Holy Family A

this account of a wicked pagan tyrant killing the male children and of Jesus escaping death by Joseph and Mary fleeing to Egypt cannot help but recall the story of Moses and the exodus. Just as Moses was protected from Pharaoh’s plot to kill the Hebrew male children, so Jesus was saved from Herod’s massacre of the male children by divine intervention. Furthermore, Egypt played a role in both Moses’ and Jesus’ escapes from death. Moses grew up in an Egyptian household, which protected him from Pharaoh’s wicked decree, while Jesus was taken by his family to Egypt to avoid Herod’s violence. This correspondence with Moses’ childhood tells us something important about Jesus’ future: the infant Jesus experiences divine protection from the evil rulers of this world because he, like Moses, is destined to save the people of Israel. Indeed, as Matthew already noted, Jesus will “save the people from their sins” (1:21).

This account of a wicked pagan tyrant killing the male children and of Jesus escaping death by Joseph and Mary fleeing to Egypt cannot help but recall the story of Moses and the exodus. Just as Moses was protected from Pharaoh’s plot to kill the Hebrew male children, so Jesus was saved from Herod’s massacre of the male children by divine intervention. Furthermore, Egypt played a role in both Moses’ and Jesus’ escapes from death. Moses grew up in an Egyptian household, which protected him from Pharaoh’s wicked decree, while Jesus was taken by his family to Egypt to avoid Herod’s violence. This correspondence with Moses’ childhood tells us something important about Jesus’ future: the infant Jesus experiences divine protection from the evil rulers of this world because he, like Moses, is destined to save the people of Israel. Indeed, as Matthew already noted, Jesus will “save the people from their sins” (1:21).

This account of a wicked pagan tyrant killing the male children and of Jesus escaping death by Joseph and Mary fleeing to Egypt cannot help but recall the story of Moses and the exodus. Just as Moses was protected from Pharaoh’s plot to kill the Hebrew male children, so Jesus was saved from Herod’s massacre of the male children by divine intervention. Furthermore, Egypt played a role in both Moses’ and Jesus’ escapes from death. Moses grew up in an Egyptian household, which protected him from Pharaoh’s wicked decree, while Jesus was taken by his family to Egypt to avoid Herod’s violence. This correspondence with Moses’ childhood tells us something important about Jesus’ future: the infant Jesus experiences divine protection from the evil rulers of this world because he, like Moses, is destined to save the people of Israel. Indeed, as Matthew already noted, Jesus will “save the people from their sins” (1:21).

The account of the flight to Egypt also links Jesus with Israel’s exodus from Egypt. Here we find Matthew’s second fulfillment quotation, : Out of Egypt I called my son. This passage looked back to the founding of the nation, when God called his firstborn son, Israel, out of slavery in Egypt (; ). Matthew views it typologically as pointing forward to this occasion when God rescues his beloved son Jesus from the tyrant Herod and later brings him out of Egypt (2:21).

The account of the flight to Egypt also links Jesus with Israel’s exodus from Egypt. Here we find Matthew’s second fulfillment quotation, : Out of Egypt I called my son. This passage looked back to the founding of the nation, when God called his firstborn son, Israel, out of slavery in Egypt (; ). Matthew views it typologically as pointing forward to this occasion when God rescues his beloved son Jesus from the tyrant Herod and later brings him out of Egypt (2:21).

2:16–18 When the magi failed to return to Herod, he ordered the massacre of all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity two years old and under. Such violence is consistent with other ruthless acts Herod performed near the end of his life, including the murder of his own wife and sons whom he feared were trying to supplant him (see Biblical Background sidebar). Yet, as horrific as the “Massacre of the Holy Innocents” was, it probably was not of the magnitude that is sometimes imagined. Bethlehem in the first century had a maximum of a thousand people, and there were probably only about twenty male children under age two dwelling in the village and surrounding district. It is not surprising that other historical works from this period do not mention this event. As tragic as these killings would have been, they remain on a smaller scale compared to Herod’s other atrocities.

