and in the way in which they spoke of him to others; nor did Jesus himself attempt to conceal from his followers that the highest interests were involved in this journey, and that it stood in some immediate connection with the coming of the kingdom of God. So the brightest expectations filled their hearts as they went with him to Jerusalem. Would the Messianic age, of which he himself had foretold the speedy advent with such emphasis and in such consoling words, now really come?

Since we have no trustworthy information whatever as to the time at which Jesus left Galilee or at which he arrived at the capital, we must be content with mere conjectures. Now various conversations and occurrences are reported as taking place in the course of the journey, which seem to show that it was by no means hurried. And again, we can hardly force all that occurred at Jerusalem into the space of a single week. It appears, therefore, that Jesus wisely determined to be in the city some three weeks at least before the festival, in order to make himself acquainted with the ground, and to establish himself firmly there before the great streams of pilgrims poured into Jerusalem. Most of these pilgrims came a week in advance, in order to observe certain ceremonies of so-called purification; and for Jesus and his company to arrive at the same time might have been dangerous, considering the general excitement that prevailed. It seemed advisable on every ground to be beforehand.

For these reasons we may suppose that it was more than a month before the Passover when Jesus embarked at Capernaum and crossed the lake. Disembarking on the southeastern coast, he passed through Hippus into the valley of the Jordan, which he followed southwards with the river on his right, until, just above Beth-Haran, he reached the ford on the way to Jericho, from which the city was about two hours' journey distant. So far it had not been a pleasant journey. The floor of the Jordan Valley is from seven to ten miles broad, and something over sixty miles in length, from the lake of Gennesareth to the Dead Sea. It lies so low that

in summer the heat is unendurable. Even in the evening and at night the close and heavy atmosphere is hardly cooled, and the whole appearance of the valley is parched and dry. It was, therefore, for the most part thinly populated and far from fertile. In the early spring-time, however, as the river poured its boisterous waters to the south and often overflowed Its banks, the region may have seemed far fresher and more

pleasant than in summer; but even then it can have had but little life or variety to display, while the two long chains of white and barren limestone rocks that skirted it on either side shut out the prospect everywhere. Not till the traveller reached the little plain of Jericho, about eight miles long and two and a half across, was the monotony of his journey relieved by a delightful surprise. Here the eye rested all at once on a spot most richly blessed by Nature. It was full of beautiful pleasure-grounds, where the luxuriance and variety of the flowers rivalled the richness of the pasturage and the excellence of the trees and shrubs. In a word, it was known throughout the world as a little paradise.

As Jesus passed through the monotonous valley and the smiling plain, who shall say what a host of thoughts crowded into his mind! When last he sought the regions of the southern Jordan, it was to hear the Baptist before his own ministry began. It was hardly more than a few months ago, but it seemed like a lifetime, so much had happened in the interval! And now, how vividly his predecessor stood before him once again, preaching of the judgment! But as to all those reminiscences our Gospels preserve the profoundest silence. They tell us only of the glances Jesus cast into the future and the occurrences upon the journey. All these we should have to place on the soil of Judah itself were we literally to follow the first and second Gospels. But this representation can hardly be correct. We shall give the several events in the order in which they occur in the Gospels, but shall set aside as wholly unworthy of credit the statement that Jesus addressed the people here also "as his custom was," and healed the multitudes that followed him. Moreover, in speaking of the task of the Messiah and of the judgment, we shall now and then insert a saying of Jesus which the Gospels give elsewhere, but which appears to us to fall most suitably into this period.

The first occurrence recorded on the journey is a hostile encounter with certain Pharisees, who either lived in Peræa or were passing through it with a purpose similar to that of Jesus himself. They had doubtless heard how audaciously Jesus attacked the holy commandments, and either to convince themselves personally of the truth of the report, or else on purpose to involve him in opposition to the Law, they asked him, "Is it allowable for a man to put away his vife?"

Why did they select this point of attack above all others? It appears that Jesus had already expressed himself on the subject with publicity and emphasis. At any rate Luke has preserved a detached saying referring to it which has also found its way into the Sermon on the Mount, in the series of contrasts between the old and the new principles which we have already examined.' It is there provided with the usual introduction, and runs: "It has been said, 'Whoever puts away his wife must give her a bill of divorce.' 2 But I say that whoever puts away his wife is the cause of the adultery that he who afterwards marries her commits with her." The law and usage of Israel on the subject of divorce had been instituted to check still grosser excesses of Oriental licentiousness; and how deeply the moral sense of Jesus must have been revolted by seeing that they were made the excuse for unheard-of levity, nay, for shameless immorality in contracting and dissolving marriage! The text of Deuteronomy referred to allowed of divorce in case a man had discovered "any thing improper" in his wife; and since this expression is exceedingly elastic, the Scribes were far from unanimous as to its interpretation. Shammai and his followers held that divorce was never allowable except when a wife had been unfaithful to her husband; but others thought that her appearance in the street without a veil, or with her neck bare, was enough. Hillel and his followers actually maintained that a man might divorce his wife if she burned his dinner or made it too salt; and Rabbi Akiba, one of Hillel's most celebrated successors, thought it reason enough for a man to divorce his wife if he preferred another woman! In any case the husband was the sole judge of his own cause, and the wife could never demand a separation. Of this last fact Mark, who was better acquainted with Roman than with Jewish habits in this matter, was not aware.* We may imagine how women were humiliated by such customs, how deeply the institution of marriage was degraded, and what fatal results to education and domestic life must necessarily follow.

