J
jbelokur
Guest
I’m looking for some info on what the Church says about Judas.
- Status
T
Trishie
Guest
- So that you don’t need to search through other replies to arrive at this one, have posted a reply form one of our CAF Apologists. If you can obtain a copy of the Archbishop book you may find further elucidation.
I hope this helps to answer any some of your question:*
”
A:
Yes, of course. Bishop Fulton Sheen, in his book Life of Christ, devoted a chapter to the betrayal by Judas, contrasting it with the betrayal by Peter—with which it was similar in some respects—and concluding that the tragedy of Judas’s life was that even after the betrayal he could have been St. Judas Iscariot if only he had repented instead of despaired. The sin against the Holy Spirit, the one that cannot be forgiven, is the sin of final impenitence. God can forgive any repented sin, but man must repent of his sins before he can be forgiven. As only God can judge hearts, we cannot know whether Judas was impenitent to his very death, but we can know that he did not demonstrate the heroic virtue of Peter, who repented his betrayal of Christ rather than allow despair to consume him.
Code:
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/images/qu.jpg[Michelle Arnold](http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/quickquestions/author/Michelle%20Arnold)Link to a talk regarding Judas by the holy Archbishop:
fultonsheen.com/Fulton-Sheen-MP3s/The-Betrayal-of-Judas.cfm?PID=171
M
mark_a
Guest
Iscariot?
BTW, I read your conversion story and really enjoyed it. One question though, what is a church plant?
J
jbelokur
Guest
Yeah, Iscariot.
Thanks for the complement about the story. A church plant happens when within an established denomination, in this case the church of the Nazarene, a new local church body is formed. My friend Fabian and I were launching a new community under the umbrella of our former denomination. He and his family too have within the last two years come back into the Catholic Church.
M
mark_a
Guest
Welcome home to everyone!!
I
inkaneer
Guest
Well for one thing the Church calls him an apostle using verse 2 from Mathew 10 in which the names of the twelve Apostles are listed with Judas being last as a reference. That is the only time he is called an Apostle. Probably the better understanding of Matthew 10:1-2 is that these were the names of the 12 men who were called to be apostles. They did not become apostles untill they were sent by Christ and that did not occur until Jesus’ resurrection. Judas was dead at that time. In addition, Judas was not preesent at the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper. He left just before. He also was not present when the power to forgive sin was given to the Apostles. So what kind of apostle is it that cannot forgive sin nor consecrate the Eucahrist? Judas is nothing more than what a protestant minister is today. In Acts 1 when Peter calls for a replacement for Judas he quotes a verse from two separate OT psalms. Seemingly this is a classic case of what every bible scholar warns us not to do. First Peter says let his house be desolate and no one reside therein then He says let another take his office. Peter is actually not joining the two verses together. He is referring to two different things. His “house” refers to Judas’ lineage, his line of succession. Remember that Jesus was of the house of David. He was in line of succeassion from David as Matthew points out in his first chapter. So no one will trace their line of Apostolic Succession from Judas. And not one bishop in 2,000 years has done so. Peter’s second Psalm verse deals with the office Judas was to hold. That office was that of bishop. In fact the Greek word that Luke uses that is translated as office is episkope that word is used elsewhere and is translated as ‘overseer’ or ‘bishop’. The KJV translates the word in Acts 1 as ‘bishoprick’. So that is why, later on in Acts 1, Matthias was only ‘numbered’ with the ‘eleven’ Apostles. Notice after Matthias’ election there are still eleven Apostles. Matthias is the first bishop but his line of succession does not come from Judas but from the other eleven Apostles.
G
Glennonite
Guest
Doesn’t Lk 6: 13-16 also show these 12 were in fact Apostles well before Pentecost? Just askin’.
6:13 And when day was come, he called unto him his disciples; and he chose twelve of them (whom also he named apostles):
6:14 Simon, whom he surnamed Peter, and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew,
6:15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon who is called Zelotes,
6:16 And Jude, the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, who was the traitor.
Glennonite
I
inkaneer
Guest
I guess it all depends on whether you ascribe a generic meaning or a specific meaning to the word. If you want to be specific then apostle means ‘one who is sent’ and that would mean sent by Christ as in the Great Commission of Mt 28:19-20. Notice also that the Bible calls Barnabas, Timothy and Silvanus apostles but they were not sent by Christ. So the word does not carry the specific meaning all the time.
