, but according to the Hebrew manner expressed in their own words what they had read in Hebrew.

By Ramah we need not suppose that the town of that name near Gibeah is meant; but take it as signifying 'high.' A voice was heard 'aloft,' that is, spread far and wide.'

Rachel's son was Benjamin, in which tribe Bethlehem is not situated. How then does Rachel weep for the children of Judah as if they were her own? We answer briefly. She was buried near Bethlehem in Ephrata, and was regarded as the mother, because her body was there entertained. Or, as the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin were contiguous, and Herod's command extended to the coasts of Bethlehem as well as to the town itself, we may suppose that many were slain in Benjamin.

This may be understood in two ways; either she thought them dead for all eternity, so that no consolation could comfort her; or, she desired not to receive any comfort for those who she knew had gone into life eternal.

"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not."

Thus having filled the hearer with horror by relating these things: the slaughter so violent and unjust, so extremely cruel and lawless; he comforts him again, by saying, Not from God's wanting power to prevent it did all this take place, nor from any ignorance of His, but when He both knew it, and foretold it, and that loudly by His prophet. Be not troubled then, neither despond, looking unto His unspeakable providence, which one may most clearly see, alike by what He works, and by what He permits.

But what, it may be said, hath Rachel to do with Bethlehem? For it saith, "Rachel weeping for her children." And what hath Rama to do with Rachel? Rachel was the mother of Benjamin, and on his death, they buried her in the horse-course that was near this place. The tomb then being near, and the portion pertaining unto Benjamin her infant (for Rama was of the tribe of Benjamin), from the head of the tribe first, and next from the place of her sepulture, He naturally denominates her young children who were massacred. Then to show that the wound that befell her was incurable and cruel, He saith, "she would not be comforted because they are not."

Hence again we are taught this, which I mentioned before, never to be confounded when what is happening is contrary to the promise of God. Behold, for instance, when He was come for the salvation of the people, or rather for the salvation of the world, of what kind were His beginnings. His mother, first, in flight; His birth-place is involved in irremediable calamities, and a murder is perpetrated of all murders the bitterest, and there is lamentation and great mourning, and wailings everywhere. But be not troubled for He is wont ever to accomplish His own dispensations by their contraries, affording us from thence a very great demonstration of His power.

(Hil. Quæst. N. and V. Test. 9. 62.) Or, The sons of Benjamin, who were akin to Rachel, were formerly cut off by the other tribes, and so extinct both then and ever after. (see Judg. 20.) Then therefore Rachel began to mourn her sons, when she saw those of her sister cut off in such a cause, that they should be heirs of eternal life; for he who has experienced any misfortune, is made more sensible of his losses by the good fortune of a neighbour.

Or, it was heard on high, because uttered for the death of the innocent, according to that, The voice of the poor entereth into the heavens. (Ecclus. 35:21.) The 'weeping' means the cries of the children; 'lamentation,' refers to the mothers. In the infants themselves their death ends their cries, in the mothers it is continually renewed by the remembrance of their loss.

Or, The Church weeps the removal of the saints from this earth, but wishes not to be comforted as though they should return again to the struggles of life, for they are not to be recalled into life.

Rachel is well set for a type of the Church, as the word signifies 'a sheep' or 'seeing;' (vid. note i, p. 19.) her whole thought being to fix her eye in contemplation of God; and she is the hundredth sheep that the shepherd layeth on his shoulder.

The sacred Evangelist adds, to show the greatness of the mourning, that even the dead Rachel was roused to mourn her sons, and would not be comforted because they were not.

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying. Lest anyone think that the slaying of the children took place against the will of God, the evangelist shows that God both knew of it beforehand and foretold it.

(17) Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah. Having mentioned the slaughter of the infants, the evangelist according to custom now mentions the prophecy foretelling this: (18) A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled, because they were not (Jer 31:15). And it should be noted that, as Jerome says, wherever any text is introduced by the apostles and evangelists, it is not necessary to present it always word for word, but as the Holy Spirit gave it to them, sometimes sense for sense in our use. Thus we have in Jeremiah (31:15): "A voice is heard on high of lamentation and weeping and mourning. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are not." The sense is the same.

