PILATE
John 18:28-19:16
Pilate finds his place in the historic records of the New
Testament, and by threefold reference in the Acts of the Apostles. We see him
most clearly in the Gospel of John. He owes his fame, such as it is, to contact
with Christ. Had it not been for this contact, we should probably have known
nothing of him. He is placed in contemporary history, and we learn little
concerning him from this source. He is named as procurator of Judea. We know
that he occupied that position for about ten years, during the whole of the
ministry of John the Baptist, to the ministry of our Lord, and at the
beginnings of the Christian movement. He was the representative of the Roman
government. As procurator, he held civil and military authority, which means,
of course, that as representing Rome, the power of life and death was vested in
him. When Pilate spoke in that area, Caesar spoke through him.
We now turn to the New Testament revelation of him found
in the references already referred to. As we do so we discover that the
revelation exactly coincides with the statements concerning him made in history
outside the New Testament. He was a man known everywhere as of haughty
disposition, fully realizing his authority, and glorying in it. His whole
bearing towards Judea and the Jews was that of scorn, and indeed, that of
hatred. In his exercise of authority he was cold and dispassionate, and quite calm
by scenes of blood or riot. We have one glimpse of him incidentally in the New
Testament in that regard. Some came and told Jesus of certain Galileans whose
blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. (Luke 13:1) That statement can,
of course, quite easily be filled in. The Galileans were hot-headed. They
constituted the greatest political trouble to the authority of Rome in that
area. Evidently somewhere, in their religious practices, they had been offering
sacrifice after some political outburst. While they were so occupied Pilate
sent down a punitive expedition, and slew them. The man is revealed in that account.
He was, moreover, a contemptuous man. That is proven by
his attitude towards the Jewish priests. The first thing that he asked them
when they brought Jesus to him was evidently a question marking his contempt
for them. "What accusation bring ye
against this man?"
The question in itself may not suggest his contempt, but
it is revealed in the answer which the priests made to him: "If this Man were not an evil-doer, we
should not have delivered Him up unto thee."
The answer reveals the very tone in which Pilate had
asked his question. The final evidence of the same attitude is discovered when
with his own hand, he wrote the accusation to be placed over the head of the
crucified Jesus: "JESUS OF NAZARETH,
THE KING OF THE JEWS."
It is impossible to read this without seeing his contempt
for the Jews, and especially for the priests.
When we examine the account carefully we find that Pilate
was actuated by a sense of justice. We are perfectly familiar with the fact
that in that regard he utterly broke down. The whole account, however, reveals
that his attempt was to be just. He had a passion for justice, a Roman passion,
a passion for the observance of Roman law. He did everything he could, except
the one final thing, to save Jesus. I have sometimes, perhaps a little
daringly, said what I still believe to be true, that Pilate would have much
preferred to crucify Caiaphas than to crucify Christ.
Yet once more it is impossible to read the account, and
arrive at the moment when, after the brutal and bloody scourging which Pilate
had been compelled to watch, for it was the law that he should do so, and not
to believe that when he led Jesus forth and showed Him to the people,
exclaiming, "Behold, the Man,"
that he himself was moved with a sense of pity, and desired if possible to
inspire that feeling in the crowd.
Yet again, he was a man of questioning mind; a man
attempting to investigate things. The question which we so clearly remember
that he asked Jesus, "What is
truth?" utterly reveals this. To that we shall return next. But we
hear him asking questions throughout. "Art
Thou the King of the Jews?" "Art Thou a King then?" "Whence
art Thou?"
All these things being observed it yet stands out clearly
that the one over-mastering characteristic of Pilate was that of a
self-centered diplomatist, an astute politician. A man, naturally cold,
haughty, oppressive, contemptuous, having a sense of justice, a capacity for
pity, and a spirit of question; but all these subservient to the one fact that
he was a diplomat, a politician.
Here it may be asked as to whether diplomacy is in
itself, wrong, and whether politicians are to be looked upon with contempt or
suspicion. Let it immediately be said there is nothing wrong in diplomacy, and
nothing wrong in being a politician, unless the diplomat or the politician is
self-centered, and all the forces of personality are employed in the Interest
of self.
Now let us turn to see him in contact with Christ. The
first appearance of Jesus before him, possibly the first time he had ever seen
Jesus, was in the early morning. The procurator thus disturbed, met the
situation with the question of the priests to which we have already referred: "What accusation bring ye against this
Man?"
With the authority of Rome vested in him, he was compelled
by Roman law to appear when a prisoner was brought to him. His first glance was
not so much for Jesus, though he saw Him, as for these troublesome Jews. Hence
his question. When they, evidently recognizing his annoyance, replied: "If this Man were not an evil-doer, we
should not have delivered Him up unto thee." He yet further manifested
his annoyance and contempt, as he said: "Take
Him yourselves, and judge Him according to your law." It was then that
Pilate heard these priests say something which revealed the situation in a
clearer light. They said: "It is not
lawful for us to put any man to death."
