Luke 2:5Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

What precisely was this census that the evangelist claims occurred over the entire earth? How could it be conducted in Judea under Augustus’s command while Herod was still king there? How was Quirinius able to administer the census in Syria under Herod’s reign when he became governor only after both Herod and his son Archelaus had passed from power? Furthermore, why does Josephus Flavius remain silent on this census?

To address these questions, we note that the census—which took place towards the end of Herod's reign—might have involved enumerating individuals and registering them, possibly tied to taxation practices customary in Roman censuses. It's critical to clarify that "the whole earth" in this context refers to the subjects of the Roman Empire and its dependent territories. Suetonius mentions three censuses during Augustus's reign, but these were limited solely to Roman citizens. None of these preceding censuses compared in scope to the one around the time of Christ's birth. It's unlikely that historians overlooked such a significant enumeration of the Roman Empire's citizens, suggesting that this census was primarily confined to Judea. This understanding aligns perfectly with the evangelist's words "throughout the whole land," as the term used (οίκουμένη) refers not just to a general region but could also refer to Judea specifically, as evidenced in Acts 11:28 and by Josephus Collins.

Moreover, the existence of a king in Judea did not thwart the Roman emperor’s authority to institute a census there. While the Romans exerted control over Herod, they maintained the Jewish populace in subservience to their governance. Herod lacked true autonomy regarding his kingship and required the emperor's approval for many decisions, including the administration of taxes. Shortly before his demise, Herod was obliged to acknowledge the emperor, illustrated by the relief administered by Augustus regarding the taxation of Archelaus's provinces during unrest, as noted by Josephus. The tax collected would not have gone to Archelaus directly.

Josephus notes that the Romans began subjugating the Jewish people notably during the incursion of Pompey, which stemmed from conflicts between two brothers. Other contemporary historians recognize that Herod was still paying tribute to Antony at one point. Given these elements, the possibility of a census mandated by the Roman Emperor at the end of Herod's reign, particularly one that might have involved taxation or a complete enumeration of the Jewish populace, appears plausible.

The passage that mentions the census during Quirinius’s governorship has been interpreted in various ways. Some suggest an understanding of the phrase that identifies this census as prior to another that Quirinius conducted while governing Syria later on. This interpretation is supported by the accuracy of Quirinius's census approximately fourteen years afterward, as documented by Josephus, which Luke also references in Acts 5:37. Others hold that this was Quirinius’s first census in Syria, distinguishing it from a later one.

The silence of Josephus regarding this census invites scrutiny into the closing years of Herod's reign, during which he faced conflict with the Arabian king Hovod. This conflict escalated due to the non-return of money owed, alongside incursions by Arabian bandits. Herod sought restitution but encountered resistance, leading him to consult the emperor’s officials in Syria. Eventually, tensions culminated in Herod’s invasion of Arabia, resulting in significant casualties among the Arabians. Josephus recounts that Augustus, upon hearing the reports, shifted his view of Herod from ally to subject, leading to profound consequences in Herod's governance.

In the climactic tension of these events, Herod faced internal discohesion as familial strife unfolded within his household. Associative conspiracies among his son Antipater and Herod's brother-in-law, Theros, prompted Herod’s apprehension and subsequent actions against perceived threats to his power. This was exacerbated by the emergence of a sect of Jews known as Pharisees, who resisted Herod's authority, culminating in punitive actions against them.

Josephus narrates that the refusal of a group of Pharisees to accept loyalty to the emperor during the census might align with the call for allegiance recorded in the Gospel, drawing a parallel between secular and scriptural truths. The uproar in Jerusalem regarding the news of a new king illustrates the fervor surrounding the birth, as well as the subsequent reactions from Herod, who responded with violence against the innocents of Bethlehem.

The intertwining accounts from Josephus and the Gospel narratives indicate a profound historical convergence that enhances our understanding of the Messiah's birth and environment, reaffirming the prophecy and the anticipated divine victory over worldly powers. Josephus's critiques of the Pharisees, alongside the prophetic declarations within the context of Jesus's birth, culminate in a narrative where the promise of the Messiah is thrown into stark relief against the backdrop of political turmoil and prophetic expectation.

