55. We resume our interpretation of the Gospel in order to speak of Jesus’ trial before Pontius Pilate, which, according to the sacred texts, occurred in two phases, separated by the Divine Victim’s appearance before King Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea. The first phase of the trial before Pilate, narrated by the four Evangelists (Matt. XXVII, 11 -14; Mark XV, 2-5; Luke XXIII, 2-7; John XVIII, 28b-38), began at 8.15 a.m. on that Friday the 25th of March of the year 34. Jesus’ public hearing before this Roman civil tribunal took place, as already stated, in the porch of the facade of the Praetorium, although Procurator Pilate from time to time came out by the lattice-gate to the stairway to communicate details of the proceedings to the people gathered outside the Fortress given the extreme legalistic attitude of the pharisees, as seen in Saint John, for the Jews «went not into the Praetorium, that they might not be defiled, but that they might eat the Pasch» (John XVIII, 28b), namely the azymes corresponding to that Friday 15th of Nisan. Nevertheless, we add that they did not pause to consider the enormous sacrilege that contaminated their souls by condemning the Innocent. This abstention from entry encompassed the porch and the whole interior of the Praetorium, but not the stairway and the rest of the outside parts. For that reason, during the trial the Sandhedrists took up posts near the grating so as better to hear what Pilate asked Jesus and what He replied. But let us now study the sacred texts which narrate this first phase of the civil proceedings, according to our Gospel chronology. As soon as the public trial before Caiphas was over, the latter sent an urgent message to Pontius Pilate to notify him that Jesus, having been condemned to death, would be brought into his presence that morning, as stipulated by imperial law. Since the Roman Procurator knew that the Jews would not enter the Praetorium, he set up a tribunal in the porch, located as we know before the three contiguous doors, to enable the people to witness the progress of the trial from without. When the mob with Jesus reached the principal facade of the Fortress Antonia, and before He was taken through the lattice gate into where the tribunal was installed, Pontius Pilate came out to hear officially from the Sanhedrists the cause for the Master’s condemnation, which he already knew privately. That is why Saint John relates that «Pilate therefore went out to them, and said: What accusation bring you against this Man?» (John XVIII, 29), whereupon the Sanhedrists present approached and verbally informed him of the charges imputed to Christ in the religious trial before Caiphas, for the Procurator to ratify the sentence of death passed against the Culprit there. But as Pilot understood that the charges were exclusively fruit of the Sanhedrin’s jealousy and hatred of Christ, he allowed them to discern his distrust of the Council and at the same time, with some disdain, notified them that because of their religious nature the charges lay outside his competence and lacked the force required for a verdict of death. That is why the Evangelist goes on to say, according to our interpretation, that the members of the Sanhedrin, followed by not a few of the people, «answered and said to him: If He were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered Him up to thee» (John XVIII, 30). As the Procurator wished astutely to free himself from that tangled religious affair, he said to the Jews, as the Evangelist recounts: «Take Him you, and judge Him according to your law» (John XVIII, 31a); which was, firstly, to hand them back the affair because of its ecclesiastical nature, and secondly to warn them to judge Him with justice and not with the partiality they had employed; and as well ironically to remind them to their face of their inability to execute anyone by their own authority, since he did not approve the execution of that sentence. But the Sanhedrists, controlling their fury at Pilate’s humiliating demeanour, said to him: «It is not lawful for us to put any man to death» (John XVIII, 31b), thereby maintaining that since Jesus had been duly judged by the Sanhedrin, it only remained to execute the sentence, which required leave from the Roman Procurator. The Evangelist Saint John adds: «That the word which Jesus had said might be fulfilled, signifying what death He should die» (John XVIII, 32). Because as we know, a week previously, in His final ascent to Jerusalem for the Passover, Jesus had said to His Apostles, amongst other things, that the Son of Man would be delivered to the Gentiles for crucifixion - the maximum punishment meted out by a Roman civil tribunal - which the Jews intended for Jesus, not only for the most painful agony but also because of the ignominy and shame it meant for the Culprit.
56. As the assembled Sanhedrists saw that their accusations lacked the force required for Pontius Pilate to ratify the proposed death sentence, they now proffered fresh charges of a political nature, with the aim of turning the Precurator’s will against Christ, as Saint Luke relates: «And they began to accuse Him, saying: We have found this Man perverting our nation and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar and saying that He is Christ the King» (Luke XXIII, 2), With these words the Sanhedrists accused Christ of proclaiming Himself an earthly King and of thus supplanting Caesar’s authority. However they did not so accuse Jesus because He had at any time called himself King of Israel, but rather, envious, took advantage of the circumstances which supported that undeniable truth. One of these was the Sanhedrin’s knowledge of Christ’s authentic royalty, not only spiritual but also temporal, He being the sole and legitimate descendant of David’s throne. As we know, this had already been spread abroad in the time of the usurper to the crown, Herod the Great, who during the visit of the three Wise Kings examined the prophecy of Micheas and Saint Joseph’s registration at Bethlehem in the census. Since he had also summoned priests and scribes for the investigation, the Sanhedrin had irrefutable proof that Christ was heir to David’s throne and therefore rightful King of Israel. Besides, many of the Jewish people learned of these facts because over the years they had spread from mouth to mouth, above all during Christ’s Public Life through His demonstrations of supernatural power; so much so that they wished to make Him King after the first multiplication of the loaves and fishes (John VI, 15). Also, as we know, during His Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, in their heavenly canticles the angelic Choirs proclaimed Him King of Israel, being heard by the Apostles, disciples and a large section of the people, because of which many joined in the angelic praises. What is more, Pontius Pilate was aware of Christ’s temporal royalty, both through information he received from the Sanhedrin and the people, and through personal investigation, since it had to do with his own authority and that of Caesar. Although the Roman Procurator knew with all certainty that Jesus was by right King of Israel, he could not fathom the mystery hidden in the sublime and prodigious preacher Who had drawn to Himself the masses without thereupon stirring them up against Roman authority. For Pilate knew the wise and prudent public saying of Christ: «Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s». In like manner, Pilate wondered that the Jews did not avail themselves of this promised King of Israel to try to free themselves from the Roman yoke, as they ardently desired; but on the contrary delivered Him up to be executed. For these reasons, although Pilate discerned that the charges against Jesus were a deceitful ruse employed by the Sanhedrin to achieve their cruel desires, and thereby quench their thirst of hatred against the Divine Preacher Who had so severely reproached the vices of those dignitaries, nevertheless the Procurator also foresaw the peril to his political office in Judea that such accusations made before the Imperial Caesar would entail. Hence he took the affair more seriously, and though inclined to save Christ believing Him to be Innocent, resolved to judge Him. Saint John says: «Pilate therefore went into the Praetorium again» (John XVIII, 33), that is to say, inside the porch, where he sat on the curul seat and made ready to judge Christ.