In a moment Pilate saw that with them it was not a
question of seeking for justice but an attempt to encompass a death. They had
made their minds up that He must die. I think it was at that point that he
began seriously to look at Jesus, and I believe he was startled and arrested.
Often enough they had brought someone to him for a decision in the civil courts
that would have no validity in the priestly courts.
That he was arrested and even startled is proven by the
fact of the private interview between him and Jesus that immediately followed.
Pilate took Jesus into the Praetorium or palace, and we have a graphic
description of what there took place in general. When they were thus alone
Pilate said to Him, "Art Thou the
King of the Jews?" and Jesus replied to him with that very searching
question: "Sayest thou this of
thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning Me?"
Now if we read that with real care we immediately
recognize that it was a curious question. Let us remember that up to this point
they had not yet told him what was the accusation they were bringing against
Jesus. It is quite evident, however, from Pilate's question that he had heard
something. The question of Jesus was as to whether he was asking this question
as the result of some private information that he had received, or was he
indeed asking the question out of his own personal wonder. The subject is full
of interest, and may have many applications which it is not now our business to
make. We may say, however, that it is a question that Christ always asks in the
presence of questioning unbelief. He has no answer to a second-hand
agnosticism.
It is quite evident that the question somewhat annoyed
Pilate as he said in reply: "Am I a
Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests delivered Thee unto me; what hast
Thou done?"
Thus dismissing the subject he asked Jesus Himself to
state the reason why He was arraigned before him. "What hast Thou done?"
To this our Lord replied: "My Kingdom is not of this world; if My Kingdom were of this
world, then would My servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the
Jews; but now is My Kingdom not from hence."
Again Pilate found himself confronted by a remarkable
statement, involving a claim to Kingship on the part of Jesus. This drew from
Pilate the question, "Art Thou a
King then?" At first he had asked Him, "Art Thou the King of the Jews?" Now recognizing a claim
to Kingship in some form came the simpler question, "Art Thou a King then?"
"Jesus
answered, Thou sayest that I am a King. To this end have I been born, and to
this end am I come into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth.
Everyone that is of the truth heareth My voice."
Thus in reply to Pilate's question our Lord claimed
Kingship in the realm of truth, and affirmed that His purpose in the world was
that of witness to truth.
When Pilate heard this, he exclaimed, "What is truth?" Bacon in his
essay on Truth commences what is certainly a great writing, with the words: "What is truth?" said the
jesting Pilate, and did not wait for an answer."
Admitting the greatness of Bacon's essay, I join issue
entirely with the suggestion of that opening sentence. Pilate never felt less
like jesting than when he asked that question. It was a cry wrung out of the
center of his personality. He was conscious that he was living in a world
largely under the domination of that which was untrue, perhaps there was a
touch of mockery in this question, but it was a wail rather than a jest.
It was at this point that he sent Jesus to Herod. He
desired to be rid of Him. He was seeking to shirk all responsibility. That
first interview had shaken him to the foundations of his life. He would gladly
wipe his hands of the whole business, and therefore sent Him to Herod. Herod
could do nothing, and sent Him back to Pilate. I think it was at this point
that he received a message from his wife: "Have
thou nothing to do with that righteous Man; for I have suffered many things
this day in a dream because of Him."
We are not told of any effect produced upon Pilate by
this message, but we do see him in difficulty and in turmoil, created by the
strangeness of the Prisoner arraigned before him.
Now Pilate proposed to chastise Him and let Him go. It
was an irregular and illegal proposition. Nevertheless he carried it out so far
as the scourging was concerned. He had given the people a choice between Jesus
and Barabbas. In doing that he had been attempting to find a way to release
Jesus. He was offering them a choice between a man who had been the scourge of
the countryside and One Who had been going about everywhere doing good. When
instructed by the priests, the crowd clamored for Barabbas, Pilate said:
"What, then, shall I do unto Jesus which is called Christ?" and the
answer came: "Let Him be
crucified."
That is the point at which the ultimate crisis arose for
Pilate He had found and publicly uttered his verdict, for the words; "I find no crime in Him,"
constituted a legal verdict.
The priests later said to him: "If thou release this Man, thou art not Caesar's friend."
That unquestionably was in his mind in this hour of crisis. He realized that
these priests might report him to Rome, and charge him with setting at liberty
One claiming to be a King. Eventually, the priests definitely said, "We have no king but Caesar,"
thus revealing their determination to secure the death of Jesus, even though
they made an acknowledgment of loyalty to Caesar, which they by no means felt.
As things proceeded, Pilate called for water and dipping
his hands in the water, said: "I am
innocent of the blood of this righteous Man; see ye to it."
There was yet another private interview between Pilate
and Jesus. In that interview, strangely perplexed unquestionably, Pilate asked
Him, "Whence art Thou?" To
that question our Lord uttered no reply. When Pilate, astonished at His
silence, said to him: "Speakest Thou
not unto me? knowest Thou not that I have power to release Thee, and have power
to crucify Thee?"
To this our Lord replied with a dignity that is almost
appalling: "Thou wouldest have no
power against Me, except it were given thee from above; therefore, he that
delivereth Me unto thee hath greater sin."
