Some Vatican scholars want to clear Judas

[ContraMundum]

More nuttiness from Rome- it's happening a lot these days!

Vatican moves to clear reviled disciple's name

JUDAS ISCARIOT, the disciple who betrayed Jesus with a kiss, is to be given
a makeover by Vatican scholars ... on the ground that he was not deliberately evil,
but was just "fulfilling his part in God's plan".


...

The move to clear Judas's name coincides with plans to publish the alleged
Gospel of Judas for the first time

...

Monsignor Giovanni D¹Ercole, a Vatican theologian, said it was
"dangerous to reevaluate Judas and muddy the Gospel accounts by reference to
apocryphal writings. ...

(Owen, The [London] Times, January 12, 2006).
[/SIZE]

[TomUK]

Was it Dante who said something to the effect of 'Judas is the worst of all the sinners in hell'?

[ContraMundum]

Was it Dante who said something to the effect of 'Judas is the worst of all the sinners in hell'?

Perhaps, but Dante didn't have the priviedge of being part of the "magisterium", did he?

If I were these scholars, I would be more worried about Jesus' comments about His chosen 12 disciples-

Joh 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name; I guarded those whom You gave to Me, and not one of them was lost, except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

[TomUK]

The error you're entering into there however is that you're letting a little thing like scripture get in the way doctrine! ;)

[Wiffey]

Now where is that rolley-eyed smiley when you need him?

I think that Jesus was pretty clear in scripture about Judas...and it was spoken of more than once, and the betrayer's fate was never painted as pretty.

I tend to be a "let's all hug and make up and bask in God's love" kind of gal, but this seems to be a big stretch...

[gitlance]

... or perhaps all Monsignor is trying to do is make people understand that regardless of what Judas did, we are not to hate him or think ill thoughts of him. This is, after all, what Jesus taught.

Further, you have to realize that the thoughts of one man do not constitute the thoughts of the Magisterium and the Papacy. If he carries on long enough, eventually Rome will intervene and put a stop to it. You certainly won't hear Rome pronouncing an infallible dogma advocating what this man thinks, unless they revise it and come to a complete understanding of what he is saying. Don't tell me you are going to believe the London Times to get something as heavy as theology right on the first time?

Also, are you forgetting about these verses?

"Now the festival of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was near. The chief priests and the scribes were looking for a way to put Jesus to death, for they were afraid of the people. Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was one of the twelve; he went away and conferred with the chief priests and officers of the temple police about how he might betray him to them." Luke 22:1-4

" So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas son of Simon Iscariot. After he received the piece of bread, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, ‘Do quickly what you are going to do.'" John 13:25-28

Apparently dear Judas was not acting quite in his right mind. I don't think you would, either, if Satan entered into you. And yes, Judas was fulfilling God's plan:

"I then said to them, ‘If it seems right to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.’ So they weighed out as my wages thirty shekels of silver. Then the Lord said to me, ‘Throw it into the treasury’—this lordly price at which I was valued by them. So I took the thirty shekels of silver and threw them into the treasury in the house of the Lord." the Messianic Prophecy of Zech. 11:12-13

[Wiffey]

Whatever happened, I do feel very badly about the idea of anyone, even Judas, suffering a terrible fate.

I'm just saying that there doesn't seem to be any scriptural support for the idea that Jesus gave Judas a pennance and he went off into the desert to repent. Scripture would indicate that he came to his senses, freaked out at what he had done and committed suicide. I won't speculate about what happened next, as that is between him and God. Was he possessed? Were there mitigating factors? I don't know. And that's the point...nobody on earth knows, so why define it? Let's leave it for God to judge, since only His judgment is perfect.

God will do as He wills, and have mercy on those He chooses, no matter what any church on earth decides.

[SirTimothy]

Gitlance, I'm starting to get just slightly irritated. Respectfully, I'm going to have to ask you to stay out of discussions in the Anglican forum. Contra posted these for Anglican discussion, and as you've made your choice to leave the communion and not to self-identify as Anglican any more, then I ask you not to debate here any more.

In Christ,

Timothy

[Andy Broadley]

If I might add my ten cents worth here.

The point being discussed was how much choice Judas had in what he did.

If it was divine will that he betray Jesus and thus lead to His crucifixion, then perhaps he should not be condemmed.

On the other hand, if he had free will in the matter, what would have happened if he hadn't done it.

No crucifixion.

No resurection.

No Church.

No CF (lol)

If it was devinely ordained that Jesus would die for our sins and rise again in glory, as I believe is generally accepted, then should we condemn Judas for his part in it?

