Was Pilate really sympathetic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spyder1jcd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Spyder1jcd

Guest
The Gospel accounts portray Pontius Pilate as a man caught in the middle of a moral conundrum, a man afraid of the Jewish leaders. His is portrayed this way to a higher degree in *The Passion of the Christ *as well as in the writings that inspired the movie, Emmerich’s The Dolorous Passion of the Christ. But historical documentation paints a different picture. Not only is Pilate identified as a brutal man ( see here), but also as a man who saw all Jews, even their leaders and priests, to be scum much lower than himself. In fact, the chief priests acted as a kind of police among the Jewish community, handing over insurrectionists to the governor so that Rome will keep out of Jewish affairs. It is more likely that the high priests saw Jesus as a threat to the “pact” that the Jewish community had with the Romans and turned Him over to preserve the Jews’ safety (John 18:14 actually supports this).

But why would the Gospels give a different depiction? Think of it this way: if you were living under a government known for its brutality towards rebels, you wouldn’t want to slander it, even with the truth. The writers of the Gospels were already living in fear of the Roman government. Why incite something by putting a Roman procurator in a bad light in the eyes of your religion? It seems that the evangelists understood that it didn’t matter who was physically responsible for Jesus’ death because we are all, through our sins, responsible.

Any thoughts?
 
Spyder,

I read once somewhere that at the time of the Crucifixion Pilate was on a sort of “probation” with his higher-ups in Rome–that they wanted him to keep the peace or else. So he was probably afraid of the Jewish leaders, not for who they were, but for what they could do to stir up a riot and cost him his job. And by the principle that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” Pilate may have had some sympathy for Jesus simply because the Jewish authorities hated Him so badly.
  • Liberian
 
Although I personally don’t agree with the theory since I think even if he was a brutal man Pilate knew enough to see Jesus was innocent of any crime. However, here is one theory I heard. Although we would not understand any of the humor as it s wirtten today, people at the time would find that aspect hilarious since they would all know how Brutal Pilate was. It would just be for comic relief or something.
 
40.png
Spyder1jcd:
But why would the Gospels give a different depiction? Think of it this way: if you were living under a government known for its brutality towards rebels, you wouldn’t want to slander it, even with the truth. The writers of the Gospels were already living in fear of the Roman government. Why incite something by putting a Roman procurator in a bad light in the eyes of your religion?
Click to expand...
Just more proof that the gospels are authentic. The writers sought to portray the truth regardless of the impact it would have on them.

It is true what was said below that Pilate was in a very difficult position. There had already been two riots in Jerusalem, and the emperor had told Pilate, more or less, one more and its you head this time. So he had to do everything possible to ensure the peace.
 
Matthew 27:11 And Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, saying: Art thou the king of the Jews? Jesus saith to him: Thou sayest it. 12 And when he was accused by the chief priests and ancients, he answered nothing. 13 Then Pilate saith to him: Dost not thou hear how great testimonies they allege against thee? 14 And he answered him to never a word; so that the governor wondered exceedingly. 15 Now upon the solemn day the governor was accustomed to release to the people one prisoner, whom they would.

16 And he had then a notorious prisoner, that was called Barabbas. 17 They therefore being gathered together, Pilate said: Whom will you that I release to you, Barabbas, or Jesus that is called Christ? 18 For he knew that for envy they had delivered him. 19 And as he was sitting in the place of judgment, his wife sent to him, saying: Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him. 20 But the chief priests and ancients persuaded the people, that they should ask Barabbas, and make Jesus away.

21 And the governor answering, said to them: Whether will you of the two to be released unto you? But they said, Barabbas. 22 Pilate saith to them: What shall I do then with Jesus that is called Christ? They say all: Let him be crucified. 23 The governor said to them: Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying: Let him be crucified. 24 And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it. 25 And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children.

26 Then he released to them Barabbas, and having scourged Jesus, delivered him unto them to be crucified.

This passage seems to offer us some insight, and especially the verses that I have bolded. I don’t know if I think Pilate was “sympathetic”, but it seems pretty clear that he knew that Jesus was innocent.
Pax vobiscum,
 
If Pilate was sympathetic, I do not know. Jesus said to him, the one who delivered me up is the one who has the greater sin. Is there a chance for him to not burn in hell? I do not know, Iam not the judge. Christ is the Judge, not I. He seemed reluctant to put Christ to death, but the fact is, he ordered the execution, and what God did with him is God’s business not mine.
 
Church Militant:
And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children.
Click to expand...
Is this meant to be literal? Did crowds of people actually shout those kind of things? It sounds like the Jews are on the hook for the crucifiction. Do the generations of Jews since then have the sin of delivering Jesus on them? Like original sin.
 
If he WAS sympathetic, he sure didn’t show it by his actions, since he delivered a man he knew was innocent to execution.
 
