The Sensing, Intuition, Feeling and Thinking Approach

HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies ISSN: (Online) 2072-8050, (Print) 0259-9422 Page 1 of 12 Original Research Psychologically informed engagement with the Matthean pericopes on Pilate and Judas through Jungian lenses: The sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking approach Authors: Within the passion narrative Matthew adds important pericopes to the Marcan text concerning 1,3 Leslie J. Francis both Pilate and Judas. These additional pericopes provide a rich resource for exploring the Christopher F. Ross2,3 psychological motivation of and the psychological consequences for these two key actors Affiliations: in the betrayal and crucifixion of Jesus. The present study employs the Jungian framework 1Warwick Religions and of the sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking (SIFT) approach to Biblical hermeneutics to Education Research Unit, explore the interpretation of Matthew 27:19–25 (concerning Pilate) through the lenses of University of Warwick, United Kingdom sensing and intuition, and the interpretation of Matthew 27:3–10 (concerning Judas) through the lenses of thinking and feeling among 24 experienced preachers in Ontario, Canada. The 2Wilfrid Laurier University, findings confirm the hypotheses advanced by the SIFT approach that significant differences Canada emerge between the psychological perceptions of sensing types and intuitive types, and that significant differences emerge between the psychological evaluations of thinking types and 3Department of New feeling types. Testament Studies, Faculty of Theology and Religion, University of Pretoria, South Africa Introduction Research Project Registration: Both Pilate and Judas have attracted considerable attention from theological, historical, literary, Project Leader: A.G. van Aarde and psychological perspectives, as exemplified by Bond (1998) and Wroe (1999) on Pilate and by Project Number: 2334682 Klassen (1996) and Gubar (2009) on Judas. In an early attempt to uncover ‘the psychology of Judas Description: Iscariot’, Uraguchi (1918) argued that the: This research is part of the character of Judas Iscariot presents a problem hard to solve, yet rewarding to diligent effort. Considered research project, ‘Biblical by psychological analysis his personality presents a mental condition very similar to the common Theology and Hermeneutics’, consciousness of present-day people. (p. 345) directed by Prof. Dr Andries van Aarde, Post Retirement Professor and Senior Research Fellow in the Psychological issues in the passion narrative Dean’s Office, Faculty of The Marcan passion narrative raises important questions of a psychological nature regarding the Theology and Religion, principal agents in effecting the arrest, trial, and death of Jesus, particularly concerning Judas University of Pretoria. (who, according to the tradition, identified and betrayed Jesus under the cloak of darkness) and Corresponding author: Pilate (who, according to the tradition, sat in the seat of judgement and held the political authority Leslie Francis, to release or not to release Jesus to freedom). These questions include both issues of psychological [email protected] motivation (why did Pilate and Judas act in the way in which they did?) and issues of psychological Dates: consequences (in what way, if at all, did these public actions carry personal consequences?). Received: 11 July 2018 Accepted: 04 Sept. 2018 The redaction critical approach to the problems raised by the Synoptic gospels may construe Published: 05 Nov. 2018 Matthew as one of the early commentators struggling with the problems raised by the Marcan passion narrative. Seen through psychological lenses, with respect to Pilate and Judas, it seems that Matthew has addressed the psychological questions of motivation and consequences in both creative and imaginative ways. In the case of Pilate, Matthew interpolates two narratives into the Marcan text: the one concerning the intervention of Pilate’s wife who warned her husband about the special knowledge she had received in a dream concerning Jesus; and the other concerning the bowl of water and Pilate publicly washing his hands of further and lasting responsibility for implementation of the popular will. In the case of Judas, Matthew interpolates into the Marcan Read online: text a complex and detailed narrative regarding Judas returning the 30 pieces of silver, Judas Scan this QR code with your smart phone or How to cite this article: Francis, L.J. & Ross, C.F., 2018, ‘Psychologically informed engagement with the Matthean pericopes on Pilate mobile device and Judas through Jungian lenses: The sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking approach’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies to read online. 74(1), a5179. