The enormitv of the sin of Judas onnsisled in its being against all bomls of discipleshiii and frieud-
ship ; against light, against mercies, affection, trust, and warnings ; against his own promises and preaching. And it wjis committed deliberately, not under sudden strain, like Peter's deniahi, but with skilful and per.sistent calculation. He was not surjjrised by a riolent temptation, but he care- fully .sought an opportunity, which lie used with unswerving pertinacity, in spite of the tenderness of the feet-washing, the solemnity of Christ's public condemnation of the traitor, and the proof given tc him privately that Christ knew who the traitor was. The demonstrative kiss (Kari(pi\r!<xei') has no parallel in history, and could hardly have been invented ; all the less so, becau.se the narrative tells ns that by ^oing forward to meet His captors, and declaring Hmiself to be the person whom they were seeking, Jesus rendered the signal unnecessary. But the sin of Judas is unique only in its o|iportunity and its form ; in kind it may be repeated. It is liossible to 'crucify the Son of God afresh ' (He 6"), and therefore it is possible to betray Him afresh.
i. All the Gos|jels represent the traitor as effect- ing his purpose immediately after the Last Supper, at wliicn he was present ; out the point at which he left the upper room is much disputed. Did he, or did he not, receive the eucharistic bread and wine i The first two Gospels seem to imply that Judas received with the rest ; but they are indefinite, for they do not mention his exit. St. John is equally indefinite ; for he omits the institution of the Eucharist, and we do not know where it should be inserted. St. Luke places the words, ' But behold the hand of him that hetrayeth me is with me on the table,' after the distribution of the eucharistic bread (22"'- "'), and apparently after the eucharistic cup also, whether or no we accept as original the di.sputed words ('"'••*'). It is possible to hold that Judas went out between the partaking of the eucharistic bread and that of the eucharistic cup (Westcott on Jn 13) ; but the view mentioned by Theophylact, that Judas par- took of the cup, but concealed his portion of the bread to show to the hierarchy, need only be mentioned. The majority of patristic and medi- a-val commentators, with some Keformation writers, adopt the view taken in the Anglican Liturgy, that Judas partook of the Eucharist (see Bynieus, de Morle Christi, i. pn. 44.3^48, Amst. 16'JI; Cornelius aLapideand ilaliionatusonMt2(i*'). The majority of modern commentators hold that he did not.
S. The perplexities respecting the career of Judas continue to the end. We have two accounts of his death in Scripture, and they diller both from one another and from a third which is obviously legendary. Can we accept any as historieat /
In Mt 27'""' we are told that Judas, on learning that Jesus was condemned to death, was stricken with remorse : per/ecto demutn scetere mngnitudo ejus intrllecta est, as Tacitus says of Nero's murder of his mother {Ann. xiv. x. 1). He took back the thirty shekels to his employers, saying, ' I have sinned in that I have betrayed innocent blood.' But they had no further interest in the vile instru- ment which they had used. ' What is that to us? See thnu to it." There are several remarkable words in what follows : koI /il^at rd d/ryvpia di t4» fair avtxiip-naer — he hurled the silver pieces into the Holy Place and went into solitude. Into the rod* the priesU alone might go (Lk !••", Mt 23" 27*", Mk 14», Jn 2"" etc.). It included both the Holy riiuc and the Holy of Holies (Mt27'", Mk 15* Lk 2;!"). It is never useil like i«p4» for the whole temple. Either this is a strange exception, or Judas in his desperation rushed into the .sanc- tuary, or (most proliably) he hurled the money from a distance. The use of (ilrrur eh and not fSiiWdi' ^r points to tlii.s, but is not conclusive. Au'ain. dW^uprxrci' means more than ' departed 'i
798
JUDAS ISCARIOT
JUDAS ISCAEIOT
it is commonly used of those who shun company, retire from oliservation (Mt 2'^- '■" 4'=' 12" 14" 15-', Mk 3-, Jn 6", Ac 20^')- So also in LXX (Ex 2", Jos 8'^ Jg 4" etc.). Yet it is putting a great deal of meaning into it to interpret, ' he lived as a solitary, became a hermit.' But, if this he adoi>ted, then dir(\(?il'i' dir7)7joTo means, ' he left his place of retirement and han;,'ed himself.'
It is from this point lliat we can compare Matthew's account with that put into the mouth of I'eter in the Acts, and with the legend. Matthew seems to mean that Judas hung himself before his betrayed Ma.ster was hanged on the cross. He plainly states that Judas left the monej-, and that the priests, with characteristic scrupulosity about trifles after unscrupulous breach of the gravest commandments (cf. Jn 1!>"), would not put the pol- luted silver into the sacred treasury,* but bought with it the letter's field, to bury aliens in. This field was afterwards known as ' the field of blood,' because it was bouglit with blood-money. Thus a prophecy of Jeremiah (? Zechariah) was fulfilled.t