✍️ The Scourging at the Pillar
Then Pilate took Jesus and had him scourged.
John 19:1
For most people today, doctrine is just an academic enterprise. We rarely see our theology as having any real moral implications. Yet, we would all affirm that heresy leads to sin. After all, doctrine’s primary purpose is to protect us from the lies of the world, the flesh, and the Devil. We know that if we fall into heresy, we are likely to fall into sin. But then the question becomes, “So what? After all, Jesus already died on the Cross for my sins, so guess I’m good. ‘Lord, forgive me. Have a great day.’” While I know many protestants who take sin seriously, I have seen the fruits of lacking a moral theology within their institution lead to incoherent and immoral beliefs.
As a purely cultural point, it’s interesting to see that many Protestants’ concern with the Sacrament of Confession, depending on who you talk to, is that it will water down our disdain for sin and become mechanistic. But without the Rosary and regular reflection on the Sorrowful Mysteries, it doesn’t matter whether you’re Catholic or Protestant. Without regular reflection on the suffering of Christ, eventually, your conscience will deaden, become malformed, and lead you astray. Reflecting on the scourging of Jesus shows us the ugliness of sin, and the reality that Christ bore it, not merely in a conceptual way, but in his very body. In short, it was our sins that did this to him. As the prophet Isaiah says,
But he was pierced for our sins,
crushed for our iniquity.
He bore the punishment that makes us whole,
by his wounds we were healed.— Is. 53:5
While I was investigating Catholicism, I discovered an excellent commentary set on the Bible called, The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture. In the commentary on Mark, we discover a very interesting fact about the events preceding Christ’s scourging. Let’s take a look at the passage first:
Pilate said to them, “Why? What evil has he done?” They only shouted the louder, “Crucify him.” 15 [f]So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released Barabbas to them and, after he had Jesus scourged, handed him over to be crucified.
Mark 15:14-15
When we read this passage, we often overlook the significance of Barabbas. Often we focus on the crowd’s chant, “Crucify him!” or the fact that Pilate is asking “What evil has he done?” So we ask, why do the Gospel writers tell us the name of the prisoner for which Jesus is traded?
This is an important Biblical study technique: you should always ask why the author is giving you a detail, especially the detail of the name of a person. Consider this: many of Jesus’ encounters in the NT are “ Jesus healed the woman” or “Jesus said to the man, ‘Take up your mat and walk.’” So why are the Gospel writers giving us the name of Barabbas? Mary Healy, the author of the commentary on Mark, gives us the answer.
“The name of the released prisoner is a clue to the symbolic significance of the scene. Barabbas means ‘Son of the Father’ in Aramaic, and Mark has just shown Jesus addressing God as Abba, Father (14:36). Jesus, the true Son of the Father, is innocent but condemned to death, while a man guilty of rebellion — the antithesis of true sonship…goes free in his place.” 1
The true Son of the Father is exchanged for a false one; The Truth has been exchanged for a lie; the Good has been exchanged for an evil. Next, the Truth is violently and brutally whipped.
Many have heard the “39 lashes” reference as recounted by St. Paul, but according to Catholic commentators, it’s likely that Christ received many more. We know this because he died the same day he was scourged. Oftentimes, the victims of crucifixion would be on the cross for days. Healy gives more details,
“…The victim was stripped naked, bound to a post or pillar, and lashed until the flesh hung in shreds…There was no limit to the number of strokes (unlike Jewish law, which set a limit to thirty-nine; see 2 Cor. 11:24). Josephus records instances of flagellation until the prisoners’ entrails or bones were visible. It was not unusual for the victim to collapse and die from the scourging alone.” 2
Yes, he truly bore our transgressions in his body. When we look upon the marred body of Christ, we must imagine what sin must do to our souls.
When we compare this passage to passages found in the Book of Wisdom, which you will not find in the Protestant Bible, we find an incredible prophetic passage. This is especially true in light of the Son of God being exchanged for a man whose name means “Son of the Father”.
He professes to have knowledge of God
and styles himself a child of the Lord.
14 To us he is the censure of our thoughts;
merely to see him is a hardship for us,
15 Because his life is not like that of others,
and different are his ways.
16 He judges us debased;
he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure.
He calls blest the destiny of the righteous
and boasts that God is his Father.— Wis. 2:13-16
As far as I know, this is the most explicit reference in the Old Testament that serves as a cross-reference to Christ’s claims of divine sonship, that is, that God is his Father. But the exchange of the King for a prisoner shows us two things: first, coincidences do appear to be a vehicle through which God writes reality. The odds that the prisoner would have a name that means “Son of the Father” should give us all pause, especially considering the historicity of the Gospels. God is showing us that even the names of individual people are part of his revelation. Though this shouldn’t be surprising considering he would “take the time” to number our hairs. But this coincidence reveals the second point, that the exchange of the Truth for a lie brings condemnation to future generations.
