Matthew 2:22Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

But you might wonder, if Joseph was apprehensive about Judea due to Archelaus, why didn’t he fear Galilee because of Herod? The apprehension was mitigated by the shift in location. The threat had predominantly targeted Bethlehem and its vicinity, and with the massacre already executed, Archelaus felt secure, presuming that the individual they sought had already perished along with the multitude. Furthermore, upon witnessing his father's end, he might have been deterred from further malicious actions. Consequently, Joseph settled in Nazareth, both to ensure safety and to reside in his homeland. An angel provided him with significant reassurance regarding this decision.

However, St. Luke does not indicate that Joseph's move to Nazareth was prompted by such an angelic message; instead, he narrates that Joseph and Mary returned to Nazareth after completing all requirements of the purification law. How do we interpret this? St. Luke refers to this situation as occurring prior to their journey to Egypt. Surely, the angel would not have directed them to depart before they fulfilled the purification laws, as that would violate the regulations; he waited until these obligations were met, leading them to Nazareth before instructing them to flee to Egypt. Upon their return, he then commanded them to go back to Nazareth; initially, their journey there was not at the behest of the angel but through their heartfelt attachment to their homeland. Their trip to Bethlehem was solely for the census and finding no accommodation, they returned to Nazareth upon finishing what they had come to do. Thus, the angel guided them back home and offered them comfort for their future. This was not merely coincidental but rather unfolded according to prophecy.

The angel guided Joseph to Galilee so that the birth of the Child, the arrival of the wise men, the fear and fury of Herod, and the tragic events that followed would be known and made known in Bethlehem, its surroundings, and across all Judea. However, these matters did not occur in Galilee, as the news was swiftly quelled with Herod’s death, resulting in no need for any investigation regarding the Child there. Furthermore, Antipas, the ruler of Galilee, exhibited greater modesty and justice than his father and brother Archelaus. It is essential to understand that Joseph's journey to Galilee also fulfilled prophetic declarations, as he settled in the city of Nazareth once he arrived there.

However, after receiving divine guidance in a dream, he traveled to the region of Galilee, which was under the rule of Herod Antipas, a less cruel and negligent brother of Archelaus. Following Herod's death, the Roman emperor partitioned his kingdom into four sections in accordance with the number of his sons; thus, they were referred to not as kings, but as tetrarchs, as noted in the Gospel.

The residents of Nazareth clearly harbored significant skepticism toward Jesus due to their extensive familiarity with Him as a child, youth, and carpenter’s son, as well as a relative of ordinary individuals. It seems likely that this prejudice would have deepened if those in Jerusalem, who earlier celebrated His birth as that of the Messiah, had had daily encounters with Him during His childhood and early years, potentially leading to disappointment after a prolonged period of observing Him without recognizing any signs of the divine dignity anticipated. The inhabitants of Jerusalem, always seeking signs and wonders, were just as incapable of maintaining their grand hopes regarding Him, as were those in Nazareth, after knowing Him so closely.

The authentic record of Jesus' early years, as noted by the Evangelist, is simply this: But Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men. The fullness of the Godhead that resided in Him was not instantly manifested; though the divine essence was within Him from the beginning, it was veiled by the limitations of His human nature. As His mental and physical faculties matured, the Godhead within Him became increasingly evident. Just as the sun shines with consistent brilliance while displaying differing intensities throughout the day, so too did Jesus gradually reveal His divine nature, especially in His mind and understanding, with His words, actions, and demeanor reflecting a divine grace and beauty.

What we profess as the authentic narrative of Jesus Christ's early years contrasts sharply with subsequent myths and legends that proliferated, filling the span of His life from His time in Nazareth until His twelfth year and subsequent journey to Jerusalem with miraculous tales. Notably, Epiphanius seemed to entertain the idea of such tales to prevent heretical claims that Christ merely descended upon Jesus at His baptism. Conversely, Chrysostom explicitly rejected these traditions. It is essential to differentiate the genuine account of Jesus Christ's infancy from later speculative ideas about the development of His powers, which, while they extend beyond His infancy, encompass His entire life leading up to His public ministry.

Their understanding was that the promised Messiah, being the son of David, ought to be raised in Bethlehem, close to Jerusalem, the seat of God's people and near the temple, which was central to the worship of the Old Testament. Upon their arrival in Judea, they learned that Archelaus, who was as ruthless and violent as his father Herod, ruled there. This news caused Joseph and Mary to once again worry about the safety of the child entrusted to them by God. However, a revelation to Joseph in a dream directed them to withdraw to Nazareth, alleviating their uncertainty.