We should notice that as far as this text is concerned, it is one of those which are brought into the gospel, but which has a literal sense that is a figure of something in the New Testament. Hence, to understand it one must consider a bit of history, which is recorded in Judges, where it says that almost the whole tribe of Benjamin was wiped out on account of a sin committed against the wife of a Levite. It also states that there was greatest mourning there, so great, indeed, that it was heard from Gabsa to Ramah, a distance of 12,000 paces. Rachel is said to mourn this, because she was the mother of Benjamin; and it is a figure of speech used to express how great was the pain. But this is a prophecy about the past. In another way it is about the future in two ways: in one way it can refer to the captivity of Israel who, when they were led into captivity, are said to have wept on the road near Bethlehem; and then Rachel is said to have mourned, because she had been buried there (Gen 35:19). And this is said in the same manner of speaking as a place is said to weep over the evils which happen in the place. The prophet, therefore, desires to say that just as there was the greatest pain and grief when the tribe of Benjamin was destroyed, so in the future would be another excruciating pain in the time of the captivity. It is explained in a second way thus: the evangelist accepts the fact of the killing of the Innocents and amplifies the pain in four ways: first, from its extent; secondly, from the amount; thirdly, what the pain concerned; fourthly, its inconsolability.

He says, therefore: A voice in Ramah. This is a city in the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:25) and can be taken as the city of Liah. But here it is taken for the heights and can be interpreted in two ways: first, a voice uttered on high was heard, because a voice in a lofty place is spread far and wide: "Go up in a high mountain, O Zion, herald of good tidings; lift up your voice with strength" (Is 40:9). Or was heard in Ramah, i.e., in heaven before God (Sir 35:21): "The prayer of the humble pierces the clouds, and he will not be consoled until it reaches the Lord"; "Do not the tears of the widow run down her cheek, as she cries out against him who has caused them to fall?" (Sir 35:15).

Wailing: This can refer to the weeping of the infants who were slaughtered. And loud lamentation: This refers to the weeping of the mothers. Or both can refer to the infants: wailing, in as much as they were lifted up by the soldiers; lamentations, in as much as they were slain. The pain of the mothers is greater than that of the infants. Again, the mothers' pain was continual, that of the infants, brief. For this reason Zechariah (12:10) says: "They shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a first-born." Also from the source of the pain, because it was concerned with the death of the infants. Hence, Rachel laments. But it might be objected that Bethlehem was not in the tribe of Benjamin but in the tribe of Judah, who was Liah's son.

This is answered in three ways: first, because Rachel was buried near Bethlehem (Gen 35:19). Accordingly, she wept for the infants in the way in which any place is said to weep: "Be appalled, O heavens, at this, be shocked, be utterly desolate, says the Lord" (Jer 2:12). Or in another way: it was stated above that Herod killed the infants in Bethlehem and in all its surrounding territory. But Bethlehem lay within the confines of two tribes, namely, Judah and Benjamin. Hence, some infants from the tribe of Benjamin were killed. Thus the objection ceases, as Jerome explains. But Augustine explains it another way and says that it is customary, when one is habituated to prosperity, that he becomes sadder when adversities come. Liah and Rachel were sisters, and the ones killed were among the children of Liah. Thus they were killed bodily, lest they be punished eternally, as in the case of Gabaa. Therefore, she is said to weep, when she sees her children killed or damned. Or the Church is signified by Rachel, because it means "seeing God," and the Church sees by faith. She weeps over her slain children, not because they were slain, but because through them she could obtain others. Or she weeps not for the slain but for the slayers.

Then he mentions the inconsolable pain: she refused... This is explained in a number of ways: first, as referring to the people who existed then. For consolation should be forthcoming, as long as a remedy is hoped for; but when there is no hope for it, there is no consolation, as in the case of the hopelessly infirm. Therefore, he says in regard to the mothers' opinion, because they were no more, i.e., no longer visible: "The lad is gone" (Gen 37:30). Or she refused to be consoled, because they were no more, i.e., as if they were no more: for consolation is expected only for evil things. Hence, according to this it is referred to the opinion of the Church, which regards them as reigning; hence, it rejoices over them as reigning: "But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope" (1 Thes 4:13). Or she refused to be consoled at present but awaited consolation in the future: "Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted" (Mt 5:5).

