There was no such census.
EWTN Catholic Q&A
Luke 2:1-3
Question about the census of Quirinius:
Dear Father, the problem with the census of Quirinius in 6 A.D.in relation to the birth of Jesus is a big historical problem. As you well know, Quirinius was not the governor of Syria when Jesus was born in 4B.C.? Luke has Jesus born when Quirinius was governor in 6 A.D. and Matthew has Jesus born in the time of Herod around 4 B.C. I have been reading on this for some time now on how to reconcile this mistake in scripture but to no avail. Could you please explain this problem to me?
Answer by Fr. John Echert:
The Gospel of St. Luke records:
2:1 In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be enrolled. 2:2 This was the first enrollment, when Quirin'i-us was governor of Syria. 2:3 And all went to be enrolled, each to his own city. 2:4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, 2:5 to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. 2:6 And while they were there, the time came for her to be delivered. 2:7 And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.
As a well-educated Gentile writer of the ancient world and in accord with custom of the time, St. Luke dates biblical events such as the circumstances of the birth of Christ in the context of world events and persons associated with the Roman Empire. Even apart from divine inspiration it is hardly likely that someone as careful as St. Luke would make a glaring error with regards to such associations, and the absolutely inerrancy of the Bible assures us infallibly that there is no error. Yet some modern scholars are convinced—wrongly, of course—that St. Luke is in error in dating the birth of Christ as he does in this text, arguing that Caesar never ordered an empire-wide census and that the census of the Roman governor Quirinius did not occur until 6 AD. What can be said about this matter? First we must insist that whether or not we can solve the seeming inconsistency, we must affirm that there is no error on the part of the Evangelist, for then God Himself would be in error with regards to His Word. From there we may speculate as to possible solutions.
Various solutions have been proposed, including the following. Some would read the Greek of the text to read that this census was an earlier census than the more widely known census of 6 AD, namely, “This was an earlier census than when Quirinius was governor of Syria.” If that is the case, the census could have been done by Quirinius prior to his position as governor of Syria or even by Herod the Great. Others have suggested that St. Luke only intended to give an approximate date, though I find this less satisfying as a solution. More recently, some have suggested that this “enrollment” was not for tax purposes but was to swear allegiance to Augustus at a time when he was being proclaimed as a savior of the world type figure—about 2 BC. Even more interesting, however, is what Justin Martyr records of Quirinius, namely, that he was a procurator (governor) in Judea at the time of the birth of Christ. As such, he may have undertaken the census—perhaps regarding the allegiance to Augustus—at this time.
At any rate, what is increasingly clear is that we are not so certain about what St. Luke had in mind nor are we entirely certain about what transpired two thousand years ago. St. Luke was much closer in time and place and had excellent sources. If he had made a glaring historical error, it is likely that early manuscripts would have attempted to correct such a text, which is not the case. Quirinius was a Roman political representative in the region at the time of the birth of Christ, and so what St. Luke writes is all the more credible, even if the census of which the Evangelist writes is known to us only by his Gospel testimony. Much of what transpired in the ancient world—especially regarding more remote and obscure parts of the Empire—was never recorded or has been lost in the sands of time.
For a careful treatment of this topic, I recommend the extensive study note on this found in the recently published RSV-CE Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: The Gospel of Luke. It contains excellent notes by Dr. Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch.
God bless,
Father Echert