I view the period of time that the twelve were with Jesus as sort of their seminary time. They were learning from Jesus and the Great Commission was graduation day. Thus Peter in Acts one specifies that whoever is selected to replace Judas in his office had to be with Jesus from the baptism by John until the ascencion. Obviously this is not the prerequisites for being an apostle as Judas committed suicide before the resurrection and was not around for the ascencion. What Peter is doing is saying in effect we need to fill this office but we don’t have time to teach or train someone. Therefore, to fill this office, we’ll take someone who has already gone through the training that we did.
N
Nita
Guest
I think you may find the following entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia informative.
newadvent.org/cathen/08539a.htm
I found the Biblical exegesis very thorough and interesting.
A couple of examples:
…And it is significant that he is never mentioned without some reference to his great betrayal. …
…
In both these accounts it will be noticed that Judas takes the initiative: he is not tempted and seduced by the priests, but approaches them on his own accord. St. Luke tells the same tale, but adds another touch by ascribing the deed to the instigation of Satan:
G
Glennonite
Guest
I’m seeing that Judas is the 12th on the list of 12. All of the other guys are the Apostles everywhere else. It seems obvious that these guys are the 12 Apostles that Jesus called; and Judas was one “of the twelve”.
Glennonite
I
inkaneer
Guest
He was one of the twelve called to be apostles but how can he be an apostle if he was never empowered to consecrate the Eucharist nor empowered to forgive sin and was never sent? Matthias is the biblical verification for the apostolic succession of bishops having been consecrated a bishop by the other apostles. But, if Matthias is an apostle because he succeeded another apostle then the question is which apostle succeeded Peter, and which James, John, Andrew, Thomas, etc.? The answer is, of course that these apostles were not succeeded by another apostle but by bishops. Judas was called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ but because of his betrayal and suicide did not make it to where he would be sent by Christ. Matthias, also, was never sent by Christ. The twelfth apostle is Paul because scripture tells us that he was called and sent by Christ. That is, of course, unless you want to have more than twelve apostles.
G
Glennonite
Guest
I don’t know where to find your requirements of being an Apostle: “…never empowered to consecrate the Eucharist nor empowered to forgive sin and was never sent.”
This website’s encyclopedia, oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Judas_Iscariot
shows that Judas was one of the original 12. I neither want, nor not-want “more than twelve apostles.” I’m just looking at what is.
Judas Iscariot, the Apostle who betrayed his Divine Master. The name Judas (Greek: `Ioudas) is the Greek form of Judah (Heb. YHVDH, i.e., praised), a proper name frequently found both in the Old and the New Testament. Even among the Twelve there were two that bore the name, and for this reason it is usually associated with the surname Iscariot [Heb. AYS QRYVCH, i.e., a man of Kerioth or Carioth, which is a city of Judah (cf. Jos., xv, 25)]. There can be no doubt that this is the right interpretation of the name, though the true origin is obscured in the Greek spelling, and, as might be expected, other derivations have been suggested (e.g. from Issachar). Very little is told us in the Sacred Text concerning the history of Judas Iscariot beyond the bare facts of his call to the Apostolate, his treachery, and his death. His birthplace, as we have seen, is indicated in his name Iscariot, and it may be remarked that his origin separates him from the other Apostles, who were all Galileans. For Kerioth is a city of Judah. It has been suggested that this fact may have had some influence on his career by causing want of sympathy with his brethren in the Apostolate. We are told nothing concerning the circumstances of his call or his share in the ministry and miracles of the Apostles. And it is significant that he is never mentioned without some reference to his great betrayal. Thus, in the list of the Apostles given in the Synoptic Gospels, we read: “and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him” (Matt., x, 4. Cf. Mark, 19; Luke, vi, 16). So again in St. John’s Gospel the name first occurs in connection with the foretelling of the betrayal: “Jesus answered them: Have not I chosen you twelve; and one of you is a devil? Now he meant Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon: for this same was about to betray him, whereas he was one of the twelve” (John, vi, 71-2).
I think this is significant in that it shows that the people whom Jesus’ chose to lead his Church could (and would) be flawed. From Peter’s denial, Thomas’ disbelief, the sleeping in Gethsemine, to the abject fear after Jesus’ Passion and Death, these people were weak, flawed humans. So are you and I; that encourages me.
