Birth of John the Baptist. Journey to Bethlehem. ture of the redemption, which was subsequently developed. It may perhaps appear too closely to press the terms of that which was the common, almost the proverbial, language of the devotional feelings: yet the expressions which intimate the degradation of the mighty from their seat, the disregard of the wealthy, the elevation of the lowly and the meek, and respect to the low estate of the poor, sound not unlike an allusion to the rejection of the proud and splendid royal race, which had so long ruled the nation, and the assumption of the throne of David by one born in a more humble state (1). After the return of Mary to Nazareth, the birth of John the Baptist excited the attention of the whole of Southern Judæa to the fulfilment of the rest of the prediction. When the child is about to be named, the dumb father interferes; he writes on a tablet the name by which he desires him to be called, and instantaneously recovers his speech (2). It is not unworthy of remark, that in this hymn of thanksgiving, the part which was to be assigned to John in the promulgation of the new faith, and his subordination to the unborn Messiah, are distinctly announced. Already, while one is but a newborn infant, the other scarcely conceived in the womb of his mother, they have assumed their separate stations: the child of Elizabeth is announced as the prophet of the Highest, who shall go "before the face of the Lord, to prepare his ways." Yet even here the Jewish notion predominates: the first object of the Messiah's coming, is that the children of Israel "should be saved from their enemies and from the hand of all that hate them; that they being delivered from the hand of their enemies, might serve him without fear (3)." As the period approaches at which the child of Mary is to be born, an apparently fortuitous circumstance summons both Joseph and the Virgin Mother from their residence in the unpopular town of Nazareth, in the province of Galilee, to Bethlehem, a small village to the south of Jerusalem (4). Joseph on the discovery of the pregnancy of his betrothed, being a man of gentle (5) character, had been willing to spare her the rigorous punishment enacted by the law in such cases, and determined on a private dissolution of the marriage (6). A vision however warned him of the real state of the (1) Neander in his recently published work has made similar observations on the Jewish notions in the song of Simeon. Leben Jesu, p. 26. (2) Luke, i. 57. 80. (3) Even the expression the "remission of sius," which to a Christian ear may bear a different sense, to the Jew would convey a much narrower meaning. All calamity being a mark of the divine displeasure, was an evidence of sin; every mark of divine favour therefore an evidence of divine forgiveness. The expression is frequently used in its Jewish sense in the book of Maccabees. 1 Macc. iii. 8.; 2 Macc. viii. 5. 27. and 29.; vii. 98. Le Clerc has made a siailar observation (note in loc.) but is opposed y Whitby, who however does not appear to have been very profoundly acquainted with Jewish phraseology. (4) Matt. i. 18. 25. (5) Grotius, in loc. from Chrysostom. (6) A bill of divorce was necessary, even when the parties were only betrothed, and where the marriage had not actually been solemnised. It is probable that the Mosaic law, which in such cases adjudged a female to death (Deut. xx 2325.), was not at this time executed in its origi nal rigour. It appears from Abarbanel (Buxtorf, de Divort.) that in certain cases a betrothed maiden might be divorced without stating the cause in the bill of divorce. This is the mean · 入 ing of the word λápa, secretly. Grotius, in loc. case, and he no longer hesitated, though abstaining from all connection, to take her to his home; and accordingly, being of the same descent, she accompanied him to Bethlehem. This town, as the birthplace of David, had always been consecrated in the memory of the Jews with peculiar reverence; and no prediction in the Old Testament appears more distinct, than that which assigns for the nativity of the great Prince, who was to perpetuate the line of David, the same town which had given birth to his royal ancestor (1). The decree of the Emperor Augustus (2), in obedience to which Decree of the whole population of Palestine was to be enrolled and registered, Augustus. has been, and still remains, an endless subject of controversy (3). One point seems clear, that the enrolment must have been of the nature of a population census; for any property, possessed by Joseph or Mary, must have been at Nazareth; and the enrolment, which seems to have included both husband and wife, was made at the place where the genealogical registers of the tribes were kept. About this period Josephus gives an account of an oath of allegiance and of fidelity, to Cæsar and to the interests of the reigning sovereign, which was to be taken by the whole Jewish nation. The affair of this oath is strangely mingled up with predictions of a change of dynasty, and with the expected appearance of a great king, under whose all powerful reign the most extraordinary events were to take place. Six thousand of the Pharisees, the violent religious party, resolutely refused to take the oath. They were fined, and their fine discharged by the low-born wife of Pheroras, the brother of Herod, into whose line certain impostors or enthusiasts, pretending to the gift of prophecy, had declared that the succession was to pass (4). An eunuch, Bagoas, to whom they had promised peculiar and miraculous advantages during the reign of the great predicted king (5), was implicated in this conspiracy, and suffered death, with many of the (1) Micah, v. 2. (3) The great difficulty arises from the introduction of the name of Cyrenius as the governor, under whose direction the enrolment, or, as it is no doubt mistranslated in our version, the taxa. tion, took place. But it is well known that Cyre nius did not become governor of Syria till several years later. The most usual way of accounting for this difficulty, adopted by Lardner and Paley, is the natural one of supposing that Cyrenius conducted the transaction, while holding a subordinate