A common position in biblical scholarship today1 is that the Gospels were the product of development over a long period of time and so are not literal accounts of the words and deeds of Jesus, even though based on memories and traditions of such words and deeds. Apostolic faith and preaching has reshaped those memories, as has also the individual viewpoint of each evangelist who selected, synthesized, and explicated the traditions that came down to him.2 All of this means that while there is one Jesus at the font of the four canonical Gospels, each evangelist knows a different facet of him and presents a different picture. We have seen this verified in an acute way in the different Gospel portraits of the crucified Jesus. Since Matthew differs only slightly from Mark in the passion narrative (at least in portraying the role of Jesus), we can speak practically of three different portraits: those of Mark, Luke, and John. Let me describe those portraits briefly, and then turn to the question of truth.
Mark portrays a stark human abandonment of Jesus which is reversed by God dramatically at the end. From the moment Jesus moves to the Mount of Olives, the behavior of the disciples is negatively portrayed. While Jesus prays, they fall asleep three times. Judas betrays him and Peter curses, denying knowledge of him. All flee, with the last one leaving even his clothes behind in order to get away from Jesus—the opposite of leaving all things to follow him. Both Jewish and Roman judges are presented as cynical. Jesus hangs on the cross for six hours, three of which are filled with human mockery, while in the second three the land is covered with darkness. Jesus’ only word from the cross is “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” and even that plaintive cry is met with derision. Yet, as Jesus breathes his last, God acts to confirm His Son. The trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin had concerned Jesus’ threat to destroy the Temple and his claim to be the messianic Son of the Blessed One. At Jesus’ death the veil of the Temple is rent, and a Roman centurion confesses, “Truly this was God’s Son.” After the cross it is possible, then, to see that Jesus was not a false prophet.
Luke’s portrayal is quite different. The disciples appear in a more sympathetic light, for they have remained faithful to Jesus in his trials (22:28). In Gethsemane if they fall asleep (once not thrice), it is because of sorrow. Even enemies fare better; for no false witnesses are produced by the Jewish authorities, and three times Pilate acknowledges that Jesus is not guilty. The people are on Jesus’ side, grieving over what has been done to him. Jesus himself is less anguished by his fate than by his concern for others. He heals the slave’s ear at the time of the arrest; on the road to Calvary he worries about the fate of the women; he forgives those who crucified him; and he promises Paradise to the penitent “thief” (a figure peculiar to Luke). The crucifixion becomes the occasion of divine forgiveness and care; and Jesus dies tranquilly praying, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.”
John’s passion narrative presents a sovereign Jesus who has defiantly announced, “I lay down my life and I take it up again; no one takes it from me” (10:17-18). When Roman soldiers and Jewish police come to arrest him, they fall to the earth powerless as he speaks the divine phrase, “I AM.” In the garden he does not pray to be delivered from the hour of trial and death, as he does in the other Gospels, for the hour is the whole purpose of his life (12:27). His self-assurance is an offense to the high priest (18:22); and Pilate is afraid before the Son of God who states, “You have no power over me” (19:8, 11). No Simon of Cyrene appears, for the Jesus of John carries his own cross. His royalty is proclaimed in three languages and confirmed by Pilate. Unlike the portrayal in other Gospels, Jesus is not alone on Calvary, for at the foot of the cross stand the Beloved Disciple and the Mother of Jesus. He relates these two highly symbolic figures to each other as son and mother, thus leaving behind a family of believing disciples. He does not cry out, “My God, why have you forsaken me?” because the Father is always with him (16:32). Rather his final words are a solemn decision, “It is finished”—only when he has decided does he hand over his spirit. Even in death he dispenses life as water flows from within him (see 7:38-39). His burial is not unprepared as in the other Gospels; rather he lies amidst 100 pounds of spices as befits a king.
When these different passion narratives are read side-by-side, one should not be upset by the contrast or ask which view of Jesus is more correct: the Marcan Jesus who plumbs the depths of abandonment only to be vindicated, the Lucan Jesus who worries about others and gently dispenses forgiveness, or the Johannine Jesus who reigns victoriously from the cross in control of all that happens. All three are given to us by the inspiring Spirit, and no one of them exhausts the meaning of Jesus. It is as if one walks around a large diamond to look at it from three different angles. A true picture of the whole emerges only because the viewpoints are different. In presenting two diverse views of the crucified Jesus every Holy Week, one on Palm/Passion Sunday, one on Good Friday, the church is bearing witness to that truth and making it possible for people with very different spiritual needs to find meaning in the cross. There are moments in the lives of most Christians when they need desperately to cry out with the Marcan/Matthean Jesus, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” and to find, as Jesus did, that despite human appearances God is listening and can reverse tragedy. At other moments, meaning in suffering may be linked to being able to say with the Lucan Jesus, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do,” and being able to entrust oneself confidently to God’s hands. There are still other moments where with Johannine faith we must see that suffering and evil have no real power over God’s Son or over those whom he enables to become God’s children. To choose one portrayal of the crucified Jesus in a manner that would exclude the other portrayals or to harmonize all the Gospel portrayals into one would deprive the cross of much of its meaning. It is important that some be able to see the head bowed in dejection, while others observe the arms outstretched in forgiveness, and still others perceive in the title on the cross the proclamation of a reigning king.
1 For Roman Catholics this is the official position of their church phrased by the Pontifical Biblical Commission in its 1964 statement on “The Historical Truth of the Gospels.” For the essential portion of that document, see my Biblical Reflections on Crises Facing the Church (New York: Paulist, 1975), 111–15.
2 In the Biblical Commission document referred to in the preceding footnote a distinction is made between the apostolic preachers who have been eyewitnesses and the evangelists who had to depend on previous tradition. Most scholars, Catholic and Protestant, think that no one of the evangelists was himself an eyewitness of the ministry of Jesus.