Pilates wife

[Jordan_Rizk]

What happened to Pilates wife?

 

[fred_conty]

She did say to her husband Pilot that she suffered much because of him, and that he should be careful to let him go. But we don’t really know anything more, at least not from the gospel.
I guess it could be speculated that she would have suffered more because Pilot didn’t let him go.

Just a thought.

 

[Tighty_Whitey]

If you didn’t mean Pilot’s wife I you really meant Pilates, I’d respond by saying that… she went to the gym!

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Okay, this is killing me.

First, it’s Pilate, not Pilot. And the possessive of Pilate is Pilate’s; that apostrophe is important.

This is the Catholic version of:

“Let’s eat grandma!” vs. “Let’s eat, grandma!”

Please don’t hate me. :nope: I correct you because I love you.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Okay, this is killing me.

First, it’s Pilate, not Pilot. And the possessive of Pilate is Pilate’s; that apostrophe is important.

This is the Catholic version of:

“Let’s eat grandma!” vs. “Let’s eat, grandma!”

Please don’t hate me. :nope: I correct you because I love you.

In the movie “The Passion of the Christ” wasn’t it Pilot’s wife who offered Mary cloths to clean up Jesus’ blood after he was scourged?

 

[Bruised_Reed]

In the movie “The Passion of the Christ” wasn’t it Pilot’s wife who offered Mary cloths to clean up Jesus’ blood after he was scourged?

Are you guys messing with me? I hab a code so I’m not up to par so I might be missing something.

 

[mark_a]

What happened to Pilates wife?

I think I read here that Pilate and his wife are revered as Saints in the (if my failing memory serves) Coptic tradition.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Are you guys messing with me? I hab a code so I’m not up to par so I might be missing something.

I stand corrected. according to John 18:29 it is Pilate. I guess the appropriate response would be “OOOOPS!”

As I was asking in my previous post, wasn’t it Pilate’s wife who offered Mary cloths to clean up Jesus’ blood after He was scourged in the movie “The Passion of the Christ”?

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I stand corrected. according to John 18:29 it is Pilate. I guess the appropriate response would be “OOOOPS!”

As I was asking in my previous post, wasn’t it Pilate’s wife who offered Mary cloths to clean up Jesus’ blood after He was scourged in the movie “The Passion of the Christ”?

I think she did. I like to think it happened.

 

[jonathan_hili]

Okay, this is killing me.

First, it’s Pilate, not Pilot. And the possessive of Pilate is Pilate’s; that apostrophe is important.

This is the Catholic version of:

“Let’s eat grandma!” vs. “Let’s eat, grandma!”

Please don’t hate me. :nope: I correct you because I love you.

I know what you mean. I’m an English teacher - and a rather pedantic one - so the awful grammar and spelling on this forum drives me nuts! :whacky:

 

[Ad_Orientem]

IIRC, there’s a tradition that she converted to Christianity. Same with Pilate. But there’s also a tradition that Pilate committed suicide. In the end, I don’t think we know what came of them.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I know what you mean. I’m an English teacher - and a rather pedantic one - so the awful grammar and spelling on this forum drives me nuts! :whacky:

I had typed “I’m having a pedantic moment” but deleted it. I don’t usually correct others’ punctuation/spelling/grammar (fear of McKean’s Law) but this was too much. It’s Good Friday and I do Pilates.

 

[patrick457]

What happened to Pilates wife?

Two words: we dunno.

 

[patrick457]

I had typed “I’m having a pedantic moment” but deleted it. I don’t usually correct others’ punctuation/spelling/grammar (fear of McKean’s Law) but this was too much. It’s Good Friday and I do Pilates.

Pontius the pilot did Pilates in his plane.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Pontius the pilot did Pilates in his plane.

Very plane and simple!

 

[Nita]

A little history on Pilate from the Catholic Encyclopedia. newadvent.org/cathen/12083c.htm

The tendency, already discernible in the canonical Gospels, to lay stress on the efforts of Pilate to acquit Christ, and thus pass as lenient a judgment as possible upon his crime, goes further in the apocryphal Gospels and led in later years to the claim that he actually became a Christian. **The Abyssinian Church reckons him as a saint, and assigns 25 June to him and to Claudia Procula, his wife. The belief that she became a Christian goes back to the second century, and may be found in Origen **(Hom., in Mat., xxxv). The Greek Church assigns her a feast on 27 October. Tertullian and Justin Martyr both speak of a report on the Crucifixion (not extant) sent in by Pilate to Tiberius, from which idea a large amount of apocryphal literature originated. Some of these were Christian in origin (Gospel of Nicodemus), others came from the heathen, but these have all perished.

His rule was brought to an end through trouble which arose in Samaria. An imposter had given out that it was in his power to discover the sacred vessels which, as he alleged, had been hidden by Moses on Mount Gerizim, whither armed Samaritans came in large numbers. Pilate seems to have thought the whole affair was a blind, covering some other more important design, for he hurried forces to attack them, and many were slain. They appealed to Vitellius, who was at that time legate in Syria, saying that nothing political had been intended, and complaining of Pilate’s whole administration. He was summoned to Rome to answer their charges, but before he could reach the city the Emperor Tiberius had died.

