¦¦;'!v.;;-" >:¦"¦;¦' ','¦

THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION
OF
JESUS CHRIST

JESUS CHRIST:

HIS I.

Person— His Authority— His Work.

Jesus Christ before His Ministry.

$1.25.

II.

Jesus Christ during His Minis

try. $1.25.

III.

The Death and Resurrection of

Jesus Christ. $1.25.
THE
DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF
JESUS CHRIST
BY
EDMOND STAPFER
PROFESSOR IN THE FACULTY OF PROTESTANT THEOLOGY
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PARIS
translates ug
LOUISE SEYMOUR HOUGHTON

NEW YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1905

Copyright, 1898,
By Charles Scribner's Sons.

rSnffieigitg tyxtsi:
John Wilson and Son, Cambridge, U.S.A.

PREFACE

'T'HIS volume concludes the series of
essays which I have consecrated to
the Life of Jesus, or, rather, to the study
of his person, his authority, and his work.
My first book, short as it was (" Jesus
Christ before bis Ministry"), covered a
period of thirty years. The second
(" Jesus Christ during his Ministry ") in
cluded only about two years. Barely six
months now remain for me to describe, or
rather a single week, the last, for the story
of the other events requires only a few
pages ; and it would be easy to write large
volumes, entire libraries, upon the events
which crowded this last week.
What do I say ? — easy to write ? These
libraries already exist, and no literature in
the world equals in volume the bibliog
raphy of the last days, and especially of

VI PREFACE
the last twenty-four hours, of the life of
Jesus. One may say that each of the
minutes which one by one passed away,
from the beginning of the evening of
Thursday, the 13th or 14th Nisan, to the
hour of sunset on the Friday following,
has counted for more than centuries in the
history of humanity.
I said in the introduction to my second
volume, that of the three periods in the
ministry of Jesus Christ the first is
shrouded in obscurity, the second is better
known, the third is thoroughly well known
and stands in full light. This is the
period which I have now to pass in review.
Everything in it is clear, evident, luminous,
and critics are in general accord as to the
facts related in the Gospels. But this can
be said only in a general way. When we
come to details we find variations in the
authentic documents. It suffices to glance
over a synopsis giving a comparative text
of the Gospels to be convinced of this.
They swarm with petty contradictions.
It is always thus in history. The more
abundant the documents concerning a
given epoch, the greater the embarrass
ment of criticism, because contradictory

PREFACE VU
statements, all equally worthy of credence,
abound in like proportion. Those histo
rians who in a later day shall narrate the
war of 1870 will be in possession of an
incomparable wealth of authorities, and
will be able to set forth the same facts in
two or three different ways, basing their
statements upon documents of indisputable
authenticity. The same is the case with regard to the
last days in the life of Jesus. When we
narrated his infancy and youth we were
face to face with the unknown; we were
forced upon conjecture. Here it is just
the other way: we have facts, authorities,
the narratives of witnesses; but between
them we must make a choice, and here
our perplexities begin. To choose is some
times more difficult than to conjecture.
Often we know not what conclusion to
form; where the Synoptics say Yes, the
Fourth Gospel says No, and vice versa.
Did Jesus keep the Jewish Passover with
his disciples on the evening before his
death? Yes, say the first three Gospels;
No, says St. John. Did the Last Supper
take place on the 13th or the 14th Nisan ?
The 13th, says St. John; the 14th, affirm

VU1 PREFACE
the Synoptics. On what day was Jesus
crucified? On the 14th Nisan, says St.
John ; on the 15th, say the Synoptics. At
what hour? At nine o'clock in the morn
ing, according to the first three Gospels ;
not until afternoon, according to the
Fourth. These are only trifling details,
if you please; but we shall show that
they are not unimportant; and besides,
there are still other contradictions, while
as to the examples just chosen the oppo
sition is irreconcilable. We cannot accept
one set of statements without rejecting the
other. It is only the harmonists who are
intrepid enough to piece together passages
reciprocally destructive, and declare that
their contradictions are unimportant. We
are more respectful toward the texts,
believing that no one respects them less
than those who distort them that they may
make them agree.
It is true that for the object which
I have in mind these differences are of
minor importance. I have already said
that I am not relating the life of Jesus,
but simply seeking to discern his thought.
I desire to speak of what went on in his
soul. In this last volume, as hitherto, I

PREFACE ix
shall treat of his person, how he under
stood himself; of his authority, what au
thority he attributed to himself ; and, finally,
of his work, which was a work of " obedi
ence unto death, even the death of the
cross." x I shall particularly ask what were
the special interests of Jesus during these
last days, and I shall show that he was
occupied in turn by two great thoughts,
antithetical to one another, — the persua
sion that a violent death was approaching
him very nearly, and the invincible hope
that it would be spared him.
I shall put aside, as I have hitherto
done, those episodes of the Gospel history
which do not directly affect my subject,
with the result that here, as in the two
former volumes, many things will be pur
posely left out. These, however, will be
less numerous than in the other works. I
can see no motive for not utilizing the data
here given concerning certain personages,
like Annas, Caiaphas, Judas; of not giv
ing a thorough study to the denial of
Peter; or of not giving this or that archae
ological detail which may illustrate the
story. 1 Phil. ii. 8.

X PREFACE
I shall tell what I find in the Gospels ;
what it is to me impossible not to find
there. I shall endeavor to set aside all
that religious education and received tra^
dition have put a priori in the thought of
all of us, upon these grave subjects. We
all have, inevitably, our ready-made ideas
upon these well-known questions, and
those accepted, time-honored explanations
of their difficulties, which no one dreams
of doubting. I shall seek to forget them
all, and to speak of the last days of Jesus'
life, of his death, of his resurrection, as
if my eyes had fallen upon the Gospel
narratives for the first time, and as if no
book, whether of edification or of criti
cism, had been written upon them, or were
known by me. The task is difficult; yet
I must undertake it, and every historian of
Jesus ought to undertake it: his duty of
impartiality requires this. My readers will
judge whether it has been given me to
succeed, at least to a certain degree.
In view of my special purpose, the chap
ters upon the resurrection of Jesus will
form, so to speak, an appendix to my
work, the rather as they do not belong to
the study proper. The acts and deeds of

PREFACE XI
the Risen One have nothing essential to
teach us about his person, his authority, or
his work ; and to remain within the limits
which I marked out for myself, I might,
and perhaps I should, have paused at the
death of Jesus upon the cross. But the
resurrection of Jesus Christ is so impor
tant, both in itself and by the influence
which faith in his resurrection has exerted
and still exerts, that I feel myself bound
to speak of it. I shall devote to it five or
six chapters, which will be in some sort
supplementary. I shall first study the
various accounts of the resurrection, shall
then say what seems to me to be the truth
about the resurrection, and finally I shall
show what is to be understood by faith in
the Risen Christ.
And now, thanking God that I have
been able to complete this task, I ask of
him that it may do good, that it may con
tribute to the instruction and edification of
souls by making them acquainted with a
Christ who is perhaps more living and
more real than he whom they have until
now adored and served. I have written
these three volumes in all sincerity and in
all faith. If some pious persons are sur-

Xll PREFACE
prised and in a manner disconcerted by
one Or another of my assertions, I am con
fident that they will reverse this first
impression, and I dare hope that they will
perceive that the Christ of my three vol
umes is indeed he who lived, the Christ of
history, the Saviour of the world, and the
Saviour of their souls.

CONTENTS

Page
Preface  v
Chapter I. The Last Winter  3
II. Intrigues against Jesus ... 20
III. The Last Discourse on the
Kingdom  37
1Y. The Entry into Jerusalem . . 55
V. The Last Days  74
VI. The Last Evening  93
VII. The Lord's Supper  108
VIII. The Arrest  121
IX. The Trial  141
X. The Execution  165
XI. The Resurrection Narratives
(The Gospel Narratives) . . 186
XII. The Resurrection Narratives
(St. Paul's Narrative) . . 202
XIII. The Truth about the Resurrec
tion  218
XIV. The Certainty of the Resurrec
tion  233
XV. Faith in the Resurrection . . 243
Conclusion  261

JESUS CHRIST
HIS PERSON, HIS AUTHORITY, HIS
WORK

Part Cjltrtt
THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF
JESUS CHRIST

CHAPTER I
THE LAST WINTER
T ET us take up the story where we
left it at the end of our second
volume; that is, at the moment when
Jesus arrived in Jerusalem for the Feast
of Tabernacles, in the early days of Octo
ber in the year 29. He will be crucified in
early April of the next year, at the Feast
of the Passover; there remain, therefore,
only six months to describe.
We have seen Jesus forming the resolu
tion to set out for the Holy City ; we have
set forth his motives for going thither, his
disappointments, his presentiments, and
have cited his very distinct utterances as
to the destiny which was awaiting him.
It was the growing opposition of the
Pharisees which urged him on to Jerusa
lem. He was resolved to look this oppo
sition in the face, and vanquish it or die.

4 THE DEATH AND
The earlier hostilities of the Pharisees
had had the contrary effect, and had
rather deterred him from visiting the
capital of Palestine. During a long
period, perhaps eighteen months, we have
seen him declining to make the pilgrimage
thither;1 he refused to set out with the
caravan, and this time he even declared
that he would not go. Then, when every
one had gone he set out2 alone, or with
his most intimate disciples, but not walk
ing with them, travelling incognito.^
In this conduct there was an abrupt
change of plan, easy to understand. Jesus
had avoided Jerusalem because he knew
by former experience what a formidable
battle he would there be called to wage.
He desired first to win over the northern
province to his ideas ; but now that Galilee
itself was closed to him, there was no
other alternative open to him but conflict,
and that in the very heart of his nation.
His ministry of wandering had only been a
moment of transition, a sort of interrup
tion of his work, fruitful, indeed, for in
it he became definitely non-sectarian ; but
1 John vii. 1. 2 John vii. 10.
8 Luke ix. 51 ; Mark x. 32.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 5
this very catholicity, separating him from
the religion of his fathers, only made the
more imperative in his eyes the necessity
of carrying the conflict to the very centre,
to Jerusalem, where either victory or defeat
must be decisive.
Jesus therefore set out, and we may
imagine with what thoughts! Would he
ever again see these lake shores, and all
this Galilee which he so dearly loved?
His own country would have none of him;
and now, what was he to meet? Death, a
horrible death; everything told him so;
the necessity of a death by violence was
showing itself more and more clearly to
be imperative. The Dolorous Way was
opening before him ; Jesus was truly set
ting forth to meet the cross.
His apostles and a few pious women
followed him; he walked in advance of
them absorbed in thought; he preferred it
ao. His own friends, no doubt, remained
faithful to him, but they were profoundly
disturbed. 1 They did not understand him,
aor did they approve of him.
At other times, however, master an.\ dis
ciples would come together, and the Little
1 Mark x. 32.

