Fleeing from Herod: Reassessing the

 Fleeing from Herod: Reassessing the "Christmas Story" for Displaced Children  
By Laura Rector

    Christmas is a deeply significant event in the Christian life, and yet some of our Christmas worship and traditions may not be grounded accurately in the biblical events. For instance, the inhospitable innkeeper who makes it into most Christmas dramas probably did not exist. In reality, Jesus likely was born in a humble, ordinary home rather than in a stable behind an inn as Christian churches usually depict (Luke 2:7). The word for inn should be more accurately translated “guest room.”[1] Some say the room where Jesus was born was actually a cave.[2] It was likely the lower room of relatives’ homes. It helps interpreters’ case that Mary and Joseph stayed in Bethlehem for a few years[3] and, after their time in Egypt, they planned to go back to Bethlehem until God intervened (Matt. 2:21-23).[4]

   This does not mean that Jesus’ birth narratives do not contain the theme of inhospitality. However, it was political instead of personal (Matt. 2:1-23). Unfortunately, our nativity plays usually gloss over political readings of the Christmas story. It does not make for a feel-good Sunday morning to ponder an innocent toddler fleeing a political threat or the slaughter of other innocent children by that same political authority (Matt. 2:1-23). Old Testament scholar Danna Nolan Fewell tells of a child who asked church leaders if she could be Herod’s “hit man” in their Christmas drama. That child pulled out an aspect of the text that we often gloss over in our excitement over baby Jesus.[5] How do we understand what Fewell calls, “Texts where children have fallen between the cracks, where their fate is not considered, erased as easily by the biblical writers as by the modern news media”?[6]

   By glossing over children’s cruel circumstances in Scripture, we also lose the significance of the text for tragic conditions that contemporary children experience. For example, the United Nations reports that more than half of the world’s refugees are children.[7] In an earlier report they said, “Whether they are refugees, internally displaced, asylum-seekers or stateless, children are at a greater risk of abuse, neglect, violence, exploitation, trafficking or forced military recruitment.”[8] This very brief paper will look at some of the implications of Jesus` birth and early childhood narratives for children who like Jesus are displaced by violence. What should it mean for the church that Jesus was a refugee child? How can Jesus’ early life help Christians shape a public theology for contemporary children fleeing violence?

Herod

   First, let me give a brief look at the political climate facing Jesus in his early childhood. Matthew’s text reveals that Jesus entered this world during the last few years of Herod the Great’s life (Matt. 2:19). Herod attempted to kill Jesus, and he did in fact kill other children in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:13-16). There is a great deal of tragedy in this text that never makes its way into our Christmas worship. For example, when Matthew quotes Jeremiah 31:15, he is painting a picture of great mourning (Matt. 2:18). Despite saying a prophecy was fulfilled, Matthew makes it clear that there is no commendation for what happens to the children.[9] A special reference is made to the location’s historic ties to Rachel, illustrating how tragic the situation is. One scholar says, “Here the assumption is that Rachel is buried in the vicinity of Bethlehem (cf. Gen. 35:19; 48:7), making her a witness to the slaughter carried out by Herod’s officers. Weeping over the loss of her latter-day children, she cries out with a voice that is heard as far away as Ramah!”[10]

   Matthew has no positive words about Herod. Even without this event, Herod was not likely a favorite amongst the majority of Jews. For starters, Herod was only half Jewish.[11] The king’s mixed lineage would have been distasteful to Jews.[12] Also, he won the throne through violence and by killing “large sections of the Judean nobility.”[13] Rome made him the local ruler of Israel in 37 B.C.[14] In history, Herod was known as “a great builder of public works.”[15] However, as New Testament scholar Craig Blomberg points out, “he laid oppressive taxes on and conscripted labor from the Israelites.”[16]

   Some contemporary scholars try to communicate a more mixed picture of Herod than the Gospel writer does. For instance, one writer said:

