They took counsel together in order to arrest Jesus

In a marvelous article in the American Spectator (which can be found here: http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print), Angelo Codevilla, writes of the contrast and conflict between the ruling class in the United States and what he calls the “country class”. There is no need here to summarize his article. Suffice it to say, I believe he is spot on as he describes the hegemony of those who have or desire power in the United States versus the two-thirds of the people who are a class unto themselves, holding such far-fetched ideas such as the importance of faith, traditional marriage, the rule of law and a strong national defense. While he notes that the country class is quite varied in its racial, religious and even political make-up, there are certain characteristics they hold in common. This made me reflect upon the various groups who appear in the Gospels.


Each of the Gospel writers had their own particular reasons for producing their work. That is, there was an existential reason for relating the words and deeds of Jesus as they did. Each writer was the head or part of a particular church with its own needs and experiences. St. Luke begins his account by making his purpose explicit: “That you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.” (Luke 1:4). Of course, the main reason they all wrote their Gospels was to proclaim the truth about Jesus Christ. The Church “has firmly and with absolute constancy held, and continues to hold, that the four Gospels just named, whose historical character the Church unhesitatingly asserts, faithfully hand on what Jesus Christ, while living among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation until the day He was taken up into heaven (see Acts 1:1).” (Dei Verbum, 19) Jesus really did and taught what the Gospels contain, up to and including His resurrection.

One thing we can garner from a careful reading of the Gospels is the cultural situation that existed in the time of Jesus. There was an assortment of groups, both political and religious, with which Jesus interacted. We find a similar divide between the ruling class in Israel and the people, the country class who felt that Jesus was indeed the Savior for whom they had been waiting. The Pharisees were, as stated above, lay authorities of the law and self-appointed deciders of true piety and authentic Judaism. The Sadducees were of the priestly class who ruled by virtue of their ancestry. The Herodians, who barely show up in any of the Gospels, were basically politically aligned with King Herod. The Zealots, one of whom became an apostle, were fiercely nationalistic, looking to overthrow Roman domination, by violence if necessary. (I find it interesting that Simon the Zealot is the only apostle never to have his words recorded by the Gospel writers.) Members of these groups rarely found themselves willingly agreeing with Jesus, and they found common ground in their hatred for Him. His goal of uniting the people of Israel was not based upon finding a consensus of belief among these groups, but rather of revealing and manifesting the truth which He personified, literally. They were to conform to Him, or else. The “or else” being His crucifixion and their loss of salvation. “The Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it.” (Mt. 21:43). Even Herod and Pilate became friends in the very act of rejecting Jesus. (Lk. 23:12).

These leaders and ruling class groups conspired against Jesus in secret precisely because the country class, the people, had come to believe that He was the Messiah. “Not during the feast, lest there be a tumult among the people.” (Mt. 26:5). The decision to bring Jesus to Pilate for crucifixion was so that the people, seeing their “Messiah” put to death in such a horrific and scandalous manner, would lose their faith in him and return to them. How could the Savior of Israel, expected to be a conquering hero, be humiliated and executed? The people awoke on Friday morning to see the one they had proclaimed as “Son of David” bound and condemned to death. The scandal was too much for them, and they joined the chorus, “Away with him! Crucify him!” They would, with the coming of the Holy Spirit, rediscover their nascent faith when the apostles began to preach.

The ruling class of modern American life is not unlike those who opposed Jesus during His public ministry. There are self-appointed religious ideologues who decide what is real faith and piety, now found in a belief in such things as global warming, evolution and various dietary restrictions. There are lawyers who do injustice under cover of law and the high priests of education who promote their own and dictate to the mass of humanity how they will act and think. There are, finally, the politically dominant who seek power at the expense of those they are bound to serve. Truth is the victim in this system, except for the wonderful potential of the country class to object in large numbers, and vote that way. For now, anyway.

It would be an error of oversimplification, at best, to consider the recent elections as a national commitment to Christ and His truth. Would that it were so! We have only to consider the election of 2008. The “messiah” of that election was certainly not real, though he won over a large enough number of the “country class” to win. But there is still some hope that those who seek the truth and yearn for the rule of law under the Constitution can make some real changes. It is a battle that will not end soon, unless the end of all comes soon. My hope and prayers is that those who have received a mandate from the people will bear in mind their obligation to the truth. Power is a dangerous thing and has a way of dimming one’s eyes to reality. And there is no real salvation in politics, and the Constitution is not about eternal life. The job of the Christian in this crazy world is to do his or her best to transform the world by the faith and truth that is Christ. We may not achieve the final victory in politics, but by remaining true to our commitment to the truth, we will certainly win the victory of our own conscience.