Glennonite
I
inkaneer
Guest
Yes, Judas was one of the twelve that were called to be apostles. But when does one ‘become an apostle’? When they are called or when they are sent? I would think the logical answer would be when they are sent for that is what the word apostle means, one who is sent. Judas was never sent. Another example is when does someone become a priest; when they enter a seminary or when they are ordained? As for consecrating the Eucharist and forgiving sins those powers are vital for any Apostle for it is only because the Apostles were empowered with this authority that they were able to pass that authority down to bishops. But how could they pass something down that they themselves did not possess? Judas obviously did not possess the authority to forgive sins he was dead when that authority was delegated. Judas left the Last Supper before the Eucharist was celebrated. He was called but never empowered. Heis not the twelfth apostle. That twelth apostle was, according to scripture, called by and sent by Jesus Christ and his name was Paul.
G
Glennonite
Guest
Alright, alright. I’ll stick to what the Church says on this; you can establish/invent whatever criteria you think is correct here. This sentence:
“As for consecrating the Eucharist and forgiving sins those powers are vital for any Apostle for it is only because the Apostles were empowered with this authority that they were able to pass that authority down to bishops.”
Upon what do base this claim?
CHAPTER 10. (DOUAY-RHEIMS TRANSLATION)
Jesus sends out his twelve apostles, with the power of miracles. The lessons he gives them.
10:1 And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities.
10:2 And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother,
10:3 James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus,
10:4 Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
10:5 These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: "Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not.
10:6 But go ye rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
10:7 And going, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
10:8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils: freely have you received, freely give.
Are you saying that Judas could do the above, but not forgive sins? And that forgiving sins is THE requirement to be an Apostle? Or is it also consecrating the bread and wine as well? Or, are we disputing the capital “A” versus the lower-case “a”?
“But when does one ‘become an apostle’? When they are called or when they are sent?”
Mt 10: 1 Called. Four verses later: Sent. It really seems like it’s the same conversation. I’d say that the “calling” was more of a, “Hey you (12) guys, c’mere and listen-up.”
No offense is intended here, but your viewpoint reminds me of a Protestant friend of mine. I’m stickin’ with what Sr. Rita told us in 3rd grade. And what verses 1-8 in Mt 10 say. If you would give me the basis for your statement above, you’d really have my attention.
No worries, this is an interesting conversation.
Glennonite
I
inkaneer
Guest
Well first you didn’t document your quote as to which gospel you took it from. Good thing I knew it was from Matthew chapter 10. Are these Apostles or are they apostles in training? Jesus sends them out but they are not fully equipped as Apostles. At this point intime they cannot forgive sin nor can they consecrate the Eucharist. The church is emphatic that the authority to do this is passed down through Apostolic Succession. These people can’t do it, at least not yet so are they apostles or does that come later? They will one day and when that day comes Jesus will tell them to go into the whole world not just to the tribes of Israel. This was a training mission, nothing more. If you look at the next chapter you don’t have to go pass verse one and Matthew is back to calling these people disciples:Alright, alright. I’ll stick to what the Church says on this; you can establish/invent whatever criteria you think is correct here. This sentence:
“As for consecrating the Eucharist and forgiving sins those powers are vital for any Apostle for it is only because the Apostles were empowered with this authority that they were able to pass that authority down to bishops.”
Upon what do base this claim?
CHAPTER 10. (DOUAY-RHEIMS TRANSLATION)
Jesus sends out his twelve apostles, with the power of miracles. The lessons he gives them.
10:1 And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities.
10:2 And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother,
10:3 James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus,
10:4 Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
10:5 These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: "Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not.
10:6 But go ye rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
10:7 And going, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
10:8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils: freely have you received, freely give.
Are you saying that Judas could do the above, but not forgive sins? And that forgiving sins is THE requirement to be an Apostle? Or is it also consecrating the bread and wine as well? Or, are we disputing the capital “A” versus the lower-case “a”?
“But when does one ‘become an apostle’? When they are called or when they are sent?”
Mt 10: 1 Called. Four verses later: Sent. It really seems like it’s the same conversation. I’d say that the “calling” was more of a, “Hey you (12) guys, c’mere and listen-up.”
No offense is intended here, but your viewpoint reminds me of a Protestant friend of mine. I’m stickin’ with what Sr. Rita told us in 3rd grade. And what verses 1-8 in Mt 10 say. If you would give me the basis for your statement above, you’d really have my attention.
No worries, this is an interesting conversation.
Glennonite
“And when Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to teach and preach in their cities.” [Mt 11:1] RSV
If they are really apostles why does he go back to calling them disciples? That makes no sense.