At last, in answer to the machinations of the priests and
the clamor of the crowd, he violated justice as he delivered Jesus to be
crucified.
Thus we see Pilate arrested by the purity of Jesus, by
the patience of Jesus, by the power of Jesus, in strange perplexity, not
knowing which way to turn. I watch the processes of his mind. First, his
contempt for the priests and for any prisoner they brought before him; then a
sudden arrest in the Prisoner Whom he had to face; then a growing fear as to
who it was Who was thus arraigned before him. Finally we see him driven to
choose between obedience to conscience and a sense of right, and expedience in
the interest of policy. He made the fatal choice. He then attempted to relieve
the anger of his mind as he wrote the superscription: "THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS."
Two other, who were malefactors, were crucified with Him.
When presently those in charge of the crucifixion came to Pilate to ask
permission, according to Roman law, to break the legs of the crucified, he
granted them their request. When, however, they came to the three crosses, they
found Jesus was dead already.
Soon there came to Pilate those who begged the body of
Jesus, and he granted them their request. After that the rulers came and asked
for a guard to be set over the tomb, for they declared that they desired to
make it certain that no one should steal the body, and so assert that Jesus was
risen. We can hear the infinite scorn and anger of Pilate as he said to them: "Ye have a guard; go your way, make it
as sure as ye can."
There would seem to have been lurking in his own mind a
suspicion that there was about this Prisoner something supernatural, and that
it would prove itself stronger than all their hostility.
As we survey this whole account of the contact of Pilate
with Jesus we see that in its process the bad in Pilate was weakened and the
good strengthened for a time. He was a man of swift brutality, but he did not
manifest it towards Jesus. He was a man of haughty indifference, but he was not
indifferent in the presence of Jesus. He was a man exercising an arrogant
authority, but there is no arrogance manifested in his dealing with Jesus. His
sense of justice was roused, and became active. His pity for pain overwhelmed
him, and made him present Jesus to the clamoring crowd, bruised and wounded, in
the hope that the vision might appeal to their pity. His desire for right drove
him to the employment of sundry expedients, some questionable, and yet all
pointing to his desire to set Jesus free. Thus our Lord, to use a modern
literary illustration, in the case of Pilate put Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde face
to face, and made them look at each other.
When Matthew records the account he says, "Jesus stood before the governor."
It is a perfectly accurate legal announcement. Actually, spiritually, morally,
finally, we may say that the governor stood before Jesus. In the last analysis
not Jesus but Pilate, was on trial. Through all the processes of that eventful
day a choice was being forced upon him. Through all the tempest of those stormy
hours there was one clear issue before him, and he himself expressed it when he
said: "What then shall I do unto
Jesus?"
Not to dwell upon it at length here and now we may
nevertheless declare that in that day the whole Roman Empire stood arraigned before
Jesus. Religion was arraigned there also in the person of the priests, and
democracy had come to judgment in the crowds. It is true that He was led as a
lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is dumb, so He opened
not His mouth; but He was the Arbiter, the Judge, and compelled the making of a
definite choice.
As to the ultimate history of Pilate everything is
shrouded in mystery. It has been declared that he committed suicide. On the
other hand there is a legend that presently in Rome, after he had been deposed
from power, he found himself in the Catacombs where Christians were gathering
together, and yielded himself to the Lord. It is a legend only. One thing we
know, and that is that if it be true, he was received and pardoned by Christ.
I think one of the most terrible accounts I know in
literature is that of Anatole France in his "Mother
of Pearl," where he attempts a picture of Pilate at the end, which is
purely imaginary, and yet profoundly philosophic. He depicts him living in lust
and luxury in a villa on the shores of Italy. Many years had passed when one
day a visitor from Rome, conversing with him said to him, "By the way, Pilate, were you not procurator in Judaea when they
put to death that Man Jesus?" Anatole France makes Pilate look at this
visitor through bleary eyes and say, "Jesus,
Jesus, I don't remember the name!"
I am not saying that this is history but it is a terrible
revelation of what may happen to a man who violates his conscience. The whole
thing may seem to leave no mark behind, and he may even forget the hour when it
took place.
Certain it is that contact with Christ always creates an
issue. We have never been able to analyze and finally classify Christ, but He
always analyses and classifies us.
Thus we learn from the account that the battle between
expedience and obedience is the utterest foolishness. To lose the central
principle of loyalty to conscience is sooner or later to find the whole
superstructure of life living in ruins.
From the account we also learn that responsibility cannot
be transferred. Pilate attempted to transfer it to the priests and then to
Herod, but the personal element in his question, "What shall I do with
Jesus?" was utmost.
"Though some of you, with Pilate,
wash your hands,
Showing an outward pity, yet you Pilates
Have here delivered me to my sour cross,
And water cannot wash away your
sin."
Shakespeare understood.
So also did Russell Lowell when in a couplet which may
lack elegance, but has the element of eternal truth, he wrote:
"An' you've gut to git up airly
Ef you want to take in God."
No man will ever be up early enough for that.
No comments:
Post a Comment