The real Herod is all that Scripture intimates. Still, there is more which has no place in   the sacred annals. Rarely has history recorded the story of an abler, more gifted, more           ruthless, more misunderstood ruler. A zealous builder, a consummate diplomat, an           eloquent orator, a brilliant general, a violent, unbridled despot—this man, a non-Jew, sat         on the throne of David. He ruled a land far more extensive than that of Solomon and a    people who attained under him their peak of material prosperity… He married ten times;        divorced, dismissed, or simply ignored the wives he grew tired of, and never ceased loving the wife he murdered. He killed his uncle, his brother, his son-in-law, his mother-    in-law, and the three sons he loved best; he slaughtered infants and graybeards, and died             an old man, of natural causes—miserably.[17]

Near the end of his life, he had some citizens arrested on false charges with the sole purpose of ordering them to be killed upon his death. As William Barclay notes, Herod “was well aware that no one would mourn for his death, and that he was determined that some tears should be shed when he died.”[18]

   What we are seeing in Matthew’s text is more of this man’s cruelty. To be fair, there are some historians who question the veracity of the Bethlehem event. However, that actually says more about the scope of Herod’s cruelty than it does about Matthew’s accuracy. Robert Mounce points out, “That Josephus the historian (or an other early writer) neglects to mention the slaughter tells us more about the cruelty of that day than it does about any lack of historicity of the event. Such purges were simply not noteworthy.”[19] Certainly, what we do know from other multi-attested events is that what happened in Bethlehem was in sync with the violence of the man. Bethlehem was a small community, so the number of children slaughtered may have been around twenty.[20]

   From the text, we also see that although Herod ordered the violence, the unhealthy political environment extended beyond one man. Scripture tells us that upon hearing of Jesus’ birth, Herod became acutely distressed, but so did “all Jerusalem” (Matt. 2:3). William Barclay notes that Herod “was almost insanely suspicious. He had always been suspicious, and the older he became the more suspicious he grew, until, in his old age, he was, as someone said, a ‘murderous old man.’” [21] In this case, Herod’s emotions extend to those under his influence. If something threatened Herod’s power, then it also threatened those around him. As Blomberg explains, “‘All Jerusalem’ probably refers primarily to the religious leaders of Israel who dominated the city, many of whom were also personally installed by Herod.”[22] When Herod meets with the Jewish leaders, Matthew uses the same verb (call together) that he later “uses to describe the sinister gatherings of Jewish leaders in his account of Jesus’ trial and crucifixion (cf. 26:3, 57; 27:17, 27, 62; 28:12) . . . Using a vocabulary with associations such as these, Matthew makes it clear that this gathering is no innocent theological consultation.”[23] Systemic sin in the community contributed to the children’s risk factors.

Implications

   By understanding Herod’s cruelty, we see that Jesus was born into a political climate that put children at risk—particularly a child who threatened a leader’s authority. Likewise, displaced children often face cruelty from adult authorities and systemic sin in their lives.

   In recent years, although all are not technically refugees, unaccompanied and separated children have arrived in the United States in record numbers, particularly children from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. The UN reports the number of children from the first three countries went from 4,059 reported in 2011 to 21,537 in 2013.[24] These numbers do not include the additional 18,734 Mexican children sent back over the border “after no more than a day or two in the custody of the U.S. authorities, making it even more difficult to obtain a full picture of who these children were and why they were coming to the U.S.”[25] In a U.N. study of children from these countries, researchers found that at least 58 percent of the children were displaced for reasons that merited international protection.[26] Although there are multiple circumstances that put such children at risk, the overwhelmingly main factor in the U.N. study was “augmented violence in the region by organized criminal actors, including drug cartels and gangs or by State actors.”[27] The Center for American Progress notes that El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras “were three of the five most dangerous countries in the world in 2013.”[28] In recent years, U.S. immigration policy has been to hold many children in detention centers, which goes against international protection standards. A federal judge ordered the children’s release by October 23, 2015, but the decision awaits appeal. As of October 20, 2015, more than 2,000 minors were still detained in such centers.[29] Indeed, in many other cases, the United States sends the children back to their personal Herods.[30]