Herod's death removed the heavy hand that had quelled both fear and hope among the populace. The fervor simmering within the people's collective heart had been exacerbated by preceding events, like the tumult in the temple. His demise left a void where no one stood to quell the long-held resentment and discontent. It appeared that Providence had allowed Herod's reign to last in order to delay the fracturing of the Jewish nation and its scattering among the Gentiles, thereby facilitating a smoother integration with the world and fostering greater sympathy for Judaism among the Gentile nations, granting it a rightful place as the salt of the earth and a precursor to Christianity. The liberation of the throne of David from the bloodthirsty Edomite was overwhelmingly celebrated by the people. Centuries of hostility marked the relationship between the Israelites and Edomites, stretching back to their ancestral enmity. Jewish lore deepened this animosity, recounting how Esau ultimately struck Jacob with an arrow (Jubil. 37). Upon their exodus from Egypt, Edom denied the Israelites passage through their land, forcing them to endure further hardship in the wilderness (Num. 20:14-21, Judg. 11:17-18). The Edomites were persistent foes of Saul, Israel's inaugural monarch (1 Sam. 14:47), and were subdued by David, both he and Solomon reigning over them in turn. In the period of Israel's decline, especially under its last monarchs, they turned into its most merciless adversaries, allying with the Chaldeans in the ultimate conquest of Judah under Nebuchadnezzar, relishing in Jerusalem's ruin with the hopes of claiming its wealth for themselves.

Prophets like Amos and Joel in the ninth century B.C. highlighted their treachery and opposition against God's governance, declaring, 'Edom shall be a waste steppe' due to the oppression of Judah's children and the shedding of innocent blood in their land (Joel 3:19). As Amos prophesied, 'For three transgressions of Edom, and for four, I will not revoke my punishment, because he pursued his brother with the sword and cast off all pity' (Am. 1:11-12). The prophet Obadiah condemned the Edomites for their gloating over Israel's misfortunes during the day of Jerusalem's pillage (Obd. 1:10). The collective testimony of the prophets marked Edom as an adversary of God, destined for ultimate destruction by the chosen people. During the Babylonian captivity, they seized considerable tracts of Jewish land, ultimately faced with expulsion by John Hyrcanus around 135-106 B.C. — a victory that mandated their circumcision. Such a history only amplified the relentless enmity between the tribes.

Thus, as a Jew expressed regarding Edom during Herod's reign, he envisaged a future where the children of Jacob would once again dominate their foes (Judg. 38). Meanwhile, Herod of Edomite lineage reigned over Israel for over a generation, casting a shadow of national disgrace that weighed heavily upon the chosen people. Following his death, the general feeling of hope suggested that he might be the last of his lineage to behold the throne of David. However, this sentiment proved transient. Archelaus, upon succeeding Herod, was viewed with even greater disdain, portrayed not only as a descendant of Idumean blood, but moreover, as the offspring of a Samaritan woman. Herod’s court intrigues and Antipater's relentless rivalries led to a division of the kingdom as the only resolution to the feuds among the royal family. The territories beyond the Jordan were allotted to Philip, while Antipas received Galilee and Perea, with Archelaus being granted Judea, Idumea, and Samaria under the title of king.

Herod's sister Salome, a fierce adversary of the Maccabean lineage, was gifted several cities in exchange for her allegiance. Upon her brother's demise, she and her spouse hastened to release all the noble Jews whom Herod had summoned to Jericho, ostensibly to execute them at his dying hour. They soon assembled the army and the populace at the Jericho amphitheater to unveil the late king’s will and relay it to Caesar for endorsement. Meanwhile, the soldiers proclaimed Archelaus as king and took their oaths of allegiance. Notably, Archelaus threw a lavish feast on the very night of Herod’s death. Following the grand funeral observances—wherein a crown was placed upon Herod’s head, a scepter in his hand, and he was laid to rest in a golden adorned bier—the new monarch faced significant familial DISCORD over their inheritance.

When he addressed the gathered crowd, Archelaus feigned gratitude towards the Jews for their loyalty, promising a multitude of reforms upon Augustus's confirmation. However, as discontent brewed among the populace demanding tax relief and the release of prisoners from recent uprisings, they clamored for retribution against those loyal to Herod. Archelaus's attempts to placate their anger only infused further unrest, especially as the approaching Passover brought throngs of pilgrims into the city. The disillusionment ultimately erupted violently when he ordered his troops to quell potential insurrections, resulting in a massacre that claimed approximately 3,000 lives, with many pilgrims forced to leave without partaking in their customary feast.

News of this brutality reached Rome, where a delegation of fifty Jews petitioned against Archelaus's rule, seeking Judea’s annexation to Syria under a Roman governor. Although this call echoed throughout the Jewish communities, it was met with mixed receptions and fueled the growing resentment towards the Herodian dynasty. The tumult stirred in the populace was entwined with hopes for a theocratic restoration under God's sole dominion, casting aside foreign rulers. The zeal for liberation resurfaced alongside a burgeoning sense of national pride, witnessed whenever the law was perceived as endangered. A group of zealots, inspired by the desire for divine governance, persisted in rebel movements stemming from earlier discontent against foreign oppression.

Turbulence characterized the land as Archelaus, seeing the cries for a restored theocracy intensifying, was compelled to quash rebellion ruthlessly. Despite the devastation wrought by Rome's legions that sought to quell these uprisings, the belief persisted among the Jewry that divine deliverance would emerge triumphantly, honoring God’s promise and ultimately culminating in a profound transformational shift that would forever alter the fate of Israel. Through all these tribulations, the threads binding a nation were being tested, leading the way towards the culmination of prophetic fulfillment that was to be witnessed in the coming ages.

Over a decade, the Jewish people, unable to endure his relentless cruelty and violence, appealed to Caesar Augustus, who summoned Archelaus to Rome, judged him guilty, and relegated him to exile in Gaul, transforming his territory into a Roman province. Thus, the autonomy of Judea came to an end, integrating it into the Roman Empire. Though the kings of Judea had been beholden to Caesar since the era of the last Maccabees, their authority was considerable, and the populace scarcely felt the Roman oppression. These rulers enacted laws, presided over civil justice, collected taxes, declared warfare, and brokered peace. However, with Judea's transition into a province governed by a Roman procurator accountable to the Syrian proconsul, all authority transferred to these officials, leaving the Jewish courts—the Sanhedrin and lower courts—exempt for minor disputes, much like Sicily and certain Italian cities maintained their own legal systems under the overarching authority of the Roman Senate and Caesar.

When Herod passed soon after the slaughter of the Bethlehem infants, the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream while in Egypt, instructing him to rise, take the Child and His mother, and return to the land of Israel, for those seeking the Child's life were dead. The angel did not command, "Run," but "go," for fear was no longer warranted (Bl. Theophylact); the cruel and suspicious oppressor who had hunted Christ was gone, allowing for a more deliberate journey that included the needed pauses for rest for Mother and Child. The angel's message fulfilled the promise made to Joseph prior to their flight to Egypt, reassuring him that the danger to the Divine Child had passed. Consequently, the faithful man promptly obeyed the heavenly instruction, taking the Child and His mother back to Israel. Nevertheless, news of Archelaus, who was equally tyrannical and bloodthirsty, ruling Judea in place of Herod illustrated that the peril had not subsided, causing Joseph to hesitate in returning. After the massacre of the children in Bethlehem, Archelaus believed, as St. John Chrysostom notes, "that all was concluded, and that among the many, the One they sought had also perished"; thus, the news of the Divine Child's presence in Judea and Bethlehem could arouse the suspicion of the new ruler and provoke a renewed threat against Him. Furthermore, staying in the area glorified by His birth and presentation in the temple, where many had already witnessed or heard about the Savior, conflicted with the divine wisdom that veiled the mystery of our redemption until the appropriate time. Jesus was not to be revealed as the Messiah until He reached maturity; an earlier revelation to the people could have fostered trivial doubts that would hinder faith in Him as the Savior.

"Among the residents of Nazareth," a local scholar observes, "it is evident how much animosity against Jesus arose from their familiarity with Him—knowing Him as an infant, knowing Him as a youth, knowing Him as a young man, knowing Him as the son of a carpenter, and knowing Him as an ordinary person among kin." This prejudice would likely have intensified had those in Jerusalem, who rejoiced at His birth as the Messiah, seen Him grow up, failing to detect anything that met their expectations even after years of observation. Could they have recognized His divine nature at the age of thirty after seeing no indication of it for so long? No, as the Jew in Jerusalem, perpetually in search of miracles and wonders, would have struggled to maintain the lofty aspirations associated with Him when Simeon and Anna spoke of Him and when the wise men from the East sought Him.