Hil. Quaest. N. and N. Test.9. 62: Or, The sons of Benjamin, who were akin to Rachel, were formerly cut off by the other tribes, and so extinct both then and ever after. Then therefore Rachel began to mourn her sons, when she saw those of her sister cut off in such a cause, that they should be heirs of eternal life; for he who has experienced any misfortune, is made more sensible of his losses by the good fortune of aneighbour.

In Rama was there a voice heard. Rama is a place in Palestine of high elevation, for the name itself means "high." This place fell by lot to the inheritance of the tribe of Benjamin, who was the son of Rachel, and Rachel was buried in Bethlehem. By "Rachel," therefore, the prophet Jeremiah means "Bethlehem," for Rachel was buried in Bethlehem (Gen. 35:19). He is saying that weeping and lamentation will be heard from on high. Listen to what the prophet says: Lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, that is, Bethlehem weeping for its children, and would not be comforted, because they are not. In this life they are no more, but their souls are immortal.

(Hom. in Nat. Innoc.) This slaughter of the infants for the Lord's sake, the death of Herod soon after, and Joseph's return with the Lord and his mother to the land of Israel, is a figure showing that all the persecutions moved against the Church will be avenged by the death of the persecutor, peace restored to the Church, and the saints who had concealed themselves return to their own places. Or the return of Jesus to the land of Israel on the death of Herod shows, that, at the preaching of Enoch and Elijahc, the Jews, when the fire of modern jealousy shall be extinguished, shall receive the true faith.

(Eccles. Hist. i. 8.) For the sacrilege which Herod had committed against the Saviour, and his wicked slaughter of the infants of the same age, the Divine vengeance hastened his end; and his body, as Josephus relates, was attacked by a strange disease; so that the prophets declared that they were not human ailments, but visitations of Divine vengeance. Filled with mad fury, he gives command to seize and imprison the heads and nobles out of all parts of Judæa; ordering that as soon as ever he should breathe his last, they should be all put to death, that so Judæa though unwillingly might mourn at his decease. Just before he died he murdered his son Antipater, (besides two boys put to death before, Alexander and Aristobulus.) Such was the end of Herod, noticed in those words of the Evangelist, when Herod was dead, and such the punishment inflicted.

After the death of Herod, Joseph was advised by the angel to return to Judea with the boy and his mother. When he returned he heard that Archelaeus, son of Herod, was king. So he was afraid to go, but the angel admonished him to cross over into the region of Galilee, and they lived in the city of Nazareth.… Joseph resembles the apostles to whom Christ entrusted the spreading of the news about him. Similar to what happened with Joseph after the death of Herod, they must deal with the same people who caused the Lord to suffer. The apostles are commanded to preach to the Jews, for they were sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But when they saw that the power remained in the hands of inherited faithlessness, they became afraid and retreated.

But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying: Rise, take the child and his mother, and go to the land of Israel.

Many here err from ignorance of history, supposing the Herod who mocked our Lord on the day of His passion, and the Herod whose death is here related, were the same. But the Herod who was then made friends with Pilate was son of this Herod and brother to Archelaus; for Archelaus was banished to Lyons in Gaul, and his father Herod made king in his room, as we read in Josephus.

From this we see that not Herod only, but also the Priests and Scribes had sought the Lord's death at that time.

"But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel."

He no more saith "fly," but "go." Seest thou again after the temptation refreshment? then after the refreshment danger again? in that he was freed indeed from his banishment, and came back again to his own country; and beheld the murderer of the children brought to the slaughter; but when he hath set foot on his own country, he finds again a remnant of the former perils, the son of the tyrant living, and being king.

See how Joseph was set for ministering to Mary; when she went into Egypt and returned, who would have fulfilled to her this so needful ministry, had she not been betrothed? For to outward view Mary nourished and Joseph defended the Child; but in truth the Child supported His mother and protected Joseph. Return into the land of Israel; for He went down into Egypt as a physician, not to abide there, but to succour it sick with error. But the reason of the return is given in the words, They are dead, &c.

And that is said to have been done by the counsel of God for their conspiring with Herod against the Lord; as it is said, Herod was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.

(De Cæl. Hierarch. 4.) See how Jesus Himself, though far above all celestial beings, and coming unchanged to our nature, shunned not that ordinance of humanity which He had taken on Him, but was obedient to the dispositions of His Father made known by Angels. For even by Angels is declared to Joseph the retreat of the Son into Egypt, so ordained of the Father, and His return again to Judæa.