Thus, during the census in David's era (2 Samuel 24:24), the census-takers went from city to city. By Herod's time, this localized division had ceased to exist. Nevertheless, genealogical records persisted, encompassing both familial and public registers. As a result, the census under Herod required all individuals to return to their respective towns according to these public genealogical records. The Evangelist specifies that Joseph was “of the house and lineage of David,” which leads to the assumption that his enrollment was necessary. However, Mary also traveled with him. Some scholars posit that Mary might have been a descendant with hereditary land rights in or around Bethlehem, making her subject to the census as well. Yet, this theory does not clarify why Mary's personal presence was essential for the registration: under Jewish law, her inherited property would belong to her husband upon marriage. Others suggest that Mary needed to be listed in the census like any ordinary woman, as Roman law imposed general taxation on women aged twelve and older. However, Jewish tradition, which dictated the census process, did not necessitate her physical presence for registration. Some interpreters seek to explain Mary's journey to Bethlehem by noting her pregnancy, suggesting that she required the support of someone close, namely Joseph. While this hypothesis is plausible, the Evangelist’s mention of her pregnancy is better understood not as an explanation for her journey but as an introduction to the subsequent narrative.

As they descended from the hillside village of Nazareth, their path meandered through the valley of Jezreel, now appearing desolate, but during that time was vibrant with industrious life. According to Josephus, Galilee back then was densely populated, boasting 240 towns and villages, the smallest of which held no fewer than fifteen thousand residents. Even if some exaggeration exists in this account, the population of the region was undeniably significant. An ancient Arabian legend suggested that a traveler could wander for an entire year without passing two nights in the same village. Their route was lined with towns and sites that stirred the historical memories of any earnest traveler.

Departing from the rounded summit of Tabor on their left, the road led south toward Jezreel, once the proud capital of Ahab, known for his wickedness. Just east of Jezreel lay the mountains of Gilboa, where the ill-fated King Saul met his end in a fierce battle against the Philistines. On their right was Dothan, renowned for its lush pastures—where Joseph had previously visited his brothers and faced their treachery. Their journey took them through rich gardens, vineyards, and fields until they reached Samaria, which had recently been magnificently rebuilt by Herod and renamed Sebastia in honor of Augustus, the Roman emperor. However, the righteous travelers could not linger in Samaria or its cities, as they were met with disdain or hostility from the Samaritans, who held a longstanding enmity toward the Jews. Thus, after perhaps pausing at Jacob's well near Shechem, they hurried to leave the land of Samaria in search of rest in the sacred land of Israel.

Upon crossing the hill of Akravvim, which marked the border between Samaria and Judea, they entered Judea, where they encountered the most sacred sites for every Jew. Firstly, they beheld the place of Shiloh, where the tabernacle had once stood and where the devoted Hannah had come to pour out her heart in prayer, as well as Gilgal, where her son, the esteemed prophet Samuel, was blessed. Their journey continued through a series of cities rich in historical significance until they eventually arrived at the gates of Jerusalem. Yet, Joseph and Mary's destination was not the capital, but rather the city of Bethlehem, the birthplace of their royal ancestor David, located about ten kilometers south of Jerusalem.

Bethlehem was situated on the slope of a steep hill, characterized by narrow, winding streets that formed irregular rows, offering a breathtaking view of the surrounding hills. On one of these hills, five kilometers to the east, stood Herod's fortress, Herodium, while further east, beyond the Jordan River, were the majestic Moabite mountains, resplendent in the sunlight's glow. The hillside of Bethlehem was encircled by cliffs that descended in terraces to the valleys below, with some areas adorned by vineyards and various fruit trees—olive trees, fig trees, and pomegranate trees. In the small plain adjacent to the city, barley fields still remained vibrant at certain seasons; this land once belonged to the prosperous Boaz, where Ruth, David's ancestor, gleaned in the fields and discovered her happiness, earning her a revered place in the history of God's chosen people.

Therefore, when Caesar's census decree was issued, which necessitated Joseph's trip to Bethlehem, might it not have stirred their righteous beliefs that Caesar's decree, under God's providential hand, was the means through which the prophecies would be fulfilled, ensuring that their Son, the Messiah, would be born in Bethlehem and not elsewhere? Moreover, despite the approaching time of her pregnancy, or perhaps precisely because of it, Mary made the decision to accompany her betrothed to Bethlehem, recognizing this as part of God's wonderful providence for her and her forthcoming child.