Here’s the thing about Caiaphas: Even the articles written about him have this tendency to focus on his father-in-law instead. For all his sense of self, it is striking how little he winds up appearing next to that other man. I had noted in an earlier study that it was not surprising, really, that the guards went to Annas first. Caiaphas may have given them their orders, but Annas was the one who would really determine how things went down. If there was to be trouble over this midnight arrest, their safety would lie with the elder man far more than with Caiaphas.

This suggests that they had a sense of the man as he truly was. Of course it is equally probable that our sense of the guards’ thinking is informed by our sense of Caiaphas. What seems particularly clear is that this was a thoroughly unscrupulous man. In an era when the office of high priest was more a political prize than a recognition of righteousness, Caiaphas proved himself particularly adept at remaining in office. That required a certain currying of favor with Roman authorities. It also required a certain amount of maneuvering amongst the Sanhedrin, and amongst the Pharisees, as well. All these power blocs needed to be managed if one was to retain that seat. And we are told he retained his seat far longer than most. Depending which articles you follow, he remained in office for something between eleven and nineteen years.

That being said, I would have to concur with the judgment of earlier authors, who perceive that the legitimacy of the office terminated with this trial of Jesus. Jesus having died as the atonement for His people, and having risen again to be received into the presence of the Father, has taken His place as the true high priest of God, restoring the office to its proper condition of lifelong service. Being as His life is unending, so, then, is his term in office. Caiaphas continued to fill the earthly position for a few more years after Jesus ascended, but eventually it came to be the case that his own position was so dependent upon Pilate’s, that when Pilate was removed from office, his own term was ended soon after.

All of this is but background info, though. If there is one thing we must bear in the forefront of our thinking as we look at the man, it is that unscrupulous, politically savvy determination to hold onto his position. Whether this drive was sharpened by his sense of being overshadowed by Annas, or whether it was innate to the man anyway, the drive remains. It is that drive which defines the man, and it is that drive which leads rather inevitably to the place he has retained in history.

Consider, for example, just what it was that drove the Sanhedrin to take action against Jesus. Granted, they had been on His case almost from the outset. But, for the first couple of years they could write Him off as just another rabble rouser from the country. What changed things, as McClintock and Strong point out, was the raising of Lazarus. That had transpired, as it were, on their doorstep. And, it was well testified. The family of Mary and Martha had many friends in the city, and they had been there to commiserate at the loss of brother Lazarus. They had seen the grave. They had seen, thereafter, Lazarus walking in his grave-clothes, three days gone. And, they knew full well that it was this same Jesus who had called that dead man to life. How do you counter that? How do you deal with it?

Jesus was growing in popularity. Just look at the reception He had received on that well staged ride into the city last week! What, with the overflow crowds in the city for Passover, and Pilate in residence, knowing just how riot-prone the city would be on such an occasion, the last thing these men needed was a popular uprising. If He was being proclaimed the Messiah, and their understanding of Messiah as conquering king was accurate, there was bound to be a revolt. If we think, for a bit, upon Jesus’ own concerns for those who would seek to push Him into taking up the kingly office, taking up the battle against Roman oppression, we must surely recognize that the fears expressed by the Sanhedrin were hardly unrealistic.

Even His own disciples suffered under similar misconceptions; convinced to the end that He was coming to set up His throne, and they would be His trusted advisors, men of power themselves when once He established His kingdom. Of one thing they were absolutely certain, He assuredly had the power. Jesus would comment about the legions of angels that He could call to Himself at any moment, were that to His purpose. These men already accepted the point. Indeed, they expected Him to make that call at any moment. This was part of the confusion of the night. Why hadn’t He acted? Peter, standing there sword in hand, having struck out for His Lord, must have been utterly beside himself. Where’s the backup? What are You doing, healing this guy, Jesus? He’s the enemy! Don’t You get it, Lord? Well, don’t you get it, Peter? If battle were the point, you would not even need your sword, for the battle belongs to the Lord. But, battle is not the point, not with these earthly powers.

