Pontius Pilate - reason for actions?

[ssa_trad_cath]

Listening to the Passion Gospel on Good Friday, I was thinking of Pontius Pilate, and the reasons why he acted the way he did.

St John’s Gospel says that “his fears increased” when the Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy for claiming to be a Son of God. Pilate, being a Roman, would have been a pagan polytheist who believed it was possible for the gods to take human form. Is it possible that he didn’t actually care whether Jesus was crucified or not - he didn’t initially think Jesus important enough to care - but then got worried that Jesus micht actually be a deity in human form? Rather than not wanting to see Him crucified but then caving in under pressure, the reverse may be true - he may have been unconcerned whether he killed Jesus or not but then became superstitious about it, resulting in his attempts to free Jesus then eventually washing his hands of it. As nobody probably bothered to ask Pilate about it, that could be why it was never recorded in the Gospels. And he has a reputation in secular history for being ruthless, so it seems a bit strange that he balked at crucifying Jesus, unless something like superstition got him worried.

Just a theory of mine that’s probably wrong, just wanted to see what other people thought.

 

[patrick457]

Listening to the Passion Gospel on Good Friday, I was thinking of Pontius Pilate, and the reasons why he acted the way he did.

St John’s Gospel says that “his fears increased” when the Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy for claiming to be a Son of God. Pilate, being a Roman, would have been a pagan polytheist who believed it was possible for the gods to take human form. Is it possible that he didn’t actually care whether Jesus was crucified or not - he didn’t initially think Jesus important enough to care - but then got worried that Jesus micht actually be a deity in human form? Rather than not wanting to see Him crucified but then caving in under pressure, the reverse may be true - he may have been unconcerned whether he killed Jesus or not but then became superstitious about it, resulting in his attempts to free Jesus then eventually washing his hands of it. As nobody probably bothered to ask Pilate about it, that could be why it was never recorded in the Gospels. And he has a reputation in secular history for being ruthless, so it seems a bit strange that he balked at crucifying Jesus, unless something like superstition got him worried.

Just a theory of mine that’s probably wrong, just wanted to see what other people thought.

I don’t know. Personally (just my opinion, mind) I think it’s equally likely that Pilate was being, for lack of a better term, a crafty jerk.

 

[PeterK]

@patrick,
I can’t help think that is very close to the truth. I think Pilate despised the Jews and was mocking them by having Jesus scourged. There’s a ‘sympathy’ for pilate’s tough predicament that shows up - like in gibson’s Passion of the Christ - that I believe is artificial. Pilate was a hardened worldly man.

Petek

 

[Richard320]

I read somewhere, and it makes sense to me, that Pilate caved in to the mob out of fear. Not fear of them. He was afraid for his job. He was essentially a bureaucrat; he had to answer to higher ups. Jerusalem was a hotbed at the time, and if a riot erupted, he would get replaced. He could see what was going on, and he couldn’t care less if Jesus was blaspheming - it wasn’t his problem, it was a Jewish problem. An internal matter. So he tried to appease them by having Him scourged.

 

[patrick457]

I read somewhere, and it makes sense to me, that Pilate caved in to the mob out of fear. Not fear of them. He was afraid for his job. He was essentially a bureaucrat; he had to answer to higher ups. Jerusalem was a hotbed at the time, and if a riot erupted, he would get replaced. He could see what was going on, and he couldn’t care less if Jesus was blaspheming - it wasn’t his problem, it was a Jewish problem. An internal matter. So he tried to appease them by having Him scourged.

It was really a chain of command: local authorities like Caiaphas and his council were answerable to the prefect (in this case, Pilate), and Pilate was answerable to his superiors (the Legate of Syria is an immediate example). Rome preferred at the time an indirect form of government, where it was the responsibility of the native officials to run daily affairs for the Romans, which includes maintenance of public order. If the magistrates didn’t run things smoothly, they would get in trouble with the prefect, who would himself probably get into hot water. So all of them would have had a vested interest in removing any potential disturbance.

