For Holy Week, Catholic Exchange is presenting a series of condensed excerpts from Inside the Passion by Father John Bartunek. These reflections will greatly enhance your appreciation of the movie The Passion of The Christ, but even more, they are rich in theological insights into the suffering our Lord experienced for our salvation.
An Unsurprising Tragedy
The Old Testament prophesied the betrayal of the Savior. In the time of the ancient Hebrew Patriarchs (circa 1800 BC), envy drove Jacob’s ten older sons to sell his eleventh son (their half-brother), Joseph, into slavery. They too did it for a handful of silver pieces. God in His Providence used that betrayal for the good of Jacob’s family — Joseph ended up viceroy of Egypt and saved his brothers and their whole clan during a famine. (You can read the remarkable story in Genesis 37-48.) The brothers were reconciled, and they became the heads of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, God’s Chosen People. In a similar way, Christians believe, God’s Providence turned Judas’s betrayal into the source of salvation for all people; Christ’s self-sacrifice provided the “bread of life” (Jn 6:35) that would relieve the spiritual famine created by original sin.
Christians also see Judas’s betrayal referred to prophetically in the Book of Psalms. Many spiritual writers even see in these passages (and others) an indication that the greatest suffering Christ endured throughout His Passion was, in fact, Judas’s betrayal.
A passage from Psalm 54 is often referred to as an especially poignant prefiguring of Christ’s sentiments in relation to this aspect of His Passion:
For if my enemy had reviled me, I would verily have borne with it. And if he that hated me had spoken great things against me, I would perhaps have hidden myself from him. But thou a man of one mind, my guide, and my familiar, who didst take sweetmeats together with me, in the house of God we walked with consent…(vs 13-15).
Psalm 40 expresses the same sorrow:
All my enemies whispered together against me; they devised evils to me…. For even the man of my peace, in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, hath greatly supplanted me… (vs 8-10).
Those descriptions are hardly the epitome of monstrous evil; the film is true to Scripture when it portrays Judas as a complex character indeed.
The New Testament discreetly reiterates the severe wound Judas’s betrayal made in the heart of Christ. During the Last Supper, the Passover Seder that Jesus celebrated with His Apostles the night before His Passion, Jesus referred to it explicitly: “When Jesus had said these things, He was troubled in spirit; and He testified, and said: Amen, amen, I say to you, one of you shall betray me” (Jn 13:21).
And yet, to the end Jesus held out the hand of friendship to His betrayer. The film first portrays this in the way Jesus looks at Judas in the Garden. As the soldiers enter Gethsemane, Jesus stands forth, ready to fulfill His Father’s will. Judas had arranged to identify Jesus by greeting Him with a kiss, a common salutation and sign of friendship in first-century Palestine. (Some kind of sign was necessary because in the dark the guards may have had difficulty identifying Jesus, or one of His disciples may have tried to pass himself off as Jesus in order to provide a chance for their leader’s escape.) When Judas sees Jesus and the other Apostles, his initial reaction is to flee. Judas was clearly ashamed of himself in front of his friends, in front of the other Apostles he knew so well. But the guards force him to go through with his plan.
As he moves towards Jesus, you see close-ups of John and Peter, representatives of the other Apostles, looking at him with sheer contempt, while in contrast the face of Jesus is welcoming, warm, sincere till the end. His response to the betrayal, when He says sadly, “Judas, dost thou betray the Son of man with a kiss?” (Lk 22:48), is more a gentle call to repentance than an accusation….
Later, during the trial in front of the leaders of Jerusalem, Judas looks on. Finally he gives the blood money back to Caiaphas and pleads for Jesus’s release. But even then he can’t accept responsibility for his betrayal. At any time whatsoever Judas could have come back, he could have wept for his sins and Jesus would have forgiven him, but he doesn’t come back.
That’s the remarkable thing about human freedom. God won’t force-feed his love; Judas was just too proud to accept his failings and the forgiveness that he needed. Letting oneself be loved even when one is unworthy of love requires humility. Many people, like Judas, simply refuse to take that step. That’s the real tragedy of Judas: not that he betrayed Christ, but that he didn’t trust in Christ’s forgiveness….
Peter: The Other Side of the Judas Coin
The obvious parallel to Judas is Peter, who also betrays Jesus during the trial with Caiaphas, by denying that he even knows Him when some threatening bystanders accuse him of being Jesus’s disciple. It’s a similar case, but not identical, as is clear in the Gospels, and as the film brings out.