2:19 After Herod dies, an angel appears in a dream to Joseph in Egypt. The mention of “dream,” “Joseph,” and “Egypt” recalls the Old Testament patriarch Joseph, who was known for having and interpreting dreams about the future in Egypt (; ). Like the Joseph of old, Joseph the husband of Mary is associated with dreams. An angel tells him in a dream to take Mary as his wife and name the child Jesus (1:20). In other dreams Joseph is warned to flee to Egypt (2:13), told to return to Israel (2:19–20), and cautioned to go to Galilee in order to avoid Judea (2:22). There are other parallels between these two Josephs. Both have a father named Jacob (; ). Both are persecuted—the old Joseph being sold into slavery (), the new Joseph having to flee from Herod. Both Josephs go to Egypt (; ). Finally, both save their families. The Joseph of old saves his family from starvation during a famine (), while the new Joseph protects his family from Herod’s murderous plot. Thus Joseph the husband of Mary is portrayed as having the mission of saving his family from harm, similar to the Joseph of old.

Biblical Background

Biblical Background

Herod the Great

Herod the Great

Herod the Great was born in the late 70s BC into an aristocratic Idumean family that converted to Judaism a half century earlier. He was appointed by the Romans to rule over the Jews, first as governor over Galilee (47–37 BC) and then as king of the Jews (37–34 BC). Herod was known for his massive building projects that brought him fame throughout the Roman Empire and for imposing heavy taxes that caused hardship among the Jewish people. The last ten years of his life were the most turbulent, as he became increasingly suspicious about plots from within his family to supplant him. He changed his will six times to name different sons as his successor. He even killed his own wife, mother-in-law, and three eldest sons out of fear of court conspiracies. His paranoia about potential family rivals became so notorious that the neighboring governor of Syria once said he would rather be Herod’s pig than Herod’s son. The report in about Herod’s killing the male children around Bethlehem out of fear of a rival newborn king is consistent with the picture we have of him in his latter years. Herod died in 4 BC, and the Romans divided his kingdom among his remaining three sons, Philip (14:3), Archelaus (2:22), and Herod Antipas (14:1–6). Herod Antipas was made tetrarch of Perea and Galilee, where most of Jesus’ public ministry takes place in the synoptic Gospels.

Herod the Great was born in the late 70s BC into an aristocratic Idumean family that converted to Judaism a half century earlier. He was appointed by the Romans to rule over the Jews, first as governor over Galilee (47–37 BC) and then as king of the Jews (37–34 BC). Herod was known for his massive building projects that brought him fame throughout the Roman Empire and for imposing heavy taxes that caused hardship among the Jewish people. The last ten years of his life were the most turbulent, as he became increasingly suspicious about plots from within his family to supplant him. He changed his will six times to name different sons as his successor. He even killed his own wife, mother-in-law, and three eldest sons out of fear of court conspiracies. His paranoia about potential family rivals became so notorious that the neighboring governor of Syria once said he would rather be Herod’s pig than Herod’s son. The report in about Herod’s killing the male children around Bethlehem out of fear of a rival newborn king is consistent with the picture we have of him in his latter years. Herod died in 4 BC, and the Romans divided his kingdom among his remaining three sons, Philip (14:3), Archelaus (2:22), and Herod Antipas (14:1–6). Herod Antipas was made tetrarch of Perea and Galilee, where most of Jesus’ public ministry takes place in the synoptic Gospels.

In his third fulfillment quotation, Matthew quotes , which refers to a voice of lamentation in Ramah. The Assyrians attacked Ramah in the eighth century BC, and in 586 BC the Babylonians assembled the defeated Jews there before marching them into exile in Babylon. This is why Jeremiah says that the sorrowful voice from Ramah was Rachel weeping for her children. As the wife of the patriarch Jacob, Rachel represents a great matriarch of Israel. Thus in its original context the prophecy depicts Rachel weeping for her descendants as they are being carried away into exile. Matthew uses the prophecy to describe Bethlehem as a new city of sorrow as this new horror has befallen God’s people there.

In his third fulfillment quotation, Matthew quotes , which refers to a voice of lamentation in Ramah. The Assyrians attacked Ramah in the eighth century BC, and in 586 BC the Babylonians assembled the defeated Jews there before marching them into exile in Babylon. This is why Jeremiah says that the sorrowful voice from Ramah was Rachel weeping for her children. As the wife of the patriarch Jacob, Rachel represents a great matriarch of Israel. Thus in its original context the prophecy depicts Rachel weeping for her descendants as they are being carried away into exile. Matthew uses the prophecy to describe Bethlehem as a new city of sorrow as this new horror has befallen God’s people there.

