Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

THEY dragged Jesus along with them; and, instead of taking him directly to the proper magistrate, they carried him before Annas, who had no other character than that of being father in law to the high priest. John xviii. 13. Now, if this was only for the purpose of letting him be seen by him, such a curiosity was not to be gratified; it was a vexatious proceeding, an irregularity.

From the house of Annas they led him to that of the high priest; all this time being bound. John xviii. 24. They placed him in the court yard; it was cold, and they made a fire; it was in the night time, but by the light of the fire Peter

was recognised by the people of the pal

ace.

Now the Jewish law prohibited all proceedings by night; here, therefore, there was another infraction of the law.

Under this state of things, his person being forcibly seized and detained in a private house, and delivered into the hands of servants, in the midst of a court, how was Jesus treated? St. Luke says, the men that held Jesus mocked him and smote him; and when they had blindfolded him, they struck him on the face, and asked him, saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee? And many other things blasphemously spake they against him. Luke xxii. 63, 64, 65.

Will it be said, as Mr. Salvador does, that all this took place out of the presence of the senate? Let us wait, in this instance, till the senate shall be called up, and we shall see how far they protected the accused person.

CAPTIOUS

SECTION V.

INTERROGATORIES.

VIOLENCE TOWARDS JESUS.

ACTS OF

ALREADY had the cock crowed! But it was not yet day. The elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and, having caused Jesus to appear before their council, they proceeded to interrogate him. Luke xxii. 66.

Now, in the outset, it should be observed, that if they had been less carried away by their hatred, they should, as it was the night time, not only have postponed, but put a stop to the proceedings, because it was the feast of the Passover, the most solemn of all festivals; and according to their law no judicial procedure could take place on a feast-day, under the penalty of

being null.

Nevertheless, let us see who

proceeded to interrogate Jesus.

This was that same Caiaphas, who, if he had intended to remain a judge, was evidently liable to objection; for in the preceding assemblage he had made himself the accuser of Jesus. † had seen or heard him, he be deserving of death.

Even before he

declared him to

He said to his

colleagues, that "it was expedient that one man should die for all." John xviii. 14. Such being the opinion of Caiaphas, we shall not be surprised, if he shows partiality.

Instead of interrogating Jesus respecting positive acts done, with their circumstances, and respecting facts personal to himself,

*

See, as to these two grounds of nullity, the Jewish authors cited by Prost de Royer, tome 2, p. 205, verbo ACCUSATION.

+ Mr. Salvador admits this: "Caiaphas," says he, "made himself his accuser.". p. 85.

Caiaphas interrogates him respecting general facts, respecting his disciples (whom it would have been much more simple to have called as witnesses) and respecting his doctrine, which was a mere abstraction so long as no external acts were the consequence of it. "The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples and of his doctrine." John xviii. 19.

Jesus answered with dignity: "I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing." Ib. 20.

[ocr errors]

Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them; behold, they know what I said." Ib. 21.

"And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so?" Ib.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »