Works

VERS. III.

§. Of the present Authority of the Council, and of its place.

THOSE ominous prodigies are very memorable, which are related by the Talmudists to have happened forty years before the destruction of the Temple.

A tradition. Forty years before the Temple was destroyed, The Western candle (that is, the middlemost, •• the holy candlestick) was put out. And the crimson Tongue (that was fastened to the ho • ns of the scape Goat, or the doors of the Temple) kept its redness. And the lot of the Lord (for the Goat that was to be offered up on the day of Expiation) came out on the left hand. And the gates of the Temple, which were shut over night, were found open in the morning. Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccat said therefore, O Temple, wherefore dost thou trouble us? We know thy fate, namely that thou art to be destroyed: For it is said, Open, O Lebanon, thy gates, that the flame may consume thy Cedars. A Tradition. Forty years before the Temple was destroyed, Judgment in capital causes was taken away from Israel. Forty years before the Temple was destroyed, the Council removed, and sat in the sheds.

With these two last Traditions lies our present business. What the Jews said, Joh. XVIII. 31. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , It is not lawful for us to put any man to death, signifies the same thing with the Tradition before us, Judgments in capital causes are taken away from Israel. When were they first taken away? Forty years before the destruction of the Temple, say the Talmudsits: No doubt, before the death of Christ; the words of the Jews imply so much. But how were they taken away? It is generally received by all, that the Romans did so far divest the Council of its authority, that it was not allowed by them to punish any with death; and this is gathered from those words of the Jews, It is not lawful for us to put any one to death.

But if this indeed be true, 1. What do then those words of our Savior mean, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , They will deliver you up to the Councils? 2. How did they put Stephen to death? 3. Why was Paul so much afraid to commit himself to the Council, that he chose rather to appeal to Caesar?

The Talmudists excellently well clear the matter. What signifieth that Tradition, say they, of the removal of the Council forty years before the ruin of the Temple? Rabh Isaac bar Abdimi saith, It signifieth thus much, That they did not judge of sines. And a little after, But R. Nachman bar Isaac saith, Do not say that it did not judge of sines, but that it did not judge in capital causes. And the reason was this, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because they saw murderers so much increase that they could not judge them. They said therefore, It is sit that we should remove from place to place, that so we may avoid the guilt. That is, The number and boldness of thieves and murderers growing so great, that by reason thereof, the authority of the Council grew weak, and neither could, nor dared put them to death; It is better, say they, for us to remove from hence, out of this chamber Gazith, where by the quality of the place we are obliged to judge them, than that by sitting still here, and not judging them, we should render ourselves guilty: Hence it is, that neither in the highest, nor in the inferior Councils, any one was punished with death. ( For they did not judge of Capital matters in the inferior Councils in any City, but only when the great Council sat in the chamber Gazith, saith the Gloss.) The authority of them, was not taken away by the Romans, but rather relinquished by themselves. The slothfulness of the Council destroyed its own authority. Hear it justly upbraided in this matter

Notwithstanding it was not so lost but that sometimes they exercised it; namely, when they observed they might do it safely and without danger. Dat veniam corvis, &c. (Spares Crows but vexeth Pigeons ) thieves, murderers, and wicked men armed with force, they dared not call into their judgment, they were afraid of so desperate a crew; but to judge, condemn, torture, and put to death poor men and Christians, from whom they feared no such danger, they dreaded it not, they did not avoid it. They had been ready enough at condemniag our Savior himself to death, if they had not feared the people, and if Providence had not otherwise determined of his death.

We may also by the way add that also which follows after the place above cited, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the day of Simeon ben Jochai, judgments of pecuniary matters were taken away from Israel. In the same Tract, this is said to have been in the days of Simeon ben Shetah (long before Christ was born) but this is an error of the transcribers. But now if the Jewish Council lost their power of judging in pecuniary causes, by the same means as they lost it in capital, it must needs be that deceits, oppressions and mutual injuries were grown so common and daring that they were let alone, as being above all punishment. The Babylonian Gemarists allege another reason, but whether it be only in favor of their Nation, this is no fit place to examine

That we may yet further confirm our opinion, that the authority of that Council in capital matters was not taken away by the Romans, we will produce two stories as clear examples of the thing we assert: One is this, R. Lazar Son of R. Zadok said, When I was a little Boy, sitting on my Fathers shoulders, I saw the Daughter of a Priest that had played the harlot, compassed round with fagots and burnt. The Council no doubt judging and condemning her, and this after Judea had then groaned many years under the Roman yoke; for that same R. Lazar saw the destruction of the City.

The other you have in the same Tract , where they are speaking of the manner of pumping out evidence against a Heretic and seducer of the people. They place, say they, two witnesses in ambush, in the inner part of the house, and him in the outward, with a candle burning by him, that they may see and hear him. Thus they dealt with Ben Sudta in Lydda. They placed two Disciples of the wise in ambush for him, and they brought him before the Council and stoned him. The Jews openly profess that this was done to him in the days of R. Akiba, long after the destruction of the City; and yet then as you see, the Council still retained its authority in judging of capital causes. They might do it for all the Romans, if they dared do it to the Criminals.

But so much thus far concerning its authority, let us now speak of its present seat.

Whether the Hall. of the High Priest were the ordinary receptacle for the Council, or only in the present occasion, we do not here inquire. It is more material to inquire concerning the Bench itself, and who sat President in judging. The President of the Council at this time, was Rabban Gamaliel (Paul's Master) and the Vice-president, Rabban Simeon his Son, or Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai (which we do not dispute now.) Whence therefore had the chief Priest here and in other places the precedence and the chief voice in judging? For thus in Stephen's case the High Priest is the chief of the inquisition, Act. VI. 1. also in Paul's case, Act. XXIII. 2. see also Act. IX. 1. Had the Priests a Council and Judgment-seat of their own? Or might they in the chief Council when the President was absent, hear causes of life and death? To this long question, and that enough perplexed, we reply these few things.

I. We confess indeed that the Priest had a Bench and Council of their own, yet denying that there was a double Council, one for Ecclesiastical, the other for Civil affairs, as some would have it.

1. We meet often with mention of the Chamber of the Counselors, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 next the Court, which is also called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 concerning which thus the Bab. Joma ,

Hear the Glosser on this place:

Behold the Chamber of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Counselors, properly so called, because the Priests did meet and sit there, not to judge, but to consult; and that only of things belonging to the Temple! Here they consulted and took care that all persons and things belonging and necessary to the worship of God, should be in readiness; that the buildings of the Temple and the Courts should be kept in repair; and that the public Liturgy should be duly performed; but in the mean time they wanted all power of judging and punishing; they had no authority to sine, scourge, or put to death, yea, and in a word, to exercise any judgment; for by their own examination and authority they could not admit a Candidate into the Priesthood, but he was admitted by the authority of the Council:

2. We meet also with mention of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Council-house of the Priests. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The High Priests made a Decree, and did not permit an Israelite to carry the scape Goat into the wilderness. But in the Gloss, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Council of the Priests did not permit this. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Council of the Priests exacted for the portion of a Virgin four hundred Zuzees, and the wise men did not hinder it.

First, This was that Council of which we spoke before in the Chamber of the Counselors. Secondly, That which was decreed by them concerning the carrying away of the scape Goat, belonged merely to the Service of the Temple, as being a caution about the right performance of the office in the day of Atonement. Thirdly, And that about the portion of a virgin was nothing else but what any Israelite might do: and so the Gemarists confess. If any noble family in Israel, say they, would do what the Priests do, they may. The Priests set a price upon their virgins, and decreed by common consent that not less than such a portion should be required for them, which was lawful for all the Israelites to do for their virgins if they pleased.

3. There is an example brought of Tobias a Physician, who saw the New Moon at Jerusalem, he and his Son, and his servant whom he had freed. The Priests admitted him and his Son for witnesses, his servant they rejected; but when they came before 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Bench, they admitted him and his servant, and rejected his Son. Observe, 1. That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Council is here opposed to the Priests. 2. That it belonged to the Council to determine of the New Moon, because on that depended the set-times of the Feasts: this is plain enough in the Chapter cited. 3. That what the Priests did was matter of Examination only, not Decree.

4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Elders of the City, (Deut. XXII. 18.) are the Triumvirat Bench. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 At the Gate ( v. 24.) means the Bench of the chief Priest. The matter there in debate is about a married woman, who is found by her husband to have lost her virginity, and is therefore to be put to death. Deut. XXII. 13, &c. In that passage among other things you may find these words, ver. 18. And the Elders of that City shall lay hold of that man and scourge him. The Gemarists take occasion from thence to define what the phrase there and in other places means, The Elders of the City: and what is the meaning of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the word Gate, when it relates to the Bench. That, say they, signifies. the Triumvirat Bench: This the Bench, or, Council of the High Priest: that is, unless I be very much mistaken, every Council of twenty three; which is clear enough both from the place mentioned. and from reason itself.

1. The words of the place quoted are these:

2. Now the Council of Twenty three is called by the Talmudists the Bench, or the Council of the chief Priest, alluding to the words of the Law-giver, Deut. XVII. 9. where the word Priests denotes the inferior Councils, and Judge the chief Council.

II. In the chief Council the President sat in the highest seat, (being at this time when Christ was under examination, Rabban Gamaliel, as we said) but the High Priest excelled him in dignity everywhere; for the President of the Council was chose, not so much for his quality, as for his learning and skill in Traditions. He was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (a phrase very much used by the Author of Juchasin, applied to Presidents) that is, Keeper, Father, and deliverer of Traditions, and he was chose to this office who was fittest for these things. Memorable is the story of Hillel's coming to the Presidentship, being preferred to the Chair for this only thing, because he solved some doubts about the Passover, having learnt it, as he saith himself, from Shemaiah and Abtalion We will not think it much to transcribe the story: The Sons of Betira once forgot a Tradition: for when the fourteenth day (on which the Passover was to be celebrated) fell out on the Sabbath, they could not tell whether the Passover should take place of the Sabbath or no: But they said, there is here a certain Babylonian, Hillel by name, who was brought up under Shemaiah and Abtalion, he can resolve us whether the Passover should take place of the Sabbath, or no; they sent therefore for him, and said to him, Have you ever heard in your life, (that is, have you received any Tradition) whether when the fourteenth day falls on the Sabbath, the Passover should take place of the Sabbath, or no? He answered, Have we but one Passover that takes place of the Sabbath yearly? or are there not many Passovers that put by the Sabbath yearly? namely the continual sacrifice. He proved this by arguments a pari, from the equality of it, from the less to the greater, &c. But they did not admit of this from him, till he said, May it thus and thus happen to me, if I did not hear this of Shemaiah and Abtalion. When they heard this, they immediately submitted, and promoted him to the Presidentship, &c.

It belonged to the President chiefly to sum up the votes of the Elders, to determine of a Tradition, to preserve it, and transmit it to posterity; and these things excepted, you will scarce observe anything peculiar to him in judging, which was not common to all the rest. Nothing therefore hindered but that the High Priest, and the other Priests, (while he excelled in quality, and they in number) might promote acts in the Council above the rest, and pursue them with the greatest vigor; but especially when the business before them was about the sum of Religion, as it was here, and in the examples alleged of Paul and Stephen. It was lawful for them to whose office it peculiarly belonged, to take care of sacred things, to show more officious diligence in matters where these were concerned, than other men, that they might provide for their same among men, and the good of their places. The Council indeed might consist of Israelites only, without either Levites or Priests, in case such could not be found sit: Thus it is commanded that in the great Council there should be Levites and Priests; but if such are not to be found, and the Council consists of other Israelites only, it is lawful. But such a scarcity of Priests and Levites is only supposed, was never found; they were always a great part, if not the greatest of the Council. Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai, the Priest, was either now Vice-president of the Council, or next to him. Priests were everywhere in such esteem with the people, and with the Council, and the dignity and veneration of the High Priest was so great, that it is no wonder if you find him and them always the chief actors, and the principal part in that great Assembly.

