Judas Iscariot: Was He Really So Bad? by The Herald

We're sorry, but this article is no longer available. Please explore other articles about Judas on Beliefnet. <!--As an icon in popular culture, there is no ambiguity about Judas Iscariot. From the fan who shouted "Judas" at Bob Dylan in 1966 to the MPs who confessed to Judas-like feelings over the downfall of Charles Kennedy, he is the personification of a traitor. In handing over his friend Jesus to the Roman authorities for 30 pieces of silver, an act which directly resulted in his master's crucifixion, Judas became irredeemable; the only disciple who could not be saved by redemption. Reports from the Vatican suggest, however, that Judas may soon be subject to a transformation most beloved of popular culture: a makeover. Scholars, led by Monsignor Walter Brandmuller of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Science, are campaigning for a more positive "re-reading" of the Judas story. This will "resolve the problem of an apparent lack of mercy by Jesus toward one of his closest collaborators" and recognise Judas as an essential actor in Jesus's sacrifice, thereby offering the man some respite from the lowest pits of hell, as portrayed in Dante's Inferno.

Curiously, this brings the Catholic church in alignment with its popular culture nemesis, The Simpsons. In one episode, Todd Flanders, the youngest of the evangelical Christian neighbours of the Simpsons, has Judas round for dinner. Todd is concerned that Judas isn't eating his "last supper" and Judas replies: "I can't eat 'cause my conscience is heavy."

This is, effectively, the makeover the Catholic Church is looking for: one that attributes to Judas a sense of morality, loyalty and repentance. It is thought that by doing so, the Church will improve its relationship with the Jewish faith. Yet in requesting this sympathetic reading, it is not trying anything that hasn't been tried before. Dr Helen Bond is senior lecturer in New Testament language, literature and theology at Edinburgh University.

"I don't quite know why they're making such a big deal of it, " she says. "There have always been currents within Christianity of looking on the positive side of Judas. First, you can say that if he hadn't handed Jesus over to the authorities then the crucifixion would never have happened, so he has played an important part in humanity's redemption. People have said the same about Pontius Pilate, too.

"You can say that if everything has been planned by God from the beginning of time, then these characters are simply playing their part, so if Judas was born to betray Jesus what else could he have done?"

The multiplicity of possible motivations and the complex character behind them makes Judas unique among the disciples and all the more interesting for it, thinks Professor David Jasper of Glasgow University.

"You could construct a whole variety of possibilities from what we have in the gospel narratives, " he says. "In one sense, he's a kind of rationalist when he asks (Jesus) why he's throwing himself away and that he could do a lot more good if he took a less dangerous line. So you could see him as a voice of reason. He's also a tragic figure, in a literary sense.

"But then, was he just a pawn in the whole process? That's a big question. Would that make Jesus a pawn, too? Was it the money? Did he have a change of heart? Was it all fore-ordained, or are people responsible for what they do? He's unusual in the gospels for being quite complex, so it's difficult to say one thing or the other about him."

--> Could Judas have been a terrorist? Read more on page 2 >>

End of Teaser for Next Page --> _ Related Features Christ's Death: Rescue Mission or Payment for Sins? Did Judas Get a Bum Rap? The Judas Project

We're sorry, but this article is no longer available on Beliefnet. <!-- The problem for the more accommodating interpretations of Judas's action is that the writers of the gospels appear adamant: he was the lowest of the low. Judas appears only in the gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. Like the other disciples, very little is known about him.

<!-- Of his surname, one theory holds that it is derived from a terrorist group against Rome, called the Iscari. If true, this would suggest he was particularly nationalistic, which provides a different motive for indicating Jesus to the Romans: Judas didn't think Jesus would attempt to overthrow Rome. Some claim that Judas was the sole Judaean disciple, while the others came from Galilee, but this cannot be proven.

Apart from the account of Judas's betrayal of Jesus, there is little else to go on. "There's a passage in John's gospel where Jesus is anointed by somebody and Judas is annoyed because he says the oil could have been sold and the money given to the poor," says Bond. "Then the narrator says, ah, but he only wanted to keep the money. This is a picture of an avaricious Judas, but all the gospels were written several decades after the event, so they all betray this animosity towards Judas because he was the betrayer."

Likewise, in the fourth gospel, Judas is singularly associated with night and goes out into the darkness during the Last Supper. Bond believes that the broader role of Judas's portrayal by the writers of the gospels is to show different types of discipleship. This point is illustrated if Judas is considered alongside fellow disciple Peter, who tells the authorities that he does not know Jesus.

"I think the two have to be seen together: Judas the betrayer and Peter the denier, " she says. "The gospels are pastoral texts and they're writing for people who are facing some kind of difficulty themselves. For instance, the first gospel, Mark, seems to be written to communities who are undergoing some kind of persecution.

"In that kind of setting, it would be very relevant to say that even Jesus himself had people who betrayed and denied him. Some may not be redeemed and some, like Peter, may break down and repent and may be redeemed."

A further issue is whether it was not his betrayal of Jesus but his subsequent suicide that meant Judas could not be redeemed. This is somewhat confused as there are two accounts of Judas's death and he commits suicide in only one of them. According to the gospel of Matthew, he hangs himself, with the implication that he has repented. Conversely, in Luke's gospel, divine retribution gets him.

"He goes away, quite happily buys a field then is suddenly struck down by God in act one, " says Bond. "His body bursts in two and his entrails end up all over the place. That's a classic description of what happens to people who set themselves against God. There's no repentance, and Luke has Satan enter into Judas." By either account, he died in April AD29-33.

Does any of this dampen the flames in the lowest pit of hell? Apparently not.

"The dominant opinion is the negative one that he's a man who betrayed his friend with a kiss and that, in Matthew's gospel, he did it for money and is just after the cash, " says Bond. "It puts such a meagre value on a life, especially the life of someone who many people think of as the Messiah. He's done it for a pittance; the kind of thing you hear about when someone's mugged an old lady." It is that image that may be impossible to erase.

--> _ Related Features Christ's Death: Rescue Mission or Payment for Sins? Did Judas Get a Bum Rap? The Judas Project