[karen freeinchristman]

If I might add my ten cents worth here.

The point being discussed was how much choice Judas had in what he did.

If it was divine will that he betray Jesus and thus lead to His crucifixion, then perhaps he should not be condemmed.

On the other hand, if he had free will in the matter, what would have happened if he hadn't done it.

No crucifixion.

No resurection.

No Church.

No CF (lol)

If it was devinely ordained that Jesus would die for our sins and rise again in glory, as I believe is generally accepted, then should we condemn Judas for his part in it?

I must admit, this is a question that has gone through my mind several times.:scratch:

[TomUK]

Not sure if this analogy is going to work but if you had the chance to kill Hitler before WWII, would you?

Just because Judas' betrayel resulted in the death and resurrection of Christ, Judas committed a grave sin - a fact which Jesus spoke clearly of as outlined by contra. For Christians the morality of an individual act does not lie on the effects of the act but intrinsic to the act itself.

Obviously i am in no position to guess where Judas shall spend his eternal rest- only God determines who shall be saved. However we should be careful when making interpretations of scripture and tradition which don't sit totally easily with either scripture or tradition (and yes, that even includes the Roman Catholic Church!)

[Naomi4Christ]

What's wrong with just leaving things the way they are?

[Andy Broadley]

Not sure if this analogy is going to work but if you had the chance to kill Hitler before WWII, would you?

Just because Judas' betrayel resulted in the death and resurrection of Christ, Judas committed a grave sin - a fact which Jesus spoke clearly of as outlined by contra. For Christians the morality of an individual act does not lie on the effects of the act but intrinsic to the act itself.

Obviously i am in no position to guess where Judas shall spend his eternal rest- only God determines who shall be saved. However we should be careful when making interpretations of scripture and tradition which don't sit totally easily with either scripture or tradition (and yes, that even includes the Roman Catholic Church!)
Sorry Tom, I don't really think the analogy works in this case. Various western governments carry the blood of many on their hands by not stopping Hitler when they had the chance.

But with Judas the same question remains.

He is condemmed for committing the act. So what would have happenned if he didn't do it?

[Andy Broadley]

What's wrong with just leaving things the way they are?
Because as they are, Judas is in a no win situation.

[Naomi4Christ]

So?

[TomUK]

He is condemmed for committing the act. So what would have happenned if he didn't do it?

The result of Judas actions were that all of mankind could be saved, which is pretty good. No matter how good the consequences however it still remains a sinful act.

Scripture is full of Judas like people. If Pharaoh hadn't oppressed the Egyptians then Moses wouldn't have been called by God. If Ahab didn't worship pagan Gods then God wouldn't have needed to call Elijah. I don't really think though that 'Pharaoh' or Ahab are considered particularly holy people in Church history.

[Andy Broadley]

So?
So. We can't have it both ways.

Either Jesus' life and death were divinely ordained or they were not.

If they were, then Judas was fulfilling his divine mission, even if he didn't know he was.

If we condem him for what he did, we have to answer the question of what would have happenned if he didn't do it.

He is condemmed to hell if he does it, and no crucifixion and resurection if he doesn't.

And did he not also repent his actions? Would that not put him on the same level as the thief on the cross who Jesus promised would be in Heaven with Him?

[Andy Broadley]

The result of Judas actions were that all of mankind could be saved, which is pretty good. No matter how good the consequences however it still remains a sinful act.

Scripture is full of Judas like people. If Pharaoh hadn't oppressed the Egyptians then Moses wouldn't have been called by God. If Ahab didn't worship pagan Gods then God wouldn't have needed to call Elijah. I don't really think though that 'Pharaoh' or Ahab are considered particularly holy people in Church history.
No, but King David is.

And his CV doesn't make too good reading.

[Fish and Bread]

Next up: Clearing Satan. ;)

[TomUK]

There's quite a significant difference between the two.
Of course David was sinful, as all the heroes of the faith were. The reason why David is considered a hero of the faith however is not because of his sinful moments but because of his moments of great faith. The situation is the other way round with Judas- the article quoted above is talking about recognising Jucas because of sinfulnes, not inspite of it as in the case of David.

[Andy Broadley]

There's quite a significant difference between the two.
Of course David was sinful, as all the heroes of the faith were. The reason why David is considered a hero of the faith however is not because of his sinful moments but because of his moments of great faith. The situation is the other way round with Judas- the article quoted above is talking about recognising Jucas because of sinfulnes, not inspite of it as in the case of David.
I repeat my question though.

What happens if Judas doesn't do it?