Rachel is well set for a type of the Church, as the word signifies 'a sheep' or 'seeing;' (vid. note i, p. 19.) her whole thought being to fix her eye in contemplation of God; and she is the hundredth sheep that the shepherd layeth on his shoulder.

But if they were many who sought his destruction, how came they all to have died in so short a time? As we have related above, all the great men among the Jews were slain at Herod's death.

Or the Evangelist uses a figure of speech, by which the plural is used for the singular. These words, the Child's life, (or soul, i. e. the Apollinarians.) overthrow those heretics who taught that Christ did not take a soul, but had His Divinity in place of a soul.

But when Herod was dead. Herod came to a bitter end. For with fever, torment of the bowels, itching, swelling of the feet, rotting of the private parts, breeding of worms, difficulty in breathing, trembling and spasms in every member, he cast off his evil soul.

Behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel. He did not say "flee" but "go," for there was no longer any need for fear. For they are dead which sought the young Child's soul. Where is Apollinarius, who said that the Lord did not have the soul of a man? For here he is reproved.

(19) Then he deals with Christ's being called back; hence, when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph. First, he mentions that the angel appeared; secondly, the angel's command; thirdly, the execution of the angel's command.

In regard to the first, three things are done: first, the time is described; secondly, the person; thirdly, the manner of the appearance.

He says, therefore, But when Herod died: not the one involved in Christ's death, because that was his son; behold an angel appeared.

It should be noted that all trouble in the Church is terminated by the death of the persecutors: "When the wicked perish, there are shouts of gladness" (Pr 11:10). Note, also, that when the unbelief of the Jews has ended, Christ will return to them: "And then all Israel will be saved" (Rom 11:26).

Behold... appeared. It should be noted that the order between men and angels is such that divine illuminations are produced in us only by angels: "Are they not administering spirits sent forth to serve for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?" (Heb 1:14). Hence, even Christ as man willed to be announced by angels.

The manner: in a dream to Joseph in Egypt.

(Verse 20) For those who sought the child's life are dead. From this we understand that not only Herod, but also the priests and scribes at the same time had planned the death of the Lord.

(20) The command: Rise, take the child and his mother. He does not say, "son" or "wife", but child, in order to designate the dignity of the child and the purity of the mother. In this is shown that Joseph was not given to her for the purpose of carnal intercourse but to minister and guard. And he assigns the cause: for those who sought the child's life are dead.

But one might ask why he says, are, for Herod alone had died. This is answered in two ways: first, because he had done so much evil that the Jews rejoiced in his death. When he had a foreboding of his death, he commanded his sister to kill the nobler Jews when he died. These had sought the life of the child with Herod: for those who sought the child's life are dead. Or another way: It is the custom of Sacred Scripture to use the plural for the singular: hence, they are dead, i.e. he is dead. Hence, the statement that those who sought the child's life destroys Apollinaris' error, that the godhead was in Christ in place of a soul.

Joseph was not disobedient to the angelic warning, but he arose, and took the young Child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. The Angel had not fixed the particular place, so that while Joseph hesitates, the Angel returns, and by the often visiting him confirms his obedience.

But the figurative interpretation holds good any way. Joseph represents the Apostles, to whom Christ is entrusted to be borne about. These, as though Herod were dead, that is, his people being destroyed in the Lord's passion, are commanded to preach the Gospel to the Jews; they are sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

(Verse 21.) He rose and took the child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. He did not say, 'I took my son and my wife,' but the child and his mother, as if a foster father, not a husband.

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 in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither. Herod left three sons: Philip, Antipas, and Archelaus. He had directed Archelaus to be king, and the other two, tetrarchs. Joseph was afraid to go into the land of Israel, that is, Judea, because Archelaus was similar to Herod, his father. Antipas was the young Herod who slew the Forerunner. And being warned by God in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee. Galilee was not of the land of Israel, but of the Gentiles, and for this reason the Jews considered the Galileans an abomination.

(21) Then he mentions the execution of the command: and he rose and took the child and his mother. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows how he returned to the land of Israel (v. 21); secondly, the section he avoided (v. 22); thirdly, the section he chose (v. 22b). He says, therefore, and he rose. Note that the angel did not say: "Go into the land of Judah," or "into Jerusalem," but universally, to the land of Israel, under which even Galilee can be included. Hence, it can be said that Joseph entered the boundaries of the land which Judah inhabited.