That is the last we know of Pilate from authentic sources, but legend has been busy with his name. He is said by Eusebius (Church History II.7), on the authority of earlier writers, …
If you want to continue reading about some of the legends, go to the website above and scroll about 2/3 of the way down.

 

[fred_conty]

Okay, this is killing me.

First, it’s Pilate, not Pilot. And the possessive of Pilate is Pilate’s; that apostrophe is important.

This is the Catholic version of:

“Let’s eat grandma!” vs. “Let’s eat, grandma!”

Please don’t hate me. :nope: I correct you because I love you.

But sometimes less is more.

 

[LegoGE1947]

But sometimes less is more.

Conversely, more is less.

 

[patrick457]

I’ll just point out that there was a trend in early Christianity to emphasize Jewish guilt over Jesus’ death (cf. 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16; Acts 2:22-38; 3:12-26; 4:8-22; 5:29-32 for ), based on (somewhat ironically) the traditional Jewish pattern of calling Israel for its disobedience and/or the rejection of its prophets (e.g. Nehemiah 9:26; 2 Chronicles 36:14-16). To reject the nation’s alleged messiah, or to be involved in any manner in the events leading to His death, is to invite a demand of repentance from the followers of that messiah. It is at least plausible - if not probable - that this context of early Christian preaching to fellow Jews provided the earliest social situations in which Jewish culpability for Jesus’ execution was emphasized and increasingly became a point of bitterness between Jews devoted to Jesus and other Jewish groups.

While increasing blame was placed on the Jews (oftentimes using hostile rhetoric that would indeed sound rather offensive in this post-Holocaust world), the Romans were increasingly whitewashed. While the earliest tradition included Roman and Jewish cooperation in the death of Jesus, in subsequent tradition history Christians would emphasize the role of each party to varying degrees: if 100% of the guilt must be assigned, some accounts tended to divide it evenly while others appeared to be much closer to total guilt/innocence. In the latter scenario it was nearly always in the direction of Jewish guilt/Roman innocence. In its most extreme form, the Romans are excused of all responsibility, so that it is only the Jews who actually perform the crucifixion. The 3nd century Gospel of Peter is one particular example of this:

But of the Judaeans none washed the hands, neither Herod nor any one of his judges. And since they would not wash Pilate rose up, and then Herod the king orders that the Lord be taken away, speaking to them, “What I ordered you to do to him, do.” Now there was Joseph the friend of Pilate and the Lord there, and knowing they were about to crucify him, he came to Pilate and requested the body of the Lord for burial, and Pilate, having sent to Herod, requested his body. And Herod said, “Brother Pilate, even if nobody had requested him, we would have buried him since also Sabbath is dawning, because it is written in the Law: ‘The sun must not set on one who has been murdered.’” And he handed him over to the people before the first of Unleavened Bread, their feast.

Now having taken the Lord they were pushing him, running, and saying, “Let us drag the Son of God along, having authority over him.” And they clothed him with purple and set him upon a seat of judgment, saying, “Judge righteously, King of Israel!” And one of them, having brought a thorny wreath-crown, set it upon the head of the Lord, and others, standing, were spitting in his eyes, and the rest struck his cheeks. Others were jabbing him with a reed-staff, and some scourged him, saying, “With such honour let us honour the son of God.” And they brought two wrongdoers and crucified the Lord in the midst between them, but he was silent as if having no pain. And they, when they set the cross upright, inscribed that ‘THIS IS THE KING OF ISRAEL.’ And having placed his clothes before him, they divided them up and cast a lot upon them.

Note the continuous reference to “them,” the Jewish mob. In this retelling, it is not Pilate, but Herod who condemns Jesus and hands Him over, not to Roman soldiers, but to the throng to be killed.

As we can see, Pilate’s role as the one who condemns Jesus to death generally diminishes in later Christian sources. The idea is that the more the state persecuted Christians, the more generous becomes the description of Pilate as a witness to Jesus’ innocence. This trend has a precedent (again somewhat ironically) in Jewish apologetics: Philo appealed to Caligula and reminded him of the many privileges that previous emperors had granted to Jews, in response to measures the emperor was about to enforce that were offensive to Jewish sensibilities. It is not just that Christians needed an ally in the form of a Roman official, but it was also significant for them to not have an enemy in the form of a Roman official, especially considering the status of Christians as illegal “atheists” after they were more or less distinguished from Jews (they could no longer invoke Judaism’s long-standing tolerated status and so were left to their own devices to negotiate their own alternatives to participating in Imperial cult).

The positive portrayal of Pilate begins to wane by the 4th century, coincidentally with the arrival of Constantine and the recognition of Christianity as a legal religion. The Edict of Milan made it so that Christians no longer needed an ally in the form of a Roman official. Constantine and his successors were living, breathing emperors whose stature overshadowed that of a long-dead governor. It is at this point that we begin to hear of legends detailing his supposed suicide and how evil spirits infesting his corpse wreaked havoc that they had to move it from place to place and so on, in contrast to the Christian-in-the-making Saint Pilate of earlier legends. Basically the positive portrayal of Pilate remained strong in the East (as mentioned, he is even considered a saint along with his wife in the Ethiopian Church), while in the West, the negative portrait of Pilate began to dominate.

