John 19: The Death of Baby Jesus

Like Mike said, reading about Jesus' death at the time when we are entering into the celebration of His birth is a bit disorientating, but oddly, I think appropriate. It seems to me that as a church at Christmastime, we are happy to leave Jesus - meek and mild - in the manger. He is harmless there, a mere babe; I cannot think of an image less confronting to the world.

(Maybe if the manger scenes in our shopping malls and churches - hah, spot the difference - were laced with a dolop of goat's urine, essence of fresh cow-pat, and a Mary looking pale and drawn from post-partum bleeding, we would be a bit less blase about giving birth in a stable. But I digress.)

Our failure to draw together the babe (recently cleaned of blood from the after-birth) and the Man in John 19 (now covered again in blood), to my mind renders the whole Christmas message into an innocuous fairy-tale. The only time that I have seen the Church as an organisation draw Christ's birth and death together, is in the Che Guevaraesque poster above. And that was at Easter time!

So in Chapter 19 we have the baby Jesus being put to death; having missed being killed after His birth along with the other innocents, thirty-odd years on this Innocent is executed. I have seen so many "Bible Epics" of this chapter, that it is hard for me to clear them from my media-addled mind. (Even now I hear John Wayne saying, "Surely this man is the Son of Gaaaad!").

The brutality and the lack of compassion from all the actors in this chapter needs no comment. We only need to recall images from "The Passion" to feel it's impact. So, here are some impressions of John 19.

As I read this chapter again and again, it seems more real to me than any movie. In my mind's eye I see Pontius Pilate squirming as he pays lip-service to "due legal process", all the while trying to protect his position in the face of the Jewish establishment...and with an eye to Tiberius who was unforgiving of any mistakes (and PP had already made a few!).

"We have no king but Caesar!"(v.15). What a proclamation (and a condemnation) from a group of religious leaders; God wasn't their King, but rather this world, with its delusion of temporal power and comfort. Standing facing the bloodied King, they choose another; how often do we do the same?

For some reason it is the soldiers that I have the greatest understanding for. Maybe because in their own lives they were often brutalised themselves. Maybe because they were powerless, unlike Pilate of Caiaphas. If they had failed to do their duty or if the condemned had survived crucifixion, then they would have been crucified themselves (hence the breaking of legs). And I recently read that the Roman soldier's water bottle carried a mixture of water and vinegar (the latter was thought to purify the water and stop disease); so in giving it to Jesus to drink, they were not being nasty but simply sharing their water rations.

But whoever, and whatever there station of life in this historical event, "They crucified Him..."(v.18). Which is a convenient verse, as we can point back in time to 'them' and say, "They did it." As if the the crucifixion isn't a timeless. time breaking event. We should of course wake up to the fact that verse 18 should read, "I crucified You."

And I should know; I handed them the nails.