But, I digress. The Sanhedrin, and Caiaphas in particular, understood this in the same light as everybody else, and they also understood how the public was reacting. They saw freedom. They saw the yoke of the foreign oppressor being throne off. If Jesus was not stopped, there would indeed be rioting, and it would indeed go poorly for the Jews, for Rome’s representatives would be expecting it. Nor would they be likely to satisfy themselves with just quelling the immediate riot. There would be payback. Heads would roll, and the officers of the temple would likely be right at the forefront of that list.

Considering what is said of Caiaphas, that he lost his office pretty much in conjunction with Pilate, and largely because he was so associated with Pilate, those concerns could hardly be considered unfounded. So, for the council, and for Caiaphas in particular, the raising of Lazarus represented a crisis point. The crisis point is not, however, that issue which we hear set out in their council session. Oh, it was all well and good to point out the danger to Israel. If people rise up behind this Messiah, it’s going to be a bloodbath. Except for one little thing: If this really was Messiah, (and given the sort of thing that had brought them to crisis point, really what cause had they to doubt it?) was He likely to allow that? Was He, God’s Own representative, really likely to lose such a battle? Would they not have done better to back Him themselves?

This is the thing: If Caiaphas and the others had truly been concerned for Israel, then surely they ought to have backed Jesus to the hilt. But, their energy is used in the exact opposite direction. They are seeking not His glorious Victory for Israel, but rather His destruction lest poor little Israel and her weak God be shown up by the Romans. If more personal motivations are left out of the picture, this is what must be concluded. The truth is, though, that personal motivations are the picture. The expressions of concern over Israel at large are but window dressing. The real danger to these men is the danger to their own prestigious positions. If Jesus wins, their likelihood of remaining in office are slim. If there is rioting and He should lose, the likelihood of holding on to office are no better. And, it is that which drives them into action.

At that very point, it would be spiritual blindness not to stop and consider: am I so different? It came down to this simple point: Jesus threatened their employment, as they saw things. Money, prestige, power, reputation: Choose the label that suits, it amounts to the same thing. This really was a crisis point for them. It was God or world, and they must choose only one and choose immediately. They did. Seems to me, though, that each day provides us with this choice. And there is great pressure within the culture to choose the world. That should hardly come as a shock. The shock, if there really is one, is that it has taken us so long, in the west, to recognize that this is the situation. Oh! But, we were established as a city on a hill, a beacon of godliness amidst the darkness. Perhaps. But, surely it must be recognized that a beacon, by its very nature, is ever a minority position. It is critical, yes. It is to be desired, certainly. But, it is a minority position, an outpost in hostile territory. Somehow, we forgot that. Somehow, we became convinced that here in America, it was different. The world was over there in Europe. This was the kingdom. But, the blinders are coming off.

Yet, even this, I see, is attempting to slide past personal application. (Interesting that, having left that note for the morning, the take away from yesterday’s Sunday School class was to do with what God is asking me to leave behind immediately.) Yes, the question that needs considering is just that: What if God is requiring something of me that threatens the way of life I’ve become accustomed to? What if He called me to depart the world of engineering for some higher purpose? What if He simply directed me to become so overtly evangelistic that continued employment in such an industry became problematic? Would I accept the call? Would I put Him on hold? It occurs to me to add to that list, what if He’s long since made that request repeatedly and I’ve been refusing to hear it?

I think upon that sort of spiritual pressure I’ve been feeling off and on about this issue of teaching. Yet, to pursue it with full engagement would require disengaging from much else. To truly pursue it would, I believe, require a full setting aside of current employment. And then what? The mortgage will not cease. Tuition bills will not suddenly evaporate. But, this just leads me to the very point: Who do I trust in. Is it in God I trust, or in myself? In fairness, I’ve had a pretty profound reminder as to which of us is the one to be trusted this last week, and reminder of His faithfulness, and a reminder that His faithfulness becomes, in many ways a test of my own.