57. Then, as we interpret from Saint John, the Procurator commanded the
Most Divine Culprit to be brought into his presence, which is why the
Evangelist says that Pilate ‘called Jesus’ (John XVIII, 33); Who, we
teach, with His hands still tied in front, was by Roman soldiers led
inside the grilled area into Pilate’s presence, as we interpret from
Saint Matthew, who says: «And Jesus was brought before the Governor» (Matt.
XXVII, 11a). The first three Evangelists, who coincide in their narrative
(Matt. XXVII, 11; Mark XV, 2; Luke XXIII, 3), refer only briefly to Pilate’s
first interrogatory, and of their texts we cite here that of Saint Matthew:
«And the Governor asked Him, saying: Art Thou the King of the Jews?» (Matt.
XXVII, 11b), cross-examination by Pilate as judge, in accordance with the
Sanhedrin’s accusations. The Evangelist goes on to relate that «Jesus
saith to him: Thou sayest it» (Matt, XXVII, 11 c); in other words,
answering Pilate that he well knew that by right Jesus was temporal King
of Israel, and not because He had ever declared so publicly, as He was
accused of having done. The Procurator took a step further in his inquiry
into the matter, as we interpret from Saint John, and for a second time «said
to Him: Art Thou the King of the Jews?» (John XVIII, 33), a question
aimed at Jesus declaring if He had ever proclaimed Himself King in
opposition to Caesar’s authority, as He was also accused of, moreover
giving the Accused the opportunity to defend Himself. To this query Christ
replied: «Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or have others told it thee
of Me?» (John XVIII, 34), which was as if to answer, Do you truly believe
that I have rebelled against Caesar, or do you question Me only because My
enemies accuse Me of it? With which, laying bare Pilate’s complete
conviction of His innocence, Christ warned him not to be swayed by the
unjust procedure of the sanhedritic Council and to act, not according to
that body’s falsehoods, but with the rectitude which, as Procurator, his
knowledge of the facts required. Since the Master’s reply made Pilate
feel that he had been accused of complicity with the Sanhedrin, his pride
as a Roman was hurt, for as such he loathed the Jews, and he displayed his
vexation angrily telling Christ in dictatorial fashion: «Am I a Jew? Thy
own nation and the Chief Priests have delivered Thee up to me. What hast
thou done?» (John XVIII, 35). With these words he arrogantly asserted his
high rank of imperial governor and judge in those parts, and therefore his
lawful competence to try Him. As we interpret from the Gospel, Jesus, to
give Pilate an opportunity for light on His status as Messias, replied: «My
Kingdom is not of this world. If My Kingdom were of this world, My
servants would certainly strive that I should not be delivered to the Jews:
but now My Kingdom is not from hence» (John XVIII, 36). In the light of
the teaching of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII we penetrate more deeply
into the mystery of that Kingdom. Christ, as God, is eternally King of the
Universe and therefore of this world, and from the creation of His Most
Divine Soul He is so likewise as Man. Besides, as the Palmarian Creed
records, Christ <
58. The Evangelist goes on to say: «And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews» (John XVIII, 38). We teach that once Pontius Pilate rose from the presidential chair, accompanied by various soldiers he led Christ outside the porch; and once both stood before the lattice gate, the Procurator said to the crowd outside, as Saint John relates: «I find no cause in Him» (John XVIII, 38). Saint Luke relates this public utterance of the Procurator more exactly: «Pilate said to the Chief Priests and to the multitudes: I find no cause in this Man» (Luke XXIII, 4). As this verdict exceedingly irritated the Sanhedrists, and also the multitudes who from their places followed the interrogatories of the trial, all burst into fearful accusations against Christ, as Saint Mark states: «And the Chief Priests accused Him in many things» (Mark XV, 3). Saint Matthew is somewhat more precise, saying: «And when He was accused by the Chief Priests and ancients, He answered nothing» (Matt. XXVII, 12), Seeing Jesus’ majestic silence the Roman Procurator said: «Dost not Thou hear how great testimonies they allege against Thee?» (Matt. XXVII, 13). Then, as we interpret from Saint Mark, Pilate again asked Him: «Answerest Thou nothing? Behold in how many things they accuse Thee» (Mark XV, 4). The Evangelist goes on to say: «But Jesus still answered nothing: so that Pilate wondered» (Mark XV, 5). Or as Saint Matthew says: «And He answered to him never a word, so that the Governor wondered exceedingly» (Matt. XXVII, 14). In other words, Christ’s meek and defenseless behavior was for Pilate yet further proof of the unwonted and amazing virtue of the mysterious Culprit brought before his tribunal. But as the insatiable rabble, captained by the members of the Sanhedrin, observed that Pilate made ready to free Christ, deeming Him to be Innocent, there broke forth a deafening clamour, with fresh accusations against the Master, as we interpret from Saint Luke: «But they were more in earnest, saying: He stirreth up the people teaching throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee to this place» (Luke XXIII, 5). That contrary reaction caused Pilate fresh dismay. On the one hand he did not consider it just to accede to Christ’s condemnation, and on the other he foresaw that to contradict the wishes of the Chief Priests and the mob could occasion him fatal consequences for the imperial post he held among the Jews. The Evangelist goes on to say : «But Pilate hearing Galilee, asked if the Man were of Galilee» (Luke XXIII, 6), that is, feigning ignorance he asked if Christ was of that region, though well aware that He was a Judean. On being told by the Sanhedrists that Christ resided in Galilee, the Procurator saw achieved his astute plan of cowardly freeing himself from that vexing obligation. For thus must be interpreted the following text of Saint Luke: «And when he understood that He was of Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him away to Herod, who was also himself at Jerusalem in those days» (Luke XXIII, 7), since, as we know, Herod’s tetrarchy encompassed the regions of Galilee and Peraea. By sending Christ to Herod Pilate also sought to reconcile himself with the monarch, as we shall see.