6 THE DEATH AND
spiritual family would be more united than
ever. At such times they drew all the
more closely to one another for being in a
region that was strange to them. National
attractions come about of themselves when
people meet far from their mother country ;
at such a time they are glad to recognize
one another and live together.1
Was Jesus thinking only of his death?
By no means. By a paradox, strange,
perhaps, but frequent, the most lively
hopes were allied in his mind with the
darkest apprehensions. He hoped that
his people would turn again to him, that
this last attempt would be crowned with
striking success ; in a word, he hoped that
the Jews would be converted, would wel
come him with acclaim, and that the
nation being ready, the kingdom would
appear. But at the same time he felt
apprehension; he was apprehensive of
being rejected, vanquished, put to death;
he foreboded a catastrophe, a sudden and
possible destruction of all his hopes ; and
he shuddered at the thought.
His forebodings were only too well justi
fied. Jesus entered Judea and went up to
1 Matt, xxvii. 55 ; Mark xv. 41 ; Luke xxiii. 49, 55.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 7
Jerusalem; he did not return; he was
barely able to make a few short journeys
in the outskirts of the city, a few brief
retreats, to enjoy a few fleeting days of
retirement and silence. The Galilean
ministry was forever ended.
No doubt he exercised a certain ministry
in the Holy City, but how different from
that of the lakeside ! No more publicans
brought to repentance, no more demonized
men healed, no more sinful women touched,
no further preparation for the kingdom by
the conversion of hearts. Instead of these,
invective and dispute, everything that up
to this time he had avoided with all possi
ble care.
Obliged henceforth to argue with the
Pharisees of Jerusalem, he took their tone,
made use of their arguments, spoke their
language; but solely because they forced
him to it. They questioned him and he
could not but reply ; but conversations of
this sort were certainly distasteful to him.
The usual custom of Jesus was neither
to discuss nor to argue; in this sense no
one was less a rabbi than he. In Galilee
it had sufficed him to make appeal to the
moral sense, and speak to the conscience.

8 THE DEATH ANO
But when disputatious j arsons force one
to reply, one is inevitably compelled to
follow them upon their own ground and
adopt their language.1 For that matter,
Jesus was passed master in these arts.
In Jerusalem, where he arrived without
making himself known, entering the city
quietly,2 Jesus at once perceived himself
to be as it were hemmed in by a wall.
What he needed was to break his way
through it, and he was not long in per
ceiving that this he could not succeed in
doing; that the opposition was stronger
than he, and that sooner or later it would
be the victor.
He at once began to preach, speaking
with all frankness; but the hatred of the
Pharisees soon pursued him, harassing
him unceasingly.3 He was truly in a
foreign country, himself a foreigner and
surrounded by foreigners; and now he
met what he had not met in Galilee, —
opposition arising from determined in
credulity and obstinate prepossession.
It is therefore not to be wondered at
that Jesus was forced to spend the last
1 Matt. xii. 3-8, xxiii. 16 ff. 2 John vii. 10 ff.
8 John vii. 20, 25, 30, 32.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 9
days of his life in treating questions of
casuistry. The distance is wide indeed
between the demonstration of the resurrec
tion of the dead from the Pentateuch, and
the Sermon on the Mount, between the
arguments disproving the Davidic descent
of the Messiah and the parables of the
Kingdom of God! But the conditions
required this. Jesus must needs change
his method of teaching when with these
bitter, aggressive, unbelieving hearers,
the cavillings of the scribes and the soph
isms of the doctors forced him to become a
controversialist.1 At times he even made
the first attack.2
It is painful to think how, during these
last months, Jesus thus wore himself out
by disputing with the rabbis in the Temple
porticos, and replying to men who were
determined neither to hear nor to believe
in him. To every word said in his favor
these wiseacres would reply: "He is of
Galilee, and no prophet comes out of
Galilee." The words were repeated in the
Sanhedrin itself; for the name of Jesus
had already been brought up in the San-
1 Matt. xxi. 23-27, xxii. 23 f.
2 Matt. xxii. 41 f.

10 THE DEATH AND
hedrin, and one of its members, secretly
favorable to him, had attempted to defend
him.1 Between the priests and Jesus there was
absolutely no possible meeting-ground, no
point of contact even. We have already
described these arrogant Sadducees ; 2 they
had all the pride of their caste, and formed
an opulent clerical body, who concerned
themselves not in the least with the people.
Aristocratic and conservative, they were
of that satisfied class who are disturbed
and irritated by the slightest suggestion of
change. In their opinion the Temple
religion ought to be incapable of change.
They were as fanatical and as incapable
of receiving new ideas as the Mussulmans
of our day; and yet success absolutely
depended upon overcoming them, upon
triumphing over their fanaticisms.
We think that it was during the Feast
of Tabernacles (October, A. d. 29) and
that of the Dedication (December, A. D.
29) that Jesus was forced into three very
intricate rabbinical discussions, of which
the Gospels speak, and obliged to reply to
i John vii. 50 f.
* See "Jesus Christ Before his Ministry," pp. 96 ff.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 11
the perfidious questions of the Pharisees
and Sadducees.1
One of the first questions put to him was
that of the tribute. It was a hotly dis
cussed question in those days, and served in
some sort as a touchstone for the intensity
of a man's patriotism. " Let us see, " said
the Pharisees, " whether he is for or against
the tribute ; " certain, whatever might be
his reply, to find in it some excuse for
turning it against him ; for it was essential
that he should be compromised, and led on
to some imprudent utterance. Nothing
seemed easier than to do this with the
question of the tribute; and who could
tell? perhaps it would provide a way to
1 It is much more natural to place these discussions
at this period than to accumulate them all in the first
days of the last week (between Palm Sunday and Holy
Thursday), as the Synoptics, who mention only one jour
ney to Jerusalem, are obliged to do. How much more
natural and accurate are the data of the Fourth Gospel
on this point ! Tradition has gathered up into the last
days much that ought to be scattered, perhaps, through
all the various visits of Jesus to the Holy City, and in
any case should be spread over the long months of the
last winter. Tradition has done what they always do
who look from a distance, — foreshortened that which is
far off. The eye-witness who stands behind the writer
of the Fourth Gospel is free from tradition; he sees from
close by, and he sees true.

12 THE DEATH AND
make him out a second Judas the Gaul-
onite. Pharisees and Herodians therefore
came together and concocted a little plot,
the purpose of which was to submit to
him this famous problem; they had most
adroitly ordered its very terms. Under
an appearance of frankness and simplicity,
the question concealed a trap.
We know the admirable reply of Jesus.
This question of paying tribute, yes or
no, was certainly one of those which he
had decided before entering upon his
ministry, and the phrase which he uttered
on the day when he caused a Roman denier
to be brought to him had no doubt been
formulated by him long before, in a motto
which he never gave up; for it is inad
missible that Jesus had never considered
this question until the moment when it
was put to him.1
By this utterance, marvellous in depth
and justice, he separated the political from
the religious power, and showed wherein
was the true spirituality, the true liber
ality. Let us study this reply of Jesus more
closely. He formally counsels obedience
1 Matt. xvii. 24 f.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 13
to Csesar. Perhaps he perceived the im
possibility of an efficacious, forcible resist
ance to Rome ; although he seems never to
have fully recognized its power. But God
had permitted Rome to be master; then
it should be obeyed, at least temporarily.
The Pharisees themselves were of this
opinion,1 and so, it need not be said, were
the Sadducees. Render to Csesar the
things that are Caesar's. Who could take
exception to that? Nothing in the past
history of the Jews opposed it; neither
the Law nor tradition commanded revolu
tion. So long as the Jew obeyed the law,
retained his moral independence, and kept
his conscience intact, he might recognize
the will of God in a temporary foreign
domination, and accept it, in consequence ;
it was possible even to maintain that he
ought to do so. Therefore Jesus could
remain entirely true to the most lively
national hopes, while saying, "Pay to
Csesar the tribute which he demands," and
give no ground for the criticism of even
those most zealous for the Law.
This is not all; without doubt Jesus
1 Except the party, at that time small, of the intran
sigent and the extreme.

14 THE DEATH AND
might have paused here, and said no more
than " Render unto Caesar the things that
are Caesar's." The reply to the question
which had been put to him was complete ;
but he took advantage of the opportunity
to add, "Render to God the things that
are God's." The aphorism is perfect in
this clear and precise form, and it pene
trated like an arrow to the soul of the
hearer. " To Ceesar that which is Caesar's,
to God that which is God's." By the
second part of his reply Jesus forestalled
all objection; he showed that he did not
forget the God of his people and his in
alienable rights.
Such as it is, this utterance of Jesus was
not only in advance of his age, it is in
advance of all the ages that have followed ;
it is even in advance of our own time.
Neither antiquity nor the Middle Ages
understood it, and still to-day it is most
wrongly applied. It remains, like all the
other sayings of Jesus, a prophecy; an
immortal motto which will never be over
passed, and which will be truly practised
only in the future.
The Pharisees confessing themselves
beaten, the Sadducees in their turn under-

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 15
took to ensnare Jesus. They worked up
the sufficiently ridiculous story of the
seven brothers successively married by the
same woman. Here we have a highly
authentic sample of the objections the
Sadducees used to make to the doctrine
of the resurrection of the dead, one of the
favorite dogmas of the Pharisaic school,
and which Jesus admitted. " Why should
it be thought incredible that God should
raise the dead?" was St. Paul's1 ques
tion, and it must certainly have been a
favorite maxim of Saul of Tarsus. In
fact, the Pharisees made strenuous efforts
to demonstrate that belief in the resurrec
tion of the body deposited in the ground
was pefectly admissible. "Are not all
things possible with God?" they would
say ; " there is then nothing surprising nor
strange in his raising the dead; " and there
were many people to whom such a reflec
tion was entirely conclusive. The resur
rection of one dead was among things
possible. There were even some persons
who affirmed that such events had already
taken place. At the present day, for a
man of modem times, a real resurrection,
1 Acts xxvi. 8.