 

[momof8]

An excellent book on Jesus’ Passion is “The Passion of Jesus and Its Hidden Meaning”, by Rev. James Groenings, S.J. The discussions of Our Lord’s hearings before Pilate are my favorite parts of the book. There were many issues at play in the events involving Pilate. What stood out to me in the book, besides the historic details, is the way that Jesus offered Pilate opportunities for grace and conversion, and I can’t help wishing Pilate had taken Him up on it. Jesus would have been crucified somehow regardless, but it would have been something to see the story play out differently for Pilate.

 

[steve53]

Pontius was being passive-aggressive.

The temple made a lot of money, and almost certainly cut Pontius a share of it to make sure things ran smoothly.

So Pontius had to crucify Jesus, on the order of Caiaphas, but he did NOT like being used by the High Priesthood.

Pilate knew that Tiberius would not like his misuse of power as well, and was putting on a show on that account too.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I think it was because the Jews told him that he would not honor Caesar if he did not kill Jesus, because Jesus called himself King, (although not of this world) and saying you were a king would be in direct challenge to the authority of Caesar. Therefore Pilate was fearful for his job. I do like the OP’s idea that Pilate might have thought that Jesus could be a deity. He turned out to be right in so many ways, like the way he wrote KING OF THE JEWS on his cross.

 

[Irishgal49]

I don’t know. Personally (just my opinion, mind) I think it’s equally likely that Pilate was being, for lack of a better term, a crafty jerk.

If Pilate can’t keep the annoying Jews under control he could literally lose his head. Rome was not going to tolerate having to squash another rebellion and the situation was boiling already. A man claiming to be ushering in a “kingdom” would be perceived as a possible threat.

Personally he probably didn’t give diddly squat about what they said re: Jesus. Just another lousy day away from Rome as far as he’s concerned. But when got all worked into a frenzy and crowds were gathering and screaming, he figured killing one man to shut them up and keep an uprising from happening was a “small price to pay”. Also, Passover is a time when Jews celebrate their liberation from oppression. So you can imagine that he was probably freaking out when they started screaming and gathering in groups. This would be the end of his career and a major war would be something he wanted to avoid at all costs.

Lorrie

 

[patrick457]

If Pilate can’t keep the annoying Jews under control he could literally lose his head. Rome was not going to tolerate having to squash another rebellion and the situation was boiling already. A man claiming to be ushering in a “kingdom” would be perceived as a possible threat.

Personally he probably didn’t give diddly squat about what they said re: Jesus. Just another lousy day away from Rome as far as he’s concerned. But when got all worked into a frenzy and crowds were gathering and screaming, he figured killing one man to shut them up and keep an uprising from happening was a “small price to pay”. Also, Passover is a time when Jews celebrate their liberation from oppression. So you can imagine that he was probably freaking out when they started screaming and gathering in groups. This would be the end of his career and a major war would be something he wanted to avoid at all costs.

Lorrie

Yes, exactly!

 

[patrick457]

I think it was because the Jews told him that he would not honor Caesar if he did not kill Jesus, because Jesus called himself King, (although not of this world) and saying you were a king would be in direct challenge to the authority of Caesar. Therefore Pilate was fearful for his job. I do like the OP’s idea that Pilate might have thought that Jesus could be a deity. He turned out to be right in so many ways, like the way he wrote KING OF THE JEWS on his cross.

It’s really a piece of dramatic irony, that inscription. The titulus (as it was probably known) was meant to advertise to the public exactly what crime(s) caused the condemned man to be executed. The way the charge is worded would seem to suggest that Jesus was put to death for being “King of the Judaeans,” rather than styling Himself to be one. (“Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,’ but rather, ‘This man said, I am King of the Jews.’”) It’s a rather cruel and sadistic joke, but it unwittingly proclaims the truth.