59. At about 8.45 a.m. the throng of Jews, led by members of the
Sanhedrin, conducted Our Lord Jesus Christ from Pilate’s Praetorium to
King Herod Antipas who, as we said, during his sojourns in Jerusalem
resided at the palace near the western wall of the Temple, 400 metres from
the Praetorium. Along the way the mob, highly incensed at the Procurator’s
indulgent manner towards Jesus, with threats and insults cruelly vented
its rabid fury against the Culprit, Whom they did not come to kill on
route because of the custody of Roman soldiers. At 9 a.m. the Divine
Master entered the presence of the tetrarch, notified beforehand by Pilate.
As Saint Luke says: «And Herod seeing Jesus, was very glad: for he was
desirous of a long time to see Him, because he had heard many things of
Him; and he hoped to see some sign wrought by Him» (Luke XXIII, 8). In
other words, the adulterous king received Jesus with frivolous glee, as
though He were an enchanter or magician come to entertain him. Though
Herod had almost become convinced of Who Christ was because of His
miracles and teachings, the Master’s presence would in nowise benefit
the licentious monarch, owing to the blunting of his soul by his moral
turpitude. Therefore Christ not only maintained perfect silence, but kept
His divine gaze fixed to the ground, in that unclean fox deserved no other
response and thus saw all his frivolous plans shattered, as we interpret
in Saint Luke when he relates that Herod «questioned Him in many things»
(Luke XXIII, 9) and that Jesus «answered him nothing». For their part,
the members of the Sanhedrin present, fearing that Christ with some
prodigy would satisfy Herod’s vain hope, and that he out of gratitude
would try to save Him, never ceased their frightful accusations against
the Innocent Culprit with the object of obtaining from Herod the death
sentence denied them by Pilate, as we interpret from Saint Luke: «And the
Chief Priests and the scribes stood by, earnestly accusing Him» (Luke
XXIII, 10). Seeing Christ’s severe and inflexible attitude to his
questions and fatuous pretensions, Herod gave vent to the spite that
burdened his proud heart, sarcastically mocking the King of kings in word
and deed, as we interpret from Saint Luke: «And Herod with his soldiers
set Him at nought and mocked Him, putting on Him a white garment...» (Luke
XXIII, 11). We teach that the accursed king commanded a bizarre garb to be
brought, white and with gaudy sheen, worn usually by the jesters for
palace feasts. Without taking off Jesus’ tunic they put it on Him, and
at the same time with unprecedented arrogance and sarcasm branded Him
before all as a sorcerer and deranged, as Saint Mary of Jesus of Agreda
teaches well when she relates that <
60. Saint Luke goes on to say, according to our interpretation, that after mocking Jesus, Herod «sent Him back to Pilate. And Herod and Pilate were made friends that same day: for before they were enemies one to another» (Luke XXIII, 11b-12). From the beginning, genuine political relations between them had not existed, for Antipas took the Roman domination badly since it lessened his authority, and the Procurator maintained a certain prejudice against the tetrarch as leader of the Jewish sect, the Herodians, supporters of the dynasty of Herod and of independence from Rome. But when Pilate commanded the massacre of Galileans in the Temple related in the Gospel (Luke XIII, 1-5), since they had been under Herod’s jurisdiction their mutual relationship came to open rivalry. Nevertheless, with the sending of Christ to Herod by Pilate and vice versa the two authorities were reconciled, not now only for reasons of deference, but also because of the implied mutual acknowledgement of jurisdiction. At about 9.20 a.m., from Herod’s palace and in all haste the Divine Master was again led to the Praetorium, for the Sanhedrists were becoming impatient at the obstacles to the execution of the Culprit.
61. But before we speak of the second phase of the trial of Our Lord Jesus Christ before Pontius Pilate, it behoves us to cast our eyes back to the Cenacle, where as we know the Divine Mary and Her two sisters, the Apostle John, the three secret disciples and the couple Obed and Mary were to be found; for James the Greater and Mark had left for Bethany at 7 a.m. to summon the Apostles, disciples and holy women there, while Peter had left Gallicantus for the Cenacle shortly after 9 a.m. Of those absent the first to return was the Prince of the Apostles, at 9.20 a.m. on that Good Friday; for those from Bethany arrived shortly afterwards. When the Apostolic College and the other religious of the Carmelite Order, including Lazarus and his two sisters Martha and Mary, had assembled at the Cenacle, the Divine Mary first spoke to them with unspeakable tenderness and emotion of Christ’s terrible sufferings before the tribunals of Annas, Caiphas, Pilate, Herod, and again before Pilate, without revealing to them that as Co-Victim She most bloodily underwent all those sufferings; for at the same time as She was at the Cenacle She invisibly accompanied Her Divine Son in His Passion. But noting that Her words on Christ’s sufferings caused the Apostles great anguish and confusion, since they related them to their own cowardice, already forgiven, with most loving solicitude She endeavored to comfort them. Finally the Divine Mary, as Mother of the Church, wisely and prudently prepared everything in order for the Apostles, disciples and holy women to keep Her Divine Son company both on His way to Calvary and in His most bloody immolation on Golgotha. To that end She organized them into four groups: She would go in one, as the Sorrowful Mother, accompanied by Her two sisters Mary Cleophas and Mary Salome, as also by the Apostle John and the two sisters Martha and Mary; another group would be made up of Peter and the other nine Apostles; a third group would comprise Agabus and the disciples, Lazarus included; and the fourth, Seraphia and the other pious women. She also recommended all to be cautious and serene, for that was the will of Her Divine Son, since by divine decree He ought to consummate the Chalice of His Passion, so as to make reparation to the Father and to redeem mankind. After strengthening them with further words of encouragement, at 10.30 a.m. the Sorrowful Mother and Her group left the Cenacle. The other groups followed, each going to the Praetorium separately and with the greatest discretion, in order for all to be present at the moment Pilate pronounced sentence on Christ and at the subsequent mysteries of His most bloody Passion and Death. Consequently only the couple Obed and Mary stayed at the Cenacle to guard the Most Blessed Sacrament reserved there under both species.