   The world saw a record 59.5 million forcibly displaced people in 2014. The UN reports that “over half the world’s refugees are children.”[31] Globally, approximately 30 million children have been displaced by violence and hardships. Syria is the largest source of refugees. Displaced Syrians have poured into Europe and other Middle Eastern countries. Europe currently faces “tens of thousands” refugee and migrant children displaced from their homes. Some are accompanied by parents; some are not. All of them face loss and challenges. One UNICEF writer described things this way: “The common thread running through each and every story here is that of loss and the dawn of a new reality in which cherished homes, communities, friends and even family members are gone. The new reality of seemingly endless travel in a foreign continent and chaotic queues at border checkpoints is a far cry from familiar surroundings left behind . . . ”[32] Most flee violence and conflict, only to face dangerous sea journeys, the loss of their possessions to smugglers, overcrowded conditions, and some governments that turn them away. In Africa and Asia, conditions are no better. In Nigeria and the surrounding area, for example, 1.4 million children have been displaced because of the violent Boko Haram. Around 2.2 million people have been displaced in South Sudan.[33] In Asia, the number of internally displaced people and refugees increased by 31 percent in 2014.[34] Like Jesus, these children flee violence and hardships caused by adult sin.

The Wise Men

   However, Herod was not the only player in this story. In the text, God has the last word on Herod’s cruelty by protecting Jesus, and he does so through a divine intervention that invited human participation.[35] Over and over again, Matthew emphasizes the fulfillment of prophecies (Matt. 2:5-6, 15, 17-18, 23). Commentators also point out that the text has parallels with the Exodus.[36] The message that God is working on behalf of his people in these tragic circumstances cannot be underscored enough. Specific people play a role in that divine deliverance.

   The first such people are the famous “wise men.” Commentators believe Jesus was a young toddler, between ages one and two, when the so-called “wise men” came to him.[37] The unknown number of magi were the “teachers and instructors of the Persian kings,” comparable to the Levites in Israel.[38] Our Christian hymns and other traditions also get the Christmas story wrong when they call them kings. The magi were prominent, religious-political community leaders interested in astronomy and astrology.[39]

   In the celebration of our Savior, we also sometimes ignore the political undertones in the magi’s actions. Indeed, these prominent men may have helped fuel Herod’s distress, drawing his attention towards Jesus. Blomberg said their question had a political inference: “The grammatical construction makes it clear that they ask about who the child is who has a legitimate claim to Israel’s throne by virtue of his birth. Herod is thus viewed as a usurper to the throne.”[40]

   When the magi visit Jesus, the visit also has political implications. For example, “The gifts used to honor the new king were typically associated with royalty.”[41] What becomes of the gifts is, of course, not part of Matthew’s story. In the text, their purpose is to bring honor to the Savior—to show that there is something special about this particular child. We can only speculate that such valuable gifts later proved helpful in Jesus’ displacement to Egypt.

    The magi’s role in the narrative ends with their disobedience of Herod’s order (Matt. 2:12). Given the cruelty of the regime, this is significant. In their own way, the magi contributed to God’s intervention in the young toddler’s life. Scripture says that they “outwitted” Herod. This, in turn, instigates his fury (Matt. 2:16).

Implications

   In this passage, the Persian magi function as a confrontation of Herod’s sin—through their disobedience of harmful human authorities, through their gifts and love for the child, and even through their very leading question directed at Herod himself. They also symbolize international support for the child. Today, nongovernmental organizations such as Save the Children and UNICEF meet the immediate needs of these children in crisis.[42] Amnesty International sharply rebukes the United States for holding children in detention centers, failing to provide adequate health, psychological, and education services, and repatriating children into dangerous situations.[43] They have also rebuked European countries for their response to the refugee crisis.[44] Understanding that the Jesus we worship also fled violence as a child, Christians should have a deep motivation to join their efforts—as some churches already have—and care for refugees directly, as well as confront policies and governments that harm such children.

Mary and Joseph

   More important than even the magi’s participation in divine deliverance is the role that Mary and Joseph played. The text says that in obedience to God, the couple took their child to Egypt (Matt. 2:13-15).

