Christian tradition says Jesus Christ was crucified this Passover week, sometime around 30 AD, and ever since the argument has raged:  who caused his death?

Read the four Gospels—Mark, Luke, Matthew and John—and the answer is clear.  Jesus was killed by “the Jews,” but what is interesting is that these Gospels, all written at different times, differ in the degree to which the Jews are responsible.

Mark, the earliest Gospel, written some 30 years after Jesus died, says the Sanhedrin (the Jewish leadership) in Jerusalem brought Jesus to the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, demanding his death because Jesus claimed he was the “King of the Jews.” Pilate was happy to comply, thereby eliminating a potential troublemaker whose claim to be ruler of the Jews threatened Roman control.  Indeed, Passover—especially in Jerusalem—was a time when the Jews were particularly restless because they were celebrating their freedom from one oppressor, Egypt, knowing full well that they were ruled by another oppressor, Rome.

Luke, written about 10 years later, writes that Pilate declared Jesus innocent of the Sanhedrin’s charges three times and tried to free Jesus, but the large Jewish crowd demanded his death.

Matthew, written just after Luke, echoes Luke’s version but adds that when the Jewish crowd demanded Jesus’ death, Pilate washed his hands in a basin of water and declared, “I wash my hands of responsibility for this man’s death.”  At which point the crowd responded, “His blood be upon us and our children,” thereby not only taking responsibility for killing Jesus, but also making their descendants responsible.

Continue reading →

After the Renaissance Popes—whose notoriety is mostly deserved—arguably the most controversial Pope in the history of the Catholic Church is Pope Pius XII, whose coronation occurred this week (March 12) in 1939.  As Pope during WW II, Pius’ notoriety stems from his reputation as a toady to Nazi Germany who was silent while the Jews of Europe were systematically murdered.   One biography of him, “Hitler’s Pope,” says it all.

The criticisms are mostly garbage, although it is fair to say Pius could have been more vocal in personally condemning Nazi atrocities.  But Pius’ church career was as a diplomat—in 1930 Pius XI appointed him Cardinal Secretary of State—so he was trained to work quietly behind the scenes and to speak in generalities and with circumlocution.  Also, according to those close to him, Pius sincerely worried that if he publicly condemned the Nazis it would lead to harsher reprisals against the Jews.

That is an explanation, not an excuse.  If clarity was called for, publicly he was not clear.

Pius was also criticized for favoring Germany over the Soviet Union, refusing to denounce Hitler for invading Russia in 1941, and criticizing Hitler’s invasion of Poland in vague language.  One explanation—again, not an excuse—is that the Soviets were atheists, whereas Germany had a thriving church that, at the time, Hitler had not interfered with.   Also, Pius’ critics note that when Germany was near defeat in 1944, he asked the United States not to treat Germany so harshly that it left the Soviet Union free rein to dominate Eastern Europe. If that deserves criticism it was also uncanny prescience.

Continue reading →