16 THE DEATH AND
the return to organic life of a body really
dead, is the impossibility of impossibili
ties.1 But at that time not one of the
peremptory reasons existed which we have
for entirely refusing to admit the possi
bility of a resurrection which should occur
in our day. "The dead," they would
say, "can rise again;" and in any case
they will rise again "at the last day; " that
is to say, at the advent of the Messiah.
Here the Sadducees represented the
old Hebraic good sense and strongly ridi
culed the belief of the Pharisees. This
was legitimate warfare, and it is certain
that that one of the stories invented by
them which is known to us was fairly well
conceived. It shows how unreasonable is
the belief in a return to life of organs
which have no longer any reason for being.
Jesus, who for a long time had been
pondering this question, and who had
cleared up his ideas upon it, replied that
"All the dead live to God."2 In the age
to come, in the restoration of all things,
the Kesurrection, there would be no more
1 See our reflections on this subject, " Jesus Christ
Before his Ministry," p. 27.
2 Luke xx. 38.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 17
marriage. We should be like the angels,
"for all live to him;" that is, the death
of the body cannot interrupt relations with
God. Here he is neither with the Phari
sees nor with the Sadducees. He denies
the resurrection of the very flesh which
has been alive, and he affirms the future
life, in a saying as sane as it is precise:
" Whoever in this life lives in God and for
God is eternal;" he is passed, at the
present time, from death into life.1 No
doubt Jesus might have said, in the same
sense, " From this time, by faith, he enters
the kingdom, though the kingdom is not
yet come."
Another time, in the course of this
winter, either at the Feast of Taberna
cles or at that of the Dedication, perhaps
the same day as the Gospels would have
it, a scribe asked Jesus which is the
greatest commandment of the law. Jesus
replied by suppressing all in the Law
which lies outside of love to God and to
one's neighbor, and he made these two
identical. This time he received some satisfaction;
a few persons approved of him; a scribe
1 John v. 24 and passim.
2

18 THE DEATH AND
even found this summary of the Law
"admirable." But this was certainly not
the case with the Sadducees, and for them
the saying of Jesus which summed up the
Law in two commandments was an abomi
nable heresy; for, in fact, there was the
Temple with its sacrifices, and one might
not declare that it was nothing as com
pared with the love of God and of one's
neighbor. Therefore they set in motion
the report that Jesus would pull down the
Temple ; that he was talking of its speedy
disappearance, and affirming that he would
replace it; and these more or less authentic
reports which were in circulation rendered
him an object of much suspicion.
Jesus knew this, and was only the more
bold to speak. One day he in his turn
asked a question, himself making the first
attack,1 showing how in a Psalm David,
by inspiration (and consequently with
absolute truth), declared that the Messiah
was his Lord and master. Therefore,
said Jesus, the Messiah is not a "Son of
David," as the scribes assert.2
1 Mark xii. 35 ff.
2 The Psalm (Ps. ex.) is not by David ; but in that
day all the Psalms, or nearly all, were held to be

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 19
Here again he was the victor; a fact
which exasperated his antagonists, who
from this day were silent.1
Davidic. It has been insisted that Jesus did not here
deny his Davidic descent ; that his purpose was to bring
the scribes to see that the Messiah must be more than a
Son of David. Never was exegesis more fantastic and
more predetermined. It is true that elsewhere Jesus
permitted himself to be called Son of David, accepting
a name which here he clearly seems to reject. Most
probably he was personally entirely indifferent to the
question of his descent, and simply wished to show the
scribes, without either affirming or denying his own
parentage, how easy it was to embarrass them by simply
imitating their casuistry.
1 Matt. xxii. 46.

20 THE DEATH AND

CHAPTER II
INTRIGUES AGAINST JESUS
T F the enemies of Jesus ceased to attack
him openly, none the less did they
plot against him in secret. We have just
referred to one of his sayings which they
laid up against him : " Destroy this Temple,
and in three days I will rear it up again."
That is, "What though the Temple itself
disappear, I myself will shortly build a
new edifice, an invisible sanctuary, in
which little by little all humanity shall
find a place." He had spoken thus long
before, on the day when he cleansed the
Temple, but his words had not been for
gotten.1 This saying, treasured up, re
peated, deliberately misunderstood, was
to be the pretext for his condemnation.
l Mark xiv. 58, xv. 29. Cf. John ii. 19. It is
Mark who gives the most authentic text, the very words
uttered hy Jesus.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 21
For that matter, every act of Jesus
was used against him. His uprightness,
his good sense, his penetrating simplicity
failed to disarm his adversaries, but rather
irritated them the more. The less they
found themselves able to answer him the
more exasperated against him they became.
It is when one has exhausted arguments
that he uses violence. When Jesus closed
the mouths of his opponents, they took up
stones to stone him1 by way of obeying
the law,2 and it is needless to say that for
a long time they had heaped offensive
epithets upon him: madman, demoniac,
Samaritan.3 An unknown writer has preserved for
us the memory of one of his discussions.4
One day they brought before Jesus a
woman taken in the very act of adultery.
His reply to their question is of admirable
beauty: "Let him that is without sin
among you cast the first stone." Never
had his irony been more keen, never did
1 John viii. 59, x. 31, xi. 8.
2 Deut. xiii. 3 ff . ; Luke xx. 6 ; John x. 33 ; 2 Cor.
xi. 25.
8 John x. 20.
* John viii. 3 ff. ; a passage which waB not originally
a part of the Fourth Gospel.

22 THE DEATH AND
he more directly reach the consciences and
close the lips of his adversaries. This
incident added to all the others simply
embittered the hatred with which he
inspired them.
At other times he would show the
absurdity of those official personages who
built tombs for themselves, colossal and
paltry edifices which served only to dis
play their hypocrisy and vanity.
The fine allegory of the shepherd and
the sheep1 was also related in Jerusalem
this winter at one of the feasts. He de
clared, " The sheep hear my voice and fol
low me," and spoke in no indirect terms
of the mercenaries who love not the sheep.
Finally, his vehement polemical dis
courses against the Pharisees were cer
tainly another of the determining causes
of his death. The immortal apostrophes,
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,
hypocrites! " etc., counted for much in the
desire to be rid of Jesus, which took pos
session of the Pharisees and the chief
priests. Who knows ; but for these attacks
he might perhaps have passed unregarded.
The Sadducees were not aggressive ; they
1 John x. 1 ff.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 23
loved their repose above all things, and
though they became the true authors of
Jesus' death, it was certainly not by
reason of any new zeal for religion and for
the law, but because they were determined
to have no disturbance, no commotion.
Those whom Jesus most disquieted were
the Sopherim among the Pharisees; it is
true that they also were most displeasing
to him. He spoke to them with an elo
quence of holy indignation which recalls
the preaching of John the Baptist; he
branded their hypocrisy; he continually
insisted that the Gentiles would be sub
stituted for the Jews, and the kingdom
transferred to them.1 At the same time
he boldly declared himself to be the Son
of God,2 and openly named the Pharisees
as the murderers of the heaven-sent
messengers. In denunciations of sublime eloquence
he fulminated against all wicked priests
and false devotees, exposed the spiteful
and sugared bigotry of hypocritical Phari
sees. Ah, how slight a thing must now
1 Matt. xx. 1 ff., xxi. 28 ff., 33 ff., xxii. 1 ff.;
Mark xii. 1 ff . ; Luke xx. 9 ff .
2 Matt. xxi. 37 f. ; John x. 36.

24 THE DEATH WD
have appeared to him the opposition of the
Galilean Pharisees !
These last days of his life must have
been deeply saddened by sight of this
most narrow formalism. His ardent in
vectives are penetrated through and
through with the grief that filled his heart
as he saw his plans failing, his people
rejecting him, an ever-growing hatred
springing up around him, his work miscar
ried, his death by violence becoming every
day more inevitable. Oh, these Pharisees,
of whom he had hoped so much ! who had
been so congenial to him! whom he had
for so long a time believed to be the true
heirs of the past! He was exasperated,
not with the men, but with their spirit,
their tendencies, with what future ages
were to call Pharisaism! This sort of
Pharisaism still exists; it is in the heart
of man; it knows no national barrier.
He had gone too far; they resolved
upon his death. This measure had already
been spoken of,1 but vaguely, and it is
hard to say when it was for the first time
seriously considered; no doubt it was at
first merely a suggestion, which, growing
* John v. 18, vii. 1, 20, 25, 30, viii. 37, 40.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 25
little by little, was transformed into a pre
diction and finally took on a , reality
which it had not at first. The Jews had
authority to rid themselves of Jesus by
stoning. The Komans were about to take
away this liberty, but they still had it;
and having it, they noted the slightest
words of the Nazarene, in order to make
of them a trap into which they might
push him.
It was probably about February or March
that the death of Jesus was definitively
resolved upon, at least in principle.1 The
chief priests came together;2 the question
before them was Jesus or Judaism. The
high priest Caiaphas saw true when he put
it in this absolute form; he clearly per
ceived all the danger of new doctrines.
This Caiaphas had little more than
nominal power; but at his side like an
evil genius was his father-in-law Annas,
a former high priest, and head of a very
powerful family. Annas was the true
incarnation of Sadduceeism. He had all
its prejudices and all its arrogance, and
to these he added consummate experience
and thorough acquaintance with all the
1 John xi. 53. 2 John xi. 47.

26 THE DEATH AND
traditions of his order. It was always to
him that every question was referred. His
authority was so great that the usual
expression was Annas and Caiaphas,1 he
being named first, before the actual high
priest. It is not to be doubted that this crafty
priest was the true author of Jesus' death,
and certainly more culpable than Caiaphas
or Pilate. Like all the Sadducees he
was a conservative ; that is, a man of the
existing order, of narrow and petty spirit.
" Quieta non movere " might have been the
motto of his life as well as that of his
party. To avoid all agitation, of what
ever nature, was the guiding principle of
Annas and his coterie. For that matter,
is it not the guiding principle of all con
servative parties?
Moreover, Annas was a proud, haughty,
cruel man, and crafty in his cruelty. Our
Temple, our homes, our wealth, our power,
these were the unvarying watchwords of
the Sadducees, and first of all of their high
priest. It had come to the point of getting rid
of Jesus, and the saying of Caiaphas, " It is
1 Luke iii. 2. See Acts iv. 6.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 27
expedient that one man should die for the
people,"1 would have been more sincere
under the form, " Let this man perish rather
than the Temple, and even the rich priests
who owe everything to it." In speaking
as he did, the high priest made no mis
take. It was necessary that Jesus should
die ; but the Christ would rise again and
" would die no more ; " 2 and when that
time came Judaism would perish.
Certainly it was not the new-born
Christianity that destroyed Judaism in the
year 70 ; but if Judaism had not then dis
appeared, the victim of its own faults,
Christianity would surely sooner or later
have brought about the ruin of the Israel-
itish nation.3
And yet Jesus had not entirely failed at
Jerusalem. He had had partial successes
with individuals ; 4 he had made a few dis
ciples. At one time he even aroused much
sympathy. "The world is gone after
him," it was said.5 At the last he had
become widely known; the people held
1 John xi. 50. 2 Rom. vi. 9.
8 See "Palestine in the Time of Jesus Christ,"

* Mark xii. 37. 6 John xii. 19.

