HOLY INNOCENTS DAY
Listen to audio version:
Readings: Jeremiah 31: 15-17 and Matthew 2: 13-18
In the normal course of our readings we rarely hear the disturbing account of the massacre of the Holy Innocents, as they are called – the young children of Bethlehem killed on the orders of King Herod the Great. The observance of The Innocents goes back at least to the 5th-century, and the slain children were regarded by the early Church as the first martyrs. I’m sorry to have to tell you that in medieval times English children were reminded of the mournfulness of the day by being whipped in bed in the morning; this custom survived into the 17th-century.
The incident raises very difficult questions. Was it necessary for the survival of in the infant Jesus that a number of innocent children should be sacrificed? Where was a loving God in all this? Is the account actually true?
As with other incidents connected with the birth of Jesus, we are left wondering where the truth lies. A virgin giving birth; angels appearing to shepherds; magi setting out at the sign of a star and offering exotic gifts. A number of people would doubt the historicity of these events, but most of us would not like Christmas without them.
Of course, the date on which we commemorate the Holy Innocents doesn’t really tie in with the rest of the Christmas calendar. Eight days after the birth of Jesus he was named and circumcised, in accordance with the law. We celebrate the visit of the Magi on January 6th, but it is unlikely that they arrived so soon after Jesus’ birth if they had been travelling a long distance. Somebody has suggested that they may have set out at the moment of Jesus’ conception, which would have given them a number of months’ travelling before he was actually born.
But our reading today tells that Herod ordered the killing of all boys under two years old, which suggests that he did not think that Jesus was a tiny infant. This seems to be the clearest indication that the magi arrived to see the new-born child sometime after he was born.
Herod the Great ruled from around 37 BC to 4 BC. Although he was a Jew, he came from Arab ancestry. He became king solely because of his relationship with the Romans. His father welcomed Pompey in 63 BC when he invaded Palestine, and this began a long period of favour from the Romans, culminating in Augustine making Herod king in 37 BC. Despite outward success, there is evidence from other sources of Herod’s insecurity and inner torment. He murdered his wife, her two sons, and brother because he feared they would usurp his throne. So it is entirely in keeping with what we know that he should be afraid at the news of the new king being born in Jerusalem, and that ruler being born from the line of David, which is something he could not claim for himself.
Angels with messages and dreams are a significant feature of Matthew’s gospel, and here we have an angel appearing to Joseph in a dream and warning him of Herod’s evil intent. So Joseph got up, took the child and his mother by night, and went to Egypt. Some see here a literary device on the part of Matthew, so that Jesus, like Moses centuries before him, can be called out of Egypt to freedom. Jesus was going to be the new leader of God’s people. But let us not dismiss Matthew’s account so quickly. There are a couple of examples in the Old Testament of people fleeing to Egypt for safety. As Judah’s near neighbour but with a very different type of ruler, Egypt was an ideal place to seek refuge in a time of crisis.
And so we come to the slaughter of the children. The account says that Herod took his revenge when he learned that he had been tricked by the wise men, who did not return to him with information about the child, as directed. There is no other record of the slaughter of the young boys, but it is in keeping from what we know of Herod’s character. Some would say that such an incident would have been recorded somewhere. But Paula Gooder points out that against the backdrop of Herod’s other atrocities, this event may not have stood out. There has always been speculation about the number of children killed. It’s estimated that the population of Bethlehem at that time was probably around 1,000, so we might expect around 20 boys to be there of under two years old.
Matthew captures the terrible grief caused by Herod’s actions with the simple quote from Jeremiah chapter 31: “A voice is heard in Ramah; wailing and lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted, because they are no more.” Ramah, incidentally, was the mourning-place of the Exile. It’s been pointed out that the rest of Jeremiah chapter 31 is a positive chapter looking forward to the future time when God would redeem his people. He would be the God of Israel once more. Maybe Matthew is telling us that, despite this time of bitter weeping, God had come to save his people in the person of the child who escaped Herod’s clutches.
So much for the detail of the narrative, but how do we come to terms with the slaughter of the innocents – twenty or so children die, but Jesus’ life is preserved? Could not God have found another way?
The former Dean of Southwark, Andrew Nunn, reflects on this: “One of the greatest theological dilemma for religious people is why bad things happen to good people. It is the question and the inability to get a good answer that makes many people give up on God. It is even more the case when evil is done in the name of religion; when it is the religious people who have the drawn sword and blood on their hands.”
He continues, “I wish I had an answer for you, for myself. My only answer is that the incarnation means that God shares in our pain and does not simply look on from afar. That doesn’t stop the bad things happening – well, not immediately – but ultimately it will. That may be unsatisfying but it is all I can offer.”
Of course, it wasn’t God who slaughtered the children, but Herod. We believe God has given us free-will to respond to him and to his love for us, or not. Sadly, the infliction of suffering, brutality, and death on innocent people, children included, is all too familiar in our own age, and in every era since the time of Jesus, and before. The ones least able to help themselves become the victims of the hatred of others. It is not difficult to think of the ill-treatment and killing of children in so many places in our world in this past year. Andrew Nunn says this feast of the Holy Innocents serves to make us sit up and take notice.
When I worked at Canterbury Cathedral, the Christingle service always took place on this day. As is customary, worshippers brought their purses of money for the work of The Children’s Society. So one response to the disturbing story of the Holy Innocents would be to support and work for those charities which seek to care for and protect children and help them to flourish – especially those in adverse circumstances.
And then, as Andrew Nunn concludes, we will hear the cry of Rachel echoing through the centuries, the cry of the mother weeping for her children, the cry of the innocent. Our response is to cry with them.
A closing prayer: “Into your hands, Lord, we commend all the innocent who have suffered at the hands of tyrants. Make us restless to see better days come when the peace you bring will be the peace we live. Amen.”