 

[LegoGE1947]

I’ll just point out that there was a trend in early Christianity to emphasize Jewish guilt over Jesus’ death (cf. 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16; Acts 2:22-38; 3:12-26; 4:8-22; 5:29-32 for ), based on (somewhat ironically) the traditional Jewish pattern of calling Israel for its disobedience and/or the rejection of its prophets (e.g. Nehemiah 9:26; 2 Chronicles 36:14-16). To reject the nation’s alleged messiah, or to be involved in any manner in the events leading to His death, is to invite a demand of repentance from the followers of that messiah. It is at least plausible - if not probable - that this context of early Christian preaching to fellow Jews provided the earliest social situations in which Jewish culpability for Jesus’ execution was emphasized and increasingly became a point of bitterness between Jews devoted to Jesus and other Jewish groups.

While increasing blame was placed on the Jews (oftentimes using hostile rhetoric that would indeed sound rather offensive in this post-Holocaust world), the Romans were increasingly whitewashed. While the earliest tradition included Roman and Jewish cooperation in the death of Jesus, in subsequent tradition history Christians would emphasize the role of each party to varying degrees: if 100% of the guilt must be assigned, some accounts tended to divide it evenly while others appeared to be much closer to total guilt/innocence. In the latter scenario it was nearly always in the direction of Jewish guilt/Roman innocence. In its most extreme form, the Romans are excused of all responsibility, so that it is only the Jews who actually perform the crucifixion. The 3nd century Gospel of Peter is one particular example of this:

But of the Judaeans none washed the hands, neither Herod nor any one of his judges. And since they would not wash Pilate rose up, and then Herod the king orders that the Lord be taken away, speaking to them, “What I ordered you to do to him, do.” Now there was Joseph the friend of Pilate and the Lord there, and knowing they were about to crucify him, he came to Pilate and requested the body of the Lord for burial, and Pilate, having sent to Herod, requested his body. And Herod said, “Brother Pilate, even if nobody had requested him, we would have buried him since also Sabbath is dawning, because it is written in the Law: ‘The sun must not set on one who has been murdered.’” And he handed him over to the people before the first of Unleavened Bread, their feast.

Now having taken the Lord they were pushing him, running, and saying, “Let us drag the Son of God along, having authority over him.” And they clothed him with purple and set him upon a seat of judgment, saying, “Judge righteously, King of Israel!” And one of them, having brought a thorny wreath-crown, set it upon the head of the Lord, and others, standing, were spitting in his eyes, and the rest struck his cheeks. Others were jabbing him with a reed-staff, and some scourged him, saying, “With such honour let us honour the son of God.” And they brought two wrongdoers and crucified the Lord in the midst between them, but he was silent as if having no pain. And they, when they set the cross upright, inscribed that ‘THIS IS THE KING OF ISRAEL.’ And having placed his clothes before him, they divided them up and cast a lot upon them.

Note the continuous reference to “them,” the Jewish mob. In this retelling, it is not Pilate, but Herod who condemns Jesus and hands Him over, not to Roman soldiers, but to the throng to be killed.

As we can see, Pilate’s role as the one who condemns Jesus to death generally diminishes in later Christian sources. The idea is that the more the state persecuted Christians, the more generous becomes the description of Pilate as a witness to Jesus’ innocence. This trend has a precedent (again somewhat ironically) in Jewish apologetics: Philo appealed to Caligula and reminded him of the many privileges that previous emperors had granted to Jews, in response to measures the emperor was about to enforce that were offensive to Jewish sensibilities. It is not just that Christians needed an ally in the form of a Roman official, but it was also significant for them to not have an enemy in the form of a Roman official, especially considering the status of Christians as illegal “atheists” after they were more or less distinguished from Jews (they could no longer invoke Judaism’s long-standing tolerated status and so were left to their own devices to negotiate their own alternatives to participating in Imperial cult).

The positive portrayal of Pilate begins to wane by the 4th century, coincidentally with the arrival of Constantine and the recognition of Christianity as a legal religion. The Edict of Milan made it so that Christians no longer needed an ally in the form of a Roman official. Constantine and his successors were living, breathing emperors whose stature overshadowed that of a long-dead governor. It is at this point that we begin to hear of legends detailing his supposed suicide and how evil spirits infesting his corpse wreaked havoc that they had to move it from place to place and so on, in contrast to the Christian-in-the-making Saint Pilate of earlier legends. Basically the positive portrayal of Pilate remained strong in the East (as mentioned, he is even considered a saint along with his wife in the Ethiopian Church), while in the West, the negative portrait of Pilate began to dominate.

The Catechism says “Jews are not collectively responsible for Jesus’ death. All sinners were the authors of Christ’s Passion ( CCC 597-598)” That would include me:blush: