 The passion narratives have for centuries been interpreted by many Christians as an indictment of the Jewish people and Judaism. Following WWII and the Holocaust, many Christian denominations have officially condemned these interpretations, which have ascribed collective guilt. A dramatic shift in understanding the life and death of the Jew Jesus comes into view when we consider the impact which the sacred texts have had on our history.
It was not until the thirteenth century that the tradition of Passion Plays outside of the liturgical context of Good Friday began in Western Europe. Unfortunately, the mixture of sacred text and folk art that ensued soon resulted in untold tragedies for the Jewish community. Even the earliest Passion Plays, seen in the Benediktbeuren ("Carmina Burana") manuscripts from Germany, insert into the New Testament text extraneous compositions such as the lyrical "planctus" ("lament") of the Blessed Mother accusing Jews of being a "hateful race" and a "damnable people" for laying on Jesus their "animal-like hands."
Increasingly in dramatizations of the Passion, Jews were depicted as blood-thirsty demons consumed with hatred for all innocent Christians. It is no wonder that in succeeding centuries, the civil leaders of European cities, even Rome, had to order special measures, including the sealing off of the ghettoes, to protect Jews from being beaten and killed following performances of the Passion Plays.
The insertions by Bach and Picander into the text of Matthew's account are not only free of such invidious assaults on Jews, but by reason of their robust Lutheran piety which focuses guilt on the individual Christian sinner, go a long way toward resolving the spiritual dilemma in a constructive manner. Still, to a real extent the problem remains with the biblical text itself, especially as it is experienced today in the light of the tragic history of Jew-baiting that has accompanied it across the centuries. Great art, if unreflectively assimilated, can greatly magnify latent problems.
The Gospels present us with not one but four distinct versions of the arrest, questioning and crucifixion of Jesus. Each of these has its own special theological outlook and its own historical setting reflecting the time in which it was written as well as the time about which it writes. The Gospel of Matthew was set down toward the end of the first century, about 60 years after the death of Jesus. The Jerusalem Temple had been destroyed some 20 years earlier when the Romans crushed the first great Jewish uprising against their colonial rule. Furthermore, the parting of the ways between the early Christians and the early rabbinic movement had already begun, judging from the strong polemics against the Pharisees, the precursors of the rabbis, that Matthew puts into Jesus' mouth throughout the Gospel (except during the Passion, in which the Pharisees play no role, even though Matthew sets them up for one.)
Other indications of the evangelist addressing problems of his own day can be seen in the virtual whitewashing of the role of Pilate, who from history we know to have been unusually brutal by Roman standards, and the shifting of blame onto the Jews. The verses in which Pilate washes his hands of Jesus and "the whole people" cry out "His blood be on us and on our children," for example, are unique to Matthew. The scholarly consensus is that neither scene is historical, but rather serve the author's needs in his own situation at the end of the first century. These needs are first, to allay suspicion that Christians might be a source of rebellion against Rome (so it would not do to depict a Roman in a negative fashion, even if accurately) and, secondly, to cast Jews and Judaism in a bad light since it had become apparent by Matthew's time that the majority of Jews were not going to accept the church's interpretation of Jesus' significance. Pagans would use Jewish incredulity as a polemic against the validity of Christians' claims, arguing that even Jesus' own people did not believe them. Today, it must be remembered that despite pagan polemics, the reality was not and is not one of "Jewish unbelief," but rather continuing Jewish belief in and faithfulness to the revelations given to the people Israel on Sinai and through the prophets.
The polemical barbs introduced by Matthew into the earlier versions (chiefly Mark) with which he worked, it needs to be said, fell well within the normal rhetoric of the day and were not at all unusual for the period. The tragedy came later, when succeeding generations not only took it all quite literally but began to add embellishments of their own to the text. Hundreds of thousands of Jews historically have died at the hands of self-proclaimed "Christians" whose view of Christian faith prompted them to seek vengeance upon Jews for the entirely false charge of deicide.
Bach's St. Matthew Passion, as I indicated, is remarkably free from such depredations. But its full enjoyment artistically needs to take into account its historical as well as aesthetic context. To that end we have included notes on the Gospel text.
Commentary on the Text
By Eugene J. Fisher
The Conspiracy against Jesus
Before Jesus' entry into Jerusalem, the Pharisees tried to warn Jesus that certain of the royal forces were plotting against his life (Lk.13:31). This plot, which must be covert because of Jesus' continuing popularity with the people of Jerusalem, now begins to take shape under the leadership of the chief priests of the Temple, evidently in response to Jesus' dramatic challenge to their administration of the Temple sacrifices (Mt.21:12-17). Though Matthew puts into the mouth of Jesus the strongest invectives against the Pharisees in all of the New Testament (e.g., Mt.23), Matthew agrees with the other evangelists that the Pharisees played no role whatsoever in Jesus' death.
The Anointing at Bethany
This act may originally have been a royal anointing such as Samuel's coronation of David. The term "messiah" means "anointed" so it would have political as well as religious connotations for the Roman occupiers and their collaborators, the chief priests, who saw Jesus as a possible rallying cry for insurrection. Matthew's Gospel was set down in the years after just such a Jewish revolt against Roman occupation was brutally suppressed and the Temple destroyed. Thus, the evangelists had real reason to fear that any royal claims for Jesus might result in Roman persecution of the early Church. By interpreting the act as an anointing for burial, Matthew would alleviate Roman suspicions of rebellion.