situation in the province, of which he afterwards became governor, and superintended a more regular taxation. But Mr. Greswell has recently adduced strong reasons for questioning whether Cyrenius could have been at this time in Palestine; and I agree with him, that such a census must have been made by the native authorities under Herod. The alternative remains either to suppose some error in the Gospel of St. Luke, as it now stands; or to adopt another version. That followed by Mr. Greswell, notwithstanding his apparent authorities, sounds to me quite ireconcileable with the genius of the Greek language. There cannot perhaps be found a more brief and satisfactory summary of (5) Independent of the nature of this promise, Birth of Christ. obstinate Pharisees and of Herod's kindred. It is highly probable that the administration of the oath of allegiance in Josephus, and the census in St. Luke, belong to the same transaction; for if the oath was to be taken by all the subjects of Herod, a general enrolment would be necessary throughout his dominions; and it was likely, according to Jewish usage, that this enrolment would be conducted according to the established divisions of the tribes (1). If however the expectation of the Messiah had penetrated even into the palace of Herod; if it had been made use of in the intrigues and dissensions among the separate branches of his family; if the strong religious faction had not scrupled to assume the character of divinelyinspired prophets, and to proclaim an immediate change of dynasty, the whole conduct of Herod, as described by the evangelists, harmonises in a most singular manner with the circumstances of the times. Though the birth of Jesus might appear to Herod but as an insignificant episode in the more dangerous tragic plot which was unfolding itself in his own family, yet his jealous apprehension at the very name of a new-born native king, would seize at once on the most trifling cause of suspicion; and the judicial massacre of many of the most influential of the Pharisees, and of his own kindred in Jerusalem, which took place on the discovery of this plot, was a filling prelude for the slaughter of all the children under a certain age in Bethlehem. But whether the enrolment, which summoned Joseph and Mary to the town where the registers of their descent were kept, was connected with this oath of fidelity to the emperor and the king; or whether it was only a population-return, made by the command of the emperor, in all the provinces where the Roman sovereignty or influence extended (2), it singularly contributed to the completion of the prophecy to which we have alluded, which designated the city of David as the birth-place of the Messiah. Those who claimed descent from the families, whose original possessions were in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem, crowded the whole of the small town; and in the stable of the inn or caravansera was born THE CHILD, whose moral doctrines, if adopted throughout the world, would destroy more than half the misery by destroying all the vice and mutual hostility of men; and who has been for centuries considered the object of adoration, as the Divine Mediator between God and man, by the most civilised and enlightened nations of the earth. Of (1) The chronological difficulties in this case do not appear to me of great importance, as the whole affair of the oath may have occupied some time, and the enrolment may have taken place somewhat later in the provinces than in the capital. (2) This view is maintained by Tholuck, and seeins to receive some support from the high authority of Savigny, writing on another sub. ject: it is supported by two passages of late writers, Isidore and Cassiodorus. Augusti siquidem temporibus orbis Romanus agris divisus censuque descriptus est, ut possessio sua nulli haberetur incerta, quam pro tributorum suзceperat quantitate solvenda. Of itself the authority of Cassiodorus, though a sensible writer, would have no great weight; but he may have read many works unknown to us on this period of history, of which we possess singularly imperfect information. this immediate epoch only one incident is recorded; but in all the early history of Christianity, nothing is more beautiful, nor in more perfect unison with the future character of the religion, than the first revelation of its benign principles, by voices from heaven to the lowly shepherds (1). The proclamation of "Glory to God, Peace on earth and good will towards men," is not made by day, but in the quiet stillness of the night (2); not in the stately temple of the ancient worship, but among the peaceful pastures; not to the religious senate of the Jewish people, or to the priesthood arrayed in all the splendour of public ministration, but to peasants employed on their lowly occupation (3). In eight days, according to the law, the child was initiated into the race of Abraham, by the rite of circumcision and when the forty days of purification, likewise appointed by the statute, are over, the Virgin Mother hastens to make the customary presentation of the first-born male in the temple. Her offering is that of the poorer Jewish females, who, while the more wealthy made an oblation of a lamb, were content with the least costly, a pair of turtle doves, or two young pigeons (4). Only two persons are recorded as having any knowledge of the future destiny of the child, Anna, a woman endowed with a prophetical character, and the aged Simeon. That Simeon (5) was not the celebrated master of the schools of Jewish learning, the son of Hillel, and the father of Gamaliel, is fairly inferred from the silence of St. Luke, who, though chiefly writing for the Greek converts, would scarcely have omitted to state distinctly the testimony of so distinguished a man to the Messiahship of Jesus. There are other insurmountable historical objections (6). Though occurrences among the more devout wor Luke ii. 8. 