62. The second phase of the trial of Our Lord Jesus Christ before the Procurator Pontius Pilate, related by the four Evangelists (Matt. XXVII, 15-30; Mark XV, 6-19; Luke XXIII, 13-25; John XVIII, 39-40; XIX, 1- 16a) began at 9.30 a.m. While Jesus, guarded by soldiers, reentered the porch of the Praetorium where the tribunal was located, the ever-swelling crowd outside, incited by the members of the Sanhedrin, vociferated the same accusations as before against the Innocent Culprit, principally that with His words He had disturbed public order and promoted rebellion against Rome. Pontius Pilate commanded the jester’s garb to be taken off Jesus and then went with Him out of the porch of judgement towards the stairway with the intention of speaking to the Jews, from whom he first demanded due order and silence so that they might clearly hear his words; for thus must be understood the text of Saint Luke when he relates that «Pilate, calling together the Chief Priests and the magistrates and the people, said to them: You have presented unto me this Man as One that perverteth the people. And behold I, having examined Him before you, find no cause in this Man in those things wherein you accuse Him. No, nor Herod either. For I referred you to him: and behold, nothing worthy of death is proven of Him» (Luke XXIII, 13 -15). Hence we see that the Roman Procurator reminded the furious crowd of his questioning of Jesus, in their presence, in the first phase of the trial; during which, as we saw, the Culprit did nothing in His own defence when interrogated by Pilate about the accusations of His enemies. As the Procurator’s fresh acknowledgement of Christ’s innocence, above all backed by the circumstance that neither had Herod condemned Him, exasperated the Sanhedrists, Pilate, endeavouring on the one hand to free the Culprit and on the other vilely to gratify the crowd, to the latter resolutely said: «I will chastise Him therefore and release Him» (Luke XXIII, 16). He thereby assured them that he would not leave the Culprit unpunished for the possible vexations He might have caused the Sanhedrin by His preaching, and that afterwards he would release Him. That new tactic served him to no purpose, wherefore Pilate, overwhelmed and indecisive, then found another possible way out, as we interpret from the sacred texts. Saint Matthew says: «Now upon the solemn day the governor was accustomed to release to the people one prisoner, whom they would» (Matt. XXVII, 15). Saint Mark relates: «Now on the festival day he was wont to release unto them one of the prisoners, whomsoever they demanded» (Mark XV, 6). Saint Luke merely says: «Now he needs must release unto them one upon the feast day» (Luke XXIII, 17). As we interpret from the Gospel, it was the custom day of the solemn day of the Passover or 15th of Nisan for the people to request the highest civil authority to free a prisoner, chosen by the Jews themselves. Pilate, taking advantage of the dense crowd gathered there, for thus must be understood «and when the multitude was come up» (Mark XV, 8), left the porch to remind them of their privilege of requesting the release of a prisoner, as we see in Saint John: «But you have a custom that I should release one unto you at the Pasch» (John XVIII, 39a). The mob then manifested to Pilate that it was so, as we interpret Saint Mark: «They began to desire that he would do as he had ever done unto them» (Mark XV, 8). Then the Procurator, showing them Christ bound as if dealing with a prisoner, thus attempted to gratify the people so that they would exercise their gracious benevolence towards Him, as we see in Saint Mark: «And Pilate answered them and said: Will you that I release to you the King of the Jews? For he knew that the Chief Priests had delivered Him up out of envy» (Mark XV, 9-10), or as Saint John relates: «Will you therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?» (John XVIII, 39b). We teach that Pilate publicly called Christ `King of the Jews’ to manifest to the people with clever irony the absurdity of the charges against the Culprit, and in that way tried to convince them that He Whom they accused of proclaiming Himself King was merely a defenseless, ill-treated and utterly powerless Man. But the Sanhedrin and the crowd, exceedingly wrath at Pilate’s proposition on Christ’s behalf, with deafening clamour manifested their rejection of His release. In the light of the referred Gospel texts it is fitting to clarify that when, on speaking of the custom of freeing a prisoner, Saint Matthew (XXVII, 15) says that it was on the `solemn day’, Saint Mark (XV, 6) and Saint Luke (XXIII, 17) say that it was on the `festival day’ and Saint John (XVIII, 39) `at the Pasch’, they are referring to the general norm of the 15th of Nisan, principal day of the solemnities. But we must bear in mind the dogmatic Definition of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII: << When the 15th of Nisan fell on a Friday, although the Supper of the Paschal Lamb was eaten as prescribed in the Law, nonetheless the solemnity or festivity of the day was moved to the Sabbath, so as to avoid two successive days of rest>>. As in that year 34 the 15th of Nisan fell on Friday, the solemnity of the feast was moved to the following day. Hence although by exception the Sabbath was the correct day to free the prisoner, Pontius Pilate desired this to take place as in other years, namely on the 15th of Nisan, because of the trial of Christ before him and his wish to free Him as soon as possible from the deicide clutches of His enemies.