 

[kkoleon]

Listening to the Passion Gospel on Good Friday, I was thinking of Pontius Pilate, and the reasons why he acted the way he did.

St John’s Gospel says that “his fears increased” when the Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy for claiming to be a Son of God. Pilate, being a Roman, would have been a pagan polytheist who believed it was possible for the gods to take human form. Is it possible that he didn’t actually care whether Jesus was crucified or not - he didn’t initially think Jesus important enough to care - but then got worried that Jesus micht actually be a deity in human form? Rather than not wanting to see Him crucified but then caving in under pressure, the reverse may be true - he may have been unconcerned whether he killed Jesus or not but then became superstitious about it, resulting in his attempts to free Jesus then eventually washing his hands of it. As nobody probably bothered to ask Pilate about it, that could be why it was never recorded in the Gospels. And he has a reputation in secular history for being ruthless, so it seems a bit strange that he balked at crucifying Jesus, unless something like superstition got him worried.

Just a theory of mine that’s probably wrong, just wanted to see what other people thought.

Pilate didn’t care to much for the Jews and their request for the capital punishment of Jesus. He was happy to allow Jesus to walk free as to spite them and he really couldn’t find a point of conviction breaking any roman law. He was more concerned with his relationship to caesar. He asked Jesus if he was king of the Jews and would have been happy in jesus ’ response that it was not of this world. The son of god reference would have worried him as it is a title reserved for Caesar also. Being ‘no friends caesars’ would have been his main concern and when they threatened to make an outcry he had to react lest the multitude were to riot and cause him no end of worries in terms of his fractured relationship to the emperor.

 

[patrick457]

Yep. In the West though Pilate was seen in a more negative light, as various legends about his eventual fate (such as his supposed suicide) show.

 

[patrick457]

Eusebius already attests to the existence of the legend of Pilate’s suicide in the 4th century (Church History 2.2.7):

It is worthy of note that Pilate himself, who was governor in the time of our Saviour, is reported to have fallen into such misfortunes under Caius [Caligula], whose times we are recording, that he was forced to become his own murderer and executioner; and thus divine vengeance, as it seems, was not long in overtaking him. This is stated by those Greek historians who have recorded the Olympiads, together with the respective events which have taken place in each period.

The legend is elaborated further in a later work known as Mors Pilati (Death of Pilate), which survives only in a single manuscript from the 14th century.

Volusianus therefore came with Veronica to Rome, and said to Tiberius the emperor: “Jesus, whom you have been longing for, Pilate and the Jews have delivered to an unjust death, and have through envy affixed to the gibbet of the cross. There has therefore come with me a certain matron, bringing a picture ofJesus himself; and if you will devoutly look upon it, you shall immediately obtain the benefit of your health.” Caesar therefore ordered the way to be strewn with silk cloths, and the picture to be presented to him; and as soon as he had looked upon it, he regained his former health.

Pontius Pilate, therefore, by the command of Caesar, is taken and brought through to Rome. Caesar, hearing that Pilate had arrived at Rome, was filled with exceeding fury against him, and caused him to be brought to him. But Pilate brought down with him the seamless tunic of Jesus; and he wore it on him in presence of the emperor. And as soon as the emperor saw him, he laid aside all his anger, and immediately rose up to meet him. Nor was he able to speak harshly to him in anything; and he who seemed so terrible and fierce in his absence, now in his presence is somehow found to be mild. And when he had sent him away, immediately he blazed out against him terribly, crying out that he was a wretch, inasmuch as he had not at all shown him the fury of his heart. And immediately he made him be called back, swearing and declaring it was infamous that he should live upon the earth. And as soon as he saw him, he immediately saluted him, and threw away all the ferocity of his mind. All wondered; and he himself wondered that he should thus blaze out against Pilate when he was absent, and that while he was present he could say nothing to him roughly. Then, by a divine impulse, or perhaps by the advice of some Christian, he caused him to be stripped of that tunic, and immediately resumed against him his former ferocity of mind. And when at this the emperor wondered very much, it was told him that that tunic had belonged to the Lord Jesus. Then the emperor ordered him to be kept in prison, until he should deliberate in a council of the wise men what ought to be done with him. And a few days after, sentence was therefore passed upon Pilate, that he should be condemned to the most disgraceful death. Pilate, hearing this, killed himself with his own knife, and by such a death ended his life.