(De Con. Evan. ii. 10.) Here it may be asked, How then could his parents go up every year of Christ's childhood to Jerusalem, as Luke relates, if fear of Archelaus now prevented them from approaching it? This difficulty is easily solved. At the festival they might escape notice in the crowd, and by returning soon, where in ordinary times they might be afraid to live. So they neither became irreligious by neglecting the festival, nor notorious by dwelling continually in Jerusalem. Or it is open to us to understand Luke when he says, they went up every year, as speaking of a time when they had nothing to fear from Archelaus, who, as Josephus relates, reigned only nine years. There is yet a difficulty in what follows; Being warned in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee. If Joseph was afraid to go into Judaea because one of Herod's sons, Archelaus, reigned there, how could he go into Galilee, where another of his sons Herod was tetrarch, as Luke tells us? As if the times of which Luke is speaking were times in which there was any longer need to fear for the Child, when even in Judaea things were so changed, that Archelaus no longer ruled there, but Pilate was governor.

(De Con. Evan. ii. 9.) This may perhaps occur to some, that Matthew says His parents went with the Child Jesus to Galilee because they feared Archelaus, when it should seem most probable that they chose Galilee because Nazareth was their own city, as Luke has not forgot to mention. We must understand, that when the Angel in the vision in Egypt said to Joseph, Go into the land of Israel, Joseph understood the command to be that he should go straight into Judaea, that being properly the land of Israel. But finding Archelaus ruling there, he would not court the danger, as the land of Israel might be interpreted to extend to Galilee, which was inhabited by children of Israel. Or we may suppose His parents supposed that Christ should dwell no where but in Jerusalem, where was the temple of the Lord, and would have gone thither had not the fear of Archelaus hindered them. And they had not been commanded from God to dwell positively in Judaea, or Jerusalem, so as that they should have despised the fear of Archelaus, but only in the land of Israel generally, which they might understand of Galilee.

(De Con. Evan. ii. 5.) The whole of this history, from the account of the Magi inclusively, Luke omits. Let it be here noticed once for all, that each of the Evangelists writes as if he were giving a full and complete history, which omits nothing; where he really passes over any thing, he continues his thread of history as if he had told all. Yet by a diligent comparison of their several narratives, we can be at no loss to know where to insert any particular that is mentioned by one and not by the other.

(ord.) But then we might ask, why was he not afraid to go into Galilee, seeing Archelaus ruled there also? He could be better concealed in Nazareth than in Jerusalem, which was the capital of the kingdom, and where Archelaus was constantly resident.

But finding the seed of their hereditary unbelief still abiding, they fear and withdraw; admonished by a vision, to wit, seeing the Holy Ghost poured upon the Gentiles, they carry Christ to them.

(Verse 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 to the region of Galilee. Many fall into error due to ignorance of history, thinking that he is the same Herod who mocked the Lord in his passion, and who is reported to be dead now. Therefore, this Herod, who later became friends with Pilate, is the son of that Herod, the brother of Archelaus; and Tiberius Caesar himself, the city of Lugdunum, which is in Gaul, banished him, and made his brother Herod successor to the kingdom. Read the story of Joseph.

But how did Archelaus reign over Judaea, when Pontius Pilate was governor? Herod's death had recently taken place, and the kingdom had not yet been divided into many parts; but as he had only just ended his life, the son for a while kept possession of the kingdom "in the room of his father Herod;" his brother also bearing this name, which is the reason why the evangelist added, "in the room of his father Herod."

It may be said, however, "if he was afraid to settle in Judaea on account of Archelaus, he had cause to fear Galilee also on account of Herod." I answer, By his changing the place, the whole matter was thenceforward thrown into shade; for the whole assault was upon "Bethlehem and the coasts thereof." Therefore now that the slaughter had taken place, the youth Archelaus had no other thought, but that the whole was come to an end, and that amongst the many, He that was sought had been destroyed. And besides, his father having come to such an end of his life before his eyes, he became for the future more cautious about further proceedings, and about urging on that course of iniquity.