63. Pilate, seeing the increasingly hostile attitude of the Jews, thought up another way to placate them and at the same time to save Christ. In the dungeons of the Praetorium there lay at that time a prisoner feared and hated for his crimes, to whom Saint Matthew alludes: «And he had then a notorious prisoner that was called Barabbas» (Matt. XXVII, 16). The other three Evangelists furnish, moreover, some particulars about the cause of his imprisonment. Saint Mark: «And there was one called Barabbas, who was put in prison with some seditious men, who in the sedition had committed murder» (Mark XV, 7). Saint Luke: «Who, for a certain sedition made in the city and for a murder, was cast into prison» (Luke XXIII, 19). Saint John: «Now Barabbas was a robber» (John XVIII, 40). Saint Anne Catherine Emmerich stresses Barabbas’ perverse nature when she says that he was a murderer who horrified the entire people because he had committed many crimes, employing sorcery with bloodshed, and from some women had even torn the fruit of their womb. When the Evangelist speaks of sedition, it must be understood as violent disturbance of a social nature without political character, for had it been of the latter the Procurator would not have permitted Barabbas’ posterior release. Before the people themselves chose the prisoner to be freed, Pontius Pilate, still standing outside the porch of judgement and with the Divine Culprit beside him, proposed to the Sanhedrists there to decide between Jesus and Barabbas. With that stratagem he hoped they would not free Barabbas, whom they deemed an extremely dangerous individual, and the following passage of Saint Matthew must be interpreted thus: «They therefore being gathered together, Pilate said: Whom will you that I release to you: Barabbas, or Jesus that is called Christ?» (Matt. XXVII, 17). We see how Pontius Pilate, with great blameworthiness on his part, since he not only trampled on the laws of justice but also rejected divine inspiration, placed Infinite Sanctity, Christ, on the same level as evil, Barabbas, thereby leaving the freeing or condemnation of the Righteous One to the mercy of the deicide rabble. At that so iniquitous actuation of Pilate, Jesus’ Deific Heart was deeply afflicted, since the comparison of His Most Sacred Person with that of a bloodthirsty murderer implied in great manner sacrilege and public outrage to the Infinite Sanctity of the Word made Flesh. That he was still not fully convinced that Jesus was the Son of God did not excuse Pilate’s most grave sin, for his ignorance was blameworthy since he failed to profit from the supernatural inspirations received. Hearing the name Barabbas, the crowd was intimidated and disconcerted in the extreme, for though fearing the release of Barabbas it did not want that of Christ. Pilate took advantage of this circumstance to reenter with Jesus the porch of judgement and from there continue to reflect on the trial’s development. It is necessary to clarify that when Saint Mark speaks of other seditious men who were prisoners with Barabbas, he mainly refer to Dismas and Gestas, the two thieves who would be crucified with Christ. They, though not accomplices in the murderer’s horrible crimes, indeed had been so in his robberies and acts of sedition. The three delinquents had already been judged and condemned to be crucified, execution of which was planned for that day, the 25th.
64. When Pilate and Jesus had reentered the grilled porch, there took place what Saint Matthew recounts: «And as he was sitting in the place of judgement, 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» (Matt. XXVII, 19). We teach that during the night in which Jesus was the victim of so many outrages, Pilate’s wife, Claudia Procula by name, had suffered immense anguish and sadness on account of certain supernatural visions she had had in her sleep, and in which she came to know of the dignity and innocence of Christ and of the perfidy of His enemies. God desired thus to illuminate that pagan woman in order to reciprocate her nobleness and goodness of heart, since whenever she had heard Christ spoken of, inwardly she had felt a mysterious unease and respect for Him. Also, the Most High made use of her to give her husband Pilate a precious opportunity of light to act justly towards Christ, Whom he acknowledged to be innocent, since he as Roman Procurator could save Him from death. Saint Anne Catherine Emmerich very correctly says that Claudia Procula had a vision of the most important mysteries of the life of Christ, Who appeared to her surrounded by light; and she also saw His infinite sufferings, His inexhaustible patience and love, the sanctity and sorrows of His Mother, as also and under horrible forms the malice and cruelty of His enemies. But it must be understood that Claudia Procula saw as well the terrible misfortunes that, because of the Death of the Innocent One, would befall not only the Jewish People, but also Pontius Pilate, who would be deposed from office, deprived of his property and exiled in the most calamitous oblivion. We teach that while suffering in her sleep on that account, she was awakened by the noise of the mob leading Jesus from Caiphas’ palace to the Praetorium. Moved by an irresistible impulse she looked out of one of the windows near the main entrance to the Praetorium, and from there saw the Lord, disfigured and wounded because of the outrages, at the moment He climbed the stairway. The sight, thus confirming the truth of her visions, made a terrifying impression on her. For which reason, when they took Christ to Herod’s palace, Claudia Procula told her husband about her sufferings and mysterious dreams during the night. Weeping profusely, she beseeched Pilate to act justly towards that Righteous Man in order that the malice of His enemies might not prevail. But as afterwards Claudia saw Pilate’s offer to the Jews to choose between Christ and Barabbas, she felt such overwhelming sorrow in the depths of her soul at her husband’s most unjust behavior that, when he was seated in the tribunal, as the text of Saint Matthew relates, by way of one of her servants she sent him a message to remind him of her visions and sufferings, as well as of his obligation to save Jesus, of whose innocence and virtue she gave full surety. We teach that the valiant woman, disillusioned by her husband Pontius Pilate’s vile and cowardly behavior, would leave him some days after Christ’s Death in order afterwards to correspond to the loving summons of the Divine Spouse, and join the pious women the day of His admirable Ascension to Heaven.
65. While the Roman Procurator, on his throne in the porch of the Praetorium, sought how to save Christ, above all now that the upright counsel of his wife Claudia bore heavily upon him, the members of the Sanhedrin bribed many of the people gathered outside to move the rest to have Barabbas freed and Jesus made to die, as we interpret from the first two Evangelists (Matt. XXVII, 20; Mark XV, 11), citing here the text of Saint Matthew: «But the Chief Priests and ancients persuaded the people that they should ask for Barabbas and make Jesus die». As Pilate thought that the public appearance of the murderous bandit would intimidate the throng more and would persuade it to request the Divine Culprit’s release, he sent for Barabbas; who, bound and guarded by soldiers, emerged from the porch with Jesus and Pilate. When the Jews saw the Roman Procurator before the lattice-gate with the Innocent One to his right and the murderer to his left, far from being terrified at the presence of Barabbas, with infernal frenzy they clamoured in his favour and against Christ, as we interpret in Saint Luke: «But the whole multitude together cried out, saying: Away with this Man, and release unto us Barabbas» (Luke XXIII, 18). Seeing the blindness of the people, the Roman Procurator tried to make them reflect on their senseless preference, as we see in Saint Luke: «Pilate again spoke to them, desiring to release Jesus» (Luke XXIII, 20), which intervention in Christ’s favour he made by questioning the crowd on three occasions, as we interpret from the sacred texts. Saint Matthew relates the first, telling us that in the face of the clamour of the mob, «the Governor answering, said to them: Which of the two will you to be released unto you? But they said: Barabbas» (Matt. XXVII, 21). Saint John relates that reply thus: «Then cried they all again, saying: Not this Man, but Barabbas» (John XVIII, 40). Saint Matthew goes on to say: «Pilate saith to them: What shall I do then with Jesus that is called Christ? They all say: Let Him be crucified. The Governor said to them: Why, what evil hath He done? But they cried out the more, saying: Let Him be crucified» (Matt. XVII, 22-23). As Saint Mark relates, the Roman Governor insisted a second time before the uncontrollable crowd: «And Pilate again answering, saith to them: What will you then that I do to the King of the Jews?», that is, with Him Whom you accuse of proclaiming Himself King. «But they again cried out: Crucify Him And Pilate saith to them: Why, what evil hath He done? But they cried out the more: Crucify Him» (Mark XV, 12-14). Or as Saint Luke gives it: «But they cried again, saying: Crucify Him, Crucify Him» (Luke XXIII, 21). The Evangelist Saint Luke then relates Pilate’s fresh actuation: «And he said to them the third time: Why, what evil hath this man done? I find no cause of death in Him. I will chastise Him therefore and let Him go. But they were instant with loud voices, requiring that He might be crucified. And their voices grew» (Luke XXIII, 22-23).