   Geography plays a significant role in Mary and Joseph’s actions. Egypt is a place of refuge for the young family.[45] It is also a place where they can still be with people who share their cultural identity. Scholars share that “every city in Egypt of any size had a colony of Jews (in Alexandria, over 2 million).”[46] Certainly, as the gospel points out, the choice of Egypt shows the fulfillment of a prophecy and significant symbolism (Matt. 2:15).[47] However, it is important to understand that this was also a deeply practical decision. One scholar writes, “The Hellenistic Jews in Egypt were indeed important, both on account of their numbers and their learning (Acts 9:6). It would have been among the Jewish colonists in Egypt that the Holy Family would have dwelt during their stay in this land.”[48]

   When God told the family to leave Egypt, the choice of Galilee is also significant (Matt. 2:19-23). Joseph took his family to a strategic location: “Nestled in the hills in the south of Galilee, it looked down on two of the most important caravan routes in the ancient world: one leading from Damascus to Egypt and the other from the seacoast to the lands to the east.”[49] The family does not return to their previous home to avoid danger to Jesus—even after Herod’s death. The kingdom had been divided amongst Herod’s sons.[50] New Testament scholar Richard B. Gardner explains:

            As the text indicates, Judea was one of the areas that came under the rule of Archelaus.             Archelaus apparently inherited his father’s violent tendencies, for he was reputed to have             murdered 3,000 people at the beginning of his reign. His brutality and dictorial ways      finally became so intolerable that he was desposed by Rome in A.D. 6 and exiled to Gaul.        All this helps to explain why Joseph is afraid to go back to Judea and heads instead for     Galilee. Although Galilee was also ruled by a son of Herod, Herod Antipas, the          circumstances there were relatively less threatening.[51]

Implications

   Studies show that children’s resilience depends on multiple factors—character traits, secure relationships with caretakers, the model of their parents or other family members, community support, and ideological factors like political engagement.[52] Above, we saw how the magi showed community support. The actions of Jesus’ caretakers—his earthly parents, Mary and Joseph—also played a key role in his survival.

    The United Nations says, “Under normal circumstances, parents provide the primary role model for their children, contributing significantly to the development of their identities and to their acquisition of skills and values. Separation from one or other parent, very often the father in circumstances of flight, can deprive children of an important role model.”[53] The international community also recognizes the significance in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which the U.S. has never ratified:[54]            

            Although the Convention on the Rights of the Child gives individual rights to children, the CRC also emphasizes relationships. The well-being of children and the enjoyment of their rights are dependent upon their families and their community. The CRC recognizes             that the family is ‘the fundamental group of society’ and places children`s rights in the     context of parental rights and duties (arts. 5, 14, 18, etc.). The importance of the        community is constantly recognized (arts. 5, 13, 14, 15, 20, 29, 30).[55]

   Ratification of the CRC could be a helpful tool for shaping U.S. policies that protect children seeking refuge and strengthen their families.[56] As Christians, we must support policies that treat the underlying causes of child displacement, so that children may live safely with their parents.[57] When that is inappropriate, such as when children have been abused in their homes or lost their parents, we must lead the way to provide models of care that put children in safe home situations and keep them out of detention centers.[58]

Conclusion

   The stability of Jesus’ toddler years was disrupted by violence (Matt. 2:1-23). Matthew’s Gospel tells us that God’s gift to the world came with great cost. The meaning of the cross should never be denigrated, but the cost of Christ’s sacrifice started far before Calvary’s hill. It started when a small toddler had to flee with his parents to a foreign land, leaving his family home. It started when the other infants and toddlers in Bethlehem were killed by a leader protecting his political power. For Christians, this should be a call to justice—a call to acknowledge this great cost even as we celebrate God’s gift and the greater cost of the cross. One way we can do this is by reading Scripture with children in mind, then implementing its message of justice through “deeds of deliverance” on behalf of other children displaced by violence.[59]

 Laura Rector is a PhD graduate from Fuller Theological Seminary in Christian Ethics.

Share on Facebook

Tweet

Follow us