Philip Cunningham, Ph. D. is executive director of the Center for Christian-Jewish learning at Boston College where is also on the Theology faculty. Phil and his family are fairly recent parishioners at St. Malachy regularly attending the 10:00am Sunday Liturgy.

In reflecting upon the scriptures that recount Jesus' death, it is crucial to recall that the Gospels are not historical accounts, but theologically-driven narratives that sometimes reflect disputes occurring at the time of their composition. Readers who forget this often make what John Paul II has called the "unjust and erroneous interpretation" that Jesus was rejected by "the Jews" in some collective sense and so accursed by God. Such conclusions have been officially and repeatedly repudiated by the Catholic Church since the Second Vatican Council. Instead, John Paul II has prayed for God's forgiveness because the "Jewish people (were) crucified by us (Christians) for so long," since for centuries Christians would violently attack Jews after hearing the Good Friday Gospel reading.

Historically, Jesus was executed for sedition by the Roman prefect, Pontius Pilate, because he declared that God's Kingdom

was coming and would supplant all earthly rulers. The fact that Jesus had to be arrested in a secluded garden at night demonstrates that he was popular with the Jewish people at large and as such was seen to be a threat. The Temple's high priest, and appointee of Pilate's, assisted in taking Jesus into custody probably because he feared that the Romans would destroy the temple if Jews protested against foreign rule during the Passover festival. Indeed, the Romans eventually did destroy the Temple when Jews revolted against Roman governance.

When the Gospels introduce Jesus' divine Sonship as the reason for his death or depict Pilate seeking his release, they are reflecting post-resurrectional debates and the needs of a Church subject to persecution by Rome. Theologically, Jesus died as the victim of human sin, something of which we are all guilty.

A similar problem about blaming the "Jews" for the crucifixion occurs in the Acts of the Apostles, written by the writer who also wrote the Gospel of Luke. In several speeches early in that book, Jews are collectively charges with the death of Jesus. Portions of some of these speeches are proclaimed as the First Reading during the Easter season. For instance, in Acts 2 Peter declares to a crowd in Jerusalem:

"You that are Israelites, listen to what I have to say: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with deeds of power, wonders, and signs that God did through him among you, as you yourselves know-this man,.., you crucified and killed by the hands of those outside the Law (Acts 2:22-23.)"

Although there can be little doubt historically that the Romans must be assigned and important, if not the principle, role in the arrest and execution of Jesus, Luke has focused and enlarged upon Jewish involvement.

There are two explanations. First, Luke may be tapping into recollections of early Christian preaching based on the Jewish tradition of prophetic self-criticism. Early Jewish preachers of Jesus may have accused some of their fellow Jews of responsibility for his death in order to provoke a repentant sentiment and an acceptance of their message,. This pattern of condemnation coupled with a call for repentance is consistent with the prophetic tradition in the Hebrew Scriptures. Therefore, Luke's condemnatory sermons can be seen as the consequence of one Jewish sub-group (the Church) attempting to per
suade other Jewish groups of the validity of its perspectives by means of typically Jewish prophetic language.

Second, Luke's emphasis on Jewish responsibility for Jesus' death is related to his effort to gain Roman favor for the Christian movement. By having Roman authority repeatedly declare that Jesus is innocent of the charges brought against him (Luke 23:4, 14-16, 22, 47), Luke demon-strates that the empire has not reason to think of Christianity as a dangerous, revolutionary movement, By thus shifting responsibility away from Romans and onto Jews, Luke shares in a tendency visible in the other Gospels, but he also succeeds in distancing the Church from those Jews who rebelled against Rome in the Year 66.

Both of these factors should be kept in mind when reading or hearing the speeches in the early chapters of the Acts of the Apostles.