66. As Pontius Pilate observed that his repeated attempts to pacify the
bloodthirsty crowd and at the same time to save Christ were unavailing, in
his iniquity and cowardice he resolved to deal out cruel punishment to Him
Whom he knew to be Innocent, so that the Jews, satisfied, would take pity
on their Victim and He be released. Also, in that way he astutely provided
against possible reprisals. For if the Sanhedrists accused him before
Caesar of having released a dangerous subverter, which they claimed Jesus
to be, it was not without the retribution He deserved for His supposed
violations of Jewish and Roman law. The Evangelist Saint John, who sets
the event in its chronological order, says that «then therefore Pilate
took Jesus and scourged Him» (John XIX, 1). For their part, both Saint
Matthew and Saint Mark record the event without regard to its placement,
saying, «and having scourged Jesus» (Matt. XXVII, 26; Mark XV, 15). We
teach that Pontius Pilate, ready to put into effect the ignominious and
excruciating Scourging of Our Lord Jesus Christ, entered the porch of
judgement with Jesus and Barabbas. When seated on the curul seat he
ordered that the murderer be locked in his prison cell, and that the
Divine Culprit be taken to a room on that same floor of the Praetorium;
hence they led Christ in a straight line to the far end of the courtyard;
that is, they crossed the length of the yard, a distance of 65 metres as
we know. Once within the arcade of the courtyard they turned left to reach
an adjoining hall reserved for the use of the Praetorial Guard. Once Jesus
had been left to the mercy of the Roman soldiers, commanded by a tribune,
two of them, more expert in scourging, first untied the hands of the
Innocent and Divine Culprit so as to despoil Him of the seamless robe,
which they did with unspeakable brutality and mockery. Although the
wretches intended cruelly to tear off even the loincloth that covered
Christ’s Deific Body, He permitted it not, as we read in the masterful
teaching of Saint Mary of Jesus of Agreda: <
67. The most cruel torment of the Crowning with Thorns of Our Lord Jesus Christ is related in the Gospel by Saint Matthew (XXVII, 27-30), Saint Mark (XV, 16-19) and Saint John (XIX, 2-3). The episode also includes His sacrilegious robing as King of the Jews. But before making a profound study of the sacred texts it is well to lay down the following teaching. The torture of the Crowning with Thorns was not expressly ordered by the Procurator Pontius Pilate but suggested to the brutal soldiers by the Sanhedrists, in return for a generous recompense. For that torture had already been planned by some members of the Sanhedrin to be carried out in the dungeon of Caiphas’ palace when they covered Christ’s Face. Though unable there to carry it out, they desisted not in their plan. Saint Matthew says: «Then the soldiers of the Governor, taking Jesus into the hall, gathered together unto Him the whole cohort» (Matt, XXVII, 27). Saint Mark relates as follows: «And the soldiers led Him away into the court of the palace: and they called together the whole cohort» (Mark XV, 16). We teach that once Christ had been scourged the two executioners, with mockery and derision, untied Him from the column, then with His seamless robe covered His most sacred Body, and after binding His hands in front led Him from the place of the Scourging to the courtyard of the Praetorium. It was then that other soldiers informed the tribune of the Sanhedrists’ proposition to carry out the crowning with thorns and other outrages, so as further to ridicule Christ for the royalty that, according to the Sanhedrists, He arrogated to Himself. As Pilate was still absent the tribune went to where he was to inform him of that most barbarous proposition, to which the Procurator acceded in the hope that the crowd, its hatred thus fully sated, afterwards would take pity on Christ and let Him be released. Hence with Pilate secluded in his private apartments in the Praetorium, the tribune commanded the soldiers of the cohort there to assemble in the courtyard, as we see in the Gospel text. After forming up in order before Jesus with unprecedented mockery, at 10.15 a.m. there began the bloody and ignominious ceremony of the enthronement and crowning with thorns of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us consider how the Evangelist relate it. Saint Matthew says: «And stripping Him, they put a scarlet cloak about Him. And plaiting a crown of thorns, they put it upon His Head, and a reed in His right hand. And bowing the knee before Him, they mocked Him, saying: Hail, King of the Jews. And spitting upon Him, they took the reed and struck His Head» (Matt. XXVII, 28-30). Saint Mark relates: «And they clothed Him with purple: and, platting a crown of thorns, they put it upon Him. And they began to salute Him: Hail, King of the Jews. And they struck His Head with a reed: and they did spit on Him. And bowing their knees, they adored Him» (Mark XV, 17-19). Saint John says: «And the soldiers platting a crown of thorns, put it upon His Head: and they put on Him a purple garment. And they came to Him and said: Hail, King of the Jews. And they gave Him blows» (John XIX, 2-3). As we see in the sacred texts, duly arranged and interpreted, after untying His hands the first thing the soldiers did was again to despoil Jesus of His seamless robe, with most bloody tearing of His Most Sacred Flesh and outpouring of His Most Precious Blood, for the robe had become stuck to His Body because of the wounds. Then with satanic mockery they robed Him in the red cloak or short military cape used by the Romans, thereby shamming His investure in regal robes. Meanwhile other soldiers plaited the crown using an extremely thorny bush known as Zizyphus, today Spina Christi, very abundant in that region and possessed of tough and lacerating thorns. After robing Him in the cloak, with mock reverences they seated Our Lord Jesus Christ on a small stone bench, simulacrum of a royal throne, at once proceeding to His bloody crowning. His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII has defined that Christ’s crown of thorns was in the form of a helmet that covered His Head, and that it had 153 thorns. But we add that many of them penetrated His cranium, others His temples and even His ears and eyes. That was due not only to the force used in putting the thorny helmet on His Most Sacred Head, but also because of the length of the thorns. So that no detail of that most ignominious crowning should be lacking they placed in Christ’s right hand, which was fastened to the left at the wrist, a reed, simulacrum of a royal sceptre, thereby completing the infamous and sarcastic parody of His enthronement as King of the Jews. Next, as is seen in the Gospel, they ridiculed Jesus to satiety with grotesque signs of reverence, bending the knee before Him at the same time as they sarcastically hailed Him as King of the Jews, spat at and buffeted His Most Divine Countenance and wounded His crowned Head with severe blows using that royal reed which at whim they took from and replaced in the Culprit’s hand. Our Lord Jesus Christ’s crowning with thorns, for its unprecedented savagery and cruelty, would have sufficed to cause His death had His Divinity not sustained His Most Sacred Humanity.
