The Shepherd, December 2005
THE WISE MEN FROM THE EAST, 3
“Herod the king was troubled.” Indeed, he was seriously alarmed by what the Magi were saying. Clearly these visitors were not mere oriental soothsayers and occultists, but genuine Magi, and as such recognised internationally as belonging to a group of important social standing. In many ways Herod the Great deserved his title. He had succeeded in bringing order and keeping the peace, he had rebuilt the magnificent Temple at Jerusalem, and he could be generous, melting down his own gold plate to buy corn for the starving population in the famine of 25 B.C. On the other hand, Josephus calls him “the most cruel tyrant who ever ascended the throne.” Paranoid about possible rivals to his throne, he spared neither his own family, the priests, the Sanhedrin nor the people. Family victims included one of his wives, a son-in-law, three of his sons, and three brothers-in-law. Noble families who might present a challenge were wiped out, many Pharisees were done away with, Hyrcanus, the last of the old high-priestly family was murdered, and two learned scholars who had torn down the Roman eagle from the Temple gateway were burned alive as torches with forty of their students. Determined that some tears would be shed at his death, he had given orders that the most distinguished citizens of Jerusalem should be arrested on trumped up charges and put to death the moment he died, although fortunately this was not carried out.
Besides securing his throne from rival claimants, he had Rome to deal with. Herod, not a true Jew but an Idumean, had been appointed by the Romans, and although he had the title and much of the power of a king, he had to keep in favour with his Roman masters. Judæa was a tiny but troublesome corner of the Roman Empire, and the Jews were considered tiresome and difficult to handle. Herod had proved capable of dealing with local troubles and uprisings in the past, but this particular King of the Jews, this particular Messiah, could prove to be more dangerous, if, as is possible, rumours of the shepherd’s vision had been circulating in Jerusalem. The Emperor Augustus had himself already been hailed as a “saviour” who had brought “peace,” and as a “god” who had brought “good tidings” of a new Golden Age to the world. Cæsar Augustus himself believed in astrology and prophecy. The Romans would have understood Herod’s problem with yet another Messiah, and would have expected him to deal with it efficiently and promptly. They were remarkably tolerant and liberal about accepting the national gods of the many peoples they ruled, but an apparently deliberate insult to the Emperor might be another matter. A new claimant to be the Messiah, or the King of the Jews, was one thing, but a claim backed up by reputable astrologers echoing Augustus’ own claim to be a divine saviour bringing good tidings of peace and a New Age might well be considered unacceptable in Rome. Herod stood the risk of finding himself accused not only of incompetency but of high treason if he failed to deal with the situation rapidly and effectively. He was indeed “troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.”
Herod did not hesitate. While the Magi were admitted to the palace and presumably accorded the customary hospitality suited to their rank, he immediately summoned “the chief priests and the scribes,” and when they were duly assembled before him impatiently “demanded of them where Christ should be born.” The scribes (literally writers) were the copyists of the sacred texts and the teachers of the Law. The priests may mean the heads of the various “courses” of priests living in or near the Holy City. (Zacharias, the father of St John the Baptist, was of the course of Abia.) They were perfectly familiar with the prophecy of Micah, and quoting from their Sacred Scriptures gave the king his answer. “And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.” Strangely enough, for whatever reason, they seem to have omitted the rest of the prophecy: “Whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Mic. 5:12). Perhaps they felt it prudent under the circumstances to keep strictly to the question of the birthplace, rather than risk widening the debate by touching on the Divine Nature of the Messiah.
At His very birth, people were already divided about Christ. Shepherds, men of no social standing, together with aristocratic pagan Magi hastened to welcome Him. Herod sought to destroy Him. The Jewish religious leaders considered it unnecessary to take any action at all and showed complete indifference to the child who might be the One foretold by the prophets over the centuries. Academic theologians, they knew all about their faith intellectually, but had no wish to stir themselves to go to Bethlehem. They considered all other nations to be religiously inferior, believing that they alone possessed the truth. They would have greatly resented pagan astrologers presuming to give them information about their Messiah, for Whose coming they had piously prayed daily, although they might well have been thoroughly dismayed had they believed that their prayers were really about to be answered, turning their lives and their whole ritual routine upside down. And so they remained blind to the star and deaf to the prophet. Only a few shepherds and Gentiles had eyes to see and ears to hear.
|