When Caesar knew of the death of Pilate, he said: “Truly he has died by a most disgraceful death, whom his own hand has not spared.” He is therefore bound to a great mass, and sunk into the river Tiber. But malignant and filthy spirits in his malignant and filthy body, all rejoicing together, kept moving themselves in the waters, and in a terrible manner brought lightnings and tempests, thunders and hail-storms in the air, so that all men were kept in horrible fear. Wherefore the Romans, drawing him out of the river Tiber, in derision carried him down to Vienna, and sunk him in the river Rhone. For Vienna is called, as it were, Via Gehenna, the way of Gehenna, because it was then a place of cursing. But there evil spirits were present, working the same things in the same place. Those men therefore, not enduring such a visitation of demons, removed from themselves that vessel of malediction, and sent him to be buried in the territory of Losania. And they, seeing that they were troubled by from themselves, and sunk him in a certain pit surrounded by mountains, where to this day, according to the account of some, certain diabolical machinations are said to bubble up.

 

[patrick457]

Contrasting with Eusebius’ and the Mors Pilati’s image of a Pilate who kills himself in disgrace (and whose corpse becomes infested with demons) is the idea of ‘St. Pilate the Martyr’. From the Paradosis Pilati (Giving Up of Pilate):

And on the following day, the Caesar, sitting in the Capitol with all the senate, tried again to question Pilate. And the Caesar says: “Tell the truth, O most impious, because through your impious action which you have perpetrated against Jesus, even here the doing of your wicked deeds has been shown by the gods having been cast down. Say, then, who is he that has been crucified; because even his name has destroyed all the gods?” Pilate said: “And indeed the records of him are true; for assuredly I myself was persuaded from his works that he was greater than all the gods whom we worship.” And the Caesar said: “For what reason, then, did you bring against him such audacity and such doings, if you were not ignorant of him, and altogether devising mischief against my kingdom?” Pilate said: “On account of the wickedness and rebellion of the lawless and ungodly Jews, I did this.” And the Caesar, being filled with rage, held a council with all his senate and his power, and ordered a decree to be written against the Jews as follows: To Licianus, the governor of the chief places of the East, greeting. The reckless deed which has been done at the present time by the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the cities of the Jews round about, and their wicked action, has come to my knowledge, that they have forced Pilate to crucify a certain god named Jesus, and on account of this great fault of theirs the world has been darkened and dragged to destruction. Go to them speedily, with a multitude of soldiers, and make them prisoners, in accordance with this decree. Be obedient, and take action against them, and scatter them, and make them slaves among all the nations; and having driven them out of the whole of Judaea, make them the smallest of nations, so that it may not any longer be seen at all, because they are full of wickedness."And this decree having come into the region of the East, Licianus, obeying from fear of the decree, seized all the nation of the Jews; and those that were left in Judaea he scattered among the nations, and sold for slaves: so that it was known to the Caesar that these things had been done by Licianus against the Jews in the region of the East; and it pleased him.

And again the Caesar set himself to question Pilate; and he orders a captain named Albius to cut off Pilate’s head, saying: “Just as he laid hands upon the just man named Christ, in like manner also shall he fall, and not find safety.”