Joseph therefore comes to Nazareth, partly to avoid the danger, partly also delighting to abide in his native place. To give him the more courage, he receives also an oracle from the angel touching this matter. Luke, however, doth not say that he came there by Divine warning, but that when they had fulfilled all the purification, they returned to Nazareth. What then may one say? That Luke is giving an account of the time before the going down to Egypt, when he saith these things. For He would not have brought them down thither before the purification, in order that nothing should be done contrary to the law, but he waited for her to be purified, and to go to Nazareth, and that then they should go down to Egypt. Then, after their return, He bids them go to Nazareth. But before this they were not warned of God to go thither, but yearning after their native place, they did so of their own accord. For since they had gone up for no other cause but on account of the taxing, and had not so much as a place where to stay, when they had fulfilled that for which they had come up, they went down to Nazareth.

Herod had nine wives, by seven of whom he had a numerous issue. By Josida, his first born Antipater—by Mariamine, Alexander and Aristobulus—by Mathuca, a Samaritan woman, Archelaus—by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, Herod, who was afterwards tetrarch, and Philip. The three first were put to death by Herod; and after his death, Archelaus seized the throne by occasion of his father's will, and the question of the succession was carried before Augustus Cæsar. After some delay, he made a distribution of the whole of Herod's dominions in accordance with the Senate's advice. To Archelaus he assigned one half, consisting of Idumæa and Judæa, with the title of tetrarch, and a promise of that of king if he showed himself deserving of it. The rest he divided into two tetrarchates, giving Galilee to Herod the tetrarch, Ituræa and Trachonitis to Philip. Thus Archelaus was after his father's death a duarch, which kind of sovereignty is here called a kingdom.

Or, we may apply it to the last times of the Jewish Church, when many Jews having turned to the preaching of Enoch and Elijah, the rest filled with the spirit of Antichrist shall fight against the faith. So that part of Judæa where Archelaus rules, signifies the followers of Antichrist; Nazareth of Galilee, whither Christ is conveyed, that part of the nation that shall embrace the faith. Galilee means 'removal;' Nazareth, 'the flower of virtues;' for the Church the more zealously she removes from the earthly to the heavenly, the more she abounds in the flower and fruit of virtues.

(22) Then he mentions the area he avoided: when he heard that Archelaus reigned in Judea. Here the history of Herod should be noted. For he had six sons, and before his death he killed Alexander and Aristobulus; at his death he commanded that Antipater be killed. Thus three remained, among whom Archelaus was the firstborn and usurped the kingdom; but he was later accused before Caesar Augustus by the Jews and his kingdom was taken away. It was then divided into four parts. Two were given to Archelaus and one each to Herod and Philip, as Luke (3:1) says. Archelaus himself was sent into exile after reigning for nine years.

Being warned in a dream. First the angel had said that he should go to the land of Israel, but because Joseph had not yet understood, the angel's message made explicit what was previously implicit. And this is indicated, when he says, being warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee.

But on the other hand, just as Archelaus ruled in Judea, so Philip in Galilee. But one must answer that this was immediately after the death of Herod, when Archelaus had the entire kingdom, because the division was made later. But then why did he not fear Archelaus? The answer is that Jerusalem was the seat of the kingdom; hence, he practically stayed there always. But why does Luke (2:41) state that they brought the child to Jerusalem every year? Augustine answers that it was safe to bring him on account of the vast throng that came there at that time; but it would have been dangerous, if he had tarried there for a long time. But why does the evangelist suggest that it was by accident that Joseph came to Nazareth, whereas Luke (2:39) says that he had his personal domicile in Nazareth. The answer is that the angel had told him to go into the land of Israel which, strictly speaking, did not include Galilee or Nazareth. That is the way Joseph understood it; therefore, he made no decision to go to Nazareth.

But if "the Nazarene" is interpreted to mean "holy" or, according to some, as "flower," this is the designation found in many instances. For Daniel calls him "holy" or "of the holy ones." Likewise we find in Isaiah: "A branch from the stock of Jesse and its flower." Even the Lord says of himself in the Song of Songs, "I am the bloom of the plain, the lily of the valleys."

To this he adds the Prophet's testimony, saying, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophets, &c.

Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt have I called my son," and "for he shall be called a Nazarene."

(Verse 23) And coming, he lived in a city called Nazareth, so that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, that he would be called a Nazarene. If he had set a fixed example from the Scriptures, he would never have said, what was spoken by the prophets; but simply, what was spoken by the prophet: but now, calling them prophets in the plural, he shows that he did not take words from the Scriptures, but the meaning. Nazarene, interprets as holy. But all Scripture testifies that the Lord would be holy. We can also say in another way, that even in the same words, according to the Hebrew truth, it is written in Isaiah: There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall rise out of his roots (Isa. 11:1).