By the arguements you put forward, the Christian church is based on a grevious sin, not on the ultimate act of love.

[Andy Broadley]

Next up: Clearing Satan. ;)
Must have missed that particular article

[karen freeinchristman]

How about the fact that God sees all of time outside of time. So he knows that Judas is going to do what he did, ahead of time. He doesn't stop it from happening, he uses it instead as part of his plan. That makes Judas still culpable, even though mankind is redeemed through his actions (so to speak).

And "what happens if Judas doesn't do it" doesn't even come into the equation.

[higgs2]

So. We can't have it both ways.

Either Jesus' life and death were divinely ordained or they were not.

If they were, then Judas was fulfilling his divine mission, even if he didn't know he was.

If we condem him for what he did, we have to answer the question of what would have happenned if he didn't do it.

He is condemmed to hell if he does it, and no crucifixion and resurection if he doesn't.

And did he not also repent his actions? Would that not put him on the same level as the thief on the cross who Jesus promised would be in Heaven with Him?
I think it is very possible that Judas is forgiven. Probable even.

[Andy Broadley]

How about the fact that God sees all of time outside of time. So he knows that Judas is going to do what he did, ahead of time. He doesn't stop it from happening, he uses it instead as part of his plan. That makes Judas still culpable, even though mankind is redeemed through his actions (so to speak).

And "what happens if Judas doesn't do it" doesn't even come into the equation.
That was my theory as well, except that it means that God has in effect set up Judas to fail, so to speak.

The fact that he seems to have shown true repentance as well, is key.

[Andy Broadley]

I think it is very possible that Judas is forgiven. Probable even.
I agree.

I would put him on a par with the thief on the cross

[Fish and Bread]

Must have missed that particular article

Actually, the Church Father Origen believed that at the end of time, God would call Satan home to heaven and that Satan would repent and join him there, completing God's plan of universal salvation. Of course, his views were eventually declared heretical, but the idea's been around a longtime that Satan would oneday in some way be redeemed. In fact, the ancient Jews used to believe that Satan had never fallen in the first place, and that he was doing God's bidding in testing people's faith and righteousness by triyng to convince them to sin.

[TomUK]

I repeat my question though.

What happens if Judas doesn't do it?

By the arguements you put forward, the Christian church is based on a grevious sin, not on the ultimate act of love.


The life of Judas and indeed our own lives are all entwined in Gods great design. To say that Judas is not guilty for his actions also means that we are not guilty for all those times we have sinnned. If that were the case then it doesn't matter whether the Christian Church is based on a grevious sin or an act of love as the Christian Church is irrelevant - the sacrifice of Jesus is irrelevant.

[Andy Broadley]

The life of Judas and indeed our own lives are all entwined in Gods great design. To say that Judas is not guilty for his actions also means that we are not guilty for all those times we have sinnned. If that were the case then it doesn't matter whether the Christian Church is based on a grevious sin or an act of love as the Christian Church is irrelevant - the sacrifice of Jesus is irrelevant.
But we are offered forgiveness through the death of Jesus.

Judas created the circumstances for that to happen.

Yet he is condemmed

[TomUK]

But we are offered forgiveness through the death of Jesus.

Judas created the circumstances for that to happen.

Yet he is condemmed

But just because he created the circumstances for salvation it doesn't mean that he is necessarily saved.

Like i said before i don't intend to 'guess' whether Judas shall be saved or not as that is an issue for God alone. However it is vital that any modern understanding of Judas remains consistent with what scripture and tradition clearly teach.

[Tetzel]

But we are offered forgiveness through the death of Jesus.

Judas created the circumstances for that to happen.

Yet he is condemmed

Oh good God! Does this mean that eventually Judas should achieve Co-redemptrix status similar to that of Mary in the RCC? She had to bear him, he had to betray him, anyone else want to climb aboard the "Jesus couldn't have happened without me train"? How about the soldiers who decided not to disobey orders to arrest him, or the cross maker for providing such a suitable device, or even us because without our sins none of this would be necessary.

[Andy Broadley]

Oh good God! Does this mean that eventually Judas should achieve Co-redemptrix status similar to that of Mary in the RCC? She had to bear him, he had to betray him, anyone else want to climb aboard the "Jesus couldn't have happened without me train"? How about the soldiers who decided not to disobey orders to arrest him, or the cross maker for providing such a suitable device, or even us because without our sins none of this would be necessary.
As far as I am aware, there has been no suggestion of Judas being given Co-redemptrix status.

I'm not a member of the RC church and do not attempt to speak as such.

I simply put forward the suggestion that Judas performed his role in Gods divine plan, although almost certainly without knowing it.