20. (2) Neander has well observed that the modesty of this quiet scene is not in accordance with what might be expected from the fertility and boldness of mythic invention. (3) The year in which Christ was born is still contested. There is still more uncertainty concerning the time of the year, which learned men are still labouring to determine. Where there is and can be no certainty, it is the wisest course to acknowledge our ignorance, and not to claim the authority of historic truth for that which is purely conjectural. The two ablest modern writers who have investigated the chronology of the life of Christ, Dr. Burton and Mr. Greswell, have come to opposite conclusions, one contending for the spring, the other for the autumn. Even if the argument of either had any solid ground to rest on, it would be difficult (would it he worth while?) to extirpate the traditionary belief, so beautifully embodied in Milton's Hymn: It was the winter wild When the heaven born child, etc. Were the point of the least importance, we should, no doubt, have known more about it. Quid tendein refert annum et diem exorti luminis ignorare, quum apparuisse illud, et cæcis homi mum mentibus illuxisse constet, neque sit, quod obsistat nobis, ne splendore ac calore ejus uta. mur.-Mosheim. There is a good essay in the Opuscula of Jablonski, iii. 317. on the origin of the festivity of Christmas Day. (4) Luke ii. 21. 39. (5) This was the notion of Lightfoot, who, though often invaluable as interpreting the New Testament from Jewish usages, is sometimes misled by his Rabbinism into fanciful analogies and illustrations. Hist. Jews, iii 97. note. (6) Our first and not least embarrassing diffi. culty in harmonising the facts recorded in the several Gospels, is the relative priority of the presentation in the temple and the visit of the Magians to Bethlehem. On one side there appears no reason for the return of the parents and the child, after the presentation, to Bethlehem, where they appear to have had no friends, and where the object of their visit was most probably effected on the other hand, it is still more improbable, that, after the visit of the Magians, they should rush, as it were, into the very jaws of danger, by visiting Jerusalem, after the jealousy of Herod was awakened. Yet in both cases, it should be remembered that Bethlehem was but six miles, or two hours' journey, from Jerusalein. Reland, Palestina, p. 424. See, on one side, Schleiermacher's Essay on St. Luke, p. 47. though I entirely dissent on this point from the explanation of this author, on the other, Hug's Introduction. Simeon. shippers in the temple, were perhaps less likely to reach the ear of Herod than those in any other part of the city, yet it was impossible that the solemn act of recognising the Messiah in the infant son of Mary, on so public a scene, by a man whose language and conduct was watched by the whole people, could escape observation. Such an acknowledgment, by so high an authority, would immediately have been noised abroad; no prudence could have suppressed the instantaneous excitement. Besides this, if alive at this time, Simeon, Ben Hillel, would have presided in the court of inquiry, summoned His bene- by Herod, after the appearance of the Magi. The most remarkable point in the benediction of Simeon is the prediction that the child, who it would have been supposed would have caused unmingled pride and joy, should also be the cause of the deepest sorrow to his mother; and of the most fearful calamities, as well as of glory, to the nation (1). diction. The intercommunion of opinions between the Jewish and Zoroastrian religions throws great light on the visit of the Magi, or The Magi. Wise Men, to Jerusalem. The impregnation of the Jewish notions about the Messiah with the Magian doctrines of the final triumph of Ormusd, makes it by no means improbable that, on the other side, the national doctrines of the Jews may have worked their way into the popular belief of the East, or at least into the opinions of those among the Magian hierarchy, who had come more immediately into contact with the Babylonian Jews (2). From them they may have adopted the expectation of the Great Principle of Light in a human form, and descending, according to ancient prophecy, from the race of Israel and thus have been prepared to set forth, at the first appearance of the luminous body, by which they were led to Judæa (3). The universal usage of the East, never to approach the presence of a superior, particularly a sovereign, without some precious gift, is naturally exemplified in their costly but portable offerings of gold, myrrh, and frankincense (4). The appearance of these strangers in Jerusalem at this critical Matt. ii. 1-12. The communication with Babylonia at this period was constant and regular; so much so, that Herod fortified and garrisoned a strong castle, placed under a Babylonian commander, to protect the caravans from this quarter from the untameable robbers of the Trachonitis, the district east of the Jordan and of the sea of Tiberias. (3) What this luminous celestial appearance was has been debated with unwearied activity. I would refer more particularly to the work of Ideler, Handbuch der Chronologie, ii. 399. There will be found, very clearly stated, the opinion of Kepler (adopted by bishop Munter), which explains it as a conjunction between Jupiter and Saturn. For my own part, I cannot understand why the words of St. Matthew, relating to such a subject, are to be so rigidly interpreted; the same latitude of expression may be allowed on astronomi cal subjects, as necessarily must be in the Old Testament. The vagueness and uncertainty, possibly the scientific inaccuracy, seem to me the inevitable consequences of the manner in which such circumstances must have been preserved, as handed down, and subsequently reduced to writing by simple persons, awe-struck under such extraordinary events. (4) It is the general opinion that the Magi came from Arabia. Pliny and Ptomely (Grotius, in Loc.) name Arabian Magi; and the gifts were considered the produce of that country. But in fact gold, myrrh, and frankincense, are too common in the East, and too generally used as presents to a superior, to indicate, with any certainty, the place from whence they came. If, indeed, by Arabia he meant not the peninsula, but the whole district reaching to the Euphrates, this notion may be true: but it is more probable that they came from beyond the Euphrates. |