2:19 After Herod dies, an angel appears in a dream to Joseph in Egypt. The mention of “dream,” “Joseph,” and “Egypt” recalls the Old Testament patriarch Joseph, who was known for having and interpreting dreams about the future in Egypt (; ). Like the Joseph of old, Joseph the husband of Mary is associated with dreams. An angel tells him in a dream to take Mary as his wife and name the child Jesus (1:20). In other dreams Joseph is warned to flee to Egypt (2:13), told to return to Israel (2:19–20), and cautioned to go to Galilee in order to avoid Judea (2:22). There are other parallels between these two Josephs. Both have a father named Jacob (; ). Both are persecuted—the old Joseph being sold into slavery (), the new Joseph having to flee from Herod. Both Josephs go to Egypt (; ). Finally, both save their families. The Joseph of old saves his family from starvation during a famine (), while the new Joseph protects his family from Herod’s murderous plot. Thus Joseph the husband of Mary is portrayed as having the mission of saving his family from harm, similar to the Joseph of old.

2:19 After Herod dies, an angel appears in a dream to Joseph in Egypt. The mention of “dream,” “Joseph,” and “Egypt” recalls the Old Testament patriarch Joseph, who was known for having and interpreting dreams about the future in Egypt (; ). Like the Joseph of old, Joseph the husband of Mary is associated with dreams. An angel tells him in a dream to take Mary as his wife and name the child Jesus (1:20). In other dreams Joseph is warned to flee to Egypt (2:13), told to return to Israel (2:19–20), and cautioned to go to Galilee in order to avoid Judea (2:22). There are other parallels between these two Josephs. Both have a father named Jacob (; ). Both are persecuted—the old Joseph being sold into slavery (), the new Joseph having to flee from Herod. Both Josephs go to Egypt (; ). Finally, both save their families. The Joseph of old saves his family from starvation during a famine (), while the new Joseph protects his family from Herod’s murderous plot. Thus Joseph the husband of Mary is portrayed as having the mission of saving his family from harm, similar to the Joseph of old.

2:20–21 The angel instructs Joseph to return to the land of Israel, for those who sought the child’s life are dead. These words from the angel are almost verbatim what God said to Moses when calling him to return to the people of Israel: “For all the men who sought your life are dead” (). Jesus therefore emerges again as a new Moses (see 2:13–15). The death of the pharaoh who sought Moses’ life made it safe for Moses to return to the Israelite people in Egypt and begin his mission of setting them free. Similarly, Herod’s death means it is now safe for Jesus to return to Israel, where he will begin his own saving mission.

2:23 Joseph settles his family in Nazareth, a small, obscure village in the Galilean hills that had at the most 480 people at the beginning of the first century.

2:22 But it was not safe for him to return to the region of Judea, because Archelaus was ruling over Judea in place of his father Herod. Herod the Great ruled for the Romans as king over all of Palestine. When he died, Rome appointed his son Archelaus to rule from Jerusalem as ethnarch over the regions of Samaria, Judea, and Idumea. Archelaus had a violent beginning. He unleashed his army on Passover pilgrims in Jerusalem, killing three thousand and sparking revolts in every major district of Palestine. One can understand why Joseph would be afraid to go back there, since Bethlehem was close to Archelaus in Jerusalem. Thus while the angel tells Joseph to return to the land of Israel, he also warns him of the dangers of Archelaus, and Joseph leads his family to the region of Galilee, which was north of Judea and not under Archelaus’ control.

2:22 But it was not safe for him to return to the region of Judea, because Archelaus was ruling over Judea in place of his father Herod. Herod the Great ruled for the Romans as king over all of Palestine. When he died, Rome appointed his son Archelaus to rule from Jerusalem as ethnarch over the regions of Samaria, Judea, and Idumea. Archelaus had a violent beginning. He unleashed his army on Passover pilgrims in Jerusalem, killing three thousand and sparking revolts in every major district of Palestine. One can understand why Joseph would be afraid to go back there, since Bethlehem was close to Archelaus in Jerusalem. Thus while the angel tells Joseph to return to the land of Israel, he also warns him of the dangers of Archelaus, and Joseph leads his family to the region of Galilee, which was north of Judea and not under Archelaus’ control.

2:23 Joseph settles his family in Nazareth, a small, obscure village in the Galilean hills that had at the most 480 people at the beginning of the first century. Although this town was not known for anything important (see ), Matthew sees great significance in Jesus being raised in a place called Nazareth, noting that this fulfills what had been spoken through the prophets … “He shall be called a Nazorean.” This fourth fulfillment quotation in Matthew is the most mysterious, since there is no text in the entire Old Testament stating that the messiah would be called a Nazorean. However, on closer examination, Matthew does not seem to be referring to one single prophetic text. The fact that he refers to “the prophets” in the plural—which is quite significant, since in the other ten fulfillment quotations he refers to what he says was spoken by an individual prophet—seems to indicate that he is referring to a theme in the prophets. In this light, we see that “He shall be called a Nazorean” alludes not to a single prophecy but to a larger theme in the prophetic tradition: the theme of the messianic branch.