Betrayal by Judas
The name, "Judas," which evokes "Judean" or "Jew" (German, "Jude"), led historically to a Christian homiletic tradition ascribing to all Jews the evil characteristics of the traitorous apostle, which in turn served to bolster the credibility of all sorts of nonsensical conspiracy charges against Jews, often with tragic results in riots and pogroms during Holy Week itself. Judas in the Gospels, however, represents no one other than himself and, as the chorale passages themselves indicate so well, the implication for all Christians as sinners in Jesus' death.
The Eating of the Passover
Jesus, who lived the life of a pious Jew faithful to all the commandments of the Law (Torah), desired to share the Passover with his disciples in Jerusalem because only there could one obtain portions of the paschal lambs sacrificed at the Temple. The earliest Christians, who also considered themselves faithful Jews, used their own Jewish celebration of the central story of Jewish history, the Exodus, in order to develop an adequate way of articulating and celebrating the events of Jesus' death and resurrection.
The Institution of the Blessed Sacrament
The central Christian liturgy, the Eucharist, is built from elements of the weekly synagogue service and the Passover Seder meal, with its blessings over bread and wine. Just as the Jewish understanding of zikkaron (memorial reenactment) refers to the fact that God's saving deed of the Exodus is not only recalled by each generation of Jews but actually relived through the ritual meal, so the Gospels present Jesus enacting the Seder faithfully as a Jew while at the same time giving to it a new and distinctly Christian "memory." Jesus' final promise reminds Christians that while certain aspects of the biblical promises have been fulfilled in his life and death, the final "fulfillment" is yet to come at the end of time. Christians, as well as Jews, still await the fulfillment of God's Kingdom on earth.
The Prophecy of Denial
Peter's self-confident words, which prove to be hollow, should give pause to any Christian who may feel the temptation to talk about the triumph of Christian faith over Jewish faith. Indeed, the heroic witness of thousands of Jews over the centuries who refused to convert to Christianity even when threatened with death should give us Christians much material for our own Lenten meditations.
Christ's Agony in the Garden
This scene stresses that Jesus went to his death at the hands of the Romans both knowingly and freely. Attempting to place collective guilt on the Jewish people, therefore, can only obscure the central truth of the Passion for Christians: It is our sins, not the misdeeds of others, that we must blame for Jesus' death.
The Betrayal and Arrest
Again, the chorale rightly insists that we Christians should see ourselves and our sins in the crowd, sent by the "chief priests and elders" of the Temple.
Jesus before Caiaphas
The chief priests of the Temple were appointed by the Roman governor and totally beholden to him for maintaining their position. As collaborators who did not enjoy popular support, they would have been eager to get rid of anyone around whom the people might rally to express their disdain for Roman rule. There is no indication that what transpired before the chief priests was a formal trial that might have been recognized by Jewish law. (John's gospel depicts only a questioning at dawn.) Nor does anything Jesus said actually constitute blasphemy under biblical or later rabbinic law. If blasphemy had been involved, the biblical penalty is clear: stoning by the people themselves to remove the threat to the covenant (Lev.24:10-16). Crucifixion, a purely Roman form of punishment used chiefly for political offenses, would not have satisfied the mandate of Scripture if blasphemy were actually a formal charge.
Peter's Denial
Jesus was taken to Pontius Pilate as an insurrectionist. It was Roman law alone that had jurisdiction over his case, although Pilate, a brutal tyrant well known in his time for crucifying hundreds of Jews on the merest suspicion of fostering unrest, did not appear to apply Roman law either. Pilate was ultimately called back to Rome to answer for his excessive brutality as governor.
The Questioning by Pilate
Pilate's enquiries into whether Jesus sees himself as "King of the Jews" indicates his interest in the case is solely political. Matthew adds several elements to the earlier narratives in an apparent attempt to soften the image of the Roman governor and shift the onus to Jews: The dream of Pilate's wife, the washing of hands, and the phrase, "his blood be on us and on our children." All three elements are historically unlikely. The arrest of Jesus was done covertly and at night precisely because of his popularity with the people of Jerusalem. In the courtyard would have been only a small crowd, likely selected by the chief priests from among fellow collaborators. In any event, this group could speak only for themselves, and certainly not for the whole Jewish people.
The Mocking
Examples of using a condemned prisoner for a mock king are attested elsewhere in the ancient world. This scene also emphasizes the essentially political character of the Crucifixion from the point of view of the Roman authorities.
The Crucifixion
Matthew has vinegar mixed with "gall" where Mark has "myrrh." The latter would have numbed the pain. Though often translated "thieves," the more likely translation for the Greek here is "two revolutionaries" or "two insurrectionists." The charge placed on the Cross is political: "King of the Jews."
The Final Agony
The phrase, "My God, My God why have you forsaken me?" is from Psalm 22. Jesus would likely have had the whole Psalm in mind, including its profoundly Jewish sense of hope despite despair.
The Burial
Matthew drops the earlier designation in Marks' Gospel of Joseph of Arimathea as "a distinguished member of the council" and makes him a "disciple of Jesus." The proper and swift burial of the deceased was and still is a strong element in Jewish tradition.
The Entombment
Matthew responds to questions about the burial and resurrection of Jesus by emphasizing that the tomb was new, it was that of a wealthy person (and thus well-known), and that there were witnesses. There could be not question about the identity of Jesus' burial place.
The Securing of the Tomb
Again, Matthew seems to prepare a counter-argument to the accusation that Jesus' own disciples removed his body from the tomb. Interestingly, the Pharisees, who have not been heard from throughout the Passion, are here reintroduced in the company of the chief opponents, the temple priests. This again is an indication that Matthew's argument reflects disputes in his own time between Christians and Jews, including the successors of the Pharisees, the rabbis, and not the situation in Jesus' time.
Copyright © 1991. Dr. Eugene J. Fisher. All rights reserved. Reprinted by permission. |