VERS. VI.

THAT this Supper in Bethany was the same with that mentioned, Joh. XIII. I dare venture to affirm; however that be taken by very many for the Paschal Supper. Let us examine the matter a little home.

• I. This Supper was before the Passover, so was that; that this was so, none need doubt; no more may they of the other, if we consider these things.
  • 1. It is said by John in express words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Before the Feast of the Passover, verse. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Passover, indeed, not seldom, signifies the Lamb itself; sometimes the very time of eating the Lamb; sometimes the Sacrifice of the day following, as Joh. XVIII. 28. But 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Feast of the Passover, always signifies the whole seven days Paschal Feast, both in the language of the Scripture, and of the Talmudists; a Jew would laugh at one that should interpret it otherways.
  • 2. When Christ said to Judas going out, What thou dost do quickly, some thought he meant this, Buy those things which we have need of for the feast, at the twenty ninth verse. For what Feast, I pray? for the Paschal Supper? That according to the Interpreters which we here oppose, was just past. For the remaining part of the Feast of that solemnity? Alas how unseasonable! where were those things, I pray, then to be bought? (If this were the very night on which they had just eaten the Lamb); the night of a feastday was festival; where were there any such markets to be found then? It was an unusual thing indeed, and unheard of, to rise from the Paschal Supper, to go to market; a market on a festival night was unusual and unheard of. It would argue some negligence, and little good husbandry, if those things that were necessary for the feast, were not yet provided; but that they must be to run, now late at night, to buy those things they knew not where, they knew not how. It is certainly very harsh and contrary to reason to understand these thing thus, when from the first verse the sense is very plain, Before the feast of the Passover. The Passover was not yet come, but was near at hand; the Disciples therefore thought that our Savior had given order to Judas to provide all those things that were necessary to the Paschal solemnity against it came.
  • 3. Observe also that of Luke, Chap. XXII. 3, &c. Satan entered into Judas, and he went his way and communed with the chief Priests, &c. And after in the seventh verse, Then came the day of unleavened bread. Hence I inquire, is the method of Luke direct or no? if not, let there be some reason given of the transposition; if it be direct, then 'tis plain that the Devil entered into Judas before the Passover; but he entered into him at that Supper in Joh. XIII. v. 27. therefore that Supper was before the Passover. For,
  • 4. Let them who take that Supper in Joh. XIII. for the Paschal -Supper, tell me how this is possible, that Judas after the Paschal -Supper (at which they do not deny that he was present with the rest of the Disciples) could make his agreement with the Priests, and get his blades together ready to apprehend our Savior, and assemble all the Council, ver. 57. The Evangelists say that he made an agreement with the chief Priests, Mat. XXVI. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and with the Captains, Luk. XXII. 4. and with all the Council, Mark XIV. 41. but now which way was it possible that he could bargain with all these in so small a space as there was between the going out of Judas from Supper, and the betraying of our Lord in the Garden? What were these all together at Supper that night? This is a matter to be laughed at, rather than credited. Did he visit all these from door to door? And this is as little to be thought, since he had scarce time to discourse with any one of them. Everyone supped this night at home, the master of a family with his family. It would be ridiculous to suppose that these chief Priests supped together, while in the mean time their families sat down at home without their head. It is required by the Law that every master of a family should be with his family that night instructing them, and performing sacred rites with and for them. These were therefore to be sought from house to house by Judas, if that were the first time of his treating with them about this matter, and let reason answer whether that little time he had were sufficient for this? we affirm therefore with the authority of the Evangelists, that that Supper, Joh. XIII. was before the Passover; at which Satan entering into Judas, he bargained with the Priests before the Passover, he appointed the time and place of his betraying our Savior, and all things were by them made ready for this wicked deed before the Passover came. Observe the method and order of the story in the Evangelists, Mat. XXVI. 14, 15, 16, 17. Mark XIV. 10, 11, 12. Then went Judas to the Priests, and said, What will you give me, &c. And from that time he sought for an opportunity to betray him. Now on the first day of unleavened bread came the disciples, &c. When was it that Judas came to the Priests to treat about betraying Christ? surely before the first day of unleavened bread. Luke also whom we quoted before, proceeds in the very same method. From that time, say they, he sought for an opportunity to betray him. If then first he went to and agreed with the Priests, when he rose up from the Paschal -Supper, as many suppose, he did not then seek for an opportunity, but had found one. The manner of speaking used by the Evangelists, most plainly intimates some space of deliberation, not sudden execution.
  • 5. Let those words of John be considered, Chap. XIV. 31. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Arise, let us go hence, and compared with the words, Chap. XVIII. 1. When Jesus had spoke these words, he went away with his Disciples over the brook Cedron. Do not these speak of two plainly different departures? Did not Christ rise up and depart, when he said, Arise let us go hence? Those words are brought in by the Evanglist, without any end or design, if we are not to understand by them, that Christ immediately changed his place, and certainly this change of place is different from that which followed the Paschal Supper, Joh. XVIII. 1.
  • 6. In that Thirteenth Chapter of John there is not the least mention nor syllable of the Paschal Supper. There is indeed plain mention of a Supper before the Feast of the Passover, that is, before the Festival-day; but of a Paschal -Supper, there is not one syllable. I profess seriously I cannot wonder enough how Interpreters could apply that Chapter to the Paschal -Supper when there is not only no mention at all in it of the Paschal -Supper, but the Evangelist hath also pronounced in most express words, and than which nothing can be more plain, that that Supper of which he speaks, was not on the Feast of the Passover, but before the Feast.
  • 7. If those things which we meet with Joh. XIII. of the Sop given to Judas, &c. were acted in the Paschal -Supper, then how, I pray, was it possible for the Disciples to mistake the meaning of those words, What thou dost do quickly? In the Paschal -Supper he said, He that dips with me in the dish is he; and the hand of Judas, as some think, was at that very moment in the dish. To Judas asking, Is it I? he plainly answered, Thou hast said; and besides he gave him a Sop for a token (as they say who maintain that opinion): Then with what reason, or with what ignorance, after so clear a discovery of the thing and person, could the Disciples imagine that Christ said, Buy quickly those things that are necessary, or give something to the poor?
  • 8. And to what poor, I pray? It was unseasonable truly, late at night to go to seek for poor people here and there, who were now dispersed all about in several ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ,) families eating the Passover; (for the poorest Israelite was obliged to that duty as well as the richest.) They who supposed that Christ commanded him to give something to the poor, could not but understand it of a thing that was presently to be done. For it had been ridiculous to conceive that Christ sent him so hastily away from Supper, to give something to the poor tomorrow. But if it be granted that the matter was transacted at Bethany, and that two days before the Passover, which we assert, then it is neither necessary you should suppose that Supper to have been so late at night, nor were poor people then and there to be far sought for, since so great a multitude of men followed Christ everywhere.
• II. This Supper was at Bethany, two days before the Passover, the same we conclude of that Supper, Joh. XIII. both as to the place and time; and that partly by the carrying on of the story to that time, partly by observing the sequel of that Supper. Six days before the Passover Christ sups at Bethany, Joh. XII. 1. The next day (five days before the Passover ) he came to Jerusalem riding on an Ass, Joh. XII. 12, 13. and in the Evening he returned to Bethany, Mat. XXI. 17. Mark XI. 11. The day following, (four days before the Passover ) he went to Jerusalem; Mark XI. 11, 15, &c. and at Evening he returned the same way to Bethany. The day after (three days before the Passover ) he goes again to Jerusalem. Mark XI. 20. In the Evening he went out to the mount of Olives, Math. XXIV. 1, 3. Mark XIII. 1, 3. Luk. XXI. 37. Now where did he sup this night? at Bethany. For so Matthew and Mark. After two days wa • the Passover, &c. Now when Jesus was in Bethany. And from this time forward there is no account either of his supping or going to Jerusalem till the evening of the Passover. From that supper both the Evangelists begin their story of Judas his contriving to betray our Lord; Math. XXVI. 14. Mark XIV. 10. and very fitly; for at that Supper the Devil had entered into him, and hurried him forward to accomplish his villainy.

We therefore thus draw up the series of the History out of the holy Writers. Before the feast of the Passover (Joh. XIII. 1.) namely, two days (Math. XXVI. 2, 6.) as Jesus was supping in Bethany, a woman anoynts his head: and some of the Disciples murmur at it. Our Savior himself becomes both her Advocate and Encomiast. Before Supper was done, Christ riseth from the table, and washeth his Disciples feet; and sitting down again acquaints them with the betrayer. John asking privately about him, he privately also gives him a token by a Sop, and gives a Sop to Judas. With this, the Devil entered into him, and now he grows ripe for his wickedness. The Devil had before put it into his heart, to betray him: ver. 2. Now he is impatient till he hath done it. He riseth up immediately after he had the Sop, and goes out. As he was going out, Jesus said to him▪ what thou dost, do quickly: which some understood of buying necessaries for the Feast, that was now two days off. It was natural and easy for them to suppose, that he, out of his diligence (having the purse, and the care of providing things that were necessary) was now gone to Jerusalem, though it were night, there being a great deal to be done, to get all things ready against the Feast. He goes away; Comes to Jerusalem; and the next day, treats with the Priest about betraying our Lord, and concludes a bargain with them. They were afraid of themselves, lest they should be either hindered by the people, or suffer some violence from them, on the Feast day. He frees them from this fear, provided they would let him have Soldiers and company ready at the time appointed. Our Savior lodges at Bethany that night, and spends the next day and the night after, there too: and, being now ready to take his leave of his Disciples, He teaches, instructs and comforts them at large. Judas having craf • ily laid the design of his treachery, and set his nets in readyness, returns, as is probable to Bethany; and is supposed by the Disciples, who were ignorant of the matter, to have performed his office exceeding diligently, in providing necessaries for the approaching Feast. On the day itself of the Passover, Jesus removes from Bethany with his Disciples, Arise, saith he, let us go hence, Joh. XIV. last, and comes to Jerusalem.

VERS. VII.

THerefore it was not the same Supper with that in Joh. XII. 1. for then our Savior's feet were anointed, now his head. I admire that any one should be able to confound these two stories. Oil perfumed with Spices, was very usual in Feasts, especially sacred; and it was wont to be poured upon the head of someone present.

The School of Shammai saith, He holds sweet Oil in his right hand, and a cup of wine in his left. He says Grace first over the Oil, and then over the wine. The School of Hillel saith, Oil in his right hand, and wine in his left. He blesseth the sweet Oil and anoynts the head of him that serves: but if the waiter be a Disciple of the Wise, he anoynts the wall; for it is a shame for a Disciple of the Wise to smell of perfumes. Here the waiter anoynts the head of him that sits down.

VERS. VIII.

IT was not without cause that it was called, precious ointment, verse. 7. and very costly, Joh. XII. 3. To show that it was not of those common sorts of ointments used in Feasts, which they thought it no wast, to pour upon the waiters head, or to daub upon the wall. But this ointment was of much more value, and thence arose the cavil.

VERS. IX.