It is easy, in this moment of provision, to be thankful to God, to finally look across the last few years and acknowledge that He has done well by us. But, in the midst of those years? When my beloved has been struggling with chronic illness, when things have been lean, and we’ve had to really determine the necessity of repairing this or replacing that? Honestly, in terms financial, we could stand to remain in that mode. It is prudent. But, it is harder to be thankful when everything seems struggle and sacrifice. A more fair assessment might force me to recognize that I barely know what struggle and sacrifice are. What if that call comes? What if I am supposed to turn my talents in this new direction, commit to it more fully? Why should it matter to me that I can see absolutely no future to it, as concerns employment and provision? It has never been the job that provides, but God. You’d think I could remember that.

But, this I do recognize about myself. I am rather keen on self-preservation. I have not yet arrived at that point where I’m ready to lose this life; at least not if I’ve been given a moment to consider. This is not something I say proudly, but rather with growing concern. He who seeks to preserve his life shall lose it. That message is clear. Yet, I find in myself a certain affinity with that rich young ruler. I know better than to set myself forth as having done sufficient good to earn my ticket to heaven. But, I also know better than to think that, were I to hear the command to set aside all that I have, sell it and give away the proceeds to those in need, so that I could follow Him more fully, I would have a real struggle coming to the place of obedience. Apart from the very Spirit of God willing and working in me, I doubt very much that I should comply. Even with His presence abiding, I suspect I should be much like Moses at the bush. Surely, You have the wrong man, Sir. I am hardly suited to the task You set. I’m honored, of course, but I expect You should probably look elsewhere for Your candidate. I’ll just stick with this current gig, if it’s all the same to You.

Now, I do believe that I am free of at least most of that political conniving that so describes Caiaphas. And, if that is not the case, Lord, do let me know, and do prompt the needed change! But, I don’t sense that duplicity, that willingness to sacrifice any other player to preserve my own position. Honestly, I think back on one occasion of relatively recent vintage wherein duty to my employer required of me an earnest assessment of another one in our employ, one of whom I could not really speak well, as concerned ability. Personable, certainly. Willing to help. Yet, seemingly incapable of actually doing so. It was a struggle, honestly. I did not wish to give that sort of assessment. I frankly do not enjoy that sensation of holding somebody’s fate in my hands, even to that little degree. But, an honest assessment of what conscience required left me required to do the uncomfortable. Unpleasant though it is, it does not leave me debating whether I did what was right. It merely reminded me that doing what is right is not always, not even often, easy, nor is it necessarily going to be that thing which feels right, appears right.

I pray that in harder matters, I shall be able to sense my God’s direction and more importantly, that I shall be willing to follow His direction. I pray that, by His power and His will, I shall find myself with sufficient spiritual backbone to stand, as Paul says, and stand some more.

Let me proceed, for I do not really care to spend too much time with Caiaphas. The ISBE points out what is, I believe, common knowledge to the Christian community, although the precise points backing the claim probably are not. “His conduct at this preliminary trial of Jesus, its time and its procedure, were almost entirely illegal from the standpoint of then existing Jewish law.” There’s our man! There’s our leader of the spiritual community! Here is that one set out by God Himself to be the paragon of righteousness, and his concern for that righteousness is nonexistent, is shown to be utterly nonexistent by this very mock trial he has presided over.

Now, here is the interesting thing, as I see it. John, who provides the most detail about this man Caiaphas, manages not to remain focused on the evil purposes of the devil in this man. Rather, he sees the wonder of God, Who is able to turn even the devil’s machinations to good purpose. This is to be found in John’s coverage of that earlier council meeting, when Caiaphas, all unwitting, prophesied (Jn 11:49-52). And, it is the fact that John makes it plain that he prophesied, as it were, in spite of himself, that makes the point. Caiaphas, as he spoke, had nothing in mind but his own purpose. “You fail to consider that is expedient.” That is the sum of this man. He is all about what is expedient, and that expediency is focused first and foremost on himself. If it happens to benefit others, that’s fine, but it’s absolutely beside the point. Better one man should die for the people, he says. And, John points out that this was not a thought of his own devising. “Rather, as high priest, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation.” And, John points out that it didn’t stop there, this death Jesus died. No, it was for all the children of God!

