Covid and Emotional Resilience: Part Two - Ambivalence

This post is part of a series prepared for Holy Week 2020, when our spiritual responses to the somber Lenten readings are tempered by emotions rising to the surface as we continue in Lockdown in New Zealand. 

In preparing this series of Holy Week devotions, I found that for each day’s readings a particular emotion came to mind, so that is the lens I’ve applied in these thoughts. Monday was Anger, today its Ambivalence.

Tuesday – Plotting against Jesus

After that, he taught daily in the Temple, but the leading priests, the teachers of religious law, and the other leaders of the people began planning how to kill him (Luke 19: 47)

Then Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve disciples, went to the leading priests to arrange to betray Jesus to them. They were delighted when they heard why he had come, and they promised to give him money. So he began looking for an opportunity to betray Jesus. (Mark 14: 10 – 11)

The gospels suggest that Tuesday was a busy day. Jesus was back in the Temple telling his people some important stuff, and getting into debates with the religious lawyers. These Jewish leaders were a combination of political and religious parties; the Pharisees being the most religious and the Sadducees - high priests - the most political. Tuesday was probably the day that they were firming up their plans to be rid of Jesus. But despite all that was going on, it is a day clothed in ambiguity.

We know the disciples were confused, having seen Jesus given a roaring welcome but then heard him prophesy death and disaster with tears in his eyes. John 12: 37 tells us the general populace too was ambivalent; “despite all the miraculous signs Jesus had done, most of the people still did not believe in him.” The gospels all portray the Jewish leaders as ambivalent. On one hand, we are told that both the Pharisees and the priests were amazed at Jesus, (eg Lk 20: 26) and on the other that they plotted to kill him (19: 47). Certainly, the Sadducees - the priestly elite – were in constant conflict with Jesus, a threat to their wealth and privilege. That is why “they tried to get Jesus to say something that could be reported to the Roman governor so he would arrest Jesus.” (Lk 20: 20).

We know the end of the story. We know that as the events of Holy Week unfold, things don’t go in the direction of fulfilling public hopes and expectations as Jesus was welcomed into the City with palms and praises. Disappointment and disillusionment set in as the crowds turn on the one to whom their deepest longings had been entrusted. And a key player in all this is Judas, who on that Tuesday listened to Jesus’ parables and prophecies with deepening frustration, and considered his options. He is the most ambivalent of all.

Seen through twenty first century eyes, Judas is a mystery. The later gospel writers cast him as demonic, but theologians down the centuries have found his actions deeply ambiguous. Professor Barclay called him “the supreme enigma of the NT” (The Master’s Men).

Consider the multiple possibilities:

• Judas’ name could have meant he was from Kerioth, not in Galilee and therefore a bit of an outsider who became bitter and jealous.

• But in other ways he was an insider. He was trusted as the treasurer and it seems from the descriptions of the Last Supper that he sat at a place of honour at the table.

• Iscariot could have meant he was one of the Sicarii, dagger bearers, fanatical nationalists pledged to restore Israel. They dreamt of a Messiah who would drive the Romans out. When the dream collapsed, he may have turned traitor in a murderous rage.

• Or there’s another possibility - watching Jesus commit more and more to a non-violent pathway, Judas could have decided to compel him to unleash his power.

• Judas’ outward behaviours did not cause any suspicion. He would have been quickly ousted if the disciples had any idea of what he was considering. Though Jesus picked up something off kilter early on.

• Was Judas just greedy? John suggested he had used his position to pilfer from the common purse (Jn 12.6). But 30 pieces of silver was not much of a reward at that time.

• Was Judas was controlled by Satan? Luke says that.

• Or was Judas’ decision actually part of Gods sovereign plan to save humanity? If so, was Judas morally responsible or just a pawn? Was Jesus choosing of him as a disciple made with foreknowledge of where it would end? Could Jesus have figured out an alternative plan to meet the soldiers in the garden that night that didn't involve the fall of one of his inner circle? These mysteries are disturbing; you have to decide, says Bob Dylan, whether Judas Iscariot had God on his side.

Here and Now

Where does bring us in the ambivalence of lockdown in Auckland in 2020? Are we to mourn the dead or celebrate that we are alive? Should we trust the government or bring them under scrutiny? We need to connect with others but must keep our distance. We enjoy some freedoms, but are trapped in our bubbles. We long for our overseas holidays to be uncancelled but we know the world may never be the same. We know God is trustworthy but we keep washing our hands and buying extra flour. One writer calls ambivalence “the shark infested waters that lie between hope and fear.”

Ambivalence is defined as simultaneous and contradictory attitudes or feelings toward an object, person or action; continual fluctuation between one thing and its opposite, and uncertainty about which approach to follow. These definitions certainly sound familiar. We regularly deal with such feelings in our own lives and in the lives of our children.

Families - I think talking to our kids about ambivalence could be helpful this week. They need to know that it is part of the human journey – and that their parents and teachers sometimes feeling confused and uncertain too. We can tell God about that; the psalmist certainly did. They could draw their own version of the graphics included here. 
And just to feed in some relevant HRM research, multiple studies report that individuals who felt emotionally ambivalent (rather than purely positive or purely negative) about a problem or situation, were more open to others’ contributions, and less prone to making poor decisions. Both of those lead to resilience.

“Faith always lives in ambivalence, else it would not be faith.”

Postscript

I don't have answers to the questions about Judas, though with most scholars I lean to the idea that his disappointed dreams led to a desire to force God’s hand. It is clear Judas deeply regretted his choice and probably took his own life, in what some see as an act of repentance. I'm not sure of that – but with psychologist Richard Beck (Experimental Theology Blog), I see suicide as sad and tragic, not sinful or evil.

Beck says he can't imagine “that God's heart didn't go out to Judas as he wrapped the rope round his neck, tears streaming down his face”. And I imagine, divine hands gently lifting him, forgiving him for not knowing what he was doing, and offering a welcoming kiss of grace.