And Pilate, going away to the place, prayed in silence, saying: “Lord, do not destroy me along with the wicked Hebrews, because I would not have laid hands upon Thee, except for the nation of the lawless Jews, because they were exciting rebellion against me. But Thou knowest that I did it in ignorance. Do not then destroy me for this my sin; but remember not evil against me, O Lord, and against Thy servant Procla, who is standing with me in this the hour of my death, whom Thou didst appoint to prophesy that Thou shouldest be nailed to the cross. Do not condemn her also in my sin; but pardon us, and make us to be numbered in the portion of Thy righteous.”

And, behold, when Pilate had finished his prayer, there came a voice out of the heaven, saying: “All the generations and families of the nations shall count thee blessed, because under thee have been fulfilled all those things said about me by the prophets; and thou thyself shall be seen as my witness at my second appearing, when I shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel, and those that have not owned my name.” And the prefect struck off the head of Pilate; and, behold, an angel of the Lord received it. And his wife Procla, seeing the angel coming and receiving his head, being filled with joy herself also, immediately gave up the ghost, and was buried along with her husband.

 

[patrick457]

It is true that since early Christianity there has been a sort of movement in certain sectors to exonerate Pilate (and by extension, the Romans) of any involvement in Jesus’ death, preferring instead to lay the blame squarely on the Jews. Already in the apocryphal Gospel of Peter (early 2nd century), Pilate is absolved of any possible guilt whatsoever: the one who passes the sentence is Herod, who hands Jesus over to “the people” to be mocked and crucified.

But of the Jews 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 standing there Joseph the friend of Pilate and the Lord, and, knowing they were about to crucify Him, came to Pilate and requested the body of the Lord for burial, and Pilate, sending to Herod, requested His body. And Herod said, “Brother Pilate, even if none had requested Him we would have buried Him, since also Sabbath is dawning. For it is written in the Law: ‘The sun must not set on him that has been murdered.’” And he handed Him over to the people before the first day of the Azymes, their feast.

Soon enough, the idea that Pilate was a ‘secret Christian’ began to emerge. Tertullian, writing in the 3rd century, claims that Tiberius received a report from Pilate (who was, according to him, “in his secret heart already a Christian”) “from Syria Palestine which had revealed the truth of Christ’s divinity” (Apologeticus 5.2; cf. 21.24). Starting from the 4th-5th centuries, we begin to see the tradition develop by looking at the apocryphal literature from the period, like the Acts of Pilate or the Paradosis Pilati.

In the Acts of Pilate, Pilate - who explicitly recognizes Jesus’ true identity as king - really only condemns Him (hesitantly) since Jesus Himself excuses Him from any blame, “because Moses and the prophets foretold [His] death and resurrection.” The Paradosis Pilati ups the ante: the reason why Tiberius sends for Pilate here is not because of the use of excessive brutality against Samaritan fanatics, but because of his role in the crucifixion of Jesus. Pilate defends himself by blaming “the lawless and ungodly Jews,” and confessing that “indeed the records of him are true; for assuredly I myself was persuaded from his works that he was greater than all the gods whom we worship.” This results in Tiberius sending troops to attack and scatter the Jews of Judaea because “they have forced Pilate to crucify a certain god named Jesus, and on account of this great fault of theirs the world has been darkened and dragged to destruction.” Pilate doesn’t come off clean though: Tiberius still decides to execute him anyway because of his involvement, whereupon he begs to God before his death forgiveness for himself and his wife (and receives subsequently receives divine approval).

In these texts, Pilate is a repentant, believing Christian, and a martyr to boot. He does God’s will in ensuring Jesus’ death and ensures its completion (often receiving encouragement and approval for his deeds). However, his exoneration goes hand-in-hand with greatly increased blame placed on the Jews (usually on the people as a whole), who are shown to reject God: the Christianization of Pilate (and his wife) makes them a foil to the Jewish leaders, whose guilt stands out all the more.

