Page 52 - laten-08-06-2020

Barabbas emanated, Pilate failed to decide on his own, to release
Jesus even though he found no guilt in him. But in order to
appease public hostility he pardoned revolutionary Barabbas.
Also he persisted his intention to crucify the innocent Jesus
what the crowd offered as a poignant choice.

But Pilate’s wife who like the gentiles in the birth narrative
(2:12) was warned (by God) in a dream and that message
was passed on to Pilate while he was sitting on the judgment
seat. Pilate accepted this divine warning and refused to take
responsibility for Jesus’ death. So, he had to give the formal
verdict, by washing his hands. He disclaimed responsibility for
Jesus’ death and transferred it to the crowd and in the terrible
words of v25 all the people accepted it. Mathew indicates that
while the chief priests and elders had taken the initiative, the
people as a whole carried a corporate responsibility for the
death of Jesus.

Another important thing to note here is that the function
of the passage is primarily theological rather than historical. Its
intention is not to report that Jesus was sentenced to crucifixion
by the Roman procurator but to exhibit the theological
conviction that Israel, the Messiah’s own people, assumed
full responsibility for his death and therefore warranted the
judgment of Mathew21:43.
Hence, re-imaging the character of Pilate helps us to
understand how he has been encountered and experienced the
cross in his own particular context. His encounter with the cross
helped him to fulfill God’s will in the life and ministry of Jesus.
His experience with the cross helped him to be a part of his
suffering by rendering injustice to Jesus under the outspoken
crowd with the political motive.

Morality of the Cross

In our Indian political context the so called majority
powerful insist their political and social agenda and eliminates

46
Lenten Meditations Re - Imaging People