Catholic Commentary
Closing Formula for Jehoahaz and Succession of Joash
8Now the rest of the acts of Jehoahaz, and all that he did, and his might, aren’t they written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?9Jehoahaz slept with his fathers; and they buried him in Samaria; and Joash his son reigned in his place.
2 Kings 13:8–9 records the standard closing formula for King Jehoahaz's reign, referencing archived accounts of his deeds and military exploits while ironically noting his historical weakness against the Arameans. The passage concludes with Jehoahaz's natural death and burial in Samaria, followed by his son Joash's succession to the throne of the Northern Kingdom.
Kings rise and fall in neat formulas, but God's memory keeps what we forget: not our might, but the moment we cried out to Him.
Typological and Spiritual Senses The closing formula, read in the fuller Catholic tradition of the four senses of Scripture (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church §115–117), yields more than mere historical record. Allegorically, the mortal king who "sleeps" and yields his throne to a successor points toward the impermanence of all earthly authority. Anagogically, the sleep of kings anticipates the universal sleep of death from which only God's resurrection power can awaken. The archival formula — "are they not written?" — finds its ultimate counterpart in the Book of Life (Rev 20:12), where the deeds of every soul, not merely kings, stand recorded before the eternal Judge.
Catholic tradition illuminates these verses in at least three distinct ways.
1. The Theology of Earthly Kingship and Its Limits. The Catechism, following the Second Vatican Council's Gaudium et Spes (§39), teaches that "earthly progress must be carefully distinguished from the growth of Christ's kingdom" (CCC §2820). The closing formula for Jehoahaz dramatizes precisely this. His reign — however vigorous its "might" — produced no lasting fruit. Pope St. John Paul II, in Centesimus Annus (§25), warns that political power disconnected from moral truth and God's covenant becomes hollow. Jehoahaz is a case study: his reign began in the sin of Jeroboam (13:2), endured divine punishment (13:3), received mercy when he cried out (13:4), yet reverted to sin (13:6). The archival notice of his "might" is a quiet rebuke to any regime that measures greatness by military prowess alone.
2. Death as Theological Statement. The Church Fathers were attentive to the language of "sleep" for death. St. John Chrysostom writes in his Homilies on 1 Thessalonians that the scriptural use of sleep for death is itself a catechesis on resurrection: "He called it sleep to show that the matter does not stop there" (Hom. 6 on 1 Thess). St. Augustine similarly notes in City of God (Bk. I) that burial is an act of hope, not merely custom — a sign that the body is held in trust for resurrection. The fact that Jehoahaz is buried, and not left unburied like those under divine curse (cf. 2 Kgs 9:10), suggests the merciful hearing of his prayer (13:4) carried even into his death.
3. The Continuity of Sacred History. The succession formula — "Joash his son reigned in his place" — participates in what the Catechism calls the "divine pedagogy" of history (CCC §53), by which God guides His people through imperfect vessels toward the fullness of the Kingdom. No single king, however flawed, derails God's plan. This is a source of profound Catholic hope.
The closing formula of Jehoahaz's reign is a mirror held up to our own desire for legacy. Contemporary Catholic life is saturated with the anxiety of productivity — we want our "acts" to be written down, remembered, significant. Jehoahaz has a whole archive, yet what the sacred text retains of him is chiefly his failure, his cry to God in distress (13:4), and the mercy he received. This is instructive: the acts worth retaining in the Book of Life are not feats of "might" but moments of dependence on God.
For Catholics examining their conscience — in preparation for Confession, during an Ignatian review of the day, or at the hour of death — this passage invites the question: when the formula closes on my life, what will be the substance of it? The Church's tradition of a "particular judgment" (CCC §1022) is the ultimate "archival reference." Practically, this passage calls Catholics to resist measuring a life's worth by external achievement, to bury the dead with hope (a corporal work of mercy, CCC §2300), and to embrace the ordinariness of succession — that life, ministry, and mission go on after us, and that this is not diminishment but participation in God's unfolding Providence.
Commentary
2 Kings 13:8 — The Archival Reference "The rest of the acts of Jehoahaz… are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?" This phrase is the stereotyped closing formula deployed throughout 1–2 Kings for the monarchs of the Northern Kingdom (cf. 1 Kgs 14:19; 15:31; 16:5, 14, 20, 27; 2 Kgs 10:34; 14:15, 28). Its repetition is itself a theological statement: it insists that these reigns, however spiritually disastrous, belong to a real, verifiable history. The Deuteronomistic Historian does not invent; he abbreviates. He points the attentive reader to a now-lost court archive — the "book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel" — distinct from our canonical book of Chronicles. The mention of "his might" (Hebrew: gĕbûrāh) is striking given that Jehoahaz's reign was marked by catastrophic military weakness at the hands of the Arameans (13:3, 7). The use of gĕbûrāh here may be formulaic or, more pointedly, ironic — his "might" consisted in clinging to a depleted force of fifty horsemen, ten chariots, and ten thousand footmen (13:7). Whatever military exploits Jehoahaz performed, they are dwarfed by the humiliation described in the preceding verses. The formula thus acknowledges his historical reality while embedding it in a larger narrative of divine judgment and mercy (13:4–5).
2 Kings 13:9 — Sleep, Burial, and Succession "Jehoahaz slept with his fathers" is the standard euphemism for natural death used throughout the books of Kings, distinguishing rulers who died in relative peace from those who were assassinated or died violently (who receive no such formula, e.g., Joram in 2 Kgs 9:24). Jehoahaz "slept" — a word that in the broader biblical imagination will become freighted with eschatological weight (cf. Dan 12:2; 1 Thess 4:13–14). He was buried in Samaria, the capital of the Northern Kingdom founded by Omri (1 Kgs 16:24). Burial in the capital was a mark of dynastic continuity — his son Joash would later also be buried there (14:16). Yet Samaria is itself a laden symbol in the Deuteronomistic History: founded outside the ancient tribal inheritances, it never achieves the theological status of Jerusalem, city of the Davidic promise. To be buried in Samaria is to rest in a capital built on compromise and syncretism.
The final clause — "Joash his son reigned in his place" — closes one reign and opens another without pause. This is the grammar of history as God governs it: kings rise and fall, but the dynastic thread continues, always moving toward its eschatological terminus. In the context of 2 Kings 13, Joash will go on to receive a prophetic oracle from the dying Elisha (13:14–19) — a detail that retrospectively gives the succession announced here a significance the formula alone cannot carry.