68. At 10.30 a.m., when the soldier were at their liveliest with mockery and other ridicule, the odious ceremony of Our Lord Jesus Christ’s enthronement and crowning with thorns was ended by the presence of Pontius Pilate in the courtyard of the Praetorium. Exceedingly troubled at the pitiful appearance of Jesus, robed and crowned as a mock King, the Procurator believed that the Nazarene’s presentation to the mob would change its ferocious attitude. Thus he took the Culprit across the courtyard and through the central gate to the porch wherein was installed the curul seat for this trial. He then went with Jesus through the lattice-gate and presented Him to the people exactly as He was, as we interpret in Saint John: «Pilate therefore went forth again and saith to them: Behold, I bring Him forth unto you, that you may know that I find no cause in Him. (Jesus therefore came forth, bearing the crown of thorns and the purple garment.) And he saith to them: Behold the Man» (John XIX, 4-5). With that mysterious expression, which came prophetically from his lips, Pontius Pilate, without so intending, publicly proclaimed the Son of God hidden beneath the Humanity He had assumed in order bloodily to be immolated. Without the Procurator’s being aware of the profound meaning of his words, though understood by the people as a prophecy, he presented Jesus as the Son of Man, a title appropriated and frequently used by the Messias in His Public Life to designate Himself, so that by the prophecy of Daniel (VII, 13) they might recognize Him as the Son of God. Though the Most High, with the word `Man’ falling from the lips of a pagan, gave to the Sanhedrin and Jewish People a fresh opportunity of grace to accept Jesus as the Onlybegotten, and therefore desist in their deicide, Pilate’s intention was merely to awaken in the crowd feelings of humanity and pity towards a defenseless, ill-treated and innocent Man, and to try to convince them of the falsity of the accusations against Him. The public reappearance of Jesus, vilified as none other, first silenced the people. But as soon as Pilate with his right hand indicated the ignominiously robed Accused as King of the Jews, saying at the same time: «Behold the Man», the members of the Sanhedrin, not to be moved, recognizing in those word the prophecy of Daniel (VII, 13-14), which presents Christ as King of eternal Majesty, roared like beasts drunk with blood, demanding His death. Their attitude was supported by the depraved and not less cruel mob, as we interpret the following verse of Saint John: «When the Chief Priests, therefore, and the servants had seen Him, they cried out saying: Crucify Him, Crucify Him» (John XIX, 6).
69. The Procurator was grieved at being thwarted by the Jewish People’s inflexible obstinacy against Christ, despite His having been presented to them, due to His pitiful state, as «the reproach of men and the outcast of the people» as foretold by David (Ps. XXI, 7). Wherefore Pilate, perceptibly angered, again wished to dissociate himself from the affair and remit it to the Sanhedrin, since his repeated verdict concerning the Culprit’s innocence went unheeded by its members, which he deemed an act contemptuous of his authority as Governor of the province. Hence we see in the Gospel, duly interpreted, that at the brutal insistence of the Chief Priests, supported by the people, on carrying out the Culprit’s execution, Pilate answered: «Take Him you, and crucify Him: for I find no cause in Him» (John XIX, 6). With those words he made it very clear that as the administrator of Roman justice he was not prepared to pass sentence of death on Christ, deeming Him to be innocent, and that if they so greatly desired to crucify Him, it would be their business and without his express permission. Hence Pilate, while aware that the astute Sanhedrin would not risk officially taking justice into its own hands, was prepared to surrender Him in the hope that the people would kill Him on the way from the Praetorium to the palace of the High Priest, and that thus the affair would be settled and he, in his own opinion, freed from any responsibility for the shedding of Innocent Blood. But the members of the Sanhedrin present before the Praetorium were not about to allow Pilate to excuse himself from the duty that, by reason of his authority, bound him to the vexatious affair, above all when what they sought was that all the blame for Christ’s Death should fall on him, and thus for them to appear in the opinion of the public as irreproachable fulfillers of Jewish and Roman law. Besides, seeing that charges of a political nature against Christ did not crown their criminal propositions with success, since Pilate did not consider them imputable to the Divine Culprit, they reasserted the religious charges, basis of the condemnatory sentence before Caiphas, which they had presented in the Praetorium at the start of the trial. That is why the Evangelist Saint John says that «the Jews answered him. We have a law; and according to the law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God» (John XIX, 7). In that manner, and now with heightened emphasis, they reproached Pontius Pilate for his lack of zeal in supporting with his authority the Jewish law. Because if according to that law Christ should die as guilty of blasphemy for proclaiming Himself the Son of God, he, as Procurator, was strictly bound before Caesar to ratify the death sentence pronounced by the Sanhedrin. The Evangelist says that «when Pilate therefore had heard these words, he feared the more» (John XIX, 8), by which it must be understood that he feared not merely because they told him that Jesus said He was the Son of God, since they had presented that charge at the beginning of the trial, but because he now found himself on the horns of a dilemma. The Procurator, increasingly inclined to admit that Christ was the Son of the one true God, on the one hand feared that divine justice would recoil on him, as his wife Claudia had warned, if he acceded to the criminal propositions of the Sanhedrin; and on the other, the responsibility that Rome could demand of him if he again rejected, without due examination, the accusations of a religious nature confirmed by the sentence dictated by a powerful and influential Sanhedrin in accordance with Jewish law. As a result Pilate now saw himself forced to consider afresh. Therefore he went with Jesus into the porch of judgement to interrogate Him, not now about His birthplace and human lineage, for these he knew, but about His divine origin, as we interpret in Saint John: «And he entered into the Praetorium again; and he said to Jesus: Whence art Thou?» (John XIX, 9a), intending that He reveal the mystery of His divine Sonship, the truth of which was becoming increasingly apparent to Pilate, not only because of reports of the Lord’s life, miracles and doctrine, but