CHAPTER XV.

LAST SUFFERINGS OF JESUS-PILATE-SILENCE OF JESUS-BARABBAS PREFERRED TO THE SON OF GOD ECCLESIASTICAL SUCCESSIONPILATE'S MISERABLE CONDUCT-JESUS CRUCIFIED-DARKNESSHOUR OF CRUCIFIXION-THE CRY ON THE CROSS.

WE now come to the close of that awful tragedy, unequalled in the history of the world, alike in its character, its virtue, and its woe.

We read that the elders, and the scribes, and the whole council, actuated by the intensest feelings of malignity and jealousy, bound Jesus, and took him to Pilate, in order that he might be punished. Pilate, whose character evidences that he was the mere tool and puppet of an ecclesiastical council, and not allowed to act according to his own judgment, asked him, “ Art thou the king of the Jews?"-they say that you are; is this your own assumption and pretension? "And he answering said unto him, Thou sayest it,”—an expression equivalent to "I am-I am the King of the Jews."

"And the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing." Why was Jesus silent? There is a time to speak, and there is a time to be silent. When a charge is made against one which one has repudiated over and over again, and that charge has no competent witnesses to sustain it, no evidence of its veracity nor of its reality, then, not discussion, not

reiterated denial, but silence is the most dignified, the most suitable, we would say the most dutiful. What was the use of denial repeated, where denial was so treated? What was the use of replying to charges which had no evidence to sustain them?

It requires in us grace to be silent when falsely accused; and there is often more grace seen in eloquent silence than in many words. Where reply is required, reply should be made but where defence can be of no value, and it is only reiterating what we have already said, there silence is alike most significant and most becoming.

:

It was the custom, we read, at the great feast of the Passover, which was now being celebrated, to release a prisoner. This was not a divine institution, but, as the Romans had the civil supremacy of Judea, in order to keep the Jews in good humour, or in contentment, they were in the habit of indulging them with various boons, which pleased them, and cost the Roman government nothing. The Romans, therefore, had introduced the custom, in order to show respect to a Jewish festival in which they did not believe, of releasing a prisoner at that time. There were many prisoners, charged with insurrection and with murder, and a ringleader of the name of Barabbas, the worst and the most guilty of all. And when Pilate asked, "Will ye that I release unto you the king of the Jews?"-evidently prepared to do so, because he knew that the priests had betrayed him for envy-" the chief priests moved the people”—urged them" that he should rather release Barabbas unto them." What a spectacle is here! The civil power was willing to do justly, apparently the people were very much disposed to be guided to do what was right; but the priests the ecclesiastical power-thirsting, under

the stirrings of ecclesiastical ambition, for supremacy and for power, put it into the people to demand Barabbas, and release a robber and murderer in preference to the holy, the spotless, the innocent Son of God! And who were these chief priests? They had a true succession, mark you; the Jewish priests had not a sham succession, but a true one. There was not a priest in the days of our Lord who could not trace his succession with perfect precision back to Aaron. They sat in the chair of Moses; and yet these very priests, with this succession, and with the Old Testament Scriptures in their hands, crucified the Lord of glory. There was no infallible church in those days, and the ecclesiastical succession was not infallible then. Let those who pretend to infallibility now, take care, lest they crucify afresh the Son of God, and put him to an open shame; and let those who think they never can speak error, because they assume to have a succession from the apostles, take care, lest they teach people to prefer a Barabbas to Jesus,-a robber to the Son of God !

Pilate, unwilling to give him up, asked, "What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? And they cried out, Crucify him. Then Pilate ”—evidently himself satisfied that he had done nothing wrong-" said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him. And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.” Miserable governor! why did he not resign a sceptre, the dignities and the duties of which he could not fulfil? Why did he not rather fling place and power to the winds, than dare to do what his conscience told him

was wrong,-what he knew was the demand of mere ecclesiastical spite,—what he knew was the betrayal of an innocent man? How sorrowful a spectacle, a chief ruler becoming the puppet of a mob, the tool of ecclesiastics! and in order to escape the fury of the one, and to content the rabid passions of the other, he committed the awful sin of giving up the Son of God to be crucified !

We read next of the treatment which Jesus received. "They clothed him with purple," the symbol of majesty and royalty, as much as to say, You pretend to be the king of the Jews, we will treat you, contemptuously, as such-"and platted a crown of thorns ❞—a mock symbol of sovereignty-"and put it about his head "-to torture him, and to be to them an element of triumph. "And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him.”

And all this while, what did Jesus do? We read nothing of an expression that he uttered, of a remonstrance that he made. "He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth." "Reviled, he reviled not again." Truly this was the Son of God.

We then read that "they bring him unto the place Golgotha," so called because it was a place used for the burial of criminals, or, as some think, because it was a mound, or hill, shaped very much like the crown of the human head, and called from its appearance, Golgotha, the place of a skull. "And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh "—which made it bitter, and which was generally given to criminals. "And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments,

casting lots upon them, what every man should take. And the superscription of his accusation was written over"—not meant to be the expression of the truth, but which was precisely so, neither more nor less— “The King of the Jews." And in order to degrade him, and show in what category they placed him, he was crucified between two thieves. And thus, while they were venting their spite against him, they were unquestionably fulfilling the ancient prophecy—“ He was numbered with the transgressors."

We read then of the conduct of those that were beside the cross-" Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself." And then they said " He saved others; himself he cannot save." They meant that for reproach; it was literal and exact truth. He did save others. The blind, whose eyes he opened; the deaf, whose ears he unstopped; Lazarus, once dead and now living; the raised son of the widow of Nain; men that felt their sins forgiven; chiefest of sinners, who found themselves reinstated, clustered round him, and acknowledged, "He saved not only others, he saved us." But the inference, "Himself he cannot save," in the sense in which they used it, was wrong; in its right sense was perfectly true: he could not save himself, but why? Not for want of power, because he was omnipotent; but because he laid down his life for his foes. The cords that bound him to the cross were cords of love. What prevented him saving himself was because it required the sacrifice of himself in order that he might save others; it was because he would not save himself that he could not that they who could not save themselves might be everlastingly saved by him.