28 THE DEATH AND
him to be a good patriot, so much so that
the Sanhedrin feared a popular uprising if
they should arrest him openly.
However, take it all in all, the number
of Judeans who truly believed in him must
have been sufficiently small ; they remained
unknown and more or less hidden; when
the decisive hour came they had not the
courage of their convictions. For a long
time Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea
dared not avow themselves won over;
among the others more than one deliber
ately kept in the background.
It is true that Jerusalem had very
deeply rooted prejudices. Follow a Gali
lean ! Take him for a prophet ! For the
Messiah, perhaps! What a discredit!
what a heresy, even! What a cause for
excommunication ! The risk of being cast
out of the synagogue and having one's
property confiscated was enough to make
more than one draw back.1
Such was the state of things in Jerusa
lem during the autumn of the year 29, and
the following winter up to the middle of
March in the year 30. It was especially,
1 Esdras x. 8 ; Heb. x. 34 j Jerusalem, Moed Katon,
iii. 1.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 29
as has been said, at the two great feasts,
Tabernacles (October, A. D. 29) and the
Dedication (December, A. r>. 29) that Jesus
made his presence felt. Perhaps he visited
the Holy City between these two festivals
and after that of the Dedication; we do
not know; but it appears certain that his
sojourn in Jerusalem was always very short.
What was he doing in the intervals of
his visits to the capital? He did not
return to Galilee, but retired a short dis
tance from the city to some quiet and safe
retreat where he was personally unknown,
and where he had no reason to fear arrest.
His conduct in these last weeks of his
life shows at once great courage and great
prudence. His courage is shown in the
openness of his attacks, and his prudence
in the care with which during the greater
part of the time he sought shelter from
the ambushes of his enemies. Always on
the alert-, he had a peculiar way of dis
appearing in the midst of a crowd, and
slipping away unobserved.1 After the
Feast of the Dedication he went still
farther away, to Perea, on the eastern side
of the Jordan-.
1 Luke iv. 30 ; John viii. 59 ; x. 39, etc.

30 THE DEATH AND
But his usual retreat was Ephraim; he
generally went thither after his appear
ances in Jerusalem. Ephraim was a small
village at a short distance northward from
the Holy City.1
In Ephraim Jesus was entirely unknown ;
he could remain there hidden, with the
Twelve.2 He could easily go thence to
Jerusalem in a few hours ; while there he
was near the desert, which at need would
offer him a retreat. By prolonging his
sojourn in Ephraim he might hope to
become forgotten, at least temporarily.
But the order for his arrest had been
given, and his enemies, knowing how
much Jesus valued the Feast of the Pass
over, had no fear that he would not return
to the Holy City to celebrate the annual
festival with his friends.3
1 Authorities are not agreed as to the situation of
Ephraim. Eusebius places it eight miles north of Jeru
salem, Jerome twenty miles. Eusebius calls it Ephron ;
in that case it must be the town mentioned with Bethel
and Jerusalem in 2 Chron. xiii. 19. Josephus also men
tions a city Ephraim (D. B. J. 4, 9, 9) in connection
with Bethel. He speaks of Vespasian taking the towns
of Bethel and Ephraim. Lightfoot (following Talm.
Menacoth, cap. 9, hal. 9) places it on the border of the
territory of the tribe of Ephraim.
2 John xi. 54. 8 John xi. 55, 56.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 31
This indeed was what came to pass.
Jesus returned to Jerusalem, and notwith
standing the gravest indications of danger,
was kept there by his desire to keep the
Passover, joined with the almost certitude
of not being disturbed during the Feast;
and it was at this time that he was
arrested. Perhaps he might even yet
have escaped, so carefully had he taken
all precautionary measures, had not one of
the Twelve infamously made known his
place of retreat and caused his arrest on
the very night of the Feast. After that,
all was over in a few hours. The Sad
ducees made away with him, having by
base flattery and a most artful lie secured
his condemnation by the Roman authority.
But let us not anticipate ; for the time
Jesus was still hoping, in spite of a thou
sand ever-growing reasons for hoping no
longer. Among his favorite retreats was one in
the outskirts of the city, Bethany, where
he had some valued friends : x Martha,
Mary, Lazarus, Simon the leper, formed a
faithful company. Jesus loved to refresh
himself in their society. The contrast
1 John xi. 1 ff . ; Matt. xxvi. 6 ; Mark xiv. 3.

32 THE DEATH AND
between Bethany and Jerusalem, though
so near one another, was complete. At
Bethany Jesus felt himself far removed
from the cavillings of the scribes, their
intricate questions, their malice and per
fidy. Bethany in some degree made up
to him for his beloved Galilee, the lake
shore, the solitary mountain retreat.
This village became his preferred resting-
place, his best-beloved home.
These were some of his places of refuge ;
it is probable, however, that he often
changed his abode, and for reasons of
prudence never remained long in any
place. Once, in his comings and goings, he
stopped in Jericho. Caravans of pilgrims
used often to pass through it. The city
was surrounded with palms and banana
trees, and being in commercial relations
with many cities on the farther side of
the Jordan, a considerable number of pub
licans were stationed there. The director
of these customs officers, a certain Zac-
cheus, perceived the breadth of Jesus'
ideas and declared himself for him, and
Jesus lodged in his house. The apostles,
long since accustomed to see their master

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 33
thus act, took no offence ; but to many, to
all the strangers in the city, this step on
Jesus' part became a stumbling-block.
At the time of this visit to Jericho
Jesus was again on his way to Jerusalem.
It was one of his critical journeys to the
Holy City, perhaps the last, and on that
day a great crowd was following him,
especially of Galileans. The rumor had
gone abroad that the kingdom was about
to appear; that it was precisely in order
to be present at its coming that Jesus
was on his way to the place where it would
first be manifested. " The slow and quiet
time of preparation is past," men said;
"the kingdom is not simply at hand, it
is imminent; it will almost immediately
appear." There was therefore an extraor
dinary excitement in all this crowd of
provincial pilgrims, among this Galilean
folk, who professed a great admiration for
Jesus, an unlimited confidence in him.1
They were ready for anything; they ex
pected everything. Did they all see in
Jesus the Messiah? We do not think so.
For the majority of them he was only the
Prophet, the Forerunner, the Herald,
1 Luke xix. 11.
3

34 THE DEATH AND
"He who cometh in the name of the
Lord," as they themselves were to say;
some called him Elias, and others Jeremiah
or one of the prophets;2 for the Messiah
was not to appear until the advent of the
kingdom. The Twelve, indeed, affirmed
that Jesus was the Messiah, and that
when the kingdom appeared he would
appear in his glory, quitting his humble
character of Servant of the Lord. Every
one, therefore, was expecting something
striking. And Jesus himself, — what were his
ideas about the kingdom at this very
moment when he was going up to Jerusa
lem, almost certain of dying there? We
have already shown that he had the gravest
reasons for looking forward to a premature
death as inevitable; but at the same time
he had a hope that the will of God might
be otherwise accomplished, that a change
might take place in the minds of the
people and of the Sanhedrin. In that case
he would resume and finish his Galilean
work, preparing for the kingdom by re
pentance and a change in the hearts of
men; and this in Jerusalem itself, in the
1 Matt. xvi. 14.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 35
Temple, welcomed by all. What a vision
was this !
Then the kingdom would appear, and
he, the Son of man, would come in his
glory. Alas! events were to turn out quite
otherwise, and the Father's will was to be
revealed to him as quite other than that
which he still hoped. He went up to
Jerusalem, asking himself whether his
people would receive him with acclama
tion or whether he must die. And he
already foresaw that the second alternative
was inevitable.
And yet he would make one last effort;
he would try a triumphal entry, making
the most of the fact that the Galileans in
his train were numerous and faithful. He
would enter Jerusalem at their head,
escorted and acclaimed by them, on a day
carefully chosen in advance. Oh, if
Jerusalem should understand in this its
day the things that belong to its peace ! 1
No doubt he felt the growing ill-will of
the leaders of his people, he had seen their
faces dark with hatred ; they had rejected
him, they hated him; yet still God was
1 Luke xix. 42.

36 THE DEATH AND
powerful and he was the Father. And so
he would still hope; it was impossible for
him not to hope.
Can we more deeply fathom the thought
of Jesus in those days when he was plan
ning his triumphal entry; and more par
ticularly can we enter into his thought as
to the advent of the kingdom ? It is easy
to answer this question, thanks to a dis
course on the coming of the kingdom pre
served to us by the three Synoptics,1 the
study of which, with that of the parables
uttered by Jesus in the closing days of
his life, will be the subject of our next
chapter. 1 Matt. xxiv. and xxv. ; Mark xiii. ; Luke xxi. 5 ff.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 37

CHAPTER III
THE LAST DISCOURSE ON THE KINGDOM
TN these closing days of his life Jesus
would sometimes seat himself over
against the Temple. The spectacle that
lay unrolled before his eyes was a magnifi
cent one : the terraced height upon which
stood the sacred edifice, the shining roof
of the sanctuary, the superb perspective
of its courts, its walls and gates, evoked
cries of admiration from all who looked
upon it. But Jesus gazed upon these
splendors with an unconquerable sadness.
All this was to be destroyed; and Jeru
salem, the city of his people, the citadel
of King David, would cast him out, and
put him to death. " O Jerusalem ! " he
cried, "thou which killest the prophets
and stonest them that are sent unto thee !
how often would I have gathered thy chil
dren together even as a hen gathereth her

38 THE DEATH AND
chickens under her wings, and ye would
not!"1 One day above all was particularly
solemn : Jesus spoke out his full heart to
his disciples. They were looking upon
the buildings of the Temple, which seemed
to them marvellous. It was then that
Jesus spoke to them in full detail, telling
them of necessary sufferings, of inevitable
calamities ; and yet in the very act of an
nouncing these woes of the Holy City he
prophesied the coming of the kingdom.
This was his final thought.
We have shown that on many subjects
the ideas of Jesus were developed grad
ually, taking on new forms under the
pressure of events and the teachings of
daily experience. But on this point his
thought had not changed in the least.
There is one notion which he kept ever
identical with itself through his entire
ministry, the notion of the kingdom of
God. What it had been in the days of
the Galilean ministry, when on mountain
or lake side he proclaimed its approach, this
it still was shortly before his death, when,
sitting in view of the Temple, he predicted
1 Matt, xxiii. 37 ; Luke xiii. 34.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 39
to his apostles the destruction of Jerusa
lem and the final catastrophe. Everything
leads us to believe that we have here his
first thought, that which he formed in
Nazareth in the days of his youth, when
he was studying the prophecies of Daniel
and Enoch, and believing that the Jews
would gladly welcome in him the Messiah.
He did not admit a nearer proximity
of the kingdom now than formerly. The
usual preparation which he had undertaken
was still needed, — a longer or shorter
work of reformation in the hearts of men,
which he still did not despair of accom
plishing; but if his people themselves
refused to be converted they were lost,
they would perish at the coming of the
great day. This great day was near at
hand, but not imminent; it was the day of
his own return, the return of the Son of
man. His entire way of looking upon this
grave subject is summed up in a few
words, in an utterance of his not recorded
in the Gospels, but cited textually by St.
Paul in one of his Epistles, written long
before the Gospels.1 l 1 Thess. iv. 15 ff.

