There’s a dramatisation from the beeb over Easter – a reworking of the passion of Christ. It’s upset some Christians.
The BBC is to screen a new drama about the final week in the life of Jesus Christ which appears to exonerate Judas and Pontius Pilate.
Producers of The Passion have portrayed the men in a sympathetic light because they believe they have been “very harshly judged” by history.
Judas is portrayed as torn between his loyalties to Jesus and Caiaphas, who organised the plot to kill Jesus.
As a reworking of the story, an exploration of the characters involved makes some sense. I tend to agree with Frank Deasy:
“I’ve always had a problem with Judas in ‘Passion’ stories in that he suddenly and inexplicably betrays Jesus,” he said. “I was keen to develop a psychological reality to Judas’s portrayal.”
I have heard it suggested that Judas may have been acting under Jesus’ instructions, but as I tend to regard the whole thing as nothing more than a fascinating piece of fiction, that is a moot point.
Still, Christian Voice gets a word in:
However, Stephen Green, the national director of the lobby group Christian Voice, accused the BBC of indulging a fashion for rewriting the Gospel.
“Whatever pressure people were under at the time, the fact remain that Judas, Pilate and Caiaphas still sent an innocent man to his death,” he said.
“These are bad men.”
How very Christian of you, Stephen. Whatever happened to “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”?
“How very Christian of you, Stephen. Whatever happened to “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they doâ€?”
Actually, the sentiment IS profoundly Christian. One can acknowledge that a person is ‘bad’ and yet forgive them (the latter being the ‘Christian’ imperative); the one is an objective assessment of that person’s acts; the other is the response to those acts.
‘Forgiveness’ does not ‘wash away’ the ‘badness’; it is simply one’s considered response to that state of affairs, and as such both can and do co-exist without difficulty.
Okay, enough theology for 08:30 on a Tuesday morning.
Indeed; however, the forgiveness is lacking in Green’s comment, no?
Following on from that; I don’t necessarily regard them as “bad” men. Pilate is portrayed as vacillating and, frankly, weak. Caiaphas was responding to what he perceived as a threat. Judas is the enigma – divided loyalties, perhaps? All of these are normal human failings rather than the actions of evil men.
Regarding Mr. Green’s ‘forgiveness’, I’m not sure he (or I) can do anything more than offer a judgement upon some historical figures. Caiaphas, Judas and Pilate did not offend us directly; therefore any ‘forgiveness’ would have to come from the person they did offend; which in fact he offered in the very quote you cited.
In this case Green offers an assessment which could be applied to any number of people–but it’s more correctly the province of those wronged to offer ‘forgiveness’.
I do regard Judas as ‘bad’, if one follows the usual account, since he betrayed a friend, no matter how noble/utilitarian the motives were. Pilate is not portrayed as ‘bad’ in the Bible, merely as somewhat puzzled by the whole affair and eager to get on with proconsular business, such as running an unruly province peacefully; Caiaphas is portrayed as ‘bad’, mainly because he ignored his priestly vocation in favor of a secular, utilitarian desire to keep the peace above all else.
I accept that Green was not personally offended and is not in a position to forgive personally – I took much the same attitude over the demands for apologies regarding slavery – and personal forgiveness was not what I intended. One can adopt a forgiving attitude without being personally offended by the original crime.
There’s a mean-spiritness about his comment – which is fairly consistent. Given that the man he claims to follow was able to forgive, then a more charitable attitude from Green would be more in keeping with his faith, would it not? After all, the programme makers are merely exploring the human motives behind the characters, which is perfectly reasonable. Unless there is a different outcome, they are not telling a different tale, merely putting another perspective on a popular story.
Mind you, I come to this with some baggage – I’m aware of Green’s attitudes generally, and they are most definitely not Christian as I understand the philosophy. At least, if they are, they are at the unpalatable end of the spectrum.
Thing is though, had Judas not betrayed Jesus he very likely wouldn’t have been sent to die and as his ‘death’ and resurrection are the cornerstones of the Christian faith maybe we should thank Judas for what he did.
Jonathan’s last blog post..Thieves….