Scholars and Christians alike have wondered why Pilate didn't refuse the demand of the Jews to have Jesus killed? Pilate clearly wanted to, and as Procurator of Judea he certainly had the authority to do so. While he may have ordered Christ to be crucified at least in part out of wanting to avoid a riot, it's important to remember that Pilate wasn't remembered as someone who seemed to care much for respecting Jewish religious sensibilities.
Soon after his arrival in 26 AD to take over as Procurator from Valerius Gratius, Pilate infuriated the Jews by marching through the streets of Jerusalem with Soldiers carrying images of the Emperor Tiberius on their standards, a clear violation of the Jewish law against images. Pilate even ordered his Soldiers to kill protestors, but the next day acquiesced and had the images removed. Later, he seized money out of the temple treasury to fund a public works project. This caused a riot, as according to the Jewish historian Josephus, the action violated both Jewish and Roman Law.
Ultimately, Pilate was recalled to Rome to face a hearing in front of the Emperor Tiberius on allegations of alleged ruthlessness. This resulted from complaints being made to the Syrian Procurator that Pilate allegedly used too much force and caused excessive bloodshed in trying to disperse Samaritans who had gathered at the foot of Mt. Gerizim for a religious service, which for some reason had made Pilate feel threatened. However, when Pilate arrived at Rome Tiberius had died, and nothing is known for sure about him after that. What we do know though, from the Jewish sources at least, is that Pilate was a pretty harsh ruler, even by 1st century standards.
From the Gospels however, we see a Pilate that is also a very astute politician, and the Gospel of John leaves us a fascinating clue as to why Pilate likely had Jesus put to death. During the trial, Christ initially refuses to answer Pilate's questions, and then the Gospel of John tells us the following (John 19: 10-12):
10 So Pilate said to him, "Do you not speak to me? Do you know I have the power to release you and I have the power to crucify you? 11. Jesus answered, "You would have no power over me if it had not been given to you from above. For this reason they who handed me over to you has the greater sin." 12 Consequently, Pilate tried to release him, but the Jews cried out, "If you release him, you are no friend of Caesar, Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar."
Biblical Scholars have noted that the phrase "Friend of Caesar" was very pact with meaning in the ancient world. It was an honorific title bestowed upon high ranking officials of merit. During this time it was especially associated with political friends of Lucius Sejanus, who for a long time was the commander of the Praetorian Guard and a most trusted advisor to the Emperor Tiberius. During this time if you were a friend of Sejanus you were considered "A friend of Caesar's."
 |
| Emperor Tiberius (r. 14-37 AD) |
Around the time of Pilate's appointment as Procurator of Judea, Tiberius had removed himself to the Isle of Capri, and Sejanus was practically running the Empire from Rome. As Pilate was given a 10 year governorship when the usual term was only one to three years, that is very suggestive that Pilate was appointed by Sejanus and had a close relationship with him.
Why is all this important? Well, Sejanus fell out of favor with his Emperor in 31 AD and was executed. Tiberius believed Sejanus was plotting against him to further his political ambitions even further. Sejanus's demise was so great that his memory was damned by the Roman Senate, his body hung out in public for abuse, and then thrown into the Tiber river. By 33 AD, most of Sejanus's closest friends and family had been killed.
If the traditional date of 33 AD for the year that Christ's Passion occurred is accurate, then Pilate would have had reason to be terrified by what was said to him. The prospect of Jewish leaders sending an embassy to Rome to denounce Pilate's actions as Governor of Judea, claiming "Pilate was no friend of Caesar" since he had released a rabble rouser named Jesus who had dared to call himself "King of the Jews," a claim that would disrespected Emperor Tiberius in the region, would have placed Pilate's career and even his life, in very serious jeopardy. Especially if he was a close friend of Sejanus.
This statement would have been seen by Pilate as a threat, even if Christ died earlier, while Sejanus was still at the height of his power. But if this threat was made in AD 33 (or anytime after the fall of Sejanus in 31), Pilate would felt absolutely imperiled. It should be noted that at the time of the Passover, Pilate would have had up to 3,000 auxiliary Roman troops at his disposal, and certainly showed little fear from the prospect of suppressing riots, both prior to and subsequent to his presiding at Christ's trial.*
Thus, my conclusion is that it was the not so veiled threat to have Pilate denounced as being "Not a friend of Caesar's," that caused him to yield to the demands of the mob. Pilate did what most politicians did, both then and today. To stay in power he compromised his principles and let a man he believed to be innocent be put to death, then washed his hands as a meager token of protest, ultimately sealing Christ's fate.
The rest as they is history, but it is also much more than that, it was the price that our loving God made for our salvation.
* For further reading: See "The Death of the Messiah" by Fr. Raymond E. Brown (1994)
3 comments:
Very well thought out post. Thank you for this.
Post a Comment