PILIGRIM: Bishop of Passau; d. May 20, 991. He was a kinsman of Friedrich, archbishop of Salzburg; was brought up at the Benedictine monastery of Niederaltaich; became a canon of the diocese; and was bishop of Passau, 971-991. For Supporting Otto II. against Duke Henry he was rewarded with the monastery of St. Mary, a part of the revenue of Passau, and a confirmation of his title. The emperor approved his control of the monastery of Krems in 975, of St. Florian and St. Polten in 976, and later of Otting and Mattsee. The bishopric had no real claim on any one of these, but Piligrim knew how to establish one on forged documents. His inordinate ambition included the elevation of Passau into an archbishopric. This effort was advanced by means of the reoccupation of Ostmark and the beginning of the mission to Hungary, and Piligrim forwarded the most embellished reports to Pope Benedict VI. in 973 or 974, to the effect that about 5,000 persons had been baptized; countless Christian captives of war had openly confessed; that the heathen offered no hindrances; and that he was convinced that the erection of several bishoprics in Hungary was necessary. in order to conserve and extend what had been accomplished. He advanced the fable to Benedict that at one time Loreh, which he represented to be the original seat of the bishopric of Passau, was the metropolitan seat for seven bishoprics in Pannonia and Moesia; and had a number of sources forged representing the relations of earlier popes with the archbishopric of Lorch. He asked, therefore, for the pallium and the authorization to erect the bishoprics in Hungary. His dependence upon fraud may have been due to the slight importance attached by the emperor and the pope to this enterprise. Failing in this effort, he succeeded in 977 in having a statement included in a document of Otto II., which declared Loreh to have been an ancient seat of primacy. But evidently Archbishop Friedrich induced the pope to confirm his right over Bavaria and Pannonia, and Piligrim had to abandon his plans. But Piligrim's care for his district was great, and churches were organized and synods were held. He was a man distinctly ahead of his times in his freedom from superstition, and made a marked impression upon his age.

(A. HAUCK.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. Dümmler, Piligrim von Passau und das Erbistum Lorch, Leipsic, 1854; S. Riezler, Geschichte Baierns, i. 391 sqq., Gotha, 1878; K. Schrödl, Passavia sacra, i. 77 sqq., Passau, 1879; Hauck, KD, iii. 168 sqq.

PILLAR OF FIRE AND CLOUD: The traditional supernatural guide and guard of the Hebrews during the desert wanderings. Beginning at Etham (Ex. xiii. 20 sqq.) the Hebrews were accompanied by a pillar of cloud by day and fire by night which went before them to show the way. When the Egyptians pursued, the pillar (Ex. xiv. 19 sqq.) passed behind the people serving as an obstructing bank of cloud toward the enemy and as light toward themselves. According to the adduced passages and other statements of the Bible, it was the Lord himself that went before Israel; theology regards it as " his angel," i.e., the agent of his manifestation (Ex. xxiii. 20 sqq,)_ This cloud also covered the tabernacle after its erection (Num, ix. 15 sqq.), and filled it (Ex. xl. 34 sqq.) as the habitation of God. On important occasions it descended upon the tabernacle, stood before it (Num. xii. 5) while the people worshiped, and regularly when Moses was to receive revelations (Num. xxxiii. 8-11). The glory of the Lord concealed in the cloud appeared at supreme moments to all the people (Ex. xvi. 10; Num. xiv. 10, xvi. 19, xvii. 7). The ascent of the cloud from the tabernacle meant the breaking of the camp; its resting upon a place the sign of pitching camp (Ex. xl. 36 sqq.; Num. ix. 17-23). There is no doubt that there were not two but one and the same pillar which appeared by night as fire, by day as cloud. It is also clearly stated that this cloud was the covering of God when he descended upon Sinai (Ex. xxiv. 15 sqq.).

As to its physical nature, this mysterious cloud, like wonders in general, attaches itself to natural conditions and phenomena. However, two efforts to materialize that theophany must be rejected. One derives the pillar of cloud from the caravan-fire which was borne before the march. Reference is made to Alexander's march (E. Cyrtius, Griechische Geschichte, V., ii. 7, Berlin, 1868-74; Eng. translation, History of Greece, London, 1868-73), which shows how great armies made use of fire for guidance, just as caravans do to-day. But this is contradicted by the materials of the narrative noted above, and the divinity of the cloud demands a supernatural phenomenon. Such a cloud lay pregnant with fire on Sinai where God most positively offered his majesty to the gaze of the people. For the same reason, the view of Ewald (followed by Riehm and Dillman) must also be rejected, who supposed that the altar-fire was the kernel of the tradition.

The cloud in the mean time became a subject for theological speculation. The author of the Wisdom of Solomon saw in it the divine wisdom (x. 17; cf. xviii. 3, xix. 7); Philo, the divine Logos (Opera, ed. T. Mangey, 501, London, 1742).

C. VON ORELLI.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The subject is best discussed in the commentaries on the passages (see under HEXATEUCH ); also in the works on the O. T. cited under BIBLICAL THEOLOGY,

71

and in those on the history of Israel (see under AHAB; and ISRAEL, HISTORY OF). Consult further the articles in the Bible dictionaries, e.g., EB, iii. 3775-78; JE, x. 39.