Quote:originally posted by cocot
Click to expand...
Code: 
   		 			 				Originally Posted by **Church Militant**
  		* And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children.
Click to expand...
Is this meant to be literal? Did crowds of people actually shout those kind of things? It sounds like the Jews are on the hook for the crucifiction. Do the generations of Jews since then have the sin of delivering Jesus on them? Like original sin.
Click to expand...
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

I can’t find it but one of my Bibles has a footnote that says “His blood be upon us . . .” was a formulaic oath for rendering a verdict.
Even if we take it literally, it ould apply only to the people who actually shouted it (a couple thousand, maybe) and most of them would probably have been wiped out when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70 ?] AD.

I hate to think of all the Jews who have been persecuted over the centuries because of this verse (and others) taken out of context.
 
Do the generations of Jews since then have the sin of delivering Jesus on them? Like original sin.
Click to expand...
Only by way of analogy.

Are Jews born with any sort of actual spiritual “stain” or some sort of special deprivation of grace on their souls, like a new type of original sin? No! Of course not.

However, the rejection of the Messiah by their ancestors does obviously mean that they are born outside the community of believers and thus are in a certain way alienated from the truth until they come to the Catholic Church.

A certain analogy can be seen with the Jews as analogous to the entire human condition.

The Jews in this analogy can be seen a symbol for all humanity. Christ coming to them in Israel was like God living among Adam and Eve in the Garden. But the Jews at the time rejected Christ, just as Adam and Eve rejected God. Only those alive at the time, in either case, are personally culpable for this act. But their descendents feel the effects of this rift in the relationship with God. Because Adam and Eve rejected God, all their descendents, though personally innocent, are nevertheless born outside of a relationship with God. Furthermore, God no longer provides them with the preternatural gifts (immortality, knowledge, comfort) associated with Eden and so we live in the exile of this life. So too, the Jews that rejected Christ in a certain sense pass on this decision to their descendents. They are personally innocent, but they are born into a community outside the Church, one which is specifically opposed to Jesus, as opposed to just indifferent like other religions. And God, now bestowing his special favors on the Church, took away the special protection Israel (for now the Church was Israel) had, and so the Temple was destroyed and the Jews live in exile. However, at the end of time, Catholics believe their will be especially the Conversion of the Jews, even as all humanity may be reunited to God.
 
I am in agreement with ChruchMilitantThe passage he quoted from the DR Bible defintately speaks of a spirit of wonder on Pilates behalf. In light of those passages i believe Pilate had some sense of remorse or guilt. He may have felt bad, but he did allow Jesus to be put to death, howver I believe it to be the sense of “either my head or his” from Pilate, as someone posted earlier. It seems to me to be kind of the mentality of the Jews in the concentration camps, how they were sad and felt guilty of those deaths around them, but they are relieved that it wasn’t them.
 
I’m into my lecto devina (a slow, contemplative praying of the Scriptures which enables the Bible, the Word of God, to become a means of union with God) mode today as everything I see today has this type of reaction in me.

I always see my sinful self in Pilate- a man who recognized that Jesus was special, knew in his heart that he was doing the “wrong” thing, but allowed the pressures/attractions (our false idols) to drive his decision.

In particular, I reference Luke 23:12 (Herod and Pilate became friends that very day, even though they had been enemies formerly) as how when we reject Jesus we become friends with Satan) and prortions of John 18:37-38 (For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice." Pilate said to him, “What is truth?”) as how we sometimes will think we can be our own magisterium and make up our own truth).

On a related note, Pilate was a man from the area that is now Lucerne, Switzerland. According to local legend, Pilate is believed to have suffered personally and professionally after the first Good Friday and thru the intercession of his wife to have repented for his role in Jesus’ execution. Without sanction from the Church, they actually believe him to be a saint. This is to me the ultimate in how I’m like Pilate. If Jesus can invite Pilate to heaven because of His infinite love for Pilate, no matter how grievous my acts against God, I’m always welcome to repent, do penance, and come back to God.
 
40.png
Spyder1jcd:
The Gospel accounts portray Pontius Pilate as a man caught in the middle of a moral conundrum, a man afraid of the Jewish leaders. His is portrayed this way to a higher degree in *The Passion of the Christ *as well as in the writings that inspired the movie, Emmerich’s The Dolorous Passion of the Christ. But historical documentation paints a different picture. Not only is Pilate identified as a brutal man ( see here), but also as a man who saw all Jews, even their leaders and priests, to be scum much lower than himself. In fact, the chief priests acted as a kind of police among the Jewish community, handing over insurrectionists to the governor so that Rome will keep out of Jewish affairs. It is more likely that the high priests saw Jesus as a threat to the “pact” that the Jewish community had with the Romans and turned Him over to preserve the Jews’ safety (John 18:14 actually supports this).

But why would the Gospels give a different depiction? Think of it this way: if you were living under a government known for its brutality towards rebels, you wouldn’t want to slander it, even with the truth. The writers of the Gospels were already living in fear of the Roman government. Why incite something by putting a Roman procurator in a bad light in the eyes of your religion? It seems that the evangelists understood that it didn’t matter who was physically responsible for Jesus’ death because we are all, through our sins, responsible.

