The first charge--that of "perverting the nation"--was too vague.  Was it

"perversion" from the Jewish point of view, or from the Roman? And if the Roman,

what act could be cited that had actually been witnessed? The second charge, if it could

have been substantiated, would have been sufficient to have ensured condemnation, but it

was wholly false. The Lord had never refused to pay tribute, and had, that very week,

told his questioners to "render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's" (Matt. 22: 21).

The third charge, however, was indeed serious, and Pilate instinctively fixes on this as of

vital importance.

We now reach the stage called Interrogatio, or the Examination of the Accused.

Pilate had placed the Accused and the accusers face to face, as the Roman law required,

and he now opens the examination by asking a question which is found word for word in

each of the four Gospels: "Art Thou the King of the Jews?" To this the Lord answers,

"Thou sayest".  On the surface this appears to be a confession, equivalent to our

"pleading guilty".  A reference to John's Gospel, however, reveals that before our

Saviour acknowledged the charge, he asked Pilate the question: "Sayest thou this of

thyself, or did others tell it of Me?" (John 18: 34). In other words, the Lord enquires as

to the sense in which the word "King" was used. Is this your own question as a Roman

Procurator, the representative of the Emperor? Or is it a question prompted by Jewish

priests? If you are saying it of yourself, and are asking whether I claim to be a king in the

Roman sense, so as to be guilty of high treason against Cæsar, I answer "No". If, on the

other hand, the Jewish priests have told it thee concerning Me, and you are asking

whether I am a king in the Jewish sense . . . . . then I "plead guilty", for I am "King of the

Jews" in that sense. I claim to be the Prophet, ho Erchomenos, the Son of God, the King

of the Jews.

We now reach the Defence, which falls under two heads:

(1) The Confession.

(2) The Avoidance.

The Lord confessed that He was a king, and to that end He had been born. But His

avoidance was that His kingdom was not of this world and was not supported by armed

men. Upon hearing the Lord's defence, Pilate returns to the Praetorium and announces

his decision:

So far as Roman law is concerned the Lord is now acquitted; the trial is over, and He

is free. What happens subsequently is the result of the play of human passion on human

conscience, and because of Pilate's fears, the Saviour is handed over to death. Pilate

seizes upon the word "Galilee" to rid himself of further responsibility and sends the

Saviour to Herod. The offer and refusal of Barsabbas, the washing of the hands, the

scourging, the cruel mockery of the soldiers, all these things lay outside the law. Pilate's

fear for his own misdeeds and his dread of coming under the suspicion of Tiberius, in

combination with the envy and malice of the Jew, were instrumental in nailing the Son of