THAT it was Judas especially who • avilled at this, we have reason to believe from what is said of him in another Supper; Joh. XII. 4. Compare this with those words, Joh. XIII. 29. When Jesus said to Judas, what thou doest do quickly, Some thought he had meant, Give something to the poor. That Supper, I presume, was the same with this: and, see, how these things agree! when a complaint arose of that prodigal wast of the Ointment, here, and before in I • h. XII. and that it seemed unfit to some, that that should be spent so unadvisedly upon our Lord, which might have been bestowed much better, and more fitly upon the poor: how easily might the others think that Christ had spoken to him about giving somewhat to the poor, that he might show his care of the poor, notwithstanding what he had before said concerning them, and the wast of the Ointment.

VERS. XII.

SHE had anointed his feet, Joh. XII. out of Love, duty, and honor to him; but this (which is added over and above to them) is upon account of his burial; and that not only in the interpretation of Christ, but in the design of the woman. She, and she first, believes that Christ should die; and under that notion, she pours the Ointment upon his head, as if she were now taking care of his body, and anointing it for burial: And it is as if Christ had said to those that took exceptions, and complained;

VERS. XV.

THE price of a Slave, Exod. XXI. 32. The price of a slave, whether great or little, He or she, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thirty Selaim of pure silver: if the Slave be worth a hundred pounds, or worth only one penny. Now 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Selaa, in his weight, weighed, three hundred eighty four barley corns.

VERS. XVII.

FOR anywhere they might; since the houses at Jerusalem were not to be hired; as we have noted elsewhere; but during the time of the Feast, they were of common right.

VERS. XIX.

PETER and John were sent for this purpose, Luke, XXII. 8. and perhaps they moved the question, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; Where wilt thou, &c. They only knew that Judas was about another business, while the rest supposed he was preparing necessaries for the Passover.

This, Peter and John were to do, (after having spoke with the Landlord, whom our Savior pointed out to them by a sign,) to prepare and fit the room.

I. A Lamb was to be bought, approved, and fit for the Passover.

II. This Lamb was to be brought by them into the Court where the Altar was.

The Passover was to be killed only in the Court, where the other sacrifices were slain: and it was to be killed on the fourteenth day, after noon, after the daily sacrifice, after the offering of the incense▪ &c. The manner of bringing the Passover into the Court, and of killing it, you have in Pesachin, in these words. The Passover is killed in three companies; according as it is said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And all the Assembly of the Congregation of Israel shall kill the Passover; Assembly, Congregation and Israel. The first company enters, and fill the whole Court: they lock the doors of the Court: the trumpets sound: the Priests stand in order, having golden and silver Vials in their hands; one row silver, and the other gold; and they are not intermingled: The Vials had no brims, lest the blood should stay upon them, and be congealed, or thickened: An Israelite kills it and a Priest receives the blood, and gives it to him that stands next, and he to the next, who taking the Vial that was full, gives him an empty one. The Priest who stands next to the Altar, sprinkles the blood at one sprinkling against the bottom of the Altar: that company goes out, and the second comes in, &c. Let them tell me now, who suppose that Christ eat his Passover one day sooner than the Jews did theirs, how these things could be performed by him or his Disciples in the Temple, since it was looked upon as a heinous offense among the people not to kill or eat the Passover in the due time. They commonly carried the Lambs into the Court upon their shoulders: this is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Its carrying in Pescachin: where the Gloss, The carrying of it upon a man's shoulders, to bring it into the Court, as into a public place.

III. It was to be presented in the Court, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 under the name of the Paschal Lamb, and to be killed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For the company mentioned: See what the Gemarists say of this thing in Pesachin, If they kill it for such as are not to eat, or as are not numbered, for such as are not circumcised or unclean, it is profane: If for those that are to eat, and not to eat, numbered and not numbered; for circumcised and not circumcised, clean and unclean, it is right: that is, for those that are numbered, that atonement may be made for the not numbered; for the circumcised, that atonement may be made for the uncircumcised, &c. So the Gemarists and the Glosses.

IV. The blood being sprinkled at the foot of the Altar, the Lamb flayed, his belly cut up, the fat taken out and thrown into the fire upon the Altar, the body is carried back to the place where they sup: the flesh is roasted, and the skin given to the Landlord.

V. Other things were also provided. Bread, according to God's appointment, wine, some usual meats, and the same called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Charoseth: Of which Commentators speak everywhere.

VERS. XX.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the word among the Talmudists.

I. The Schools of the Rabbins distinguish between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sitting at the Table, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lying at the table 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If they sit to eat, everyone says grace for himself, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If they lie, one says grace for all. But now that lying, as the Gloss on the place saith, was when they leaned on their left side upon couches, and eat and drank as they thus leaned. And the same Gloss in another place; They used to eat lying along upon their left side, their feet being on the ground, everyone on a single couch: Bab. Berac. As also the Gemara, To lie on ones back, is not called lying down, and to lie on ones right side, is not called lying down.

II. The Israelites accounted such lying down in eating a very fit posture requisite in sacred feasts, and highly requisite and most necessary in the Paschal Supper. We do not use lying down, but only to a morsel, &c. And indeed to those that did eat leaning, leaning was necessary. But now our sitting is a kind of leaning along. They were used to lean along, everyone on his own couch, and to eat his meat on his own table: But we eat all together at one table.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Even the poorest Israelite must not eat, till he lies down. The Canon is speaking about the Paschal Supper. On which, thus the Babylonians. It is said that the feast of unleavened bread requires leaning or lying down, but the bitter herbs not: concerning wine it is said in the name of Rabh Nachman, That it hath need of lying down: and it is said in the name of Rabh Nachman, that it hath not need of lying down: and yet these do not contradict one another; for that, is said of the two first cups, this, of the two last. They lay down on the left side, not on the right, because they must necessarily use their right hand in eating. So the Gloss there.

III. They used, and were fond of that custom of lying down, even to superstition, because it carried with it a token and signification of liberty. R. Levi saith, it is the manner of Slaves to eat standing: but now let them eat lying along, that it may be known that they are gone out of bondage to liberty. R. Simon, in the name of R. Joshua ben Levi, let that which a man eats at the Passover, and does his duty, though it be but as big as an olive, let it be eaten lying along, They eat the unleavened bread the first night, lying down, because it is a commemoration of deliverance. The bitter herbs have no need of lying down, because they are in memory of bondage. Although it be the bread of affliction, yet it is to be eaten after the manner of liberty. See more there. We are obliged to lie down when we eat, that we may eat after the manner of Kings and Nobles.

IV. When there were two beds, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The worthiest person lies uppermost; the second to him next above him. But when there were three beds, the worthiest person lay in the middle, the second above him, the third, below him. On which, thus the Gloss. When there were two, the principal person, lay on the first couch, and the next to him, lay above him, that is on a couch placed at the pillow of the more worthy person. If there were three, the worthiest lay in the middle; the next, above him; and the third, below him: that is, at the coverlids of his feet. If the principal person desires to speak with the second, he must necessarily raise himself so as to sit upright, for as long as he sits bending, he cannot speak to him; for the second sat behind the head of the first, and the face of the first was turned another away: and it would be better with the second (in respect of discourse) if he sat below him; for then he might hear his words, even as he lay along. This affords some light to that story Joh. XIII. 23, 24. where Peter, as seems likely, lying behind our Savior's head, in the first place next after him, could not discourse with him, nor ask about the Betrayer. Therefore looking over Christ's head upon John, he gave him a sign to inquire: He sitting in the second place from Christ, with his face towards him, asketh him.

VERS. XXII.

THE very occasion, namely eating together, and fellowship, partly renews the mention of the Betrayer at the Paschal Supper; at if he had said, We are eating here friendly together, and yet there is one in this number, who will betray me: partly that the Disciples might be more fully acquainted with the matter itself. For at the Supper in Joh. XIII. he had privately discovered the person to John only; unless perhaps Peter understood it also, who knew of Johns question to Christ, having at first put him upon it, by his beckning. The Disciples ask, Is it I? partly through ignorance of the thing, partly out of a sincere and assured profession of the contrary.

VERS. XXIV.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It w • re better for him, that he were not created. A very usual way of speaking in the Talmudists.

VERS. XXVI.

BREAD at Supper, the Cup after Supper. After Supper he took the cup, saith Luke, Chap. XXII. 20. and Paul, 1 Cor. XI. 25. but not so of the Bread.

That we may more clearly perceive the history of this Supper in the Evangelists, it may not be amiss to transcribe the Rubric of the Paschal Supper, with what brevity we can, out of the Talmudists; that we may compare the things here related, with the custom of the nation.

I. The Paschal Supper began with a Cup of Wine. They mingle the first cup for him. The School of Shammai saith, He gives thanks first for the day, and then for the wine: But the School of Hillel saith, He first gives thanks for the wine, and then for the day. The Shammeans confirm their opinion, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because the day is the cause of their having wine: that is, as the Gloss explains it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that they have it before meat. They first mingle a cup for everyone, and (the Master of the Family) blesseth it, Blessed be he that created the fruit of the vine: and then he repeats the consecration of the day. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (that is, he gives thanks in the plural number for all the company, saying, Let us give thanks) and drinks up the cup. And afterward he blesseth concerning the washing of hands, and washeth. Compare this cup with that, Luke XXII. 17.

II. Then the bitter herbs are set on. They bring in a table ready covered, upon which there is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Soure sauce and other herbs. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let the Glossers give the interpretation. They do not set the table, till after the consecration of the day: and upon the table they set lettuce. After he hath blessed over the Wine, they set herbs, and he eats lettuce dipped; but not in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the sour sauce, for that is not yet brought: and this is not meant simply of lettuce, unless when there be other herbs. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 His meaning is this, Before he comes to those bitter herbs, which he eats after the unleavened bread, when he also gives thanks for the eating of the bitter herbs, as it is written, Ye shall eat ( it ) with unleavened bread and bitter herbs: First unleavened bread, and then bitter herbs. And this first dipping is used only for that reason, that children may observe and inquire; for it is unusual for men to eat herbs before meat.

III. Afterwards there is set on unleavened bread, and the sauce called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the lamb, and the flesh also of the Chagiga of the fourteenth day. Maimonides doth not take notice of any interposition between the setting on the bitter herbs, and the setting on the unleavened bread: but the Talmudic Mishnah notes it in these words. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They set unleavened bread before him. Where the Gloss, This is said because they had moved the table from before him, who performed the duty of the Passover: now that removal of the table was for this end, that the Son might ask the Father; and the Father answered him, Let them bring the table again that we may make the second dipping; then the Son would ask, Why do we dip twice? Therefore they bring back the table, with unleavened bread upon it, and bitter herbs, &c.

IV. He begins, and blesseth, Blessed be he that created the fruits of the Earth: and he takes the herbs, and dips them in the sauce Charoseth, and eats as much as an Olive, he, and all that lie down with him; but less than the quantity of an Olive he must not eat: then they remove the table from before the Master of the family. Whether this removal of the table be the same with the former, is not much worth our enquiry.

V. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Now they mingle the second cup for him: and the Son asks the Father; or if the Son doth not ask him, he tells him himself, How much this night differs from all other nights. On other nights, saith he, we dip but once; but this night twice. On other nights we eat either leavened or unleavened bread; on this, only unleavened, &c. on other nights we eat either sitting or lying, on this all lying, &c.