40 THE DEATH AND
In A. D. 52 or 53, Paul, writing to the
Thessalonians, quoted to them a "saying
of the Lord." It is this: "We which
are alive and remain unto the coming of
the Lord shall not precede them which
are asleep; for the Lord himself shall
descend from heaven at a given signal, the
voice of the archangel and the trump of
God; and the dead in Christ shall rise
first. Then we which are alive, the rem
nant, shall be caught up at the same time
with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord
in the air, and thus we shall be forever
with the Lord."1 This assertion of Paul
is fully confirmed by the sayings of Jesus
himself, as the Evangelists have preserved
them. Jesus also spoke of angels sounding
the trumpet, and of his own descent as
Son of man, coming in the clouds of
heaven. All the parables of the close of
his ministry, all his sayings, all his ex
tended discourses, show that this is pre-
1 It is evident that St. Paul slightly modified the
expression for the convenience of his readers, and that
placing it upon the lips of Jesus we must read thus:
"You who may be alive, having been reserved to see
my appearing," or " the appearing of the Son of man,"
etc. For that matter, St. Paul speaks according to a say
ing of Jesus, and does not cite it word for word.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 41
cisely his thought, in these days of intense
thought on the subject of the last things,
and that his views never varied.
Intense thought, we say, for in the
latter part of his life Jesus was certainly
much absorbed in these high and grave
questions: the end of the world, his re
turn, the coming of the kingdom, pre
ceded by a catastrophe which would
overwhelm his people. That these were
unceasingly in his thoughts is proved by
the parables of this period, every one of
which treats of this same subject (the Ten
Virgins, the Talents, the Marriage Supper,
the Vinedressers, the Last Judgment,
etc.). And as Jesus liked to utter the
last perfected form of his thought in the
form of parables, as it was in parables
that he finally left it, we must seek for
his final thought in the figures that he
uses. This is what we find in them: the
kingdom is always to come ; in the parable
of the Ten Virgins1 it is represented by
the festal hall which men will enter
whenever the bridegroom shall appear.
The same is the case in the parable of the
i Matt. xxv. l ff.

42 THE DEATH AND
Minae or the Talents;1 the kingdom will
be given, will le inaugurated; it is there
fore not yet come. In the words to the
Pharisees of Jerusalem, which date from
this epoch, Jesus says the same: "The
publicans and harlots will enter before you
into the kingdom of heaven."2 Ye shut
up the kingdom of heaven;3 that is, you
hinder others from making ready to enter,
"and you shall not enter therein."
When he ate the Passover with his dis
ciples, on the night before his death, he
said that one day he would drink the new
wine in the kingdom.4 Jesus' first notion
about the kingdom is therefore precisely
the same as his last. The kingdom is not
a spiritual or moral state, realized by him
in the present life, and working itself out
invisibly in the consciousness of his dis
ciples. There is one only kingdom of
heaven, — that which shall be set up when
the Son of man appears at the end of the
present age5 or in the age to come.6
As to the great eschatological discourse,
i Matt. xxv. 14 ff. a Matt. xxi. 31.
8 Matt, xxiii. 13.
* Luke xxii. 16-18 ; Mark xiv. 25; Matt. xxvi. 29.
6 Matt. xiii. 40, 41. 6 Matt. xix. 28.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 43
60 embarrassing to certain prejudging
critics that they prefer either to deny its
authenticity or to give it an allegorical
explanation, though without having the
shadow of a reason for such an allegoriza-
tion, it is admirably comprehensible from
the historic point of view.1 Jesus was re
peating what was said in the apocalypses
of his own days, and as he never said that
he was allegorizing, or that his words must
be taken spiritually, no one has any right
to do so. Moreover, these ideas had for a
long time been the property both of him
self and of the whole people.
1 The authenticity of this discourse has been con
tested, is contested still in all the various camps of criti
cism, the most conservative as well as the most radical.
It is certain that parts of it have been worked over. A
simple comparison of the three texts shows that Luke's
account was worked over post eventum ; but its authen
ticity as a whole appears to me beyond dispute. Who,
indeed, could have invented Mark's account ? Such
assertions have been disproved by facts ! Modern exe-
getes tell us that Jesus could not have said this or that,
always deciding what he must have said ! We believe
that it is more respectful toward his thought not to per
mit ourselves to pass judgment on his words, but to set
them forth impartially, just as they have been trans
mitted to us by disinterested hearers, who more often
than not did not understand him. As to allegorizing
all these words, we leave this to those who find symbols
where Jesus never said that he put any.

44 THE DEATH AND
It is true that never hitherto had he
spoken so clearly. If he did so now at
last, it was because his violent death was
imminent, and because the kingdom would
come only after his death. This being so,
it was necessary that the apostles should
know and remember it, that when he was
no longer with them, their faith in the
coming of his kingdom should not in the
least be shaken. All that the prophets had
said should be accomplished. He said to
himself, "I shall return! I shall return!"
This certainly sustained him; and before
Caiaphas, when he was condemning him
to death, he exclaimed, " From henceforth
you shall see the Son of man sitting on
the right hand of Power, and coming in
the clouds of heaven,"1 thus showing that
1 Matt. xxvi. 64; Mark xiv. 62; Luke xxii. 69.
There have at times been those who have found in the
words " From this time forward," or " henceforth," the
proof that the words that follow are allegorical. Ac
cording to this view the return in the clouds is a perma
nent and spiritual return. Nothing, absolutely nothing,
authorizes such an interpretation, entirely due to the
imagination of these allegorizers. The words "from
this time forth " have a perfectly simple and clear sense,
to which we shall return when we speak of the appear
ance of Jesus before the Sanhedrin on the occasion of
his trial.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 45
men should daily look forward to the
coming of the kingdom.
The following are indeed the apocalyptic
ideas of Jesus, in their final and complete
form : —
The present order is to come to an end
by a tremendous revolution, a "tribula
tion " which shall be a time of travail, fol
lowed by a birth or a new birth, a
"palingenesis."1 This new birth was to
be accompanied by phenomena which
would be only the result of these child
birth pangs.2
It is beyond question that certain feat
ures of this discourse are due to the narra
tives themselves, since the dates at which
the several accounts were committed to
writing are indicated by the varying
degrees of precision with which the siege
of Jerusalem is described. But Jesus
must have predicted very terrible events.
The passages in which he does so cannot
be unauthentic; they are too closely in
accordance with the ideas of his times.
That terrible events would precede the
Messiah's advent was universally foretold
l Matt. xix. 28.
2 Matt. xxiv. 3 ff. ; Mark xiii. 4 ff. ; Luke xvii. 22 ff.

46 THE DEATH AND
and everywhere believed.1 At a given
moment, "the sign of the Son of man"
would appear in the heavens ; this would
be the great day. The sign was to consist
of a luminous vision, a lightning flash, a
flame of fire darting across the sky. Then
the Messiah, that is to say, Christ himself,
would appear in the clouds, coming down
from heaven; the angels would sound the
trump of God. They would surround the
Son of man, whose glory and majesty
would exceed anything that could be
imagined. The twelve apostles should be
seated upon twelve thrones, at his side.
The dead should rise in their own bodies,
and the Messiah should judge the world.2
This judgment would be shared by men
in two categories according to their works,
good and bad. The sentences would be
executed by angels.3 The elect would be
received into a delightful abode, prepared
for them from the foundation of the
1 Enoch 99, 100, 102, 103 ; Sibylline Leaves, iii. 336
ff., 633 f., iv. 168 f., v. 511 f.; Daniel vii. 25 ff., viii.
23 ff., ix. 26, 27, xii. 1.
2 Matt. xvi. 27, xix. 28, xx. 21, xxiv. 30 f., xxv.
31 ff., xxvi. 64; Mark xiv. 62; Luke xxii. 30; 1 Cor.
xv. 52 ; 2 Cor. v. 10 ; 1 Thess. iv. 15 f.
8 Matt. xiii. 36 f., 49, 50, xxv. 31.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 47
world.1 There they would sit at table with
Abraham, the patriarchs and the prophets.2
These would be the minority.8 The others
would go to Gehenna, a dark valley filled
with fire. There they would be gnawed
by worms, in company with Satan and the
rebel angels. The fall of the angels, as
related by Enoch, was at that time uni
versally admitted.4 There would be weep
ing and gnashing of teeth.5 The abode of
the blessed would be like a closed hall,
luminous inside, in the midst of a world of
darkness and torment.6 The new order of
things would be eternal. Happiness and
misery would be endless.
We shall shortly show that Jesus appears
to have held to the destruction of the
wicked, — their annihilation ; but whether
suffering or annihilation, their future state
would be irrevocable, and, in consequence,
1 Matt. xxv. 34.
2 Matt. viii. 11, xiii. 43, xxvi. 29 ; Luke xiii. 28, xvi.
22, xxii. 30.
8 Luke xiii. 23 f.
4 Jude 6 ; 2 Pet. ii. 4, 11 ; Rev. xii. 9 ; John viii. 44.
6 Matt. v. 22, viii. 12, x. 28, xiii. 42, 50, xviii. 8, xxiv.
51, xxv. 30 ; Mark ix. 43.
6 Matt. viii. 12, xxii. 13, xxv. 30; Jos. D. B. J. 3,
8,5.

48 THE DEATH AND
eternal. An abyss lay between the abode
of the blessed and that of the damned.1
The Son of man, forever seated on the
right hand of God, would be the final
judge of men.2
Jesus had been so clear, so explicit,
that all the first Christian generations
believed that the end of the world was
very near.8 "The time is at hand," they
were continually saying ; 4 the Apocalypse
declares it to be in three and a half years.6
At the same time we must observe that
Jesus never set a time ; he even declared
that he knew not the exact time, the day
and hour were unknown to him.6 It was
to be a surprise.7 Men must be ready to
depart, must have their loins girded and
their lamps kindled. They were to be
1 Luke xvi. 26.
2 Luke xxii. 69 ; Acts vii. 55.
8 Acts ii. 17, Hi. 19 f., v. 23 ; 2 Thess. ii. 8 ; 1 Tim.
•vi. 14 ; 2 Tim. iv. 1 ; Titus ii. 13 ; James v. 3, 8 ; Jude
18; 2 Peter iii. ; Rev. i. 1, ii. 5, 16, iii. 11, xi. 14, xxii.
6, 7, 12, 20. Cf. 2 Esdras iv. 26.
* Rev. i. 3, xxii. 10 ; Maran-aiha, 1 Cor. xvi. 22.
6 Rev. xi. 2, 3, xii. 14. Cf. Daniel vii. 25, xii. 7.
6 Mark xiii. 32.
7 Luke xvii. 20. Cf . Babyl. Talm. Sank. 97a ; Matt.
xxiv. 36 ff. ; Mark xiii. 32 ff. ; Luke xii. 35 f. ; 2 Pet.
«i. 10.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 49
taken unawares as by a thief, or by a
lightning flash.1
Yet the proximity of the day was immi
nent. There is no possible equivocation
as to this proximity as affirmed by Jesus.2
"This generation shall not pass away
until all be accomplished." "There be
those among you who shall not taste of
death before the kingdom of God have
come."3 The signs of the times were
clear.4 The Church believed that John,
whose life was very long, would see the
day before his death.5
We have already seen that Jesus ad-
1 Lnke xvii. 24.
2 Matt. x. 23, chaps, xxiv. and xxv., and especially
xxiv. 34 ; Mark xiii. 30 ; Luke xiii. 35, xxi. 28 ff.
8 Matt. xvi. 28, xxiii. 36, 39, xxiv. 34 ; Mark ix. 1 ;
Luke ix. 27, xxi. 32.
* Matt. xvi. 2-4; Luke xii. 51-56.
5 John xxi. 22, 23. It is hard to understand how the
most perspicacious interpreters, during so many centu
ries and even to-day, have been unable to perceive what
is said in these Gospels. They are blinded by an a pri
ori, and allegorize because the event did not take place.
It is incredible how the critical faculty can obliterate
itself to this point. Men see not that which is, that
which stares them in the face, because they cannot see
it. I do not say, because they will not ; no, they are
sincere ; but truly this involuntary blindness is very
strange. v4