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v74i1.5179 Copyright: © 2018. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. http://www.hts.org.za Open Access Page 2 of 12 Original Research being disowned and the blood money being rejected by the to biblical hermeneutics as originally shaped by attention on chief priests, the purchase of the Potter’s field known to this the social location of the reader in terms of factors such as day as the Field of Blood, and Judas’ final act of suicide. Here, gender and ethnicity (Segovia & Tolbert 1995a; 1995b). The indeed, in the Matthean passion narrative is a well-stocked idea that the reader perspective might be shaped by the resource for psychological investigation. psychological type profile of the reader, drawing on psychological type theory as proposed by Jung (1971), was Some biblical commentators continue to approach the advanced in a couple of early papers by Stiefel (1992) and distinctive Matthean additions to the Marcan narratives Bassett, Mathewson and Gailitis (1993) and subsequently concerning Judas and Pilate in a variety of ways independent developed into the sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking of psychological theory or language. For example, Callon (SIFT) approach to biblical hermeneutics and liturgical (2006) has provided a rigorous analysis of Matthew’s preaching in a series of theoretically driven studies by Francis portrayal of Pilate which is rooted in a close scrutiny of (1997), Francis and Atkins (2000; 2001; 2002) and Francis and the wider Matthean text and of other historical resources. Village (2008). The SIFT approach has also been explored in a Nonetheless, it remains clear that other biblical commentators sequence of qualitative studies in which ‘readers’ who share on Matthew’s Gospel routinely reflect on the psychological the same psychological type preferences have been invited to issues raised by the Matthean additions to the Marcan work in groups to explore specific passages of scripture. The narrative. In terms of the intervention made by Pilate’s wife, theory is that such groups (constituted on the basis of Boring (1994:486) argues that this increases Pilate’s guilt, psychological type preference) lead to greater clarity and since ‘he now knows by divine revelation that Jesus is greater distinctiveness of the type-associated readings of text. innocent’. France (2007:1054) argues that ‘this unexpected The following passages of scripture have been explored in interruption of the trial narrative further explains Pilate’s this way: the feeding of the 5000 reported in Mark 6:34–44 reluctance to convict Jesus’. In terms of Pilate’s act of hand (Francis 2010); the resurrection narratives reported in Mark washing, Barclay (1957:399) speaks of the ‘strange and tragic 16:1–8 and Matthew 28:1–15 (Francis & Jones 2011); the picture of him washing his hands … Pilate could not stand cleansing of the Temple and the incident of the fig tree against the mob and made the futile gesture of washing his reported in Mark 11:11–21 (Francis 2012a; Francis & ap Siôn hands’. Brown (1994:637) draws the parallel between this 2016b); the Johannine feeding narrative reported in John ‘haunting … scene of blood that cannot be easily eradicated’ 6:4–22 (Francis 2012b); the narrative of separating sheep from goats reported in Matthew 25:31–46 (Francis & Smith 2012); and the guilty conscience of Lady Macbeth. In terms of the the birth narratives reported in Matthew 2:13–20 and Luke guilt expressed by Judas and his suicide, Wright (2002:174) 2:8–16 (Francis & Smith 2013); two narratives concerning reflects on the big difference between remorse, such as that of John the Baptist reported in Mark 1:2–8 and Luke 3:2b–20 Judas, and genuine repentance, such as that of Peter. France (Francis 2013; Francis & Smith 2014); the Johannine feeding (2007:1039) drives that comparison more fully, contrasting narrative reported in John 6:5–15 (Francis & Jones 2014); Matthew’s presentation of Judas’ expression of regret (I have two passages from Mark exploring different aspects of sinned) with Peter’s bitter weeping. France reflects on how discipleship reported in Mark 6:7–14 and Mark 6:33–41 one story ends in despair and suicide, and the other ‘in the (Francis & Jones 2015a); the foot washing account reported in full rehabilitation of the future leader of the church’. John 13:2b–15 (Francis 2015); two healing narratives reported in Mark 2:1–12 and Mark 10:46–52 (Francis & Jones 2015b); Psychological perspectives in biblical the narrative of blind Bartimaeus reported in Mark 10:46–52 interpretation (Smith & Francis 2016); the Road to Emmaus narrative Psychological perspectives in biblical interpretation embrace reported in Luke 24:13–35 (Francis & ap Siôn 2016a; Francis & a range of different approaches

Load more