It is no accident that the rulers of this world, both at the beginning of Jesus’ life and at the end, seek to destroy him.—Marcus Borg.

On this Second Sunday of Christmas, the infancy narrative of Jesus continues with the events in Matthew’s Gospel. In contrast to the peaceful scenes of Luke’s nativity story, Matthew paints a picture of impending danger as the Holy Family moves from place to place to insure the safety of the Christ Child. The story pivots on divine intervention through dreams and the willingness of Joseph to listen, to believe and act in accordance with God’s will. These events are unique to Matthew and are shown to be a part of God’s providential plan. Whereas all the Gospel writers sought to show that Jesus was indeed the fulfillment of the ancient prophecies, Matthew was especially concerned to provide this evidence.

After Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Mt. 1:18-25), wise men from the East came to pay him homage and offer their gifts (2:1-12). However, as these visitors prepared to leave, they were warned in a dream not to return to King Herod, who was always on guard against any threats to his power. His plan was not to worship the child, as he told the wise men, but to gain information in order to destroy a potential usurper.

After the departure of the wise men, Joseph was warned in a dream by an angel of the Lord to take his family and flee to Egypt, as the child was in danger from Herod. Although Egypt was the historic place of bondage from which the Lord had delivered Israel in the Exodus, it had also been a place of refuge (1 Ki. 11:40; 2 Ki. 25:26). In Israel’s earlier history, the patriarch Jacob moved his family to Egypt to escape famine (Gen. 37-50). Here Joseph assumes Jacob’s patriarchal role, taking action to insure the safety and well-being of his family.

Matthew points out that the sojourn in Egypt was another fulfillment of prophecy: “Out of Egypt I have called my son” (2:15), which is a reference to Hosea 11:1. The Hosea passage speaks of Israel’s exodus from Egypt, with “my son” referring to the nation of Israel. Now Jesus is identified as “my son” who will save God’s people from their sins (Mt. 1:21).

The most probable route taken by the Holy Family would have involved traveling through the desolate Judean wilderness, then navigating through the Sinai Peninsula before reaching the Egyptian border. The direct distance from Bethlehem to the border of Egypt is approximately 62 miles if one follows a straight line. However, the actual traveled distance would have been significantly longer due to the terrain and available paths.

When Herod realized that he had been tricked by the wise men, he ordered all children under two years of age in the area of Bethlehem to be killed, assuming that this action would eliminate the child in question (2:16-18; cf Ex. 1:16, 22). This extreme measure draws comparison to the story of Moses, who life was endangered when the Pharaoh ordered all the male children of the Hebrews to be killed. (Ex. 1:16, 22).

In the calendar of the Church Year, we remember the deaths of these children as well as innocent victims of violence in all times and places on the feast day of the Holy Innocents on December 28.

When Herod died in 4 BCE, the Lord once again came to Joseph in a dream and told him he could safely return to Israel (v. 20). However, with Archelaus, a son of Herod now in control of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. Joseph was still reluctant to go back to Bethlehem in Judea; therefore, in another dream, he was told to go to Galilee, which would be a safer place for them.

In this way, Joseph was guided to the obscure village of Nazareth in Galilee. Matthew says this was once again in fulfillment of the prophets: “He will be called a Nazorean” (v. 23). Although there is no direct Old Testament scriptural reference here, Matthew could be calling attention to the vocation of a nazir—one whose life was devoted to God (Jdg. 13:5). The reference could also point to neser or branch, a metaphor the Prophet Isaiah used to refer to the Messiah (Is. 11:1).

Here Matthew links the birth of Jesus to the history of Israel and sets the stage for events to come. The homage and gifts from the foreign visitors foreshadow Jesus’ acceptance by the Gentiles. The perils faced by the Holy Family show that from the beginning Jesus was perceived as a threat to the political and religious establishment that would seek to destroy him. Throughout the narrative, Joseph is portrayed as a truly “righteous man” (1:19) who listened to and obeyed the Lord to protect the Holy Child so that he could grow to maturity in safety.

Just as Joseph and his family returned from danger and exile through God’s providence, reading from the Hebrew Scriptures also exemplifies God’s care and guidance. The Prophet Jeremiah saw his nation conquered and his people marched into exile in Babylon. But in faith, Jeremiah knew that there would be a return, and that the Lord would gather the people from wherever they had been scattered. Even those for whom travel would be difficult (31:8) would walk by streams of water on straight paths so that they would not stumble.

In 1952, Pope Pius XII, in his apostolic constitution Exsul Familia Nazarethana, pointed to the flight into Egypt and taught that the Holy Family is “the archetype of every migrant, refugee, and displaced person.”

The implications of the reality of Christmas go far beyond gifts, glitter, and triumphant hymns to turn real life upside down. Joan Chittister in “The Implications of Christmas” in Visions and Viewpoints (12/3/2018) writes: “It was a moment of crisis, of abandonment, of loss, of total dependence for this little family. The knew too much of what the families of the world know yet, in fact.

“This was a refugee family. They were homeless. In a highly communal society their survival depended on the hospitality and support of strangers. That’s the real story. Where has it been for so long? Maybe we’ve never wanted to face the implications of this birth, its social status, its neediness. Maybe it has been so well-masked that we have never realized the demands it makes on us. It has implications for now, for the world we’re in where we ourselves are turning refugees away so we can make ‘America first.’ First in wealth. First in power. First in prominence. First in isolation from the racial reality of the rest of the world—from the pain of all of it.

“Isn’t it time to grow beyond the fairy tale spirituality and face our own part in the drama? Aren’t we the missing people in the Christmas frieze, the people absent from the beggar’s birth, the real deciders of what this birth will bring? At least in our own time. Now. Isn’t it time to realize that this birth is meant to change us all? To make us the bringers of a Merry Christmas to others.”

As you reflect on the words of Joan Chittister, what are the deeper implications of this Christmas season for you?

Readings for Christmas 2-A: Jeremiah 31:7-14; Psalm 84; Ephesians 1:3-6, 15-19a; Matthew 2:13-15, 19-23

This reflection is adapted from Circle of Days: A Church Year Primer – Year A by Paula Franck and Isabel Anders available in print and ebook formats from circleofdayspublishing.com and amazon.com.