Regarding Judas what I am saying is that Judas leaves the Last Supper before the institution of the Eucharist by Christ. The command to “…do this in memory of Me.” is given to only eleven Apostles present. It has to be understood that way elsewise everyone could consecrate the Eucharist not just those present. The authority to forgive sin is given to the Apostles after Judas is dead.
Also I will point out that the church teaches in it catechism that there are twelve Apostles not thirteen, not fourteen. The term twelve apostles is mentioned several times. Paul is called an Apostle in scripture no less than 10 times. Now, we have a problem here. How many apostles are there, 12 or 13 or 14? But there is an even bigger problem. In Acts 1;17 Peter says of Judas that he was, “numbered among us and was allotted his share in this ministry.” Notice, Judas only had a share. I think it is obvious that it it was not a full share as he could notforgive sin nor consecrate the Eucharist… Also Judas was only numbered among them. That is a far cry from calling Judas an apostle. Notice that after the election of Matthias there is still only eleven apostles [Acts 1:26] So here it is in a nutshell. Judas was called [by Christ] to be an apostle and went through part of the training but never received the Great Commission and was thus never sent. Heis no apostle of Jesus. Matthias was never called [by Christ] to be an Apostle and also was never sent by Christ. Hewas no apostle either. He was selected by the eleven apostles who ordained him a bishop and they sent him. Paul was called by Christ and sent by Christ [Acts 9:15]. Paul is the twelfth apostle. Judas flunked out of seminary, big time.
P
patrick457
Guest
Not directly relevant, but that being said, Jesus Himself is in a sense an ‘apostle’ (which after all merely means “one who is sent”) according to Hebrews 3:1.
G
Glennonite
Guest
Sorry 'bout the chapter reference; I tried, but the text wouldn’t come up the way I inserted it into the pasted part.
A *training *mission…nothing more…got it. Judas had a share…one twelfth of the share? Never mind. Numbered among the Apostles is a far cry from being called an Apostle…got it. Only went through part of the “training”…got it. There’s a thing called, “the Great Commission”…gooot iit.
Flunked…out…of…seminary…You sure speak with authority…I’m…speechless.
Glennonite
I
inkaneer
Guest
What got me on to this was something that Scott Hahn [as well as other biblical scholars] said about joining different verses in scripture with no regard to their context. If you look at what Peter says in Acts 1 it appears this is exactly what he is doing in Acts 1:20 when he says:Sorry 'bout the chapter reference; I tried, but the text wouldn’t come up the way I inserted it into the pasted part.
A *training *mission…nothing more…got it. Judas had a share…one twelfth of the share? Never mind. Numbered among the Apostles is a far cry from being called an Apostle…got it. Only went through part of the “training”…got it. There’s a thing called, “the Great Commission”…gooot iit.
You sure speak with authority…I’m…speechless.
Glennonite
“20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’; and ‘His office let another take.’” [Acts 1:20] RSV
He is actually quoting two different Psalms. First, he paraphrases verse 25 of Psalm 69:
“Let their habitation be desolate, and let none dwell in their tents.”
and joins it with verse 8 of Psalm 109:
“Let his days be few, and let another take his office.”
A classic case of what not to do if there ever was one. So why is scripture contradicting bible scholars? I didn’t know. Then one day I was reading Luke’s gospel and came to Chapter 1 verse 27 which says:
“to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.” [Luke I:27] RSV
I emboldened the part that caught my attention. Jesus was said to be of the house of David too. That meant He [and Joseph] were descended from David. Or, to put it another way, they were in a line of succession from David. Then Acts 1:20 became clear. Peter wasn’t joining two verses together. He was speaking of two different things. When he quoted Psalm 69:25, “'Let his habitation [house] become desolate…” he was referring to Judas’ Apostolic line of succession. No bishop would follow in the line of succession from Judas because there was no line of succession. That means Mattias cannot be Judas’ successor. Peter then goes on to quote Psalm 109:8, “Let his days be few, and let another take his office.” The word in Greek that is translated as ‘office’ is the word *episkope *. It is the very same word that is translated as bishop in other parts of scripture. So Mattias does not succeed Judas. Matthias is ordained by the eleven Apostles and takes the office [episcopcy] that Judas forfeited. He is enrolled with the Apostles as a bishop as all Apostles were the original holders of the office of bishops. But his line of succession comes from Peter or the eleven and not from Judas.
- Status