2:23 Joseph settles his family in Nazareth, a small, obscure village in the Galilean hills that had at the most 480 people at the beginning of the first century. Although this town was not known for anything important (see ), Matthew sees great significance in Jesus being raised in a place called Nazareth, noting that this fulfills what had been spoken through the prophets … “He shall be called a Nazorean.” This fourth fulfillment quotation in Matthew is the most mysterious, since there is no text in the entire Old Testament stating that the messiah would be called a Nazorean. However, on closer examination, Matthew does not seem to be referring to one single prophetic text. The fact that he refers to “the prophets” in the plural—which is quite significant, since in the other ten fulfillment quotations he refers to what he says was spoken by an individual prophet—seems to indicate that he is referring to a theme in the prophets. In this light, we see that “He shall be called a Nazorean” alludes not to a single prophecy but to a larger theme in the prophetic tradition: the theme of the messianic branch.

First, Matthew is making a play on words, drawing on the similarities between the word Nazareth and the word netser, which in Hebrew means “branch.” This is significant because in some Old Testament prophecies the symbol of the branch is used to refer to the messiah. Most notably, states that the great tree of the Davidic dynasty had been reduced to “the stump of Jesse.” Jesse was the father of David, the founder of the dynasty. The image of this royal tree being cut down would recall the tragic Babylonian invasion of 586 BC, when the Davidic heirs were ousted from power and the people sent off into exile. No Davidic king ruled from that point all the way up to the time of Christ. Yet Isaiah’s prophecy offered hope: out of the stump of Jesse would grow a branch—a symbol of the royal line continuing even through the exilic period. Matthew sees in this prophecy that a messianic figure would come from this line. Anointed with the Lord’s spirit, this king would establish a worldwide kingdom, reuniting the divided peoples of the earth ().

First, Matthew is making a play on words, drawing on the similarities between the word Nazareth and the word netser, which in Hebrew means “branch.” This is significant because in some Old Testament prophecies the symbol of the branch is used to refer to the messiah. Most notably, states that the great tree of the Davidic dynasty had been reduced to “the stump of Jesse.” Jesse was the father of David, the founder of the dynasty. The image of this royal tree being cut down would recall the tragic Babylonian invasion of 586 BC, when the Davidic heirs were ousted from power and the people sent off into exile. No Davidic king ruled from that point all the way up to the time of Christ. Yet Isaiah’s prophecy offered hope: out of the stump of Jesse would grow a branch—a symbol of the royal line continuing even through the exilic period. Matthew sees in this prophecy that a messianic figure would come from this line. Anointed with the Lord’s spirit, this king would establish a worldwide kingdom, reuniting the divided peoples of the earth ().

Second, this prophecy of Isaiah made such an impression on the Jews that other prophets used the image of the branch to describe the future Davidic king who would save the people (; ; ; ). Therefore, although no prophecy explicitly states that “He shall be called a Nazorean,” there is a strong tradition in the Old Testament prophets that refers to the messiah king as “the branch,” and this is what Matthew is most likely alluding to. Since the name of Jesus’ hometown (Nazareth) is similar to the word for branch (netser), Matthew is showing how fitting it is that Jesus, the messianic branch foretold by Isaiah, would be raised in the “branch” town of Nazareth.

Second, this prophecy of Isaiah made such an impression on the Jews that other prophets used the image of the branch to describe the future Davidic king who would save the people (; ; ; ). Therefore, although no prophecy explicitly states that “He shall be called a Nazorean,” there is a strong tradition in the Old Testament prophets that refers to the messiah king as “the branch,” and this is what Matthew is most likely alluding to. Since the name of Jesus’ hometown (Nazareth) is similar to the word for branch (netser), Matthew is showing how fitting it is that Jesus, the messianic branch foretold by Isaiah, would be raised in the “branch” town of Nazareth.