Had he meant to quote a particular text, he would not have written 'Prophets,' but 'the Prophet.' By thus using the plural he evidently does not take the words of any one passage in Scripture, but the sense of the whole. Nazarene is interpreted 'Holyd,' and that the Lord would be Holy, all Scripture testifies. Otherwise we may explain that it is found in Isaiah (c. 11:1.) rendered to the strict letter of the Hebrew. There shall come a Rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall grow out of His rootse.

We see here the cause why the angel also, putting them at ease for the future, restores them to their home. And not even this simply, but he adds to it a prophecy, "That it might be fulfilled," saith he, "which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene."

And what manner of prophet said this? Be not curious, nor overbusy. For many of the prophetic writings have been lost; and this one may see from the history of the Chronicles. For being negligent, and continually falling into ungodliness, some they suffered to perish, others they themselves burnt up and cut to pieces. The latter fact Jeremiah relates; the former, he who composed the fourth book of Kings, saying, that after a long time the book of Deuteronomy was hardly found, buried somewhere and lost. But if, when there was no barbarian there, they so betrayed their books, much more when the barbarians had overrun them. For as to the fact, that the prophet had foretold it, the apostles themselves in many places call Him a Nazarene.

"Was not this then," one may say, "casting a shade over the prophecy touching Bethlehem?" By no means: rather this very fact was sure greatly to stir up men, and to awaken them to the search of what was said of Him. Thus, for example, Nathanael too enters on the inquiry concerning Him, saying, "Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?" For the place was of little esteem; or rather not that place only, but also the whole district of Galilee. Therefore the Pharisees said, "Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet." Nevertheless, He is not ashamed to be named even from thence, signifying that He needs not ought of the things of men; and His disciples also He chose out of Galilee; everywhere cutting off the pretexts of them who are disposed to be remiss, and giving tokens that we have no need of outward things, if we practice virtue. For this cause He doth not choose for Himself so much as a house; for "the Son of Man," saith He, "hath not where to lay His head;" and when Herod is plotting against Him, He fleeth, and at His birth is laid in a manger, and abides in an inn, and takes a mother of low estate; teaching us to think no such thing a disgrace, and from the first outset trampling under foot the haughtiness of man, and bidding us give ourselves up to virtue only.

They might have read this in some Prophets who are not in our canon, as Nathan or Esdras. That there was some prophecy to this purport is clear from what Philip says to Nathanael. Him of whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth. Hence the Christians were at first called Nazarenes, at Antioch their name was changed to that of 'Christians.'

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth. How is it that Luke says that after the Lord was born, He completed the forty days, was held in the arms of Simeon, and then went down to Nazareth (Lk. 2:22-40)? But here Matthew says that after the return from Egypt He went to Nazareth? Learn, therefore, that Luke spoke those things on which Matthew was silent. I will give an example: after the birth, He completed the forty days, and then went down to Nazareth. This is what Luke says. Matthew speaks of what took place afterwards, that He fled into Egypt, and then returned from Egypt to Nazareth, which took place later. They do not contradict each other. One of them, Luke, speaks of the descent from Bethlehem to Nazareth, while the other, Matthew, speaks of the return from Egypt to Nazareth, which took place later. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. Which prophet said this? It is not to be found now. For many books have been lost, because of both the carelessness of the Hebrews and the frequent captivities. But perhaps this was an unwritten prophecy among the Jews. "Nazarene" means "sanctified" and as the Christ is holy, it is right that He is called "a Nazarene." For by many prophets the Lord was called "The Holy One of Israel" (Ps. 88:18, Is. 1:4, etc.)

(23) That what was spoken by the prophet might be fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazarene." This is not found written, but it can be said that it was gathered from many passages. For Nazarene means holy; and because Christ is called holy: "Until the holy one is anointed" (Dan 9:24), therefore, he is said to be so called by the prophet. Or it can be said that by Nazarene is meant abounding with flowers, as in Is (11:1): "There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse and a flower shall grow out of his roots." This agrees with Song of Songs (2:1): "I am a rose of Sharon, a lily of the valleys."