Be it a question of science, metaphysics, or religion, the man who says: 'What is truth?' as Pilate did, is not a tolerant man, but a betrayer of the human race."
interesting bon mot from Maritain... (assuming you don't mind a bit of insta-commentary) he seems to view Pilate as sort of a skeptic, no? Is Pilate one of the scoundrels or fiends of the New Testament, jh? I thought he was the wise pagan or something. Caiaphas--now, there's the old bureaucratic judge.
And didn't the Stagarite & Co ask...what is truth? are they too betrayers...
Grazi for clarification. So according to Maritain, Pilate represents a sort of naive or vulgar skepticism...yet does P. actually know JC was....Christ? How would he know?? He's just a judge (the role of the court/judges in the NT seems somewhat interesting..politically, however).
He finds no fault (or sin) but he doesn't see any actual miracles or evidence of holiness, does he? He only has the word of the apostles and the followers of JC. So, in a sense Pilate wants proof...he may be a bit of a skeptic--perhaps the naive or vulgar scoffer (tho usually portrayed as roman noble-- not a plebe), but a bit of skepticism when confronted with a person with a reputation... as the son of God may have been warranted. But he doesn't find anything treasonable in Christ.
The confrontation with Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin presents another odd scene--Caia. seems to say, even if he's innocent of any crimes, it's better for all concerned if we hang him anyway. Utilitarianism, circa 30 AD. Caiaphas was the hangman ( Dante has him buried under ice in the inner circle of the inferno..as you probably know).
j your last image of caiaphas is instructve regarding maritains' statement
it is not so much the "divinity" of jesus which pilate ignores it is the innocence the truth of a real man being put to death with no recourse to justice
it is the cognitive fulcrum point of the thesis of rene' girard the "scapegoat dynamic"
jesus asks by his mere presence before pilate:
how much senseless killing will have to happen before people start to understand:
Pilate, even if he suspects JC's innocence (if not...holiness) does not free him, but passes him off to Caiaphas (per Luke I believe). Betrayal, perhaps there.
Then....JC by definition, at any time, could have interrupted the proceedings couldn't He have, even break his cuffs? Not to....wax heretical but at times something a marcionic issue creeps in. Does Christ merely allow the trial/betrayals, etc--already knowing the outcome, and having the supernatural power to stop it...or is he, rather human, all too human. Personally, the latter seems a bit more plausible (and...Pilate does appear in the official historical record, at least a few signs...). So they hang an innocent wiseman: not sure they hang ...Dios.
the narrative states that jesus believed that god the father could end the drama if he had truly wanted to "let thsi cup pass from my lips o lord...yet...let not my will be done but Thine" is the quintessential christian prayer - quoting JC in Matthew
the mystery is the willingness of god to experience even the most senseless death as a way of consolidating his love for us
that god might enter into the dynamic of human darkness and death was foolishness to the greeks and a scandal to the jews
christianity was first formed in response to intense skepticism read Justin Martyr and john of damascus
the church grows out of the firsthand witness of the disciples
I find it interesting that the code of St Matthew (ie, the Beatitudes as y'all say), which seems rather pleasant and ethical, --even Kantian in a sense-- would be put to use by emperor Constantine a few hundred years later as an imperial force. Same for crusaders as well.
7 comments:
interesting bon mot from Maritain... (assuming you don't mind a bit of insta-commentary) he seems to view Pilate as sort of a skeptic, no? Is Pilate one of the scoundrels or fiends of the New Testament, jh? I thought he was the wise pagan or something. Caiaphas--now, there's the old bureaucratic judge.
And didn't the Stagarite & Co ask...what is truth? are they too betrayers...
i think maritain's point is
that Pilate's words relativize truth...a way of saying
your truth is not my truth
but aristotle believed that the true the good the beautiful is available and knowable to all men and the apprehension of truth is a universal thing
yes pilate was skeptic
skepticism as a means of
social order
the irony in maritain's mind is
that the truth was standing
right in front of pilate
Pilate's is the voice of the
benighted masses
and teh believers' trial is to see the light of the world
crucified
and
risen
thanks
Grazi for clarification. So according to Maritain, Pilate represents a sort of naive or vulgar skepticism...yet does P. actually know JC was....Christ? How would he know?? He's just a judge (the role of the court/judges in the NT seems somewhat interesting..politically, however).
He finds no fault (or sin) but he doesn't see any actual miracles or evidence of holiness, does he? He only has the word of the apostles and the followers of JC. So, in a sense Pilate wants proof...he may be a bit of a skeptic--perhaps the naive or vulgar scoffer (tho usually portrayed as roman noble-- not a plebe), but a bit of skepticism when confronted with a person with a reputation... as the son of God may have been warranted. But he doesn't find anything treasonable in Christ.
The confrontation with Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin presents another odd scene--Caia. seems to say, even if he's innocent of any crimes, it's better for all concerned if we hang him anyway. Utilitarianism, circa 30 AD. Caiaphas was the hangman ( Dante has him buried under ice in the inner circle of the inferno..as you probably know).
j
your last image of caiaphas is instructve regarding maritains' statement
it is not so much the "divinity" of jesus which pilate ignores it is the innocence the truth of a real man being put to death with no recourse to justice
it is the cognitive fulcrum point of the thesis of rene' girard
the "scapegoat dynamic"
jesus asks by his mere presence before pilate:
how much senseless killing will have to happen before people start to understand:
answer:
quite a lot
OK.
Pilate, even if he suspects JC's innocence (if not...holiness) does not free him, but passes him off to Caiaphas (per Luke I believe). Betrayal, perhaps there.
Then....JC by definition, at any time, could have interrupted the proceedings couldn't He have, even break his cuffs? Not to....wax heretical but at times something a marcionic issue creeps in. Does Christ merely allow the trial/betrayals, etc--already knowing the outcome, and having the supernatural power to stop it...or is he, rather human, all too human. Personally, the latter seems a bit more plausible (and...Pilate does appear in the official historical record, at least a few signs...). So they hang an innocent wiseman: not sure they hang ...Dios.
the narrative states
that jesus believed
that god the father could
end the drama if he had
truly wanted to
"let thsi cup pass from my lips o lord...yet...let not my will be done but Thine" is the quintessential christian prayer - quoting JC in Matthew
the mystery is the willingness
of god to experience even the most senseless death as a way of consolidating his love for us
that god might enter into the dynamic of human darkness and death was foolishness to the greeks and a scandal to the jews
christianity was first formed in response to intense skepticism
read
Justin Martyr
and
john of damascus
the church grows out of the firsthand witness of the disciples
it is absurd
therefore i believe
jh
I find it interesting that the code of St Matthew (ie, the Beatitudes as y'all say), which seems rather pleasant and ethical, --even Kantian in a sense-- would be put to use by emperor Constantine a few hundred years later as an imperial force. Same for crusaders as well.
Post a Comment