more especially due to the graces received in his direct dealings with Him during the trial. The Evangelist says: «But Jesus gave him no answer» (John XIX, 9b). That is, by His silence He at that moment withheld the truth from him who scorned His divine inspirations to the detriment of justice in defence of the Innocent One. Christ’s majestic authority and eloquent muteness exceedingly bewildered His proud judge, who, with arrogance and a vain display of power endeavored further to humble the Divine and Omnipotent Culprit, as is seen in the Gospel: «Pilate therefore saith to Him: Speakest Thou not to me? Knowest Thou not that I have power to crucify Thee, and I have power to release Thee?» (John XIX, 10). The Evangelist goes on to say that «Jesus answered: Thou shouldst not have any power against Me, unless it were given thee from above» (John XIX, 11), that is, you could not crucify Me were I not to permit it. We teach that Christ coupled these words with a secret manifestation of His infinite power, which Pilate felt inwardly with such penetrating force that he no longer doubted being in the presence of the Son of the Eternal and True God, from Whom is derived and upon Whom depends all authentic power and authority. Following that stern reproach and perceptible demonstration of His Infinite Power, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in a voice audible to the whole multitude, spoke for the last time before Pilate’s tribunal, reprimanding him, the Sanhedrin and the people for their guilt in the proceedings against God in the Person of His Onlybegotten: «Therefore, he that hath delivered Me to thee hath the greater sin» (John XIX, 11). That very serious warning penetrated the inner most depths of their consciences, so that all were not only even more convinced of the heinousness of the crime committed, but mysteriously even foresaw its fatal consequences. This was another great opportunity Christ gave to His people in order for them, more conscious of their sins, to desist in their deicide purpose. For they were the most to blame since the legacy of the Gospel was meant particularly for them as the People Chosen for that heavenly mission and therefore, versed in messianic prophecy and holy Jewish law and tradition. It was also a fresh opportunity for Pilate, principal judge of the affair, to act with the justice demanded by his clear knowledge of the facts.
7O. It behoves us further to ponder these words of Christ to Pilate: «Thou shouldst not have any power over Me, unless it were given thee from above» (John XIX, 11). So as better to understand the concept of power in the sense of authority we must consider the intratrinitary life itself, wherein is to be found the most beautiful and sublime expression of the most profound essence of the attribute of authority. We know that with respect to one another the Three Divine Persons are Coeternal, Coequal and Co-omnipotent. Hence in the Most Holy Trinity ad intra, no one of the Three Divine Persons has more authority than the other two.
In the light of the definitions of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII, let us consider how each of the Three Divine Persons possesses the essential and eternal attribute of supreme authority. (1) The beginning or source of all authority radicates in the Eternal Father, since He is the First Person, source without source. (2) The Son eternally receives the same authority from the Father, since the Second Person is begotten of the First. (3) The Holy Ghost, since He proceeds from the Eternal Father and from the Son, eternally receives from Them the same authority.
Because of the processions and relationships, in the intratrinitary life there is a mysterious order of -authority, which by no means implies subjection of one Person of the Trinity to another, given their coequality of attributes.
71. But let us consider how the intratrinitary concept of authority is communicated to creatures. We know that by His infinite power the Triune God is Supreme Maker and essential Cause of all created things, and thus by nature absolute Ruler of the Universe, over which the Three Divine Persons exercise coequal Paternity. Yet in His inscrutable plans God delegates part of His Infinite Authority to creatures, Let us consider how.
(a) At the moment of creation the Most Divine Soul of Christ was endowed with fullest authority over all other created things as their First Instrumental Cause. Thus Our Lord Jesus Christ as Man is the supreme authority constituted ad extra, though not infinite.
(b) At the moment of creation the Divine Soul of Mary was endowed with fullest authority over all things created after Her, as their First Co-instrumental Cause. Thus after Her Divine Son the Most Holy Virgin Mary is the supreme authority constituted ad extra.
(c) Among the angelic spirits there is also a hierarchical order or authority of some over others, the highest degree of which pertains to the seven Archangels headed by Saint Michael, Prince of all the angelic choirs.
(d) As for mankind, God created the first man, Adam, master and lord of visible creation, authority over which was given to him through the Souls of Christ and Mary. Eve was also created with authority though in degree inferior to Adam, whose authority was over her as Saint Paul says: «The head of the woman is the man» (I Cor. XI, 3; Eph. V, 23). The essential nucleus of human society, the married couple, was formed with the conjugal bond of our first parents. Before sinning Adam already exercised over Eve the authority that belonged to him as man and husband, which exercise was most perfectly compatible with the joyful harmony connatural to them, by virtue of original justice. But after sinning, in addition to there being sundered the blessed harmony and delightful intimacy of the first couple with God, Adam’s authority over Eve entailed man’s dominion over his wife and her subjection to him, to their consequent mutual mortification. The harmony of life together in Paradise of husband and wife was at an end, and thus must be interpreted the following text of Genesis concerning Eve: «Thou shalt be under thy husband’s power, and he shall have dominion over thee» (Gen. III, 16). Little by little, through human procreation, other systems of more extensive groupings made up of different families were formed, which gave rise at first to patriarchal authority. The evolution of society has given and continues to give rise to manifold social systems, as for example tribes, cities, states and nations, etc., with their resultant systems of authority, power and government.
(e) In the animal, vegetable and mineral kingdoms there is also a system of order and authority, according to their nature.
(f) In Hell no principle of order or authority is possible due to the anarchy that reigns as consequence of the insatiable hatred prevailing among the condemned.