VI. The Table is set before them again, and then he saith, This is the Passover, which we therefore eat, because God passed over the houses of our Fathers in Egypt. Then he lifts up the bitter herbs, in his hand, and saith, we therefore eat these bitter herbs, because the Egyptians made the lives of our Fathers bitter in Egypt. He takes up the unleavened bread in his hand, and saith, We eat this unleavened bread, because our Fathers had not time to sprinkle their meal to be leavened, before God revealed himself, and redeemed them. We ought therefore to praise, celebrate, honor, magnify, &c. him, who wrought all these wonderful things for our Fathers, and for us, and brought us out of bondage into liberty, out of sorrow into joy, out of darkness into great light, let us therefore say Hallelujah. Praise the Lord. Praise him, O ye servants of the Lord, &c. to, And the flint stone into fountains of waters (that is, from the beginning of the CXIII, to the end of the CXIV Psalm.) And he concludes, Blessed be thou O Lord God our King Eternal, redeeming us, and redeeming our Fathers out of Egypt, and bringing us to this night; that we may eat unleavened bread and bitter herbs: and then he drinks off the second cup.

VII. Then washing his hands, and taking two loaves, he breaks one, and lays the broken upon the whole one, and blesseth it, Blessed be he who causeth bread to grow out of the earth: and putting some bread and bitter herbs together, he dips them in the sauce, Charoseth, and blessing, Blessed be thou, O Lord God, our Eternal King, he who hath sanctified us by his precepts, and hath commanded us to eat; he eats the unleavened bread and bitter herbs together; but if he eats the unleavened bread and bitter herbs by themselves, he gives thanks severally for each. And afterwards giving thanks after the same manner over the flesh of the Chagiga of the fourteenth day, he eats also of it; and in like manner giving thanks over the Lamb, he eats of it.

VIII. From thence forward he lengthens out the Supper, eating this or that, as he hath a mind; and last of all he eats of the flesh of the Passover, at least as much as an olive; but after this he tastes not at all of any food. Thus far Maimonides in the place quoted, as also the Talmudists in several places in the last Chapter of the Tract Pasachin.

And now was the time when Christ taking bread, instituted the Eucharist; but whether was it after the eating of those farewell morsels, as I may call them, of the Lamb, or instead of them? It seems to be in their stead, because it is said by our Evangelist and Mark, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. As they were eating, Jesus took Bread. Now without doubt they speak according to the known and common custom of that Supper, that they might be understood by their own people. But all Jews know well enough that after the eating of those morsels of the Lamb it cannot be said, As they were eating; for the eating was ended with those morsels. It seems therefore more likely, that Christ when they were now ready to take those morsels, changed the custom, and gave about morsels of bread in their stead, and instituted the Sacrament. Some are of opinion that it was the custom to taste the unleavened bread last of all, and to close up the Supper with it; of which opinion I confess I also sometimes was. And it is so much the more easy to fall into this opinion, because there is such a thing mentioned in some of the Rubrics about the Passover, and with good reason, because they took up this custom after the destruction of the Temple.

First he blessed, then he brake it. Thus it always used to be done, except in the Paschal bread. One of the two loaves was first divided into two parts, or perhaps into more, before it was blessed. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 One of them is divided. They are the words of Maimonides, who also adds, But why doth he not bless both the loaves, after the same manner, as in other feasts? Because this is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The bread of poverty. Now poor people deal in morsels, and here likewise are morsels.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let not him that is to break the bread, break it, before Amen be pronounced from the mouths of the Answerers.

These words being applied to the Passover now newly eaten, will be more clear. This now is my body, in that sense, in which the Paschal Lamb hath been my body hitherto. And in the twenty eighth verse, This is my blood of the New Testament, in the same sense, as the blood of Bulls and Goats hath been my Blood under the Old, Exod. XXIV. Heb. IX.

VERS. XXVII.

BREAD was to be here at this Supper by Divine Institution; but how came the Wine to be here? And how much? And of what sort?

I. A Tradition. It is necessary that a man should cheer up his wife and his children for the feast. But how doth he cheer them up? With Wine. The same things are cited in the Babylonian Talmud. The Rabbins deliver, say they, That a man is obliged to cheer up his Wife and his Domesticks in the feast; as it is said, And thou shalt rejoice in thy feast ( Deut. XVI. 14.) But how are they cheered up? With wine. R. Judah saith, Men are cheered up with something agreeable to them; Women, with that which is agreeable to them. That which is agreeable to Men to rejoice them, is Wine. But what is that which is agreeable to Women to cheer them? Rabh Joseph saith, Died garments, in Babylon; and linnin garments, in the land of Israel.

II. Four cups of Wine were to be drunk up by everyone. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 All are obliged to four cups, men, women, and children: R. Judah saith, But what have children to do with Wine? But they give them wheat and nuts, &c.

The Jerusalem Talmudists give the reason of the number, in the place before quoted, at full. Some, according to the number of the four words made use of in the history of the Redemption of Israel out of Egypt. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And I will bring forth, and I will deliver, and I will redeem, and I will take. Some, according to the number of the repetition of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cup, in Gen. XL. 11. 13. which is four times: Some, according to the number of the four Monarchies: Some, according to the number of the four cups of vengeance; which God shall give to the Nations to drink, Jer. XXV. 15. & LI. 7. Psal. XI. 6. & LXXV. 8. And according to the number of the four cups which God shall give Israel to drink, Psal. XXIII. 5. & XVI. 5. & CXVI. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The cup of two salvations.

III. The measure of these cups is thus determined, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rabbi Chaia saith, Four cups contain an Italian quart of Wine. And more exactly in the same place▪ How much is the measure of a cup? Two fingers square, and one finger, and an half and a third part of a finger, deep. The same words you have in the Babylonian Talmud at the place before quoted, only with this difference, that instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the third part of a finger, there is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the fifth part of a finger.

IV. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is commanded that he should perform this office with red Wine. So the Babylonian, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is necessary that it should taste, and look like Wine. The Gloss, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that it should be red.

V. If he drinks Wine pure, and not mingled with Water, he hath performed his duty; but commonly they mingled Water with it: Hence, when there is mention of Wine in the Rubric of the Feasts, they always use the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They mingle him a cup. Concerning that mingling, both Talmudists dispute in the forecited Chapter of the Passover: which see, The Rabbins have a Tradition, over Wine, which hath not Water mingled with it, they do not say that blessing, Blessed be he that created the fruit of the Vine; but, Blessed be he that created the fruit of the Tree. The Gloss, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Their Wine was very strong and not fit to be drunk, without water, &c. The Gemarists a little after: The Wise agree with R. Eleazar, That one ought not to bless over the cup of blessing, till water be mingled with it. The mingling of water with every cup, was requisite for health, and the avoiding of drunkenness. We have before taken notice of a story of Rabban Gamaliel, who found and confessed some disorder of mind, and unfitness for serious business, by having drunk off an Italian quart of Wine. These things being thus premised, concerning the Paschal Wine, we now return to observe this Cup of our Savior.

After those things which used to be performed in the Paschal Supper, as is before related, these are moreover added by Maimonides. Then he washeth his hands, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and blesseth the blessing of the meat, (that is, gives thanks after meat) over the third cup of Wine, and drinks it up. That cup was commonly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The cup of blessing. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Talmudic dialect: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The cup of blessing is, when they give thanks after supper, saith the Gloss on Bab. Berac. Where also in the Text, many things are mentioned of this cup. Ten things are spoken of the cup of blessing. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Washing and cleansing: (that is, to wash the inside and outside, namely that nothing should remain of the Wine of the former cups.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let pure Wine be poured into the cup, and water mingled with it there. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let it be full. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The crowning, that is, (as the Gemara,) by the Disciples. While he is doing this, let the Disciples stand about him in a crown (or ring.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The veiling; that is, as Rabh Papa, He veils himself, and sits down as R. Issai, he spreads a handkerchief on his head. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He takes up the cup in both hands, but puts it into his right hand, he lifts it from the table, • ixeth his eyes upon it, &c. Some say he imparts it (as a gift) to his family.

Which of these rites our Savior made use of, we do not inquire; The Cup certainly was the same with the cup of blessing: Namely, when according to the custom, after having eaten the farewell morsel of the Lamb, there was now an end of Supper, and thanks were to be given over the third Cup after meat; he takes that Cup, and after having returned thanks, as is probable, for the meat, both according to the custom, and his office, he instituted this for a cup of Eucharist (or thanksgiving.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The cup of blessing which we bless, 1 Cor. X. 16. Hence it is that Luke and Paul say that he took the Cup after supper, that is, that Cup, which closed up the Supper.

It must not be past by, that when he instituted the Eucharistical Cup, he said, This is my blood of the New Testament, as Matthew and Mark: nay as Luke and Paul, This cup is the New Testament in my blood. Not only the seal of the Covenant, but the Sanction of the new Covenant. The end of the Mosaical Economy, and the confirming of a new one. The confirmation of the old Covenant, was by the blood of Bulls and Goats, Exod. XXIV. Heb. IX. because blood was still to be shed: the Confirmation of the new was by a Cup of Wine; because under the New Testament, there is no further shedding of blood. As it is here said of the Cup, This cup is the New Testament in my blood; so it might be said of the Cup of blood, Exod. XXIV. That cup, was the Old Testament in the blood of Christ; There, all the Articles of that Covenant being read over, Moses sprinkled all the people with blood, and said, This is the blood of the Covenant which God hath made with you; And thus that old Covenant, or Testimony, was confirmed. In like manner Christ having published all the Articles of the New Covenant, he takes the Cup of Wine, and gives them to drink, and saith, This is the New Testament in my blood, and thus the New Covenant is established.

There was besides a fourth Cup, of which our Author speaks also, Then he mingles a fourth cup, and over it he finisheth the Hallel; and adds moreover the blessing of the Hymn, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is, Let all thy works praise thee, O Lord, &c. and saith, Blessed be he that created the fruit of the Vine, and afterwards he tastes of nothing more that night, &c. Finisheth the Hallel; that is, he begins there where he left oft before, to wit, at the beginning of the CXV Psalm, and goes on to the end of the CXVIII Psalm.

Whether Christ made use of this Cup also, we do not dispute; It is certain he used the Hymn, as the Evangelist tells us, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , when they had sung a Hymn, at the thirtieth verse, we meet with the very same word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Midras Till.

And now looking back on this Paschal Supper, let me ask those who suppose the Supper in Joh. XIII. to be the same with this, What part of this time do they allot to the washing of the Disciples feet? What part to Judas 's going out? And what part to his discoursing with the Priests, and getting ready his accomplices for their wicked exploit.

I. It seems strange indeed that Christ should put off the washing of the Disciples feet, to the Paschal Supper: When, 1. That kind of action was not only unusual, and unheard of at that Supper, but in no wise necessary, or fitting: for, 2. How much more conveniently might that have been performed at a common Supper before the Passover, as we suppose, when he was not straightened by the time, than at the Paschal Supper, when there were many things to be done, which required dispatch?

II. The office of the Paschal Supper did not admit of such interruption, nor was it lawful for others so to decline from the fixed rule, as to introduce such a foreign matter; and why should Christ so swerve from it, when in other things he conformed himself to the custom of the Nation, and when he had before, a much more fit occasion for this action, than when he was thus pressed and straightened by the time?

