n. It may next be inquired whether the Nazarenes in later times fell into heresy. Augustine accuses them only of Judaizing {De Hmres. ix; Contr. Faust, xix, 4; Contr. Crescon. I, xxxi, 36 ; Episf. ad Hieron. Ixxxii ; ii, 16; De Bapt. contr. Donat. vii, 1). Epiphanius hav- ing briefly defined them in the prefatory index as Juda- izers, begins in the work itself (Jlceres. xxix) with stat- ing that they hold the same opinions as the Corin- thians, but in his seventh chapter he professes his inabil- ity to say whether they did or did not hold Corinthian doctrine regarding Christ. This quite sets aside his previous statement, which may be referred to his well- known proneness to make charges of heresy. In hisCom- mentary on Isaiah Jerome calls the Nazarenes the He- brews that believe in Christ (in Isa. cap. ix, t. 3, p. 33 [ed. 1G16]), giving the Nazarene explanation of the prophecy that Christ's doctrine delivered the land of Zebulon and Naphtali from . . . Jewish traditions, that by St. Paul's preaching the Gospel shone among the Gentiles, and at length the whole world saw the clear light of the Gospel (see also A d A ugust. Ep. 89, t. ii, p. 266 [ed.l616]). Accordingly Lardner writes, " It might easily be shown that the Nazarean Christians did not reject St. John's Gospel, nor hold any principles that oblige them to reject or dislike it" (Jewish Testimonies, cap. i, vol. vi, p. 387 [Kippis's ed. 1861]). On the other hand, Theodoret (iJe Iher.J'ab. ii, 2) accuses the Naza- renes of denying Christ's divinity ; but the later author- ity of Theodoret cannot outweigh the mass of earlier testimony in their favor.
III. Adopting, then, the conclusion that the Nazarenes retained their orthodox creed, it remains to be asked wliether they retained their position in the Church, or whether, while free from heretical error, they were yet sectarian. There is no historical information to enable us to answer this question; but there does not appear to be any sufficient reason why the Church of Jerusalem, when it renounced Judaism, should exclude the Church of Pella from communion simply for its retention of na- tional customs; and certainly there was no reason whj' the Church of Pella should renounce communion with Jerusalem. The general observance for some centuries of the decree of the Council of Jerusalem (Judaizers), enforcing on Gentiles abstinence from things strangled and from blood, implied also (it may fairly be argued) a liberty to the Jews to continue in the observance of their national law ; while canons intended to prevent Gentile churches from adopting Jewish customs do not
apply to the Nazarenes. On the other hand, the strong condemnations of the Nazarenes as heretics by Epipha- nius and Augustine can be fully explained only on the supposition that the Nazarenes had become the authors of a schism by renouncing communion with the Church. Augustine states in several places that the Nazarenes were called by some Sijmmachians (q. v.). See Gieseler, Von den Nazardern u. Ebioniten (in Staudlin u. Tzschir- ner's Archiv, vol. iv, St. 2); Schwegler, Das Nach- apostolische Zeitalter, p. 179 sq. ; Schliemann, Die Cle- mentinen nebst d. verwamlten Schriften, etc. (Hamb. 1844) ; Haag, Ilistoire des dogmes Chretiens, i, 109 ; ii, 22 ; Tay- ler, llippolyim and the Christian Church, p. 70 ; Hagen- bach, Historg of Doctrines, i, 55, 56, 170; ii, 328, 344; Schaff, History of the Christian Church, i, 212; Mos- heim, Eccles. Hist, i, 222, 400 ; Riddle, Christian An- tiquities, p. 182, 185; Neander, Ch, Hist, i, 349 et pas- sim ; Pressense, Heresy and Christian Doctrine, p. 78 ; Church Rev. vol. xx ; and especially the article in Blunt, Diet, of Sects, Heresies, etc., s. v., from which we have largely borrowed.
Naz'areth (// 'NaZapiSr or Na^wpsr ; usually thought to be a GriBcized derivative from "1^3, a sjn-out, Aram. rX"i;j3, see Hengstenberg, Christol. ii, 1 sq.; comp. Keim, Gesch. Jesu [Zur. 1867], i, 318; but Hitzig, in the Heidtlb. Jahrbilchern, 1870, p. 50, conjectures somewhat wildly an original form, n'1T3,with the sig- nif. " goddess of success"), the place of residence (but not the birthplace) of our Lord. In the following accoimt we avail ourselves to some extent of the statements in Fairbairn's and Smith's Dictionaries. See Jesus.
1. Scrijyture Mention. — Nazareth was the town of Joseph and Mary, to which they returned with the in- fant Jesus (f('c Trjv iroXiv iavrtZv) after the accom- plishment of the events connected with his birth and earliest infancy (Matt, ii, 22). Previous to that event, the place is altogether unknown to history. In Old- Testament Scripture it is never once named, though a town coidd hardly fail to have existed on so eligible a spot from early times. Josephus, though personally familiar with the whole district in which it lies, is equally silent regarding it. The secluded nature of the spot where it stands, together with its own insignifi- cance,- probably combined to shroud it in that obscurity on accoinit of which it would seem to have been divine- ly chosen for the rearing of God's incarnate Son. As his forerunner, John the Baptist, "was in the desert," unnoticed and unknown, "till the day of his showing unto Israel," so the great Messiah himself, till his public ministry began, was hidden from the world among the Galilifian hills.