Striking the Head

Isn't it good to take down one to save many?

Many of the Jews who had come with Mary and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him. But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what he had done. So the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the council, and said, “What are we to do? This man is performing 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 better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed.” He did not say this on his own, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the dispersed children of God. So from that day on they planned to put him to death. - John 11:45–53

In today's Gospel, John has us take the viewpoint of the high priest, Caiaphas.  What would we do if we felt our entire nation was threatened?

He makes the case that it is better to have one man die than to have that man destroy the whole nation, and who could argue against that?

It was a strategy the Romans used to keep peace in their occupied territories, to strike the head of a revolt causing the followers to scatter.

But we have learned that there are times that doesn't work.  The person killed could become a martyr and the movement could grow anyway.  In Jesus's case, the situation would be even worse, after word spreads of his resurrection.

What could the high priest have done that would have diffused the situation?

Would it have made a difference if they chose not to kill him, but to try to make him go away?

Would enough people have chosen to follow Jesus to make his movement a real threat?

The fact that they thought Jesus a threat proves that his message was dangerous to them.  He accused them of being hypocrites, preying on the people for their own gain, rather than leading them to God.

If he was wrong, he wouldn't have been a threat, since the people would have ignored him.

Of course, if he was wrong, he wouldn't have had to come to them at all.

So, there was no way they could ignore him and let him be.  He was telling the truth and that was the real threat.

So, the strategy that worked before worked because the people had to submit to authority, but after Jesus, that all changed.

They saw a new authority above the high priests and leaders, one that loved them as children.

More to come...