That any one can seriously put forward such a conjecture as this is the best proof of our helpless ignorance.

The two disciples had fulfilled their task. They had found every thing ready in the house of the unnamed friend, and had made the necessary provisions, including the preparation of the lamb which was to be the principal dish.1 About two o'clock in the afternoon the trumpets of the Levites gave the signal, and the Jews, bearing the lambs on their shoulders, approached the court of the temple, which was adorned with varied tapestries for the occasion. Then, between the hours of three and five, the people themselves slaughtered the lambs, which had previously been examined by the priests, while the trumpets sounded and the choirs sang, and the priests, in two long rows, received the blood in gold and silver vessels, passed it on from one to the other, and poured it out at the foot of the altar. Then the animals were skinned, still in the temple, their kidneys, fat, and liver left before the altar, and the rest wrapped up in the fleece and carried home to be roasted ready for the feast to begin after sunset. We can fancy what a bustling scene the mount of the temple would present! Josephus tells us that in the year 66 A.D. no less than 256,500 lambs were slaughtered; and even if we allow for great exaggeration, and assume, say, a fifth of that number as the average, still the slaughter and preparation of the animals would cause an indescribable commotion.

In the evening Jesus came with his disciples and approached the house where the cheerfully-lighted hall awaited him. There they took off their sandals, washed their hands and feet, and lay down on the couches. The course of the festivities prescribed by tradition was something as follows: First of all a goblet was filled, generally with three parts of wine to one of water, and was passed round after the head of the family had uttered a short thanksgiving both for the wine ("Blessed art thou, O Lord our God! thou king of the earth who hast made the fruit of the vine!") and for the feast day. After this the partakers divided the bitter herbs and ate some of them. Then they served the biscuit of unleavened bread baked in flat, round cakes about half an inch thick, together with the mess of fruit and the roasted flesh of the Paschal lamb. The head of the family took one of the biscuit, broke it up with the blessing, "Praised be He who makes the bread come forth out of the earth!" and handed the pieces

1 See vol. i. pp. 277, 278.

to those present, who ate them together with some of the herbs dippel in the fruit. While the second cup of wine was being prepared, the significance of the feast was expounded, and Psalms cxiii. and cxiv. (the beginning of the Hallel) were sung,' after which the cup went round. Then the head of the family washed his hands again and ate the first piece of the lamb, as he would presently eat the last; upon which the regular meal began, and was passed in cheerful conversation, all eating to satiety. The meal was closed with a third cup of wine, called the cup "of the blessing;" and, as a fourth cup went round, the remainder of the song of praise (Psalms cxv.-cxviii.) was sung, and the feast concluded. fifth cup however was not prohibited. We may suppose that these regulations were in the main observed in that upper chamber to which we have transported ourselves in imagination, and where Jesus took the place of the head of the family.

A

But in one respect this circle of friends formed a sad exception to the general rule. The Paschal supper was preeminently a time of rejoicing. But here there was a cloud upon the feast. The first words that Jesus uttered as he reclined upon the couch, though they testified to a certain sense of joy, had yet a mournful ring: "How have I longed to eat this Passover with you [before I suffer], for I shall not eat it again till it be the true feast of redemption in the kingdom of God." But it was not only the thought of the approaching severance that weighed upon his heart, it was far more the sense of distrust which he had never felt before when in the midst of his friends.

And when all the symbolical ceremonies that introduced the feast were over, it must have become more obvious than ever that Jesus was under some painful restraint. He could not go on with the meal; and the dark suspicion that he cherished forced him at last to give it utterance. A deep sigh broke the strained and painful silence, and he cried: "I tell you, one of you here at table with me is about to give me up into the hands of my enemies!" Is it possible that he hoped to arrive at greater certainty, to hold back the disciple who was in such fearful peril, and to draw a frank and penitent confession from him? If so, he was disappointed. The friends were bewildered. They could not understand it, save one. They knew that such a deed would be utterly impossible to them; and not in the least for their own satisfaction, 1 See vol i. p. 280.

but simply to clear themselves from each other's suspicions, they began, first one and then another, to ask, "It is not I?" "Master, it is not I?" But Jesus had no intention of saying more. The warning would be understood by him whom it concerned. So he only emphasized the blackness of the deed: "It is one of you twelve who are here dipping your bread in one dish with me! The Son of Man must indeed go, as it is written of him; but woe to him by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It were well for that man had he never been born."

Here the first Gospel adds that Judas asked again, “Rabbi, is it I?" and that Jesus answered that it was. But this is incredible. If the Eleven had known that Judas was the traitor, they would not have quietly allowed him to go his way. It is far more probable that even the account we have already taken from the Gospels represents Jesus as having spoken more definitely than he really did. If he did not announce a fact, but spoke of an urgent danger, as a solemn warning against desertion, the disciples may well have regarded it at the time as another instance of his gloomy forebodings, while they afterwards involuntarily threw it into a more definite form.