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
Pilate doesn’t seem any worse then any other Roman governor of the time. Romans in general thought themselves better. I don’t think that site says anything about Pilate being anti-semitist or anything in that line. I’d say since he spared the Jews over the ensign issue, then he was a morally conscious man and just was the governor at the wrong time and didn’t ahve many options.
 
40.png
MercedesBents:
If he WAS sympathetic, he sure didn’t show it by his actions, since he delivered a man he knew was innocent to execution.
Click to expand...
That’s really the major question at hand. If Pilate did know that Jesus was innocent, why would he execute him? The Gospels insinuate that he was afraid of a rebellion by the Jewish leaders. Which is entirely possible, since more that one of the posters on this thread have claimed that PIlate was under pressure of the emperor during that time. But the chief priests and scribes had to have known that in the end, they couldn’ve have gotten away with blackmailing the Roman procurator. Are we really to believe that Pilate was at the mercy of these men?

Or perhaps Pilate did not see Jesus as innocent. If he really was under pressure of the emperor, Jesus would be the perfect incediary that would set off a rebellion. Maybe he sympathized with the chief priests and scribes on the possibility of this insurrectionist becoming a real danger. Recall the words of the Jews to Pilate in the Gospel of John: “If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.” (John 19:12) Perhaps Pilate was afraid that word of Jesus’ rebellious teachings would reach the emperor.
 
40.png
MercedesBents:
If he WAS sympathetic, he sure didn’t show it by his actions, since he delivered a man he knew was innocent to execution.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. My image of Pilate is of a brutal man who saw the innocence of Jesus, but honestly didn’t care about innocence or guilt in the end. I do think he knew that Jesus was innocent, at least of any Roman crimes, but in the end what did Pilate do on Jesus behalf? He knowingly let an innocent man get killed under his authority, that’s not a “good” thing to do.

Peace and God bless!
 
But the chief priests and scribes had to have known that in the end, they couldn’ve have gotten away with blackmailing the Roman procurator. Are we really to believe that Pilate was at the mercy of these men?
Click to expand...
I think that there’s nothing wrong with the conclusion that, to a certain extent, he was at their mercy and they knew it. The Sanhedrin of that day was notoriously corrupt, and the Jews of that time are far from being held up as saints by Orthodox Jews. Indeed, the Talmud expresses the opinion that it was because of their general evil and “hatred against their brothers” that the Second Temple was allowed by God to be destroyed. Caiaphas and Annas especially are regarded as heretics and wicked men by Orthodox Jews and in the Talmud. In fact, in my opinion the Gospels paint a “rosier” picture of them than the Orthodox Jewish tradition does; they are not considered to be a part of Orthodoxy, and are considered both heretical (for being Sadducees) and wicked. Indeed, the entire “House of Annas” is considered accursed.

Peace and God bless!
 
I see Pilate as what he is in Dante’s inferno. One of the “opportunists”. He knew Jesus was innocent, he was sympathetic in some way, he tried to get off with lesser punishments, but ultimately he gave into pressure which in no way excuses him. I think the best symbol of Pilate is his “washing his hands of it”…he just sort of tried to be a weasel and just sorta wished he had never been involved but refused to do the right thing.

Which is not as bad as the Chief Priests, who knew Jesus was the Messiah, probably even that he was divine in some sense, and worked to have him killed.
 
40.png
Spyder1jcd:
That’s really the major question at hand. If Pilate did know that Jesus was innocent, why would he execute him? The Gospels insinuate that he was afraid of a rebellion by the Jewish leaders. Which is entirely possible, since more that one of the posters on this thread have claimed that PIlate was under pressure of the emperor during that time. But the chief priests and scribes had to have known that in the end, they couldn’ve have gotten away with blackmailing the Roman procurator. Are we really to believe that Pilate was at the mercy of these men?

Or perhaps Pilate did not see Jesus as innocent. If he really was under pressure of the emperor, Jesus would be the perfect incediary that would set off a rebellion. Maybe he sympathized with the chief priests and scribes on the possibility of this insurrectionist becoming a real danger. Recall the words of the Jews to Pilate in the Gospel of John: “If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.” (John 19:12) Perhaps Pilate was afraid that word of Jesus’ rebellious teachings would reach the emperor.
Click to expand...
If me and a garrison of my troops were faced with a large rebellion of people who have something to fight for I would be more then cautious myself.
 
I think the best symbol of Pilate is his “washing his hands of it”…he just sort of tried to be a weasel and just sorta wished he had never been involved but refused to do the right thing.
Click to expand...
Precisely. Imagine washing your hands of an issue and then ordering an execution! The gall of that act is almost comically offensive.

“I have nothing to do with the fact that it is only by my authority that this innocent man can be crucified. Well, anyway, pin him up!”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top