Having done what he did, he then showed repentance, and as such should not be condemmed.

[gitlance]

Mary is not officially seen as co-redemptrix, though you should look into the arguments behind that title and see how they relate to Adam and Eve.

[Andy Broadley]

Mary is not officially seen as co-redemptrix, though you should look into the arguments behind that title and see how they relate to Adam and Eve.
As I pointed out, I am neither Roman Catholic, nor do I support any particular RC stance in this case.

[Tetzel]

Mary is not officially seen as co-redemptrix, though you should look into the arguments behind that title and see how they relate to Adam and Eve.

All in good time. It's been over 50 years since her last promotion, something will come up.

[Andy Broadley]

All in good time. It's been over 50 years since her last promotion, something will come up.
Sorry, but if this thread is going to degeneraye into an us v them slagathon, then I'm outa here.

Good while it lasted though.

[Tetzel]

Perhaps I was overly glib, but there are people working on this idea.

http://www.voxpopuli.org/response_to_7_common_objections_part1.php

More here
http://www.religioustolerance.org/mary_cor.htm

Looks like it will happen eventually

[Andy Broadley]

Perhaps I was overly glib, but there are people working on this idea.

http://www.voxpopuli.org/response_to_7_common_objections_part1.php

More here
http://www.religioustolerance.org/mary_cor.htm

Looks like it will happen eventually
There are areas of RC belief and dogma that I cannot agree with, and Mary is one of them.

I respect and understand their beliefs, but cannot agree with them.

However, that is not important, brcause this thread is about Judas, not Mary.

Be a shame if a quality discussion got derailed onto something totally different.

[ContraMundum]

If I might add my ten cents worth here.

The point being discussed was how much choice Judas had in what he did.

If it was divine will that he betray Jesus and thus lead to His crucifixion, then perhaps he should not be condemmed.

On the other hand, if he had free will in the matter, what would have happened if he hadn't done it.

No crucifixion.

No resurection.

No Church.

No CF (lol)

If it was devinely ordained that Jesus would die for our sins and rise again in glory, as I believe is generally accepted, then should we condemn Judas for his part in it?

I think it's pretty safe to say that God didn't force Judas to do what he did, and that Judas' will had some part in it.

It's a tragic story, to be sure. But it's a vital lesson for us too, and that is why it is recorded.

I'd like to mention something to the Roman sympathisers here. The church has a habit of praying for those who are departed, and the faithful departed even get petitioned for interecession. Neither of these practices has ever been applied to Judas. So, from a purely "traditional" point of view there is no precedence for giving Judas some kind of absolution.

[Andy Broadley]

I think it's pretty safe to say that God didn't force Judas to do what he did, and that Judas' will had some part in it.

It's a tragic story, to be sure. But it's a vital lesson for us too, and that is why it is recorded.

I'd like to mention something to the Roman sympathisers here. The church has a habit of praying for those who are departed, and the faithful departed even get petitioned for interecession. Neither of these practices has ever been applied to Judas. So, from a purely "traditional" point of view there is no precedence for giving Judas some kind of absolution.
This is not a denominational issue now though.

OK, the idea came from the RCC, but this is a question for all Christians.

[Fish and Bread]

I've posted in the thread, but I've yet to weigh in on the main issue yet....

My view is that it's is unwise to speculate on the damnation of anyone. Christian tradition is to pray for their salvation. To the extent that Christians have condemned Judas to hell with their words, they were wrong. These are things we can't know and thus should be left open ended to a certain degree.

However, I think it's foolishness to go back and try to say Judas definitely repented before his death. We can't know that either and there's no basis for it in the bible or in tradition.

[Wiffey]

I think that Judas clearly regretted his actions...which is why he returned the 30 pieces of silver and took his own life.

Nobody would be more pleased than me to find out that God forgave Judas. It wouldn't surprise me, and would fit in nicely with what I believe about His infinite mercy.

But that is a personal opinion with no basis in either Tradition or scripture. While I like the sentiment behind the idea of Judas' rehabilitation, I think this should probably remain undefined.

IMO too many folks try to overdefine too many things...and this would be just such a case.

And on a practical note: If the RCC wants to focus on forgiveness, IMO they should start with divorced or re-married Catholics who are essentially excommunicated for life for having a failed marriage. If God can forgive Judas for Christ's betrayal and crucifixion, I fail to see why (example) divorcing a man who uses you as a punching bag merits permanent banning. Why not rehabilitate millions of folks who, although human and imperfect, seek forgiveness and reconciliation? It makes no sense to me.