III. Judas sat at Supper with the rest, and was there when they did eat; Matth. XXVI. 20, 21. Mark XIV. 18. and, Alas! How unusual was it for any to depart in that manner, from that Supper before it was done: It is enough doubted by the Jewish Canons, whether it were lawful; and how far any one, who had joined himself to this or that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 family, might leave it to go to another, and take one part of the Supper here, and another part there: but for a person to leave the Supper and go about another business, is a thing they never in the least dreamt of; they would not, they could not suppose it. You see how light a matter Judas 's going away to buy necessaries, as the Disciples interpreted it, seemed to them, because he went away from a common Supper; But if they had seen him thus dismissed, and sent away from the Paschal Supper, it would have seemed a monstrous and wonderful thing. What? To leave the Paschal Supper now begun, to go to Market? To go from a common Supper at Bethany, to buy necessaries for the Passover, against the time of the Passover, this was nothing strange or unusual: but to go from the Paschal Supper before it was done to a Market or Fair, was more unusual and strange, than that it should be so lightly passed over by the Disciples.

We therefore do not at all doubt that Judas was present both at the Passover and the Eucharist: which Luke affirms in direct words, Chap. XXII. 20, 21. nor do we doubt much of his being present at the Hymn, and that he went not away, before all was done: but, when they all rose up from the Table, and prepared for their journey to Mount Olivet (in order to lie at Bethany, as the Disciples supposed) the vilanous Traitor stole away, and went to the company that he had appointed the Priests two days before, to make ready for him at such a time and place. Methinks I hear the words and consultations of this bloody Wretch: To morrow, saith he, will be the Passover, and I know my Master will come to it: I know he will not lie at Jerusalem, but will go back to Bethany, however late at night, where he is used to lie: make ready therefore for me armed men, and let them come to a place appointed, immediately after the Paschal Supper, and I will steal out privately to them, while my Master makes himself ready for his journey, and I will conduct them to seize upon him in the gardens without the City, where by reason of the solitariness of the place, and the silence of the night, we shall be secure enough from the multitude. Do ye make haste to dispatch your Passovers, that you may meet together at the Council after supper, to examine and judge him, when we shall bring him to you; while the silence of the night favors you also, and protects you from the multitude. Thus all things are provided against the place and time appointed, and the Thief stealing away from the company of the Disciples, as they were going out towards the Mount of Olives, and hastening to his armed confederates, without delay, brings them prepared along with him, and sets upon his Master now in the Garden.

VERS. XXXIV.

THE same also he had said, Joh. XIII. 38. The Cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice. Therefore some say, that that was the same Supper with this of the Passover. Very right indeed, if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ought to be rendered, The Cock shall not crow once, or, The Cock shall not crow at all ▪ But it is not so; but it amounts to this sense, within the time of Cock crowing, thou shalt deny me thrice, for Peter had denied him but once before the first crowing of the Cock, and thrice before the second. Mark XIV. 68, 72. From hence therefore we may easily observe, in what sense those words are to be understood, which were spoke to Peter, two days before the Passover, Joh. XIII. last. The Cock shall not crow, &c. not that the Cock should not crow at all between that time, and Peter 's denying; but, as if our Savior had said, Are you so secure of yourself, O Peter? Verily I say unto you, the time shall be, and that shortly, when you shall deny me thrice within the time of Cock crowing. 'Ev 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , At Cock-crowing, Mark XIII. 35. At the Paschal Supper, it is said, This night, before the Cock crow, &c. Matth. XXVI. 34. Mark XIV. 30. Luke XXII. 34. But there is nothing of this said in that Supper, Joh. XIII.

Concerning the Cock-crowing, thus the Masters, R. Shilla saith, Whosoever begins his journey before Cock-crowing, his blood be upon his head. R. Josiah saith, If before the second crowing: But some say, If before the third. But of what kind of Cock is this spoken?

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Of a middling Cock; that is, as the Gloss explains it, A Cock that doth not crow too soon, nor too late. The Mishnah, on which this Gloss is, hath these words; Every day they remove the ashes from the Altar, about Cock crowing: but on the day of Atonement, at midnight, &c. You may wonder that a dunghill Cock should be found at Jerusalem, when it is forbid by the Canons that any Cocks should be kept there. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They do not keep Cocks at Jerusalem, upon account of the holy things: Nor do the Priests keep them through out all the land of Israel. The Gloss gives the reason, Even Israelites are forbid to keep Cocks at Jerusalem, because of the holy things: for Israelites have eaten there peace-offerings, and thank-offerings: but now it is the custom of dunghill Cocks to turn over dunghills, where perhaps they might find creeping things, that might pollute those holy things that are to be eaten. By what means, and under what pretence the Canon was dispensed with, we do not dispute. 'It is certain there were Cocks at Jerusalem, as well as at other places. And memorable is the story of a Cock, which was stoned by the sentence of the Council, for having killed a little child.

VERS. XXXVI.

THE place of the Olive-presses at the foot of Mount Olivet. In John, it is a garden beyond Kidron. They do not make Gardens or Paradices in Jerusalem because of the stink. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Gloss, Because of the stink that riseth from the weeds which are thrown out: besides, it is the custom to dung Gardens, and thence comes a stink. Upon this account, there were no Gardens in the City (some few Gardens of Roses excepted, which had been so from the days of the Prophets ) but all were without the walls, especially at the foot of Olivet.

VERS. XLIX.

IT was not unusual for a Master to kiss his Disciple: but for a Disciple to kiss his Master, was more rare. Whether therefore Judas did this, under pretence of respect, or out of open contempt and dirision, let it be inquired.

VERS. LX.

ENquire, Whether these are to be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Of which the Talmudists speak at large, especially in the Treatise Maccoth. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are commonly rendered False witnesses; and deservedly: and yet Maimonides reckons up these as necessary, in that City where the Council of twenty three, is placed: Why, saith he, is such a Council not set up, but in a City where there are an hundred and twenty men? Namely, that there may be three and twenty for the Council, and three ranks consisting of sixty nine men, and ten men to attend upon the affairs of the Synagogue: two Scribes, two Bishops, two to be judged, two witnesses. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. The reason of the thing is a little obscure: the characters of the men you may take in these examples. The witnesses say, We testify that N. killed N. They say to them, How do you depose this, when the killer, or he that was killed, was with us in such a place on that day. These as yet are not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But if they should say, How can you testify this, when you were with us on that day, &c. On which Mishnah, thus Maimonides, The witnesses depose, that Reuben killed Simeon: and afterwards Kohath and Hushim come, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and disprove their testimony: there come afterwards other witnesses, and depose the same with the former, namely, that Reuben killed Simeon: and Kohath and Hushim disprove their testimony also; if a second, third, and fourth, nay if a thousand pair, come and depose the same thing, while those two so disprove them, they must all die by the testimony of these two, &c.

There was the like Testimony in other things: thus in the first Halacah of the Chapter quoted; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 How are witnesses made 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ? We testify concerning N. that he is the Son of a divorced Woman, &c. They do not say, Let this witness (if he prove false) be made the Son of a divorced Woman, instead of the other, but he is beaten with forty stripes. The words are obscure enough; but their meaning is this. Since a false witness was by the Law to suffer the same things which by his perjury he had designed to bring upon another; it is here inquired, in what cases a witness is so far to be accounted false, as to undergo such a retaliation? And it is answered, Not in all; and this reason is alleged, If any one, by false witness, should endeavor to deprive another of his legitimacy, and by consequence of the privilidges of being legitimate, by saying that he is the Son of a divorced Woman, though he were indeed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a false witness, yet he must not be punished in the like kind, to be made as the Son of a divorced Woman; but he must be whipped. But in capital cases the custom was, that whosoever endeavored to procure death to another person by false witness, must himself be put to death.

VERS. LXV.

WHEN witnesses speak out the blasphemy which they heard, then all hearing the blasphemy are bound to rend their clothes. See more there, They that judge a blasphemer; first ask the witness, and bid him speak out plainly what he hath heard; and when he speaks it, the Judges standing on their feet, rend their garments, and do not sow them up again &c. See there the Bab. Gemara discoursing at large why they stand upon their feet, why they rend their garments, and why they may not be sowed up again.

VERS. I.

LET us trace a little, the proceedings of this Council.

• I. They spend the night in judging on a capital cause; which is expressly forbid by their own Canon. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They handle capital causes in the day time, and finish them by day. Money matters indeed that were begun by day, might be ended in the night, which is asserted in that place; but capital causes were only to be handled by day: But here, in sitting upon the life and death of our Savior, there is need of night and darkness. This judgment is begun in the night, and carried on all the night through in a manner.
• II. This night was the evening of a Feast-day, namely of the first day of the Paschal week, at what time they were also forbid to sit in judgment. They do not judge on a Feast-day. How the Lawyers are divided on this point, I will not trouble you now with recounting. This very Canon is sufficient ground for scruple, which we leave to them to clear, who through rankor and hatred towards Christ, seem to slight and trample under feet their own Canons.
• III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , when it was morning: This was the time of saying their Phylacteries, namely from the first day-light to the third hour . But where was these men's Religion today? Did you say your Phylacteries this morning, my good Fathers of the Council, before you came to sit on the Bench? Another business that you had in hand, (effectually to destroy Jesus ) either robbed you of your prayers, or robbed your prayers of charity.
• IV. Now appears 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the first Feast-day of the Passover, when they used to present themselves in the Temple, and offer their gifts, Exod. XXIII. 15. But when and how was this performed by them today? They take heed of going into the Judgment (or Pretors ) hall, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Chagiga, or Passover, s but you will scarce find what time they allowed today for that purpose; nor indeed was it lawful for them to eat anything on that day; it being provided by a Canon, That when the Council shall have adjudged any one to die, let them not taste anything that day .

Let that be considered, Cases of money are heard in the daytime, and may be determined in the night. Capital causes are tried in the day, and finished in the day. Judgment in cases of money is passed the same day, whether it be for sinning or acquitting. Judgment in capital causes is passed the same day, if it be for acquitting: but if it be for condemning, it is passed the day after. The reason of this difference is given by the Gemarists; whom see. The reason of the latter is thus expressed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Blessed is the Judge who leaveneth his judgment: that is, as the Gloss, who delays his judgment, and lets it rest all night, that he may sift out the truth.

The difference between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is greater than the Reader may perhaps think at first sight; by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they signify the whole process of the trial, the examining of the Plaintiff and Defendant, and of the Witnesses, the taking the votes of the Council, and the entering of them by the Scribes: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies only the passing of judgment, or giving a definitive sentence. You may better perceive the difference from the Glossary on Bab. Sanhedr. In the Text this is decreed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let them not judge on the eve of the Sabbath, nor on the eve of a Feast-day; which is also repeated in other places. The reason of the prohibition is this, namely, that the trials which were begun on the eve of the Sabbath, or a Feast-day, should not be finished on the Sabbath or Feast-day. Which indeed, saith the Gloss, is observed in pecuniary trials, and care is taken that there be no writing: (for it is forbid to write so much as a letter on the Sabbath) but in capital causes it takes not place upon that account; for the votes of those that acquitted or condemned were written the day before.

You see in the History of the Gospel, 1. The Trial concerning our Savior 's life, dispatched at one and the same sitting. 2. And that too on a Feast-day.

VERS. V.