50 THE DEATH AND\
mitted the resurrection of the dead. It
was a somewhat new doctrine, unknown
to some, rejected by others.1 Among the
Pharisees it was a matter of faith.2
The nature of the resurrection life was a
subject of inquiry. Some said, " They will
eat, will drink, will marry." Jesus ex
cluded marriage.3 He admitted a table, a
feast, a new Passover.4
As to the wicked, he had two doctrines :
sometimes he looked for their annihila
tion; they should wholly die. This was
to be their punishment, and the righteous
alone were to rise again.5 At other times
Jesus thought that the wicked would rise
again, to be eternally punished.6
With regard to these points of detail
he introduced no innovations. All these
apocalyptic doctrines were in Daniel,7 in
1 Mark ix. 9 ; Luke xx. 27 f .
2 Daniel xii. 2 f. ; 2 Mace, vii., xii. 45, 46; Acts
xxiii. 6, 8 ; Jos. Ant. Jud. xviii. 1,3; D. B. J. 2, 8, 14,
and 3, 8, 5.
8 See chap. i. pp. 16 f. Jesus replying to the Sad
ducees. 4 Matt. xxvi. 29 ; Luke xxii. 30.
6 Luke xiv. 14, xxi. 35, 36. Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 23 f.;
1 Thess. iv. 13 f. ; 4 Esdras ix. 22.
« Matt. xxv. 32 ff.
7 Chaps, ii., vi.-viii., and x.-xiii.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 51
Enoch,1 in the Sibylline Oracles,2 and
Jesus accepted these contemporary beliefs
without discussion.
They have been proved false by the
event, for the imminent renewal of all
things did not take place, and the second
Christian generation was tempted to say
that Jesus was mistaken. The apocryphal
Epistle of Peter has preserved for us the
echo of the agonies of conscience suffered
by the disciples of that time.8
How was it, then, that Christians re
mained Christians after their Master had
been, as it seemed, convicted of error?
Because they found in his teachings other
passages to which they could give an inter
pretation which calmed their fears. Jesus
had said that the gospel must be " preached
to all nations " before the end should
come.4 The end, then, was not imminent.
In the parable of the Mustard Seed, in the
figure of the leaven which acts little by
Httle, he had predicted a slow work,
tvhich would doubtless go on for a very
long time. And then, they would add,
1 Chap, i., xlv.-lii., Ixii., xciii. ff.
2 iii. 573 ff., 652 ff., 766 ff., 795 ff.
8 2 Peter iii. 3 ff. * Matt. xxiv. 14.

52 THE DEATH AND
above all, he predicted a Palingenesis, a
renewal of all things; and has this re
newal not taken place? The kingdom of
God is the Church, a kingdom of the
spirit in which all are kings and priests.
Jesus had also spoken of the uplifting of
the lowly, the insignificant, and the poor,
of the rehabilitation of the humble; this
was the true kingdom.
Now Jesus had said of this uplifting
that it is simply the preparation for the
kingdom, and in his mind the slow action
of leaven and the slow development of the
mustard seed did not signify several cen
turies, but simply a delay of a few years.1
The Church has said: Jesus founded
the kingdom, and this kingdom is the
Church. In thus speaking she is both
right and wrong: wrong, for evidently
Jesus did not conceive of the kingdom
1 See "Jesus Christ During his Ministry," pp. 106 ff.
There remains the remark about the whole world which
was to hear the preaching of the gospel before the com
ing of the kingdom ; but the authenticity of this saying
is cogently attacked by the most disinterested critics.
If Jesus really said this, we should point out that from
his point of view the earth was very small, and might
be entirely gone over in a few years. And furthermore
we repeat what has already been said : It is impossible to
disprove a whole body of teaching by a single utterance.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 53
under several different forms and in divers
successive manners. No; like all his con
temporaries, he called the kingdom of
God the state of things described by the
apocalypses of his people. But the
Church was also right, for Jesus — it can
not be too often repeated — never indulged
in speculation, and never kept strictly to
any defined theory of the kingdom of
God, to any inflexible theological construc
tion in which nothing could ever be
changed. In this sense he was not a Jew,
and he never pictured to himself the king
dom of God as a wholly exterior and
miraculous advent of some enormous,
indescribable mechanism descending from
heaven. The Christian Church has made
no mistake in looking upon Jesus, not as
the hero of senseless apocalyptic dreams,
but as the hero of freedom, of conscience,
and the establishment of a new idea of
worship. It has made no mistake in say
ing that with Jesus the kingdom of God
is the kingdom of souls that belong to
God; for he established the worship that
is in spirit and in truth, a purer wor
ship than that of Moses. The idea of a
temporal revolution never occurred to

54 THE DEATH AND
him ; he never accepted it, not even for a
second. The social side of his work was
only a result of its religious side, and was
to be realized only in the future.1 If
Jesus had said nothing more than this,
"The world is coming to an end, you
must detach yourself from your present
life and renounce everything," he would
never have surpassed John the Baptist.
The kingdom was to be the reign of
righteousness, and when he created a
church destined to prepare for the coming
of the kingdom, and which, until the
time when his kingdom should come, was
to pray to God, " Thy kingdom come ! "
he showed an admirable sureness of vision.
No doubt he did not abolish a single one
of the apocalyptic notions of his people,
but he fulfilled, transformed, renewed
them. After his death, the apostles — St.
Paul first of all — rejected the Jewish shell
which enclosed the living germ which
Jesus had scattered broadcast by his
preaching, and showed that he had ful
filled, that is, developed out of the dreams
of his people, all of eternal truth that
they contained. 1 Luke xii. 13, 14.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 55

CHAPTER IV
THE ENTRY INTO JERUSALEM
TXTE have spoken of the elation of the
disciples and their expectation of
the imminent appearance of the kingdom.
They entered rival claims for the more im
portant places in it, which for that matter
was what the Pharisees were doing every
day. On the way to Jerusalem, on one of
those days when Jesus was walking alone
before the others, absorbed in thought,
Salome asked of him the two highest
places for her two sons.1 Jesus, who
also was expecting the kingdom, did not
discountenance this hope ; he did not con
test the notion that Salome's two sons
might receive their reward in this present
life, and shortly be seated on thrones judg-
1 Matt. xx. 20 f. ; Mark x. 35 f. See " Jesus Christ
Before his Ministry," p. 143.

56 THE DEATH AND
ing the tribes of Israel; he simply declared
that it was not he, but the Father, who
would award these places; and then he
related to the disciples a parable1 in
which he made allusion to a recent politi
cal event, the deposition of Archelaus, a son
of Herod. He had gone to Rome to receive
the investiture ; but the Jews, who detested
him, had sent a deputation to say to the
emperor, " We will not have this man to
reign over us," and had gained their cause.
Finally Jesus addressed the apostles,
speaking with the express purpose of tell
ing them that he should very soon be put
to death. The apostles did not under
stand, and full of faith they awaited the
great signal, looking up to the clouds.
Were they not soon to open ? Would not
the trumpet soon be heard? Would not
the angels soon appear, heralds of the
descent of the kingdom and of that change
in all things of which Jesus had recently
spoken? But Jesus did not share these
ideas: he believed the coming of the
kingdom to be at a later date than his
disciples supposed. In most of the para
bles of this period he pictured the lord
1 Luke xix. 12-27.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 57
who " delayed his coming, " the father who
"went a long journey," the bridegroom
who "tarried."
There is here no difference between the
early preaching by the lake side and that
of the closing period of his life. In both
the kingdom is at hand, but its coming is
not immediate; his people were so little
prepared, his Galilean work had so com
pletely fallen below his expectations, that
the coming of the kingdom was by so
much retarded ; and besides, must not his
death come first? This was what he was
asking himself, and he believed it to be
the case.
And yet he would make one last attempt;
instead of entering the city quietly like
any pilgrim from abroad, as he had always
done hitherto, he would try a peaceful
manifestation which might, he hoped,
arouse a popular movement in his favor.
He felt indeed that the time was becoming
more and more decisive ; he must be ready
for any event.
How the times had changed ! Formerly
he used to check the apostles, used to say
to them, " Be ye wise as serpents ; " x he
i Matt. x. 16.

58 THE DEATH AND
had shunned publicity, and had hidden
himself when the people desired to pro
claim him king; now he was about to try
to assume this title, to ask men to give it
to him. He resolved to enter the city in
a solemn procession. Zechariah had pre
dicted that the Messiah would enter Jeru
salem riding on an ass ; a Jesus knew this
passage, which in his mind was a prophetic
description of the coming of the national
king, entering the Holy City riding on
an animal that was the symbol of peace.
In fact the ass was the animal ridden by
kings in time of peace ; and Jesus decided
to fulfil this prophecy. His intention to
meet and realize it is certain. He there
fore made preparation for this scene.
Precisely at what time did this mani
festation occur ? Only five days before the
beginning of the Passover; that is, only
four or five days before his death, for he
was crucified on the first day of the feast,
if not indeed on the day before it.
It has been asked if it is not necessary
to place the triumphal entrance into Jeru
salem at an earlier date ; if the traditional
date of Palm Sunday is not too late.
1 Zech. ix. 9.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 59
Must we really date it on the first day of
the week in which Jesus was put to death ?
We think so. No doubt we have said that
it is impossible to represent to ourselves
all the acts which the Synoptics relate or
presuppose as having been accumulated in
the first days of the week which then
began; we have pointed out with what
facility at some distance of time memories
are crowded together, and a whole series
of events which in fact occurred much
earlier, and which ought to be distributed
over a long space of time, crowded into
the last days, or even the last hours, of a
man's life. Acts seen from a distance
are massed, foreshortened ; a but still we
believe that the entry into Jerusalem is
properly placed on the first day of the
week of Jesus' death. The statements of
the Fourth Gospel on this point are very
positive and appear to be entirely authentic.
In fact, Jesus arrived in Jerusalem for
the Feast very late, though the custom
was to arrive early, in order to perform
the purifications. His enemies, not see
ing him come, believed that he was again
escaping them.2
1 See note on page 11. 2 John xi. 56.