Be this as it may, it was some relief to Jesus to have giver. utterance to what oppressed him. The meal went on, though with little sign of festive joy. After a time they spoke of other things, of which however we have lost all record. Luke indeed indicates several subjects as spoken of at this last meeting; but much of what he gives us on this occasion finds its true place elsewhere. Such for instance is an exhortation to ministering love, rising from a dispute about precedence,1 and concluded with a reference to the example of Jesus himself: "Who is greater, the guest or the servant? Surely the guest. And yet I am among you as a servant!" We can more readily believe that Jesus cast a retrospective glance upon all that they had gone through together, commended their unshaken fidelity, and expressly named them his successors now that he was on the point of leaving them: "You are the men who have clung to me in all my trials, and to you do I commit the kingdom as my Father has committed it to me." But some suspicion is thrown even upon this saying by the words that follow it. Luke also represents certain words as uttered at table which we shall follow Matthew and

Mark in placing later, the hall.

- after Jesus and his disciples had left

So the meal was ended. Jesus himself was completely dominated by the thought that a fatal termination of the struggle was close at hand; but he had again perceived how far he was from having really imparted his conception of the future to his friends. Their preconceived ideas so blinded them to the true state of things, that in spite of his repeated warnings they were still unprepared for the catastrophe. It was therefore for their sakes as well as because he felt impelled himself to give words, and if possible some yet more emphatic utterance, to the dark forebodings as well as the unshaken hopes which filled him, that he obeyed the inspiration of a sudden thought, and performed a simple action which produced so deep an impression on his friends as to lead to most remarkable results. He raised his head, and there was something in his face which riveted the attention of his disciples. They followed him with their eyes as he took two cakes of bread, laid them before him, uttered the customary blessing, and broke one of them into thirteen pieces, one of which he ate, and placed the rest upon the other cake, which served as a plate, and passed it to his friends with the words, "Eat it. It is my body." Then he filled the cup to the brim, set it on the table, and, after the usual thanksgiving, raised it to his lips and then passed it round saying, as they all drank from it: "This is my blood of the covenant, that shall flow for the salvation of many. Of a truth I tell you that I shall never again drink of the fruit of the vine till the great day when I shall drink it new in the perfected kingdom of God!" No one present could fail for a moment to comprehend his meaning. It was a symbolical action, after the manner of the prophets. We have more than once seen Jeremiah, for example, adopt a like method of enforcing his words by accompanying them with some visible illustration.1 "Even as

I break this bread," Jesus meant to say, "so shall my body be broken and slain; even as this wine flows out so shall my blood flow. Nay, my death is so near at hand that I shall never drink wine again, shall never more lie down to meat, in this world." It is possible, however, that he spoke, as Matthew says, of this wine, that is to say, the wine of the Passover, and only meant that as this was the first so it was also the last Passover which he would live to celebrate

1 See vol. ii. pp. 374, 366, 367, et seq.

with his friends. In any case, he uttered his firm conviction that he would rise again, that he would be reunited to his disciples, and in the immediate future, when heaven and earth were made new, would taste the joy of the kingdom of God here upon this earth.

Yet more. It was not enough for his friends to believe that salvation would come in spite of his fall, they must know that his death was the very means by which it would be secured his blood that would so soon be shed was the "blood of the covenant." We must remember in this connection that in ancient times a sacrifice was always made at the conclusion of a treaty. In the blood that was shed lay the real significance of the ceremony. The Israelites regarded blood as pre-eminently sacred, for they believed it to be the seat and principle of life, or the very life itself, so that when the blood of the victim was sprinkled upon the two parties to a treaty they were brought into the very closest connection with each other as sharers in one life, pledged to inviolable fidelity. Now, tradition declared that when Moses sealed the covenant between Yahweh and Israel upon Mount Sinai, he had said as he sprinkled the blood, "This is the blood of the covenant," - that is to say, the blood by which the covenant is established. It was to this that Jesus now referred as he adopted the expression. That covenant had never been carried out, for one of the parties to it had proved faithless; and therefore the promise of the Lord had not been fulfilled, and the kingdom of God had not come. But what Moses had intended, he, Jesus, was to accomplish; and that, too, at the moment of his death. As his blood flowed out, the covenant would be established, the true and eternal covenant which had failed before, the covenant between God and man, between the Father and his children, the covenant of love, of life, of blessedness. Well might he say that his blood would flow for the salvation of many! And when his death had brought to pass what his life had failed to accomplish, - when ere long all things were glorified, — he relied upon returning and sharing with his dear ones the extreme of bliss.

This is the simplest account of what took place, and is given by Mark. The first Gospel agrees with it, except that it makes Jesus say that his blood of the covenant was shed for many "for the forgiveness of sins." But this ides that

1 Compare 1 Peter i. 2.

2 See vol. ii. p. 266; Exodus xxiv. 6-8; Hebrews ix. 18 ff.