NO GREATER LOVE: THE PLOT AGAINST JESUS

​

Before the arrest of Jesus at Gethsemane, the Synoptic Gospels, (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) briefly mention a plot by the Jerusalem authorities against the Lord. “Then the chief priests and the elders of the people gathered in the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, and they took council together in order to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him. But they said, ‘Not during the feast, lest there be a tumult among the people,’” (Mt 26:3-5, also Mk 14:1, Lk 22:1-2) John’s Gospel, however, gives us more details of this meeting, which occurred soon after the Lord had raised His friend Lazarus from the dead which caused many more Jews to believe in Jesus.

​

“So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council, and said, ‘What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy both our holy place and our nation.’ But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, ‘You know nothing at all; you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish.’ He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they took council about how to put him to death.” (Jn 11:47-53)

​

John may have gotten the information about this meeting from Joseph of Arimathea or Nicodemus who were secret disciples of Jesus. (Jn 19:38-42) The majority of the council seemed to be more concerned about the effect of Jesus on the nation and the temple than about who He is and whether or not He came from God. Here the question arises concerning the ways of God. From the Mosaic Law and the prophets, it was clear to the Jerusalem authorities that God was not the God just of Israel, but of everyone. It was also clear that God was not known or believed by most of the known world. The Jews were only a small nation in the great Roman Empire and even the Roman Empire was not the whole world. How was the whole world to come to worship the One True God?

​

One possible way for this to happen was through the nation of Israel. The great king David not only reigned over a united Israel, but he also won many military victories and defeated the surrounding nations so that they were afraid to attack Israel. (2 Sam 8:1-14, 1 Cron 18:1-13) The Pharisees hoped that the long-awaited Messiah would free Israel from Roman domination so that a restored and powerful Israel would bring the worship of God to the whole world with the Jerusalem Temple as the center of worship. Jesus, however, did not fit in with this idea. He did not criticize or threaten the Romans, but He did cleanse the Temple (Jn 2: 13-22, Mt 21:12-13, Mk 11:15-19, Lk 19:45-46) and predict its demise. (Mt 24:1-2, Mk 13:1-2, Lk 21:5-6) This must have made the Pharisees and the priestly Temple aristocracy very uncomfortable. Jesus was not fulfilling what the Jerusalem authorities believed was God’s plan for the world. This is very common; we have a plan for God, but God has a different plan. On the other hand, there were those who heard Jesus, saw His miracles (signs) and put their faith in Him. They did not know what God’s “agenda” was, but they put their faith in the One who was to carry it out. For these people the Temple sacrifices were not the ultimate thing which needed to be preserved. God ultimately desires righteousness from us. The psalmist prays “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me.” (Ps 51:10) Later in the same psalm we read, “For you take no delight in sacrifice; were I to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased. The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.” (Ps 51: 16-17) The political arrangements of the day were not important for the early Christians. What is important is our relationship to God. Politics has its place, but ultimately, we must “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Mt 22:21)

​

In Jesus of Nazareth, Pope Benedict comments on the prophesy of the High Priest Caiaphas that “You know nothing at all; you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish.” On the surface, the content of Caiaphas' "prophecy" is thoroughly pragmatic, and, considered in those terms, it seems reasonable from his point of view: if the people can be saved through the death of one man (and in no other way), then this individual's death might seem the lesser evil and the politically correct path. But what on the surface sounds and is intended to be merely pragmatic acquires an entirely new depth on the basis of its "prophetic" quality. The one man, Jesus, dies for the nation: the mystery of vicarious atonement shines forth, and it is this that constitutes the most profound content of Jesus' mission.

​

 The idea of vicarious atonement pervades the entire history of religions. In many different ways people have tried to deflect the threat of disaster from the king, from the people, from their own lives, by transferring it to a substitute. Evil must be atoned for, and in this way justice must be restored. The punishment, the unavoidable misfortune, is offloaded onto others in an effort to liberate oneself. Yet this substitution through animal or even human sacrifice ultimately lacks credibility. What is offered by way of substitution is still a mere proxy for one's own offering and can in no way take the place of the one needing to be redeemed. A proxy is not a substitute, yet the whole of history is searching for the one who can truly stand in for us, the one who is truly able to take us up with him and so lead us to salvation.

​

 Referring to the prophecy of Caiaphas, St. John then tells us, “He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.” St. John is referring to the “vicarious atonement” referred to by Pope Benedict. Of course, the Temple sacrifices of animals was a futile attempt at vicarious atonement which was fulfilled by the Lord’s suffering on Mount Calvery. However, vicarious atonement was not invented by Pope Benedict or St. John the Evangelist. The prophet Isaiah wrote of vicarious atonement over five hundred years before the birth of Christ. “Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows, yet we esteemed him stricken, struck down by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” (Is 53:4-6) After the Crucifixion and Resurrection of the Lord, the early Christians were certainly trying to make sense of what happened to Jesus. This, and many other passages from the Old Testament were a great help to the Church both then and down to the present time.

​

Of course, not everyone interprets Isaiah 53 the way the Church interprets it. Is Jesus the “suffering servant” that the author of Isaiah 53 wrote about? Was the author of Isaiah 53 inspired by God? The whole idea of vicarious atonement is offensive to modern, rich, western, technological mankind. We can build a better world without the “outmoded” ideas from the past which focused so much on our sinfulness and our unworthiness before God. Of course, much of the world does not adopt this “modern” way of thinking and does realize its need for God and its need to be free from the bondage of sin.  

​

We have a division in humanity about Jesus which started with the Pharisees and Sadducees in Jerusalem and has continued down to the present day. The Jerusalem authorities looked on Him as a “rebellious son” who was going to destroy the Temple. Jesus knew what they thought of Him and said from the Cross, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” (Lk 23:34) Later, vicarious atonement was explained as an invention by the Church in order to exalt Jesus.

​

What the Lord said and did is recorded in the four Gospels.  The interpretation of what is written there has divided humanity for two thousand years. “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Mt 10:34-36, Lk 12:51) In describing the plot against Jesus, St. John the Evangelist asserts that the High Priest Caiaphas prophesied that “Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.” (Jn 11:51-52) St. John is giving us the Christian interpretation of the death of Jesus. The “children of God” are not just Jewish believers in Jesus, but all who believe in the Lord. For two thousand years, some have accepted the vicarious atonement offered to us by the Lord, and some have rejected it. This remains a decision which is demanded of all of us. – Jim Nugent, CfP