John 19:14Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Others say that Mark clearly and undoubtedly indicated the hour of the sentence by which the Lord was condemned to crucifixion. For judges are said to crucify and execute from the time when they pronounce the sentence, since by words it received the force of punishment and death.

Therefore Mark says that He was crucified at the third hour, the hour when Pilate pronounced sentence. Since Mark notes the time of the sentence, John recorded the hour when the Lord was crucified.

Moreover, see how much took place between Pilate’s sentence of crucifixion and the hour when the Lord ascended the cross. After releasing Barabbas, he scourged Jesus and definitively delivered Him to be crucified. For the release of Barabbas was the condemnation of the Lord.

The soldiers mocked Him. Consider how much time would have passed in prolonged mockery. Pilate brought Him out and spoke with the Jews. Again he entered and examined Jesus. Again he came out and spoke with the Jews. All this could have occupied the time from the third hour to the sixth.

Therefore John, who set this forth accurately, since he followed everything, mentions the sixth hour. This was when Pilate delivered Him completely “to be crucified,” no longer conversing with the Jews while they condemned Jesus, but having pronounced the final decision concerning Him.

If someone asks why, after pronouncing sentence of crucifixion about the third hour, he again wished to release Him, let him know this first. Compelled by the crowd, he pronounced sentence. Then he was troubled by his wife’s dream, for she warned him: “Have nothing to do with that righteous Man” (Mt 27:19).

Through all this, notice how John expressed himself. It was “about the sixth hour.” He did not say definitely, “it was six o’clock,” but as if without precision and without firm assertion: “about the sixth hour.”

Therefore it should matter very little to us that the Evangelists seem not to agree perfectly with one another, even if we allow such a difference. For see whether they have not all said that Jesus was crucified. If one says of the hour that it was the third, and another the sixth, does this harm the truth in any way?

Yet it has been sufficiently shown that there is not even a disagreement. We have often said that Pilate is more weak and fearful than malicious. See this even now. He gives the matter the appearance of inquiry and judgment, but in everything he acts weakly.

“Behold,” he says, “your King.” He neither condemns Jesus nor openly rebukes the Jews, but covertly reproaches them for slander. He says, as it were: behold what kind of man you accuse of seeking kingship over you, a poor man who does not think of seeking it.

The accusation is false. What does He have that belongs to a usurper? Soldiers? Wealth? Noble birth? “Behold your King.” What profit is there if you kill Him, a Man who cannot do the slightest harm?

Now the Evangelist Mark says: “It was the third hour, and they crucified Him” (Mk 15:25). What does this mean, except that the Lord was crucified at the third hour by the tongues of the Jews, and at the sixth hour by the hands of the soldiers?

Thus we may understand that the fifth hour had already passed and some beginning of the sixth had come when Pilate sat on the judgment seat. John expresses this with the words “about the sixth hour.” When He was led away, nailed to the tree with the two robbers, and the things related in the Gospel happened at the cross, the sixth hour was fully completed.

From that hour until the ninth the sun was darkened and darkness came. This is attested by the three Evangelists: Matthew, Mark, and Luke (Mt 27:45; Mk 15:33; Lk 23:44).

But because the Jews sought to shift the murder of Christ from themselves onto the Romans, that is, onto Pilate and his soldiers, Mark passed over the hour when Christ was crucified by the soldiers. This was already happening from the sixth hour. He mentioned only the third hour, when they may be understood to have cried before Pilate: “Crucify Him, crucify Him!” (Jn 19:6).

Thus it would be clear that Christ was crucified not only by those who hung Him on the tree at the sixth hour, that is, the soldiers, but also by the Jews, who at the third hour cried that He should be crucified.

There is also another solution to this question. Here one should not understand the sixth hour of the day. John does not say, “It was about the sixth hour of the day,” or simply, “about the sixth hour.” Rather, he says: “Now it was the parasceve of the Passover, about the sixth hour.”

Parasceve in Latin is praeparatio, preparation. It is a Greek word, and the Jews readily use it in such cases, even those who speak Latin more than Greek. Thus it was the preparation of the Passover. Our Passover, as the Apostle says, is Christ slain (cf. 1 Cor 5:7).

If we count the preparation of this Passover from the ninth hour of the night, then the matter is clear. For then the chief priests seem to have passed sentence on the Lord, saying: “He is liable to death” (Mt 26:66), while He was still being heard in the high priest’s house.

It is fitting to suppose that the preparation of the true Passover, of which the Jewish Passover was a shadow, began from that moment. This was the preparation for the slaying of Christ, when the chief priests passed sentence that He must be slain.

From that hour of the night, which is supposed to have been the ninth hour, until the third hour of the day, when Christ was crucified according to the testimony of the Evangelist Mark, six hours passed: three by night and three by day.

In antiquity the hours of a full day were counted separately: twelve by day and twelve by night. Therefore the ninth hour of the night is the ninth hour from sunset, and the third hour of the day is the third hour from sunrise. Thus the Sanhedrin passed its sentence three hours before dawn, and the execution took place three hours after dawn.

