I was wondering about this little snippit in toadys’ (Palm Sunday) gospel reading.
Why did the writer of Luke see fit to mention this?
Of course, we probably have no record of Pilate’s relations with Herod-Luke says that they had been enemies, but after Herod’s interrogation of Jesus(and Herod sending Jesus back to Pilate) they became good friends.
Anybody know more?
I can’t answer the question, but I wondered exactly the same thing yesterday morning during the Gospel reading.
The verse in question is Luke 23:12, part of the passion of Christ that gets half-read half-acted out on Palm Sunday every three years.
[QUOTE=Bible, King James Version]
[8] And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him. [9] Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing. [10] And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him. [11] And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate. [12] And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves.
[/QUOTE]
As far as what it means, I have gone a-googling, but nothing I found seems all that definitive, such as,
Luke is making it clear, for expediency reasons, that Jesus’s crucifixion is not the Romans’ fault,
Bad people join together in order to do bad things, and
Jesus miraculously makes them friends since he is nice to his enemies.
Luke had to explain the series of Pilate & Herod buddy comedies they made together shortly thereafter.
This is so weird. I don’t remember ever hearing this before hearing it in today’s gospel reading. And God knows I’ve been to Mass damn nearly every Palm Sunday! 
Me, four.
What this means is that every third year you have not been paying attention to the Passion Gospel until this year. 
Same here. And, along with those posting above, I swear I’ve never heard this before.
I read it as Pilate taking Jesus back as being a favor to Herod, thus making them friends. That fits in with the general Gospel story of Pilate being reluctant to execute Jesus.
I thought Herod died soon after (or even before) Yeshua of Nazareth did, so if he and Pilate knew each other Pilate would have to be around 50 during the final events of Yeshua’s life.
I always took it as an explanation for something the some sort of political alliance that must have happened between them: the point where Herod and Pilate actually started working together.
I always sort of felt bad for Pilate. He really tried to get Christ off the hook, doing everything he could to save him, until it became sort of dangerous to keep denying the will of the people.
Did anyone else hear the Jesus Christ superstar song “so you are the Christ, you’re the great Jesus Christ…” during the Passion?
StG
This must be Herod Antipas, right? Not Herod the Great, who was the one supposedly responsible for the massacre of the innocents at the time of Jesus’ birth.
Funny thing is, other sources suggest the depiction of Herod and company was, if anything, far too kind. That whole family was a nasty coterie of bastards.
I don’t know the specifics but this fits perfectly in to spiritual warfare and how human destiny is controlled, for those not under the protection of Jesus, by daemons/demons, and their united front to try to kill Jesus so they can continue to reign over humanity, and how the people who praised Jesus as He rode into Jerusalem would all turn against Him and order Him crucified & how Jesus gave no reply as He knew these people are being controlled and if He said anything the wouldn’t listen anyway.
Some details in the gospels are not there specifically for a reason other than it is part of the story/what the witnesses remembered about it. If you are recounting an event, you tell what you know/remember about the event, not always because each detail means something significant.
Also, if I recall my Bible lessons correctly, Luke was a Dr. and quite interested in details like that. Also that he was a missionary to the Gentiles, so the details of meetings between gov’t leaders may have meant something else to them. Or it could just be placing the death of Jesus in context with political events.
23:6-12 Herod had heard many things of Jesus in Galilee, and out of curiosity longed to see him. The poorest beggar that asked a miracle for the relief of his necessity, was never denied; but this proud prince, who asked for a miracle only to gratify his curiosity, is refused. He might have seen Christ and his wondrous works in Galilee, and would not, therefore it is justly said, Now he would see them, and shall not. Herod sent Christ again to Pilate: the friendships of wicked men are often formed by union in wickedness. They agree in little, except in enmity to God, and contempt of Christ.
njtt - Yes, Herod Antipas.
St. Germain - Most New Testament scholars think that the story was carefully slanted that way. The Gospel writers wanted to let the Romans off the hook. However, the fact is that crucifixion is a Roman punishment, administered by the Roman government as the penalty for a political crime (treason). Jesus was executed as a threat to the Roman state, and the Romans had zero interest in his religious beliefs or activities, except as they led to a political threat.
The Gospels present these facts in a setting that shifts the blame to the Jews and focuses on the religious context. This reflects the situation at the time of their writing - after the destruction of the Temple, the irrevocable split between Judaism and Christianity, and the movement of the nascent faith into the Roman world.
Yeah, the whole “The Romans are incredible rat bastards who should be destroyed” message tends to not go over well when the audience is THE ROMANS.