Peter’s emotions are not complicated: He was simply terrified. He saw what was going on and he thought, “Uh oh, I’m next. I’ll have my head on the chopping block, and I’m not ready for this….” He hadn’t received the courage of the Holy Spirit yet. Peter’s denial came out of his weakness. He was surprised into it in a moment of confusion when his whole world was crumbling. He didn’t nurse it and think about it and coddle it and prepare for it as Judas had done. He just fell into it. This is why Peter was able to recover when Jesus gave him that indescribable look after his third denial. Judas got the look too, but he had already hardened his heart.
Judas had his moment of truth [in the film] when Jesus fell off the bridge and gave him one last look, one last invitation to repentance. Peter gets his after his third denial, when Jesus falls to the ground under the blows of his captors and turns his head to Peter, who has also fallen to the ground. The camera shots of Jesus’s two looks are uncannily similar. The difference was in the responses. Judas had already hardened his heart too much; Peter hadn’t. When Peter runs into Mary as he flees from the place of the trial he finds the strength to accept his failure, to repent, to admit his sin. Mary’s look echoes Jesus’s, and she accepts Peter’s repentance in Jesus’s place, since Peter can’t get to Jesus to ask directly.
The Gospels don’t record this encounter, but it emphasizes the contrast between Peter and Judas, bringing into sharper relief the message of hope taught by Christ’s reactions to the betrayals…. What saved Peter from despair; why did he have the “right disposition” and Judas didn’t? The flashback that appears when Peter has made his denial provides a clue. Jesus had predicted Peter’s denial at the Last Supper (the scene of the flashback), just as He had predicted Judas’s, according to the Gospel narratives. As Peter realizes that the prediction has come true, and as he looks into Christ’s bruised and swollen eyes, it dawns on him that Jesus knew all along how weak Peter was, how arrogant and conceited. And yet, even knowing that, He had never pulled back His love. Becoming aware of Christ’s immeasurable love for him, Christ’s unconditional love for him — that’s what saved him from despair. Christ’s love bred Peter’s hope.
Good Guilt and Bad Guilt
Peter’s denial was as heart-wrenching for Peter as Judas’s was for Judas. Early Christian tradition relates that Peter wept for that denial every day for the rest of his life. But Peter used it as a springboard to grow in love and trust. It taught him that he was weak, and he accepted the lesson, along with Christ’s forgiveness. Judas didn’t.
The film’s insight into Judas’s tragic passage to despair fits in with the great spiritual writers’ understanding of the moral life. Human nature has a built-in moral gauge that impels you to adhere to what is right and avoid or reject what is wrong. Although the gauge has been damaged by original sin (and sometimes social and cultural influences aggravate the damage), it still points towards behavior marked by characteristics like fairness, loyalty, and generosity, just as the needle of a damaged compass will still slide towards polar north. The impetus to do good and avoid evil (discerning between the two is often where the damage makes things difficult) makes itself felt more acutely at two moments of every moral decision: just before and just after.
Temptations (moral interference transmitted by the forces of evil and their leader, the devil) frequently come at those moments as well. Before the moment of decision they supply reasons and alternatives against choosing what is morally right, and sometimes those reasons and alternatives show an almost irresistible force, as during Christ’s combat in Gethsemane. After the decision has been made, when the moral gauge is registering approval for a good decision or disapproval for a bad one, temptations change their tack. In the aftermath of a good decision, they often retreat to gather strength for another onslaught. In the aftermath of a bad decision, they often consist in feelings of self-deprecation and hopelessness, draining off the moral courage necessary to admit one’s failings, take responsibility for the wrong done, and reboot the moral computer.
“Guilt” is the name given to the moral gauge’s indication that a wrong decision has been made. In itself, it is morally neutral: it can lead either to repentance (as in the case of Peter) or to flight and denial (as in the case of Judas). Feeling guilt, therefore, is a sign that the gauge, however damaged it may be, is still running — the first requirement for any kind of moral or truly spiritual life. What each person does with that guilt will determine his or her moral character and spiritual strength. Everyone can be like Peter, and everyone can be like Judas.
Fr. John Bartunek received a Bachelor of Arts in history from Stanford University in 1990, graduating cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. He spent a year as a professional actor in Chicago before entering the Legionaries of Christ, a religious congregation. He is currently studying for an advanced degree in moral theology in Rome, where he resides. You can write to him at fatherjohn@insidethepassion.com.
Deepen your journey into the unforgettable film, The Passion of The Christ, with the only authorized book that goes behind the scenes. Fr. John Bartunek, LC, provides biblical, historical, and theological insights gleaned from hours spent on the set and interviews with the director, actors, and filmmaking crew. Inside the Passion is the most complete and thorough commentary on the movie you will read. Foreword by Mel Gibson. Click here for more information or to order.