Accordingly this preparation of the Passover, that is, the preparation for the slaying of Christ, which began at the ninth hour of the night, lasted about six hours. The fifth hour had been completed, and the sixth was beginning when Pilate ascended the judgment seat.

This very preparation, which began at the ninth hour of the night, lasted until the slaying of Christ took place, for which the preparation was being made. This occurred, according to Mark, at the third hour, but not the third hour of the preparation. It was the third hour of the day.

Likewise the sixth hour was not the sixth hour of the day, but of the preparation, if, of course, one counts six hours from the ninth hour of the night to the third hour of the day.

Of these two solutions to this difficult question, let each choose the one he wishes. But the one who reads the serious discussions On the Harmony of the Evangelists will decide with greater reason which is better to choose. If other solutions can be found, let the unshakable truth of the Gospel be defended still better against the slander of unbelieving and impious vanity.

Now, after this brief discussion, let us return to the narrative of the Evangelist John.

When Jesus was brought in, Pilate pointed to Him and said, "Behold your King!"

What did he wish to express by this cry? Although the Evangelist gives no answer, we must suppose that here too Pilate still tried to free Jesus from execution.

Pointing to Him as the King of the Jews, he spoke, as it were, in this way.

"You accuse this Man of appropriating royal power, of naming Himself King of the Jews.

Because of this you consider Him Caesar's enemy, intending to deprive Caesar of power over you.

You also call me no friend of Caesar because I do not agree with you. But look at Him yourselves. Can He really be dangerous to the mighty Caesar?

Only you consider Him dangerous. And if you are right in this, then He truly is your King!"

John's remark, he did not change his former position as defender of Jesus' innocence. Rather, he began still more zealously to seek a way to save Him from death. The evangelist's silence does not allow us to say with certainty what means the procurator used to achieve this goal. Nor can we say what he said to the chief priests. The procurator clearly could not affirm that the Accused did not acknowledge Himself guilty of assuming the name Son of God. Besides the fact that the Lord had not denied this title before him, the chief priests could suddenly produce witnesses that He had called Himself the Son of God. Nor could Pilate state that the accusation against Jesus Christ, for calling Himself the Son of God, did not constitute a crime worthy of death. It was not his business to judge the gravity of crimes concerning the Jewish religion. But with all the more right Pilate could declare to the chief priests that the Prisoner on trial, if guilty of anything, had already been punished for it too much. It would be unjust to punish the same thing so cruelly twice. He could again decline the final decision of the case, under the pretext of needing consultation with Herod, to whose district Jesus Christ belonged. As Caesar's representative, he could even openly take the Lord under the protection of Roman justice. He could treat Him as a man persecuted by the Sanhedrin for personal motives. However it may have been, Pilate's defense was so effective that the chief priests were forced to abandon the charge that the Lord had violated the ancestral laws. They judged it better to return again to a single criminal accusation: treason against Caesar. During Pilate's last interrogation, the Pharisaic and Sadducean false politicians had full opportunity to confer among themselves. They found a means to strengthen this accusation and make it irresistible to the procurator. "So you wish," cried the chief priests proudly, "to save Him from execution? Act as you please. But know this: if you release Him, you are not Caesar's friend. Everyone who calls himself a king opposes Caesar." The incited rabble shouted the same thing, reproaching Pilate for unfaithfulness to his sovereign. At these unexpected words, all Pilate's firmness suddenly vanished. "Caesar's friend" was a title in which the most noble men in Rome took pride, as did the governors of the greatest provinces. Herod the Great himself considered it a special honor to be called, and to be known among the people, as Augustus' friend. All the more must a Roman equestrian have valued this title. He was still very far from having the ruler of the world call him his friend. "If you release Him, you are Caesar's enemy." These words, spoken before all the people by the mouth of the whole Sanhedrin, were more terrible than thunder. They revealed that the chief priests were ready to transfer the case to Caesar's judgment. There they would accuse Pilate together with Jesus Christ, as a traitor careless of his lord's honor and interests. These threats had all the more force for Pilate because, as governor of Judea, he was not free from offenses. For these he could justly and successfully be accused before Caesar, especially by enemies who acted in Rome with both gold and intrigue. An accusation of treason before Caesar would not have been so terrifying if Augustus, or someone like him, had then sat on the Roman throne. One might have hoped that the Roman demigod would magnanimously examine the matter in its true form. He would not blame Jesus Christ for merely calling Himself king. But Rome then groaned beneath the iron scepter of Tiberius. He was a monster who trusted and pitied not even his own relatives. Feeding on suspicion and pretense, he tormented everyone at the slightest suspicion. The most shameless accusations always found response and reward with him. Besides the future danger from Caesar, Pilate had to fear the present danger from the people. The unrestrained crowd, incited by the Pharisees, grew more insolent and rebellious from hour to hour. Its savage cry already showed that it was ready for any violence. A handful of praetorians meant nothing in comparison with the countless multitude of Jews gathered from all over the world for the feast of Passover. Besides the danger of a popular uprising, Pilate would also have to answer for it before Caesar. What if Tiberius learned that the sole cause of the uprising was the Roman procurator's refusal to the Jewish people? They were demanding execution for the personal enemy of Tiberius, as they regarded this supposed claimant to the Jewish throne. Such thoughts could have troubled even someone other than Pilate. He was a man whose conscience was not finally stifled, who had some notion of justice and a certain inclination toward it. But from childhood, after the example of Roman grandees, he was accustomed to place his own advantage above morality. He looked not so much at conscience as at circumstances. He considered pleasing Caesar the highest law of his actions. He appeared just where he could do so without harm to himself, at least without serious harm. He was a man unacquainted with true religion, and with the better experiences and hopes of the human race. These experiences create the true heroes of virtue. Without these hopes, even the most exalted morality is unstable and unreliable. To defend an innocent man, one would have had to renounce Caesar's friendship publicly and despise danger to one's own life. For such a lofty sacrifice, even in paganism, the firm spirit of Regulus and the disinterestedness of Cincinnatus were needed. But the spirit of the Reguli and Cincinnatuses had long since left the Capitol, now filled with flatterers of Augustus and slaves of Tiberius. Let us add one more thought. Some ancient teachers of the Church supposed that Judas sold his Teacher in the hope that He would free Himself from His enemies' hands by supernatural powers. It is still more reasonable to suppose this about Pilate. Having resolved to condemn Jesus Christ to death, he probably hoped that the gods, if He was their son, would not delay in saving Him from execution. Such an execution was so shameful to their divine dignity. Considering all this, one easily understands how the cry of the people and chief priests overpowered the judge's weakened will. Having resolved to yield to necessity, Pilate ascended the judgment seat to conclude the trial. The Lord, who until then had remained in the praetorium, was brought out to the Lithostrotos to hear the sentence. The accusers also drew near. Instead of noise, silence fell. All awaited what Pilate would say and how this most extraordinary case would end. "Behold your King!" Pilate involuntarily exclaimed, looking at Him whom he now had to condemn to death, contrary to conscience and desire.

From all the Gospel accounts it follows that the Lord was crucified around noon. A little earlier or a little later is an insignificant difference and has no bearing on the reliability of the Gospel accounts. The day, like the night, was generally divided into four parts of three hours each. Therefore almost everywhere in the New Testament only the first, third, sixth, and ninth hours are mentioned (cf. Mt 20:3-4). For the same reason, when these hours are indicated, the qualification “about” so often appears.

“He did not say affirmatively: the hour was the sixth, but as if without precision and without certainty: it was about the sixth hour. Therefore it should matter very little to us that the Evangelists seem not to agree perfectly with one another, even if we allow such a difference. For see whether they have not all said that Jesus was crucified. If one says of the hour that it was the third, and another that it was about the sixth, does this harm the truth in any way? Yet it has been sufficiently shown that there is not even a disagreement” (Theophylact).

“Behold your King.” Before the Sanhedrin’s threat to accuse Pilate before Caesar of treason, Pilate’s resolve to release the Lord vanished. Yet before pronouncing the final sentence against Him, against his conscience, he once more hurled a harsh reproach at the whole Sanhedrin. He did this in powerless irritation with the words: “Behold your King.”

It seems, however, that this was not only a barb against the Sanhedrin, nor merely simple pity for the mocked Lord. A more important meaning seems to lie in these words. Did the thought not dawn on the Roman politician that, if the Jews were still capable of forming a political nation, as a political unity in the world, with their own high calling and destiny, and with their own special religious task or mission, no one was so capable of fulfilling this higher task as the accused now before him?

Was He not truly the spiritual King of Israel, as He Himself had called Himself (Jn 18:36-37)? Does not the matter of the inscription on Christ’s cross also confirm this (Jn 19:19-22)? Of course, Pilate could not fully grasp this thought in all its spiritual meaning. Yet did it not vaguely present itself to him? And did he not express it in the brief words: “Behold your King”?

Did the accusers themselves not understand this meaning in his speech? Was this why their fury burst out so wildly in answer to these words: Death, death to Him! Crucify Him? This is a cry from a wound struck in the most sensitive place. But before finally yielding, Pilate once more turns the knife in that wound with the words: “Shall I crucify your King?”

This forced from the representatives of the people an even more desperate cry. With their own mouths they expressed the destruction of their ancient theocracy and their full descent into the whirlpool of the falsehood of the pagan world: “We have no king but Caesar” (cf. Theophylact).

With this everything was said. The sentence was pronounced over the whole later history of the Jewish people. At last Pilate delivered Him to them to be crucified. Some details of this delivery are related by the Evangelist Matthew (Mt 27:24-25), and with them John’s account should be supplemented here.