See that? Yes, John covers the duplicitous nature of Caiaphas, reveals him for what he really is. But, it’s ancillary to him. What’s far more interesting and important is what is revealed of God in the midst of this man’s machinations. Oh, Caiaphas thought himself powerful, or perhaps felt a greater need to posture because he recognized the real power was in his father-in-law’s hands. And, the devil certainly showed himself powerful in the way he maneuvered Caiaphas, Annas, Judas, Pilate and even the massed humanity of Jerusalem to contribute to his purpose of destroying the Son of God. But, God, John points out rather relentlessly, was shown more powerful yet! For, it is in Him (and only in Him) to turn even these most vile purposes, these most reprehensible players, to His good purpose.

We find Peter with a similar perspective when he comes to preach his first sermon. You all conspired to kill the very son of God! But, God! God had a purpose in all of this, and His purpose was your very salvation. He Who was condemned to death by you remains your Salvation. He is able to forgive even that, that you might live.

There is, of course, another point we must draw from this remarkable statement Caiaphas has made. It is no particular commendation of the man that he be permitted to prophesy. It is no basis for pride. It speaks absolutely nothing of the man. It speaks of God. This is a part of what Paul was driving home to the Corinthian church. You have these gifts? So what! The gifts are no reflection on you. They are a reflection of God. They are gifts, after all! They are emblematic of His generosity. They are not medals bestowed upon the worthy. They are presents given in spite of the absence of worth. You are not star soldiers in His army. You are little children at His feet. Don’t get all pumped up about it.

The corollary is that we ought not take these more remarkable displays as some sort of evidence as to the godliness of that one in whom they are displayed. I suppose this ought apply all the more if the display is in us, personally. If I prophesy, it is nothing. It is no mark of my having arrived. It is no proof of God’s being pleased with me. If I prophesy in truth, it is because God is determined to get His message out, even if it means using the likes of me!

I would note, as well, the reason John attaches to this display. Because he was high priest that year, God decided to prophesy through him. The man may have been reprehensible, and the office may have been utterly perverted from its intended form. But, it remained the office that God Himself had instituted. However lousy a representative he turned out to be, he remained God’s representative. He may have no thought for God’s honor, but God would honor that office anyway. He would be given to speak with a wisdom beyond his own, speaking as the Holy Spirit chose to spoke, not as he himself was so brilliant as to reason out. I dare say, that in spite of the goading barbs of Jesus, in spite of his excessive concern for self-preservation, he would not have hazarded this move without such outside intervention, nor would the council have endorsed it except for that same influence.

Let me just reiterate that aspect of John’s message. Yes, the devil is active on the scene. But, he is not in control of the scene. The Spirit of God is in control. He is orchestrating events, ensuring that every player plays his part, setting His guarantee on the timing of each event, that His good purpose is served. From the very stating of the idea that led to the culmination of His purpose on the lips of this man, it has been His command by which men have acted. Even Judas, in this limited sense, must be seen as moving at God’s command. The guilt is no less, but the final cause, or the ultimate cause, of the whole thing is God’s purpose and that alone.

I think that is a good place to stop. Caiaphas effectively terminated his time in office at this travesty of justice, for in and through this process did Jesus ascend to His own fulfillment of the office of high priest, entering into a service that shall never end. He spoke Truth beyond his capacity, and it is highly doubtful that he ever managed to grasp the truth in what he had spoken. Surely, he is to be pitied rather than despised. Surely, we are far to able to follow in his footsteps except we remain vigilant as to our own estate, and choose to draw the lesson of his life as guard against that potential within us.