 

[steve53]

"Eusebius already attests to the existence of the legend of Pilate’s suicide in the 4th century (Church History 2.2.7):

It is worthy of note that Pilate himself, who was governor in the time of our Saviour, is reported to have fallen into such misfortunes under Caius [Caligula], whose times we are recording, that he was forced to become his own murderer and executioner; and thus divine vengeance, as it seems, was not long in overtaking him. This is stated by those Greek historians who have recorded the Olympiads, together with the respective events which have taken place in each period."

I doubt that.
If Pilate had been executed, or forced to commit suicide, Philo would at least have hinted at it in his writings.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

"Eusebius already attests to the existence of the legend of Pilate’s suicide in the 4th century (Church History 2.2.7):

It is worthy of note that Pilate himself, who was governor in the time of our Saviour, is reported to have fallen into such misfortunes under Caius [Caligula], whose times we are recording, that he was forced to become his own murderer and executioner; and thus divine vengeance, as it seems, was not long in overtaking him. This is stated by those Greek historians who have recorded the Olympiads, together with the respective events which have taken place in each period."

I doubt that.
If Pilate had been executed, or forced to commit suicide, Philo would at least have hinted at it in his writings.

I agree. Eusebius needs to be taken with a grain of salt. He’s fun to read though!

 

[patrick457]

By the way:

Warren Carter, in his book Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor, identifies five main ways of looking at Pilate, which ranges from showing him as a villain to a saint:

1.) Pilate the Villain: A Cruel, Anti-Jewish Tyrant. This extremely negative view, which has become more popular and is strongly advocated after WWII in light of the Nazi atrocities against Jews, is based on a reading of historical sources like Philo - who was himself very unsympathetic to Pilate - and Josephus. It portrays Pilate as an iron-fisted, anti-Semitic (he is usually thought of as getting this trait from the Praetorian prefect Sejanus) despot who relishes offending his Jewish subjects on purpose and who is not hesitant to shed blood every so often. After Sejanus’ fall from grace and eventual execution in AD 31, Pilate - realizing that he no longer has any protector in Rome - attempts to adjust his relationship with the Jews into a less hostile one, if only to save himself.

2.) Pilate: Weak and Without Conviction. A common slightly less negative view, focusing mainly on his role in Jesus’ death, sees Pilate as a weak-willed individual. He may have had noble intentions to release the “innocent” Jesus, but lacking any backbone, he eventually caves in to stronger voices. Instead of doing what he thinks is right, he weakly capitulates on the demands to have Jesus executed in order to preserve public order and his own neck.

3.) Pilate: A Typical and Culturally Insensitive Roman Official. This is the ‘middle of the road’ approach. Pilate is seen as trying to do his job as prefect of Judaea as best and as directly as he can. He attempts to strengthen Jewish recognition and loyalty to Roman rule, but does not realize how insensitive he was really being. His responses to Jewish resistance (use of military force or change of plans) only succeed in rubbing salt in the wound. In this picture, Pilate is rather ditzy and boorish: he is competent, but out of his depth personally and politically. He lacks the necessary cultural knowledge and respect as well as the political acumen and administrative mechanisms to rule effectively.

4.) Pilate: A Christian Convert. This view develops aspects found in the second verdict, that Pilate finds Jesus innocent of any charges and not properly to be condemned to death. Unlike it though, this view proposes that during the trial Pilate comes of know of Jesus’ special identity and so becomes a (sort of) Christian. Ultimately, he only acts - very hesitantly - because it was necessary for the accomplishment of the divine plan. Hence, in this verdict all the responsibility for Jesus’ death rests firmly upon the shoulders of the Jews.

5.) Pilate the Saint. It is only a short step from the fourth verdict, of Pilate as a Christian, to the ultimately positive fifth verdict, of Pilate as a saint.

Carter then lists six factors as explaining why different interpreters would have different conclusions about Pilate:

1.) Time Gap.
2.) Different Interests of Readers.
3.) Readers’ Limited Knowledge.
4.) The Limited Number of Sources.
5.) Limited Information.
6.) Diverse Views in Diverse Sources.