Jesus, as we should have expected, had a very decided answer ready for these Pharisees: "Have you never read in the Scripture that the Creator made man male and female in the beginning, and said, 'Therefore shall a man forsake his father and mother to cleave to his wife; and these two shall

1 See pp. 226 ff.

2 Deuteronomy xxiv. 1.

8 Luke xvi. 18; Matthew v. 31, 32, after an amended text.
4 Mark x. 12.

be one'? They are inseparably one, and the caprice of man may not sever those whom the will of God has joined!" But this appeal to the state of things before the promulgation of the Law neither silenced nor convinced the Pharisees. "Then would you have it go for nothing," they retorted sharply, "that Moses expressly ordained divorce by means of a written bill?" "It was only because of your dulness of soul," said Jesus, in a tone of lofty rebuke," that Moses permitted you to put away your wives. It was not so in the beginning And I tell you, whoever puts away his wife and marries another is an adulterer; and so is any one who marries a woman that her husband has divorced."

The Pharisees withdrew in indignation at this audacious rupture with the Law of the Lord. But even the disciples, among whom Simon was certainly not the only married man, were astonished and alarmed. This need not surprise us. Perhaps when Jesus had spoken on the subject before they had paid no special attention to what he said. At any rate, they had never before seen the matter in the light in which he had put it now, and his rule was in direct contradiction to public opinion and to all the usages of society. We can easily see that it was dictated by a very lofty conception of marriage itself, and was inspired by a deep faith in mankind and in the future. With his eye upon the approaching kingdom of God, Jesus could no longer consent to a compromise, or make terms with an unclean passion. Early Christianity, however, which fell so far short of the Master's exaltation of spirit, soon thought it necessary to temper the strictness of his command; and in two of the four passages that refer to the subject (the two which occur in Matthew), the abso lute prohibition of divorce is modified by the insertion of the words, "unless the woman has committed adultery." This reservation, which was quite at variance with the intention of Jesus, produced a corresponding change in the question of the Pharisees, who were now made to ask whether a man might put away his wife" for every cause." The Roman Catholic Church, on the contrary, maintains, at least in theory, that marriage cannot be annulled. But to return to the disciples. In the first Gospel we are told that when the controversy was over they said to the Master, If it is true that a man can never under any circumstances put away his wife, the most prudent course is not to marry at all!" Jesus did not stay to refute this timorous deduction, but gave a fresh 2 Compare p. 227

Genesis ii. 24.

turn to the discourse by admitting that in some cases, apart from those in which marriage was physically impossible, it might be best to abstain from it. It might be a necessary sacrifice to the kingdom of God. There had been and there still were those whom a deep sense of their own special mission urged to sacrifice wedded love, domestic happiness, and all the pleasures of life in order that they might consecrate their undivided powers to the highest interests of man. But for this a special sense of duty, a special strength of will and intensity of faith, and great self-command and self-denial were needed.

So said Jesus; and we listen to his words on this subject with extremest interest. It need hardly be said that, though he appealed to the authority of the Scripture in his controversy with the Pharisees, yet the views of marriage which brought him once more into conflict with the religion of his people were not founded upon a text of the Bible. On the contrary, if the text in Genesis was for him, that in Deuteronomy was against him! It was in view of man's original disposition, which revealed the Creator's will, that he maintained the purely moral nature and the divine origin of marriage, and as a consequence its sanctity and indissolubility. From this the dignity and rights of woman and the lofty significance and function of family life follow as a natural consequence. But in the same breath, as it were, with which he maintains all this, he goes on to demand inexorably the sacrifice of every thing, if need be, to principle. On this very journey we catch the echo both of his high appreciation of domestic life and of his conviction that all things must be sacrificed for the kingdom of God's sake.

His experiences upon the way were not always painful. Thus we are told that once, when he had gone into a house, certain parents came with their children in their arms or walking at their sides. It was easy to see what they wanted. Sometimes parents would bring their children to the synagogue for the superintendent or one of the rabbis to ask a blessing on their heads; and so these people had brought their little ones to the prophet of Nazareth with a feeling that the very touch of such a holy man of God must have some special power in it. But the disciples, who were beginning to feel their own importance and who would not have their Master disturbed for such a trivial cause, turned them away with some harshness; and they were just going back disappointed, when fortunately Jesus saw what was taking place.