And the whole people said in reply, “His blood be upon us and upon our children.” 26 Then he released Barabbas to them, but after he had Jesus scourged, he handed him over to be crucified.
Matthew: 27:25-26
After they make their deal with Pilate, they invite condemnation on themselves and their children. This is the cost of living in the lies of the world. Ironically, those particular denominations that have strayed from the moral teaching of the Catholic Church have adopted a theology whose underlying philosophy leads to the harm of countless children. In short, today’s Pro-Life protestants are extremely valuable in the fight for the unborn, but the previous generations, due to a lack of robust theology and authority structures, ultimately handed them a culture of death. Even today, I asked Pro-Life Protestants on X, if they thought IVF was a sin, and they were all divided on the question. In an excellent video by Catholic Apologist Trent Horn, he outlines the history of support for abortion by major protestant leaders and denominations in the 1930s-1970s.3 I highly recommend you check it out.
To show that this is not merely Catholic criticism, back in December of 2005, the President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS), Dr. Albert Mohler wrote this:
Most evangelical Protestants greeted the advent of modern birth control technologies with applause and relief. Lacking any substantial theology of marriage, sex, or the family, evangelicals welcomed the development of "The Pill" much as the world celebrated the discovery of penicillin--as one more milestone in the inevitable march of human progress, and the conquest of nature. 4
He goes on to say, “For many evangelical Christians, birth control has been an issue of concern only for Catholics. When Pope Paul VI released his famous encyclical outlawing artificial birth control, Humane Vitae, most evangelicals responded with disregard — perhaps thankful that evangelicals had no pope who could hand down a similar edict.”5
He continues in the article to talk about the changes in morality on the issue. But as Trent shows, joining the Pro-Life movement this late in the game has not just come at the cost of failing a theological exam. It led to the Pro-Choice movement gaining significant momentum in their pursuit of the slaughter of children out of convenience.
I bring up Dr. Mohler’s position not to dig up some old article, but to demonstrate that even someone as prominent as the head of the largest SBC seminary in the country acknowledges that it was a lack of robust theological understanding that caused the evangelicals to slip on the issues of contraception and abortion. Fortunately, earlier this year, the SBC voted to condemn the use of IVF, a practice that radically affects both the body and the conscience of those who participate in it.
To be sure, Catholics also invite condemnation. As any Protestant will tell you, just take a look at the Pew Research results on Catholics’ acceptance/approval of the Church’s teaching on contraception and abortion. It’s clear that we too commit the same sin of exchanging Christ’s teaching for a barbaric, or if you will, a “Barabbian” lie.
At this point you may wonder, “What does this all have to do with the scourging of Christ?” It is this: when we forget the ugliness of sin, we forget the dangers believing lies entails. History has shown that even when the Church’s leaders have fallen prey to the ways of the World, the teaching remains intact. But as we saw yesterday, the faithful must remain steadfast and accept whatever suffering comes our way. It is up to us, the faithful, to cling to the pillar that is Christ. As the world takes up the whip, we cling to Christ, the cornerstone of our faith, and if the Lord wills, let the world rip us to shreds.
The Scourging at the Pillar reminds us of the ugliness of sin. This sin comes through our exchanging the Truth for a lie, the consequences of which are seen in the world, in us, and in the Church. Yet, there is hope. The blood that the crowd cries to be upon their children, is the same blood that brings those children salvation.
Generational sin is a real thing, but so is generational mercy. All it takes is one generation to accept the truth of Christ and his teachings. Then, God in his mercy, will show his grace unto the “thousandth generation of those who love [him] and keep [his] commandments.” (Ex. 20:5-6)
As a new Catholic praying the Rosary during the week, we look forward to Mass where we are offered the cup of Christ’s blood, the source of our salvation. As a former Protestant, one might feel inclined to say, “Lord, if it be your will, let this cup pass from me.” I would encourage any protestant to pray this prayer, but we know that if this cup is indeed what Christ said it was, then just as God did not permit the cup to pass by his son, so too God will not let the cup of salvation pass you. He loves you too much.
— Keep praying.
DR.
Healy, M. (2008). The Gospel of Mark (Ser. The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture). Baker Academic. 310. emphasis original.
Ibid. 311.
Ibid.