STrangulatus est, was strangled: namely by the Devil, who had now been in him three days together. The words of Peter, Act. I. 18. do not suffer me to understand this of hanging himself. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst. Interpreters take a great deal of pains to make these words agree with his hanging himself, but indeed all will not do. I know the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is commonly applied to a man's hanging himself, but not to exclude some other way of strangling. And I cannot but take the story (with good leave of antiquity) in this sense. After Judas had thrown down the money, the price of his Treason, in the Temple, and was now returning again to his mates, the Devil who dwelt in him, caught him up on high, strangled him, and threw him down headlong, so that dashing upon the ground, he burst in the midst, and his guts issued out, and the Devil went out in so horrid an Exit. This certainly agrees very well with the words of Peter now mentioned, and also with those that follow, This was known to all that dwelt at Jerusalem. It agrees also very well with the deserts of the wicked wretch, and with the title of Iscariot. The wickedness he had committed was above all example; and the punishment he suffered was beyond all president. There had been many instances of persons who had hanged themselves, this would not so much have stirred up the people of Jerusalem to take notice of it, as such a strangling and throwing down headlong, which we suppose horrible above measure, and singular beyond example. See what we have said at the tenth Chapter concerning the word Iscariot.

VERS. IX.

HOW much this place hath troubled Interpreters let the famous Beza, instead of many others declare: This knot hath hampered all the most ancient Interpreters; in that the testimony here is taken out of Zacharias, and not from Jeremy; so that it seems plainly to have been 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a failing of memory, as Augustine supposes in his third Book, De consensu Evangelistarum, Chapter the seventh; as also Eusebius in the twentieth Book 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of Demonstration. But if any one had rather impute this error to the transcribers, or (as I rather suppose) to the unskillfulness of some person who put in the name of Jeremy, when the Evangelist had writ only as he often doth in other places, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by the Prophet. Yet we must confess that this error hath long since crept into the holy Scriptures, as Jerome expressly affirms, &c.

But (with the leave of so great men) I do not only deny, that so much as one letter is spurious, or crept in without the knowledge of the Evangelist, but I do confidently assert that Matthew writ Jeremy, as we read it, and that it was very readily understood and received by his Countrymen. We will transcribe the following monument of antiquity out of the Talmudists, and then let the Reader judge. A Tradition of the Rabbins. This is the order of the Prophets. The Book of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the twelve. And a little after: But since Isaiah was before both Jeremiah and Ezekiel, he ought to have been set before them: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But since the Book of Kings ends with destruction, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and all Jeremy is about destruction, and since Ezekiel begins with destruction, and ends with comfort; and all Isaiah is about comfort, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They joined destruction with destruction, and comfort with comfort; that is, they placed those Books together which treat of destruction, and those together which treat of comfort.

You have this Tradition quoted by David Kimchius in his Preface to Jeremy. Whence it is very plain that Jeremy of old had the first place among the Prophets; and hereby he comes to be mentioned above all the rest, Mat. XVI. 14. because he stood first in the volume of the Prophets, therefore he is first named. When therefore Matthew produceth a Text of Zacharias under the name of Jeremy, he only cites the words of the Volume of the Prophets under his name, who stood first in the Volume of the Prophets. Of which sort is that also of our Savior, Luk. XXIV. 44. All things must be fulfilled which are written of me in the Law and the Prophets, and the Psalms. In the Psalms, that is, in the Book of Hagiographa, in which the Psalms were placed first.

VERS. XVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bar Abba, a very usual name in the Talmudists. R. Samuel Barabba, and R. Nathan Barabba. Abba bar Abba. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . In the Jerusalem Dialect it is very often uttered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bar Ba. Simeon Bar Ba R. Chaijah bar Ba . This brings to my mind what Josephus relates to have been done in the besieging of the City, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . When huge stones were thrown against the City by the Roman stings, some persons sitting in the Towers gave the citizens warning by a sign to take heed, crying out in the vulgar dialect, The Son cometh, that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Son of man indeed then came in the glory of his justice and his vengeance, as he had often foretold, to destroy that most wicked and profligate Nation.

VERS. XIX.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When King Sapores went about to afflict Rabbah, his mother sent to him, saying, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Have thou nothing to do with that Jew, &c.

VERS. XXVI.

SUCH was the custom of the Romans towards those that were to be crucified: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Whom after he had beaten with whips he crucified. And a little after, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To be whipped before the judgment-seat, and to be nailed to the Cross.

VERS. XXIX.

SEE those fictions in Tanchum concerning an Angel that appeared in the shape of Solomon: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In whose hand there was a reed: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And whom they struck with a reed.

VERS. XXXI.

THESE things are delivered in Sanhedrim , of one that is guilty of stoning: If there be no defense found for him, they lead him out to be stoned, and a crier went before, saying aloud thus, N. the Son of N. comes out to be stoned, because he hath done so and so. The Witnesses against him are N. and N. whosoever can bring anything in his defense, let him come forth and produce it. On which thus the Gemara of Babylon. The Tradition is, that on the evening of the Passover Jesus was hanged, and that a Cryer went before him for forty days, making this Proclamation, This man comes forth to be stoned, because he dealt in sorceries, and persuaded and seduced Israel; whosoever knows of any defense for him, let him come forth and produce it: But no defense could be found, therefore they hanged him on the evening of the Passover. Ulla saith, His case seemed not to admit of any defense, since he was a seducer, and of such God hath said, Thou shalt not spare him, neither shalt thou conceal him. ( Deut. XIII.)

They led him that was to be stoned out of the City, Act. VII. 58. so also him that was to be crucified. The place of stoning was without the three Camps, for at Jerusalem there were three Camps, (namely God's, the Levites, and the Peoples, as it was in the encamping in the Wilderness.) And in every city also, where there was a Council (namely of twenty three) the place of stoning was without the City. For all cities that have walls, bear a resemblance to the Camp of Israel.

Because Jesus was judged at a Heathen Tribunal, therefore a death is inflicted on him, not usual with the Jewish Council, namely Crucifixion. In several things the circumstances and actions belonging to his death, differed from the custom of the Jews in putting persons to death.

1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They never judge two on the same day . But here besides Christ are two thieves judged.

2. They never carried one that was to be hanged to hanging, till near Sun-set . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They stay till near Sun-set, and then they pass sentence, and execute him. And the reason is given by the Glosser, They do not perfect his judgment, nor hang him in the morning, lest they should neglect his burial and happen to forget themselves (and the Malefactor should hang till after Sun-set) but near Sun-setting, so that they may bury him out of hand. But Christ was sentenced to death before noon, and at noon was nailed to the Cross. For,

3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They first put the condemned person to death, and then hanged him upon a tree: But the custom of the (Roman) Empire, is first to hang them, and then to put them to death .

4. They did not openly lament for those that were led forth to be put to death, but for Jesus they did. Luk. XXIII. 27, 28. The reason of this difference is not to be sought from the kind of the death, but from the persons. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They did not bewail for a person led out to execution, but they lamented inwardly in their hearts . You will wonder at the reason, which the Gloss thus gives you: They did not openly bewail him, upon this account, that his being vilified (when nobody openly lamented him) might help to atone for him; but they sorrowed for him in their hearts; for this did not tend to his honor, nor lessen the atonement. These were better instructed, who lamented for Christ, both as to the thing and person.

VERS. XXXIII.

BEZA pretends that this is writ amiss, for Golgoltha, ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) when yet it is found thus writ in all Copies. But the good man censures amiss; since such a leaving out of letters in many Syriac words, is very usual, you have this word thus writ without the second λ, by the Samaritan Interpreter, in the first Chapter of Numbers.

VERS. XXXIV.

TO those that were to be executed they gave a grain of Myrrh infused in wine to drink, that their understanding might be disturbed, (that is, that they might lose their senses.) As it is said, Give strong drink to them that are ready to die, and wine to those that are of a sorrowful heart, &c. And the Tradition is, That some women of quality in Jerusalem allowed this freely of their own cost, &c.

But it makes a scruple that in Matthew it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , vinegar with gall; in Mark 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , wine mingled with myrrh. If wine, why is it called vinegar? If wine mingled with Myrrh, why gall? Ans. The words of Mark seem to relate to the custom of the Nation; those of Matthew to the thing as it was really acted. I understand Mark thus, They gave him, according to the custom of the Nation, that cup which used to be given to those that were led to execution; but (as Matthew has it) not the usual mixture, namely wine and frankincense, or myrrh; but for the greater mockage, and out of more bitter rankor, vinegar and gall. So that we may suppose this cup not to have been prepared by those honorable women, compassionating those that were to die, but on purpose by the Scribes, and the other persecutors of Christ, studying to heap upon him all kind of ignominy and vexation. In this cup they afterwards dipped a spunge, as may be supposed. See the 48th verse.

VERS. XXXV.

OF stoning we have this account , When he is now four cubits from the place of stoning, they strip him of his clothes; and if it be a man, they hang a cloth before him, if a woman, both before and behind. These are the words of R. Judah: but the wise say, A man is stoned naked, a woman not naked. So that it is plain enough he was crucified naked.

VERS. XXXVIII.

SEE in Josephus who they were that at that time were called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and how much trouble and pains the Governors of Judea were at, to restrain and root out this cursed sort of men. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Hezekiah the chief Robber was subdued by Herod. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . One Simon straggling about with the robbers with whom he associated, burnt the palaces in Jericho. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Felix having caught the chief Robber Eleazar, who for twenty years had wasted the Country with fire and sword, sent him to Rome, and many others with him. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Another kind of Robbers sprang up in Jerusalem, who slew men in the daytime, and in the midst of the City, &c.

There is a rule set down, and the art showed of discovering and apprehending Robbers: Go to the victualing houses at the fourth hour, (the Gloss, That was the hour of eating, and they went all to the victualing-houses to eat) and if you see there a man drinking wine, and holding the cup in his hand, and sleeping, &c. he is a thief, lay hold on him, &c.

Among the monsters of the Jewish routs, preceding the destruction of the City, the multitude of Robbers, and the horrible slaughters committed by them, deservedly claim the first consideration, which next to the just vengeance of God against that most wicked Nation, you may justly ascribe to divers originals.

• 1. It is no wonder if that Nation abounded beyond measure with a vagabond, dissolute, lewd sort of young men; since by means of Polygamy, and the divorces of their wives at pleasure, and the Nations unspeakable addictedness to lasciviousness and whoredoms, there could not but continually spring up bastards, and an offspring born only to beggary or rapine, as wanting both sustenance and ingenuous education.
• 2. The foolish and sinful indulgence of the Council could not but nurse up all kind of broods of wicked men, while they scarce ever put any one to death, though never so wicked, as being an Israelite; who must not by any means be touched.
• 3. The opposition of the Z • lots to the Roman yoke, made them study only to mischief the Romans, and do all the mischief they could to those Jews that submitted to them.
• 4. The Governors of Judea did often out of Policy indulge a licentiousness to such kind of rapines, that they might humble that people they so much hated, and which was continually subject to insurrections, by beating them, as it were, with their own clubs; and sometimes getting a share in the booty. Thus Josephus concerning Florus , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. He spoiled all the people, and he did in effect proclaim that all might go out in the Country to rob, that he might receive a share in the spoils. And thus a sword that first came out of their own bowels, was sheathed in them.

VERS. XXXIX.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To shake the head, with the Rabbins signifies irreverence and lightness.

VERS. XLVI.

1. ALL the rout indeed and force of Hell was let loose at that time against Christ, without either bridle or chain: He calls it himself, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The power of darkness, Luk. XXII. 53. God, who had foretold of old, that the Serpent should bruise the heel of the promised seed, (and now that time is come) had slackened the Devils chain, (which in regard of men, the Divine Providence used to hold in his hand) so that all the power and all the rancor of Hell, might freely and without restraint assault Christ; and that all that malice that was in the Devil against the whole Elect of God, summed up and gathered together into one head, might at one stroke and on-set be brandished against Christ without measure.

II. Our most Blessed Savior therefore feeling such torments as either Hell itself, or the instruments of Hell, men conspiring together in villainy and cruelty, could pour out upon him, cries out under the sharpness of the present Providence, My God, my God, why hast thou delivered me up and left me to such assaults, such bitternesses, and such merciless hands? The Talmudists bring in Esther using such an ejaculation, which is also cited in the Gloss on Joma : Esther stood in the inner Court of the Palace. R. Levi saith, when she was now just come up to the Idol-Temple, the divine glory departed from her: therefore she said, Eli, Eli, lamma Azabhtani.

VERS. XLVII.

VERS. XLIX.

THAT Christ here used the Syriac Dialect is plain from the word Sabacthani; but the word Eli, Eli, is not so properly Syriac; and hence arose the error and misconstruction of the standers by; in Syriac he should have said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mari, Mari; but Eli was strange to a Syrian ear; this deceived the standers by, who having heard more than enough of the apparitions of Elias from the Jewish fables, and being deceived by the double meaning of the word, supposed that Christ was tainted with the same folly and mistake, and called out to Elias for help; which it was no strange thing for that deluded people to expect.

VERS. LI.

LET us hear what the Fathers of the Traditions say concerning this Catapetasm, or veil . The wall of the Pronaon was five cubits, the Pronaon itself eleven. The wall of the Temple was six, the Temple forty. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 one cubit, and the entrance twenty. What Taraxis means, Maimonides will tell you, In the first Temple there was a wall one cubit thick, separating the Holy from the Holy of Holies: but when they built the second Temple, it was doubled, whether the thickness of that walt should be accounted to belong to the measure of the Holy, or to the measure of the Holy of Holies; wherefore they made the Holy of Holies twenty cubits complete, and the Holy forty cubits complete, and they left a void cubit between the Holy and the Holy of Holies, but they did not build any wall there in the second Temple; only they made two hangings, one contiguous to the Holy of Holies, and the other to the Holy; between which there was a void cubit, according to the thickness of the wall that was in the first Temple; in which there was but one (Catapetasm, or) veil only.

The High Priest (on the day of atonement) goes forward in the Temple till he comes to the two hangings that divide the Holy from the Holy of Holies; between which there was a cubit. R. Josi saith, There was but one hanging there; as it is said, And the hanging shall separate to, or, between the Holy and the Holy of Holies. On which words thus the Gemara of Babylon . R. Josi saith rightly to the Rabbins, and the Rabbins to thee: for he speaks of the Tabernacle, and they of the second Temple; in which since there was not a partition-wall, as there was in the first Temple, there was some doubt made of its holiness, namely, whether it should belong to the outward part of the Temple, or to the inward: whereupon they made two hangings.

While therefore their minds were troubled about this affair, not knowing whether they should hang the veil at the Temple, or at the inmost recess of it, and whether the void space between of a cubit thick should belong to this or that; they called the place itself by the Greek word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, Trouble, (as Aruch plainly affirms) and they hung up two Veils, that they might be sure to offend neither against this part nor that.

You will wonder therefore that Matthew doth not say 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Veils in the Plural; or perhaps you will think that only one of these two Veils was rent, not both: But it was enough for the Evangelists Matthew and Mark, who speak of this miracle, to have shown that that fence between, which hindered seeing into the Holy of Holies, and going into it was cleft and broken. This is it they mean, not being solicitous in explaining particulars, but contented to have declared the thing itself. Perhaps the Priest, who offered the incense that Evening, was in the Temple at the very moment when this miracle happened; and when he went out amazed to the people, and should tell them, The Veil of the Temple is rent, it would easily be understood of a passage broken into the Holy of Holies, by some astonishing and miraculous rending of the hangings. Compare Heb. X. 19, 20.

When the High Priest went into the inmost recess of the Temple on the day of atonement, he went in by the South-side of the outward hanging, and the North-side of the inner . But now both are rent in the very middle, and that from the top to the bottom.

VERS. LII.

YOU can hardly impute the rending of the hangings to the Earthquake, but it must be ascribed rather to another peculiar miracle; since it is more proper for an Earthquake to break hard things than soft, and to rend Rocks rather than Curtains: Rocks were rent by it in those places where Sepulchers had been built, so that now the gates of the Resurrection were thrown open, the bonds of the Grave were unloosed, and the bodies of dead men were made ready, as it were, for their rising again, when Christ the first-fruits was raised. The Jews had a fancy that the Kingdom of the Messias would begin with the Resurrection of the dead, (as we have noted before) vainly indeed, as to their sense of it; but not without some truth, as to the thing itself, for from the Resurrection of Christ, the glorious Epoch of the Kingdom of God, took its beginning, as we said before, (which he himself also signifieth in those words, Mat. XXVI. 29.) and when he arose, not a few others arose with him. What they thought of the Resurrection, that was to be in the days of Messias, besides those things which we have already mentioned, you may see and smile at in this one example: R. Jeremiah commanded when you bury me, put shoes on my feet, and give me a staff in my hand, and lay me on one side, that when the Messias comes I may be ready.

VERS. LIV.

THAT is, This was indeed the Messias: Howsoever the Jews deny the Son of God in that sense, in which we own it, that is, as the second person in the holy Trinity; yet they acknowledged the Messiah for the Son of God, (not indeed by nature, but by adoption and deputation; see Mat. XXVI. 63.) from those places, I Chron. XVII. 13. Psal. II. 12. & LXXXIX. 26, 27. and such like. The Centurion had learnt this from the people, by conversing among them; and seeing the Miracles which accompanied the death of Christ, acknowledged him to be the Messias, of whom he had heard so many and great things spoken by the Jews. In Luke we have these words spoken by him, Certainly this was a righteous man. Which I suppose were not the same with these words before us; but that both they and these were spoken by him, Certainly this was a righteous man: Truly this was the Messias, the Son of God. Such are those words of Nathaniel, Joh. I. 49. Thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel. Peter when he declared that Christ was the Son of the living God, Mat. XVI. 16. spoke this in a more sublime sense than the Jews either owned or knew; as we have said at that place.

VERS. LVI.

THAT Magdalene was the same with Mary the sister of Lazarus, Baronius proves at large , whom see. It is confirmed enough from this very place; for if Mary Magdalene was not the same with Mary the sister of Lazarus, then either Mary the sister of Lazarus was not present at the Crucifixion of Christ, and at his burial; or else she is past over in silence by the Evangelists, both which are improbable; whence she was called Magdalene, doth not so plainly appear; whether from Magdala a Town on the Lake of Genesareth, or from the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which signifies a playting or curling of the hair, a thing usual with harlots. Let us see what is spoken by the Talmudists concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mary Magdala, who they say was Mother of Ben Satda .

They stoned the Son of Satda in Lydda, and they hanged him up on the evening of the Passover. Now this Son of Satda was Son of Pandira. Indeed Rabh Chasda said, the husband (of his mother) was Satda, her husband was Pandira, her husband was Papus, the Son of Judah: but yet I say his mother was Satda, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 namely Mary the plaiter of women's hair; as they say in Pombeditha, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 she departed from her husband. These words are also repeated in Schabbath : Rabh Bibai at a time when the Angel of death was with him, said to his Officer, Go, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bring me Mary the plaiter of women's (hairs.) He went and brought to him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mary the plaiter of young men's (hair), &c. The Gloss,

I pronounce 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ben Satda, not that I am ignorant, that it is called Ben Stada by very learned men. The reason of our thus pronouncing it, we fetch from hence, that we find he was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ben Sutdah by the Jerusalem Talmudists , to which the word Satda more agrees than Stada. By the like agreement of sounds they call the same Town both 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Magdala, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mugdala, as we have observed elsewhere.

As they contumeliously reflect upon the Lord Jesus, under the name of Ben Satda, so there is a shrewd suspicion that under the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mary Magdala, they also cast reproach upon Mary Magdalene. The title which they gave their Mary, is so like this of ours, that you may with good reason doubt, whether she was called Magdalene from the Town Magdala, or from that word of the Talmudists 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Plaiter of hair. We leave it to the learned to decide.

VERS. LVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Josi, A very usual name in the Talmudists five were called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Be R. Josi, Ishmael, Lazar, Menahem, Chelpatha, Abdimus. Also, R. Jose ben R. Chaninah, &c. One may well inquire why this Mary is called the mother of James and Joses, and not also of Judas and Simon, as Mark VI. 3.

VERS. LVIII.

IT was not lawful to suffer a man to hang all night upon a tree, Deut. XXI. 23. Nay, nor to lie all night unburied. : 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

VERS. I.

LET us trace a little, the proceedings of this Council.

• I. They spend the night in judging on a capital cause; which is expressly forbid by their own Canon. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They handle capital causes in the day time, and finish them by day. Money matters indeed that were begun by day, might be ended in the night, which is asserted in that place; but capital causes were only to be handled by day: But here, in sitting upon the life and death of our Savior, there is need of night and darkness. This judgment is begun in the night, and carried on all the night through in a manner.
• II. This night was the evening of a Feast-day, namely of the first day of the Paschal week, at what time they were also forbid to sit in judgment. They do not judge on a Feast-day. How the Lawyers are divided on this point, I will not trouble you now with recounting. This very Canon is sufficient ground for scruple, which we leave to them to clear, who through rankor and hatred towards Christ, seem to slight and trample under feet their own Canons.
• III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , when it was morning: This was the time of saying their Phylacteries, namely from the first day-light to the third hour . But where was these men's Religion today? Did you say your Phylacteries this morning, my good Fathers of the Council, before you came to sit on the Bench? Another business that you had in hand, (effectually to destroy Jesus ) either robbed you of your prayers, or robbed your prayers of charity.
• IV. Now appears 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the first Feast-day of the Passover, when they used to present themselves in the Temple, and offer their gifts, Exod. XXIII. 15. But when and how was this performed by them today? They take heed of going into the Judgment (or Pretors ) hall, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Chagiga, or Passover, s but you will scarce find what time they allowed today for that purpose; nor indeed was it lawful for them to eat anything on that day; it being provided by a Canon, That when the Council shall have adjudged any one to die, let them not taste anything that day .

Let that be considered, Cases of money are heard in the daytime, and may be determined in the night. Capital causes are tried in the day, and finished in the day. Judgment in cases of money is passed the same day, whether it be for sinning or acquitting. Judgment in capital causes is passed the same day, if it be for acquitting: but if it be for condemning, it is passed the day after. The reason of this difference is given by the Gemarists; whom see. The reason of the latter is thus expressed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Blessed is the Judge who leaveneth his judgment: that is, as the Gloss, who delays his judgment, and lets it rest all night, that he may sift out the truth.

The difference between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is greater than the Reader may perhaps think at first sight; by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they signify the whole process of the trial, the examining of the Plaintiff and Defendant, and of the Witnesses, the taking the votes of the Council, and the entering of them by the Scribes: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies only the passing of judgment, or giving a definitive sentence. You may better perceive the difference from the Glossary on Bab. Sanhedr. In the Text this is decreed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let them not judge on the eve of the Sabbath, nor on the eve of a Feast-day; which is also repeated in other places. The reason of the prohibition is this, namely, that the trials which were begun on the eve of the Sabbath, or a Feast-day, should not be finished on the Sabbath or Feast-day. Which indeed, saith the Gloss, is observed in pecuniary trials, and care is taken that there be no writing: (for it is forbid to write so much as a letter on the Sabbath) but in capital causes it takes not place upon that account; for the votes of those that acquitted or condemned were written the day before.