Mitch, C., & Sri, E. (2010). The Gospel of Matthew (pp. 56–59). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Mitch, C., & Sri, E. (2010). The Gospel of Matthew (pp. 56–59). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

The Gospel we just heard shows that from his earliest days Jesus attracted the hostility of the powerful who feared losing power. An angel warns Joseph in a dream that Herod intends to search for the child and destroy him. Scholars tell us that the Greek verb for destroy, apollynai, which Matthew uses to express the angel’s warning to Joseph, “Herod is going to search for the child to destroy him …” (), is the same verb used in the passion narrative to describe how the priests and elders wished to destroy Jesus (). Matthew seems to be telling us that at both the beginning and end of his life Jesus was vulnerable. The forces that would demand his life in the praetorium at Jerusalem were also conspiring to take his life in the stable at Bethlehem. The familiar and warm images of the baby Jesus in a manger surrounded by shepherds and magi cannot entirely obscure the reality of the cross that will follow him throughout his life.

But like the passion narrative that would come much later in Matthew’s Gospel, the infancy narrative reveals another more powerful force at work in the unfolding drama. Just as God did not abandon Jesus at Calvary, so too God would act to save the child Jesus, warning him through the mediation of an angel and protecting him through the courage and skill of his foster father, Joseph. Through the use of the long genealogy of Jesus, Matthew shows us that Jesus was truly the son of David, son of Abraham. Today’s account assures us that God would not allow the promise of a savior to be thwarted by any worldly force.

If the cross followed Jesus throughout his childhood, then we should not be surprised that the cross is present in the lives or our own children as well. Millions of children today, both the born and the unborn, are vulnerable to powerful forces beyond their control. Now it is not the hostility of Herod that haunts the smallest representatives of Christ; it is, instead, the scourge of being unwanted, the evil of hunger and disease, the forces of war and dislocation that stalk the most vulnerable among us. The cross that casts its shadow over the children of our world today is the same cross that followed Jesus from Bethlehem to Calvary.

Teach What You Believe: Timeless Homilies for Deacons: Liturgical Cycle A Homily 10: The Cross at Bethlehem: Holy Family (A)

The Gospel we just heard shows that from his earliest days Jesus attracted the hostility of the powerful who feared losing power. An angel warns Joseph in a dream that Herod intends to search for the child and destroy him. Scholars tell us that the Greek verb for destroy, apollynai, which Matthew uses to express the angel’s warning to Joseph, “Herod is going to search for the child to destroy him …” (Matt 2:13), is the same verb used in the passion narrative to describe how the priests and elders wished to destroy Jesus (Matt 27:20). Matthew seems to be telling us that at both the beginning and end of his life Jesus was vulnerable. The forces that would demand his life in the praetorium at Jerusalem were also conspiring to take his life in the stable at Bethlehem. The familiar and warm images of the baby Jesus in a manger surrounded by shepherds and magi cannot entirely obscure the reality of the cross that will follow him throughout his life.

But like the passion narrative that would come much later in Matthew’s Gospel, the infancy narrative reveals another more powerful force at work in the unfolding drama. Just as God did not abandon Jesus at Calvary, so too God would act to save the child Jesus, warning him through the mediation of an angel and protecting him through the courage and skill of his foster father, Joseph. Through the use of the long genealogy of Jesus, Matthew shows us that Jesus was truly the son of David, son of Abraham. Today’s account assures us that God would not allow the promise of a savior to be thwarted by any worldly force.

If the cross followed Jesus throughout his childhood, then we should not be surprised that the cross is present in the lives or our own children as well. Millions of children today, both the born and the unborn, are vulnerable to powerful forces beyond their control. Now it is not the hostility of Herod that haunts the smallest representatives of Christ; it is, instead, the scourge of being unwanted, the evil of hunger and disease, the forces of war and dislocation that stalk the most vulnerable among us. The cross that casts its shadow over the children of our world today is the same cross that followed Jesus from Bethlehem to Calvary.

We cannot know with much certainty any of the details of Jesus’ early life. But this we can know with certainty: Jesus was vulnerable before the forces of his day. But from the very beginning to the very end Jesus would know the loving protection of his Father, manifested in the care and protection of his foster father, Joseph, and his mother, Mary. We now stand in the place of Joseph and Mary, protecting, nurturing, and caring for the children who stand in the place of the child Jesus.

Jesus was vulnerable before the forces of his day. But from the very beginning to the very end Jesus would know the loving protection of his Father, manifested in the care and protection of his foster father, Joseph, and his mother, Mary. We now stand in the place of Joseph and Mary, protecting, nurturing, and caring for the children who stand in the place of the child Jesus.

Bulson, M. E. (2007). Homily 10: Holy Family (A). In Teach What You Believe: Timeless Homilies for Deacons: Liturgical Cycle A (pp. 30–31). New York; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.