60 THE DEATH AND
Why this delay ? Precisely because he
was arranging the details of his triumphal
entry, because he wished it to be at this
very moment and none other, that it might
be as solemn as possible.
He had halted at Bethany, where, as has
been said, there were two houses open to
him, — that of Martha and Mary, and that
of Simon, called the Leper. He chose the
latter.1 Martha served, and Mary, draw
ing near to the triclinium on which Jesus
reclined, poured over his feet the contents
of a vase of perfume and wiped them with
her long hair.
Of this Jesus said, "She is anointing
my body beforehand for burial." He was
then still occupied with the thought of his
approaching death. If he was to perish by
public execution his body would not be
embalmed; funeral honors were not given
to those who were put to death, least of
all to those who died by stoning. But
this woman had embalmed his body before
hand. He thus predicted that his death
would shortly occur; this woman had
herself thus foretold it.
And yet on the morrow he left this
1 John xii. 1-11 ; Mark xiv. 3-9; Matt. xxvi. 6-13.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 61
Bethany retreat to attempt a triumphal
entrance. All the time he had this double
thought: "I am to die, and yet I still
hope." He had foreseen everything, and pre
pared for it with equal care and prudence.
It is very noteworthy that Jesus arranged
this manifestation by himself alone, and
without speaking of it beforehand to any
of his apostles, even to those dearest to
him. He desired to keep it secret to the
last moment, and himself arranged its
smallest details all unknown to his friends.
He had friends in Jerusalem who are
still unknown to us, with whom, perhaps
from motives of prudence, he had not
even made his disciples acquainted. He
had arranged with some of these that on
the first day of the week, at a certain hour,
an ass with her colt by her side should
be fastened before a door at a certain
crossway, in the hamlet of Bethphage, at
the foot of the Temple wall. The place
was visible at some distance from the top
of the Mount of Olives, and when Jesus
sent two of his disciples thither he could
point out from afar the place where they
would find the beasts. A signal had been

62 THE DEATH AND
agreed upon, and the unknown friends
who were to lend them to him were to let
them go at the words "The Master hath
need of them." This was in some sort a
password which was to make them know
that they were in presence of Jesus'
messengers. The two disciples did as they had been
bid. They repeated the words and were
able to carry out their mission. Jesus,
who had awaited their return on the
Mount of Olives, seated himself upon the
animal and following the road that leads
to the city, solemnly entered it. The
Galileans, his disciples who had come to
the feast, followed him with acclamations.
Some had put their garments on the ass,
as a sort of trappings, others had spread
them upon the road; they carried palms
and strewed them in the way, crying,
" Hosanna ! Blessed is he that cometh in
the name of the Lord!" They expected
thus to inaugurate the kingdom. Jesus
permitted them to name him the national
king, the King of Israel.1
A year ago he had rejected this title;
now he accepts it, because the hour is
1 Luke xix. 38.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 63
come. The time is come to strike a great
blow; it is at last time that his people
come to a decision. If they welcome
him, the kingdom will come, and his
death will not be necessary.
Thus Jesus gave all possible publicity
to this entrance into Jerusalem. It was
an invitation to the multitude to recognize
him, to welcome him, — some as the Mes
siah, others as the precursor of and pre
parer for the kingdom.
The Galileans, that is to say, his friends,
those whom he had already gained, alone
responded. They were enthusiastic, and
the entrance of Jesus was certainly a
triumph. But the procession included
only these. Not one of the inhabitants of
Jerusalem joined them.
According to the Fourth Gospel,1 some
of the Jerusalemites came out to meet
Jesus ; but they came only out of curios
ity, and with no conception of what it
was all about, for they asked, "Who is
he?"2 And the Galileans, and only
they, replied, "It is Jesus, the prophet
of Galilee."
Such was the scene.
i John xii. 18. 2 Matt. xxi. 10.

64 THE DEATH AND
Let us insist upon the profound signifi
cance of this solemn act of Jesus.
On his part, the entrance into Jerusalem
was a supreme attempt to be welcomed
as the national Messiah, to convert the
people, who might have chosen him as
their head, in order to prepare them for
the coming of the kingdom. We can only
repeat here what we have several times
said: up to his last hour, even in Geth-
semane, Jesus believed that he might be
recognized by bis people as the Messiah
whom they were awaiting, and hoped that
thus a violent death might be avoided.
The scene in Gethsemane, as we already
pointed out in our first volume,1 has no
reasonable meaning if it is not to be thus ex
plained. His sympathy with his people's
hopes explains his attitude on Palm Sun
day; he believed in a national messianic
kingdom, and approved of his disciples
believing in it. He might have checked
that manifestation, might have hidden
himself, as he had done the year before,
on the lake side.2 He not only did not do
so, but it was he who had desired this man-
1 See "Jesus Christ Before his Ministry," p. 153.
2 John vi. 15.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 65
ifestation, had arranged it, and prepared
for it by himself alone, with the help of no
one, not even of one of his apostles.
We know, then, what at this time was
his whole thought as to the kingdom of
God, and all that was said in the fore
going chapter concerning his final notion
of the kingdom is fully confirmed.
Let it be clearly observed that Jesus
never opposed the belief of his apostles in
the speedy coming of a visible, external
kingdom, that he never even rejected the
idea of an external messianic domination.
At the temptation he rejected a worldly
domination which might be obtained only
by homage to Satan ; but he did not reject
it in itself considered.
If Jesus accepted, without the slightest
resistance, the ovations of his people, if he
even sought them, it is because he accepted
the idea of a national messianic kingdom;
for he perfectly well knew that this was
what those expected and proclaimed who
sang "Hosanna!" and he accepted and
approved of their homage. He had desired
it, sought it; as clearly as possible he had
invited the people to render homage to
him. There was therefore no misunder-
5

66 THE DEATH AND
standing between himself and those who
welcomed him.
His conduct proves without question
that he shared the hopes of his people,
and looked upon himself as the king of a
national messianic kingdom. The hom
age paid him and accepted by him were
paid to the Jewish Messiah. To argue
the contrary is to say — without a shadow
of proof — that Jesus was playing a comedy
of accommodation, — a comedy which he
had himself planned and arranged!
In spite, then, of all his sinister pre
monitions of a possible and nearly approach
ing death, Jesus was still hoping that a
kingdom might be established, purely
religious and such as the prophets had
described. He would found it by pacific
means. A miracle from the Father would
no doubt hasten its coming; as for him,
it was in order to arouse a national sen
timent that he acted as he did that day.
He was a patriot, and he desired his
country's glory.
Yes, I well know that death, a horrible
death, was present to his mind; he had
spoken of it to Mary the day before, at the
feast in Bethany. The idea of it haunted

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 67
him; he had already thought that in it
might lie the salvation of his people and of
the world; for this salvation depended on
his obedience, and his obedience would go
as far as his Father willed that it should go.
To renounce, to serve, to give himself, to
give himself every day, even to the last
sacrifice, if necessary, — this was his work,
because the coming of the kingdom was
on this condition; if he died, — well, life
would come out of his death, as the wheat
comes out of the seed after it has fallen
into the ground and died; and in the soul
of Jesus the thought of the approaching
end, the dread, the almost certainty of
death, and the opposing hope, hope invin
cible, hope against hope, dwelt side by
side. It would all be as the Father willed.
He must at this time have repeated and
applied to himself the words he had for
merly said : " Sufficient unto the day is the
evil thereof; the morrow will take care for
itself."1 In any case the kingdom, the true, final
kingdom, was always in the future. Jesus
no more founded it by entering Jerusalem
riding on an ass, escorted by an enthu-
i Matt. vi. 34.

68 THE DEATH AND
siastic crowd, than he had founded it
before that time. He was preparing for
its coming, and that is all.
On that day Jesus failed. He at once
perceived it. Hardly had he set out for
the city; while yet upon the Mount of
Olives, at the moment when the Holy City
first came into view, he had a clear view
of what awaited him, and he shed tears.
They were forced from him by grief for
the incredulity of his people; at that
moment he had a very clear perception
that his hope would be snatched away
from him. And yet he would go forward,
he would permit the acclamations, he
would make his appeal to the Jews; he
would go on to the end, even while de
claring that they would neither hear nor
understand him.1 This attitude is thor
oughly human and easy to be understood.
He was attempting a triumph, and at the
very moment when he tasted of it he felt
it escaping him. It was one more teach
ing added to so many others; he must
die. In fact his want of success was com
plete. In the enormous afflux of people
1 Luke xix. 41 f.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 69
in these days of festal preparation the
little procession of Galileans passed almost
unperceived. The people of Jerusalem
did not in the least understand it, and did
not even know who this triumphant hero
was, or what was expected of him ; Jeru
salem had no love for provincials, least of
all for those who came with a degree of
local renown. The burghers of the city
were thoroughly impregnated with the
Sadducean spirit. Cold, prudent, circum
spect, they were unwilling to be excited;
they asked who was this Jesus, and the
answer they received made them smile.
A prophet, — from Nazareth, in Galilee.
" No good thing could come out of Naza
reth ; " x and the little company was, so to
speak, lost in the crowd which was throng
ing the streets and gateways.
All the Galilean lack of success was as
nothing compared with this; Jesus had
only succeeded in irritating his enemies
the more. The Pharisees, as furious as
the Sadducees, allied themselves with
them against him; these irreconcilable
enemies forgot their bitter hatred in the
union of a common danger. They would
l John i. 47.

70 THE DEATH AND
face it together, and take up their quarrels
again after it was over. The death of
Jesus had already been resolved upon as a
principle, and now his attempt upon Jeru
salem, his would-be triumph, was the last
drop in a cup already over full : the matter
must be carried through without delay.
On Wednesday a council was held in
the palace of Joseph Caiaphas;1 it was
decided to arrest him.
To bring him to trial was to put him to
death, for the law against sacrilege was
excessively strict; death was its only pos
sible penalty. The Sadducees felt no
hesitation, being alarmed for themselves
and their privileges. They were deter
mined to push the matter to extremity, not
merely because, as sceptics and aristocrats,
any popular movement was displeasing to
them, but because they felt their power
threatened. The power of the Sadducees, absolutely
nothing in the country, was still very real
in the Temple circles; the company of
priests could be recruited only among
them, and the priests were extremely use
ful personages. The priests, the Temple,
1 Matt. xxvi. 1-5; Mark xiv. 1, 2; Luke xxii. 1, 2.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 71
were a never-failing source of revenue for
the city; the pilgrims who came thither in
throngs brought with them much money.
It was necessary then to get rid of this man.
The only preoccupation of the members
of the council held at the High Priest's
palace was to avoid all disturbance, all
popular excitement. They therefore ad
opted a plan which from their point of
view was very wise, — to postpone the
execution of the warrant of arrest until
after the Feast. The delay would be of
only ten days at most, and it seemed
imprudent to proceed earlier. They could
not tell precisely how many partisans
Jesus had in the city. They thought he
had many. In this they were in error; but
in any case the pilgrims from Galilee were
for him, and to arrest him in the midst of
the Feast would be to provoke an uprising.
As for Jesus, his faith in his work, in
his Father, in himself, did not waver for a
second. But he was forced to form a new
plan. First of all he would withdraw and con
ceal himself. He had said, " If they per
secute you in one city, flee into another."1
i Matt. *. 23.