You see in the History of the Gospel, 1. The Trial concerning our Savior 's life, dispatched at one and the same sitting. 2. And that too on a Feast-day.

VERS. V.

STrangulatus est, was strangled: namely by the Devil, who had now been in him three days together. The words of Peter, Act. I. 18. do not suffer me to understand this of hanging himself. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst. Interpreters take a great deal of pains to make these words agree with his hanging himself, but indeed all will not do. I know the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is commonly applied to a man's hanging himself, but not to exclude some other way of strangling. And I cannot but take the story (with good leave of antiquity) in this sense. After Judas had thrown down the money, the price of his Treason, in the Temple, and was now returning again to his mates, the Devil who dwelt in him, caught him up on high, strangled him, and threw him down headlong, so that dashing upon the ground, he burst in the midst, and his guts issued out, and the Devil went out in so horrid an Exit. This certainly agrees very well with the words of Peter now mentioned, and also with those that follow, This was known to all that dwelt at Jerusalem. It agrees also very well with the deserts of the wicked wretch, and with the title of Iscariot. The wickedness he had committed was above all example; and the punishment he suffered was beyond all president. There had been many instances of persons who had hanged themselves, this would not so much have stirred up the people of Jerusalem to take notice of it, as such a strangling and throwing down headlong, which we suppose horrible above measure, and singular beyond example. See what we have said at the tenth Chapter concerning the word Iscariot.

VERS. IX.

HOW much this place hath troubled Interpreters let the famous Beza, instead of many others declare: This knot hath hampered all the most ancient Interpreters; in that the testimony here is taken out of Zacharias, and not from Jeremy; so that it seems plainly to have been 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a failing of memory, as Augustine supposes in his third Book, De consensu Evangelistarum, Chapter the seventh; as also Eusebius in the twentieth Book 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of Demonstration. But if any one had rather impute this error to the transcribers, or (as I rather suppose) to the unskillfulness of some person who put in the name of Jeremy, when the Evangelist had writ only as he often doth in other places, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by the Prophet. Yet we must confess that this error hath long since crept into the holy Scriptures, as Jerome expressly affirms, &c.

But (with the leave of so great men) I do not only deny, that so much as one letter is spurious, or crept in without the knowledge of the Evangelist, but I do confidently assert that Matthew writ Jeremy, as we read it, and that it was very readily understood and received by his Countrymen. We will transcribe the following monument of antiquity out of the Talmudists, and then let the Reader judge. A Tradition of the Rabbins. This is the order of the Prophets. The Book of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the twelve. And a little after: But since Isaiah was before both Jeremiah and Ezekiel, he ought to have been set before them: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But since the Book of Kings ends with destruction, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and all Jeremy is about destruction, and since Ezekiel begins with destruction, and ends with comfort; and all Isaiah is about comfort, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They joined destruction with destruction, and comfort with comfort; that is, they placed those Books together which treat of destruction, and those together which treat of comfort.

You have this Tradition quoted by David Kimchius in his Preface to Jeremy. Whence it is very plain that Jeremy of old had the first place among the Prophets; and hereby he comes to be mentioned above all the rest, Mat. XVI. 14. because he stood first in the volume of the Prophets, therefore he is first named. When therefore Matthew produceth a Text of Zacharias under the name of Jeremy, he only cites the words of the Volume of the Prophets under his name, who stood first in the Volume of the Prophets. Of which sort is that also of our Savior, Luk. XXIV. 44. All things must be fulfilled which are written of me in the Law and the Prophets, and the Psalms. In the Psalms, that is, in the Book of Hagiographa, in which the Psalms were placed first.

VERS. XVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bar Abba, a very usual name in the Talmudists. R. Samuel Barabba, and R. Nathan Barabba. Abba bar Abba. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . In the Jerusalem Dialect it is very often uttered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bar Ba. Simeon Bar Ba R. Chaijah bar Ba . This brings to my mind what Josephus relates to have been done in the besieging of the City, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . When huge stones were thrown against the City by the Roman stings, some persons sitting in the Towers gave the citizens warning by a sign to take heed, crying out in the vulgar dialect, The Son cometh, that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Son of man indeed then came in the glory of his justice and his vengeance, as he had often foretold, to destroy that most wicked and profligate Nation.

VERS. XIX.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When King Sapores went about to afflict Rabbah, his mother sent to him, saying, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Have thou nothing to do with that Jew, &c.

VERS. XXVI.

SUCH was the custom of the Romans towards those that were to be crucified: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Whom after he had beaten with whips he crucified. And a little after, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To be whipped before the judgment-seat, and to be nailed to the Cross.

VERS. XXIX.

SEE those fictions in Tanchum concerning an Angel that appeared in the shape of Solomon: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In whose hand there was a reed: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And whom they struck with a reed.

VERS. XXXI.

THESE things are delivered in Sanhedrim , of one that is guilty of stoning: If there be no defense found for him, they lead him out to be stoned, and a crier went before, saying aloud thus, N. the Son of N. comes out to be stoned, because he hath done so and so. The Witnesses against him are N. and N. whosoever can bring anything in his defense, let him come forth and produce it. On which thus the Gemara of Babylon. The Tradition is, that on the evening of the Passover Jesus was hanged, and that a Cryer went before him for forty days, making this Proclamation, This man comes forth to be stoned, because he dealt in sorceries, and persuaded and seduced Israel; whosoever knows of any defense for him, let him come forth and produce it: But no defense could be found, therefore they hanged him on the evening of the Passover. Ulla saith, His case seemed not to admit of any defense, since he was a seducer, and of such God hath said, Thou shalt not spare him, neither shalt thou conceal him. ( Deut. XIII.)

They led him that was to be stoned out of the City, Act. VII. 58. so also him that was to be crucified. The place of stoning was without the three Camps, for at Jerusalem there were three Camps, (namely God's, the Levites, and the Peoples, as it was in the encamping in the Wilderness.) And in every city also, where there was a Council (namely of twenty three) the place of stoning was without the City. For all cities that have walls, bear a resemblance to the Camp of Israel.

Because Jesus was judged at a Heathen Tribunal, therefore a death is inflicted on him, not usual with the Jewish Council, namely Crucifixion. In several things the circumstances and actions belonging to his death, differed from the custom of the Jews in putting persons to death.

1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They never judge two on the same day . But here besides Christ are two thieves judged.

2. They never carried one that was to be hanged to hanging, till near Sun-set . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They stay till near Sun-set, and then they pass sentence, and execute him. And the reason is given by the Glosser, They do not perfect his judgment, nor hang him in the morning, lest they should neglect his burial and happen to forget themselves (and the Malefactor should hang till after Sun-set) but near Sun-setting, so that they may bury him out of hand. But Christ was sentenced to death before noon, and at noon was nailed to the Cross. For,

3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They first put the condemned person to death, and then hanged him upon a tree: But the custom of the (Roman) Empire, is first to hang them, and then to put them to death .

4. They did not openly lament for those that were led forth to be put to death, but for Jesus they did. Luk. XXIII. 27, 28. The reason of this difference is not to be sought from the kind of the death, but from the persons. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They did not bewail for a person led out to execution, but they lamented inwardly in their hearts . You will wonder at the reason, which the Gloss thus gives you: They did not openly bewail him, upon this account, that his being vilified (when nobody openly lamented him) might help to atone for him; but they sorrowed for him in their hearts; for this did not tend to his honor, nor lessen the atonement. These were better instructed, who lamented for Christ, both as to the thing and person.

VERS. XXXIII.

BEZA pretends that this is writ amiss, for Golgoltha, ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) when yet it is found thus writ in all Copies. But the good man censures amiss; since such a leaving out of letters in many Syriac words, is very usual, you have this word thus writ without the second λ, by the Samaritan Interpreter, in the first Chapter of Numbers.

VERS. XXXIV.

TO those that were to be executed they gave a grain of Myrrh infused in wine to drink, that their understanding might be disturbed, (that is, that they might lose their senses.) As it is said, Give strong drink to them that are ready to die, and wine to those that are of a sorrowful heart, &c. And the Tradition is, That some women of quality in Jerusalem allowed this freely of their own cost, &c.

But it makes a scruple that in Matthew it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , vinegar with gall; in Mark 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , wine mingled with myrrh. If wine, why is it called vinegar? If wine mingled with Myrrh, why gall? Ans. The words of Mark seem to relate to the custom of the Nation; those of Matthew to the thing as it was really acted. I understand Mark thus, They gave him, according to the custom of the Nation, that cup which used to be given to those that were led to execution; but (as Matthew has it) not the usual mixture, namely wine and frankincense, or myrrh; but for the greater mockage, and out of more bitter rankor, vinegar and gall. So that we may suppose this cup not to have been prepared by those honorable women, compassionating those that were to die, but on purpose by the Scribes, and the other persecutors of Christ, studying to heap upon him all kind of ignominy and vexation. In this cup they afterwards dipped a spunge, as may be supposed. See the 48th verse.

VERS. XXXV.

OF stoning we have this account , When he is now four cubits from the place of stoning, they strip him of his clothes; and if it be a man, they hang a cloth before him, if a woman, both before and behind. These are the words of R. Judah: but the wise say, A man is stoned naked, a woman not naked. So that it is plain enough he was crucified naked.

VERS. XXXVIII.

SEE in Josephus who they were that at that time were called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and how much trouble and pains the Governors of Judea were at, to restrain and root out this cursed sort of men. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Hezekiah the chief Robber was subdued by Herod. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . One Simon straggling about with the robbers with whom he associated, burnt the palaces in Jericho. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Felix having caught the chief Robber Eleazar, who for twenty years had wasted the Country with fire and sword, sent him to Rome, and many others with him. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Another kind of Robbers sprang up in Jerusalem, who slew men in the daytime, and in the midst of the City, &c.

There is a rule set down, and the art showed of discovering and apprehending Robbers: Go to the victualing houses at the fourth hour, (the Gloss, That was the hour of eating, and they went all to the victualing-houses to eat) and if you see there a man drinking wine, and holding the cup in his hand, and sleeping, &c. he is a thief, lay hold on him, &c.

Among the monsters of the Jewish routs, preceding the destruction of the City, the multitude of Robbers, and the horrible slaughters committed by them, deservedly claim the first consideration, which next to the just vengeance of God against that most wicked Nation, you may justly ascribe to divers originals.

• 1. It is no wonder if that Nation abounded beyond measure with a vagabond, dissolute, lewd sort of young men; since by means of Polygamy, and the divorces of their wives at pleasure, and the Nations unspeakable addictedness to lasciviousness and whoredoms, there could not but continually spring up bastards, and an offspring born only to beggary or rapine, as wanting both sustenance and ingenuous education.
• 2. The foolish and sinful indulgence of the Council could not but nurse up all kind of broods of wicked men, while they scarce ever put any one to death, though never so wicked, as being an Israelite; who must not by any means be touched.
• 3. The opposition of the Z • lots to the Roman yoke, made them study only to mischief the Romans, and do all the mischief they could to those Jews that submitted to them.
• 4. The Governors of Judea did often out of Policy indulge a licentiousness to such kind of rapines, that they might humble that people they so much hated, and which was continually subject to insurrections, by beating them, as it were, with their own clubs; and sometimes getting a share in the booty. Thus Josephus concerning Florus , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. He spoiled all the people, and he did in effect proclaim that all might go out in the Country to rob, that he might receive a share in the spoils. And thus a sword that first came out of their own bowels, was sheathed in them.

VERS. XXXIX.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