72 THE DEATH AND
At a later time he would resume his min
istry with his twelve apostles ; for the time
being it was his duty to evade his enemies,
and with this he must first concern him
self. The very day of the triumphal entry,
the first day of the week, he left the city
as soon as evening closed in,1 this time on
foot, and went to pass the night in the
beloved village Bethany. The next day
he returned early to the city, and showed
himself openly in the Temple, continu
ing his discourses and conversations, well
knowing that no one would dare to arrest
him in the porticos of the Temple in broad
daylight. He was still hoping, and he
persevered in his work; he would neither
hasten the hour of the Father, nor hinder
it from striking when it had arrived.
Jesus offers us the sublime and touching
spectacle of perfect submission, the full
obedience of each day, each minute. At
the same time he was sad, sorrowful in
this waiting and uncertainty; his presenti
ments were becoming ever more clearly
1 I have shown that the purification of the Temple
on that day is inadmissible. See "Jesus Christ During
his Ministry," p. 130.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 73
defined, and yet they were only presenti
ments; he passed through moments of
dread, of agitation, of anguish. One day
he was heard to cry, " My soul is troubled ;
Father, save me from this hour!"1 He
was still hoping, then; he said, "Save
me!" He still believed that his death might
be avoided; he asked this of his Father.
Never was he more divine than in these
hours of complete and real humanity.
1 John xii. 27.

74 THE DEATH AND

CHAPTER V
THE LAST DAYS
JESUS came into Jerusalem, then, on
each one of the four days following
his triumphal entry. He was proposing
to keep the Passover there, as was his
custom; he had the most vivid desire for
this,1 and the fact comes out with the
clearest evidence that he was taken una
wares by the events that followed. He
had no suspicion, he could have had none,
of the incredible rapidity with which they
were rushing to a crisis.
How much did he know of the plots that
were being formed against him? It is
easy to conjecture. As we have said, it
was on Wednesday that the decision to
arrest and put him to death was defini
tively taken ; but at the same time every
thing was postponed until after the Feast.
i Luke xxii. 15.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 75
It was not merely an uprising of the people
that the Sanhedrin feared, but also, per
haps, complications with the Roman power.
Pilate was there, and it would be wise to
wait until he was gone,1 and the city had
resumed its usual quiet and returned to
its normal number of inhabitants.
It was then absolutely settled by the
Sanhedrin that for the time being Jesus
was not to be disturbed; he was to be
arrested, with as little publicity as pos
sible, as soon as the Feast days were over,
the bulk of the pilgrims gone, especially
the pilgrims from Galilee, and Pilate
returned to Caesarea. Then his trial
should proceed according to the usual
forms, which were very long and minute.
All should be done with strict legality;
Jesus should be condemned to death, and
should die by stoning. All this had been
intelligently ordered. It was thought, with
reason, that to arrest Jesus when the city
was crowded with strangers would be
most imprudent; and as, on the other
1 Pilate resided at Caesarea, and came to Jerusalem
only at times of the great feasts, precisely in order to
keep down the disturbances which might occur on these
occasions. Josephus, Ant. Jud. 18, 5, 3.

76 THE DEATH AND
hand, it was forbidden to leave Jerusalem
and return home before the Feast was
entirely completed,1 the Sanhedrin were
nearly certain that their prey would not
escape them.
Were all these plans and decisions of
the assembly reported to Jesus ? Since he
had friends and acquaintances in Jerusa
lem, since he had secret disciples in the
Sanhedrin itself, — Joseph of Arimathea,
Nicodemus,2 — it is very possible, even
probable, that one of them had warned
him that very Wednesday of all that had
just been plotted.
This, then, was what Jesus therefore
resolved: to remain quietly in Jerusalem
as long as the Feast lasted, for it had
been formally said, " Not during the feast
days ; " 3 to hasten away as soon as the days
of unleavened bread were accomplished,
and disappear for a time. He thought,
perhaps, of hiding himself even from the
Twelve, and as we shall presently see
1 See "Palestine in the Time of Jesus Christ,"
p. 446. 2 Mark xv. 43; Luke xxiii. 50; John iii. 1 ff., vii.
50 ff.8 Matt. xxvi. 5 ; Mark xiv. 2.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 77
some reason for conjecturing, appointing a
place of meeting them in Galilee at a later
time. This plan might have been carried
out but for the treachery of Judas. It
was the Iscariot, the man of Kerioth, who
brought about the arrest by the San
hedrin during the Feast, and thus fixed
the day of Jesus' death. We shall shortly
see how.
Did Jesus know, as early as Wednesday,
that one of his disciples had been seen in
secret conference with certain members of
the Sanhedrin? It is quite possible. He
certainly had his suspicions ; the very next
day he said, "One of you shall betray
me, " 1 but he had no material proof such
as would permit him openly to point out
the traitor.
Meanwhile, with much prudence and
wisdom, he took the most minute precau
tions for his personal safety during the
last days of his life ; and it seems entirely
probable that but for the infamous conduct
of Judas he might have escaped his ene
mies. His measures were so well taken
that nothing less than the treachery of one
1 Matt. xxvi. 21; Mark xiv. 18; Luke xxii. 21;
John xiii. 21.

78 THE DEATH AND
of the Twelve themselves was needed for
his apprehension.
He never passed a night in Jerusalem.
A surprise while he and his disciples were
sleeping in the common chamber of some
unnamed friend would have been easy
enough. Therefore he quitted the city
every evening, and slept in some suburban
farm. It is probable that he often changed
his shelter, and never mentioned before
hand which one he would choose.
However this may have been, there was
one whither he went, if not every evening,
at least somewhat often,1 no doubt because
it appeared to him to be particularly safe.
It was an orchard belonging to a farm
devoted to the production of olive oil.
An oil press was one of its dependencies,
and near the oil press was a pleasure
house, a sort of villa.2 The property be
longed to a friend of Jesus, a secret dis
ciple, of whom there were many around
him in his last days.
In this orchard Jesus often passed the
early hours of the night with his disciples.
1 Luke xxii. 39 ; John xviii. 2.
2 This is the meaning of xat>'MV- Matt. xxvi. 36;
Mark xiv. 32.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 79
It was a refuge where he could collect his
thoughts and pray in all security ; for the
Twelve alone knew of this retreat, and
thus far none of them had inspired the
slightest distrust.
Later in the evening he would climb the
closely wooded, thickly peopled Mount,
on which several houses offered him a
secure shelter. The fig-trees, the palms,
the olive-trees gave their names to these
villages, farmsteads, suburbs of the city,
— Bethphage, Gethsemane, Bethany.
At the top of the Mount was the country-
house of the famous Annas; he also had
bazaars there, — four shops placed under
two great cedars.1 Jesus knew well all
these environs of the city, and could easily
conceal himself among them.
But the safest of all these retreats was
that of Gat-Chamena2 (Gethsemane), of
which mention has already been made, for
it was probably the only one which was
known only to the Twelve and the friend
who owned it. It is possible that Jesus
1 Jerus. Taaniih, 4, 8.
2 Gat, press, chamena, oil. Now Dschesmanye (Matt.
xxvi. 36 ; Mark xiv. 32) ; Gethsemanei in the Greek of
the Gospels.

80 THE DEATH AND
and the apostles sometimes passed the
whole night there, either wrapped in their
mantles, under the trees, or in the house
itself. By day Jesus feared nothing; he was
convinced, as we have said, that during
the Feast he would surely not be arrested
in open day in the publicity of the Temple.
That he did not at once return to Galilee
was because he greatly desired to keep the
Passover at Jerusalem. It would have
been the first time that he had failed to
observe this touching custom of his people,
and he could all the less bring himself to
give it up, since be was in comparative
security during all the days of unleavened
bread. Therefore, but for Judas, nothing would
have happened, at least at this time.
What manner of man was this Judas?
How could one of the apostles, one who
had beHeved, one whom Jesus had chosen,
upon whom he had counted, one who
certainly had his good qualities, or Jesus
would not have designed him for the
apostolate, — how could he have fallen to
this last infamy, to betray Jesus? The
atrocity of his act is so great as to seem at

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 81
first incomprehensible. A truly terrible
change must have been going on in his
mind, especially during the first days of
this week, or at least on the Thursday,
when he made his horrible resolve.
The attempt has been made to find
special motives for the betrayal; the Fourth
Gospel speaks of his avarice, and even
says that he was a thief. He may have
been cheating Jesus for some time past,
appropriating to himself a portion of the
gifts made to the common purse; and
thus, little by little, he may have been led
away by avarice. Being the cashier of the
community, he may have desired to have
more money than he could possess while
remaining a member of it. This is no
doubt a possible explanation, but after all
there is a long distance between the most
shameless cupidity and the betrayal of
one's master, the betrayal of Jesus.
It has been supposed that, seeing in
Jesus the national Messiah, and dissatisfied
because he did not make some splendid
manifestation of himself, Judas had thought
to force him to declare himself by giving
him up to the Sanhedrin, thus hemming
him in a corner from which he would find
6

82 THE DEATH AND
a way of escape by a brilliant miracle.
The supposition is charitable but inad
missible. What! Judas could have still been a
believer! He could have betrayed Jesus
by reason of a sort of unbalanced faith in
him! The supposition is wholly absurd,
for if he had still believed Jesus to be the
true Messiah he would have left him to
carry out his own plans, and would not
have dreamed of constraining him. No;
when Judas betrayed Jesus he no longer
considered him to be the true Messiah, he
no longer believed in him.
But does his loss of faith entirely suffice
to explain his treachery? We do not
think so. Having ceased to believe, he
had but to withdraw from the company of
the Twelve and return to obscurity; or
if he wished to oppose Jesus, he should
have done it to his face, without conceal
ment. His loss of faith does not explain
his profiting by his position as privileged
member of the college of the Twelve to
betray his former Master.
How was it possible that he could remain
an apostle, continue to call Jesus Rabbi,
play the comedy of fidelity and even of

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 83
affection to the very last day? This last
extreme of perfidy is perfectly certain,
entirely historic, but to this day it remains
enigmatical from very frightfulness. Of
all acts of this kind, the act of Judas is
certainly one of the most appalling in its
revelation of the degree of baseness to
which man may descend.
And yet there are examples of similar
acts of treachery. There are sometimes
found in secret societies — the observation
has often been made — members who be
come Judases, who take upon themselves
to be denunciators. They are to be found
among the most ardent, whose enthusiasm
has received a check. Traitors are not
infrequent in clandestine associations.
It is perhaps here that we must seek the
true explanation, for the act that took
place here is evidently of this order. From
a zealot Judas became a traitor. He was
one of the fanatics of the Httle community,
one who was planning great changes, form
ing grand projects; and suddenly this
fanatic turned upon the community and
denounced its head. A phenomenon of
this sort has its psychological explanation,
and it is verified by history.

84 THE DEATH AND
In the case which concerns us here,
we can up to a certain point discover the
cause of the atrocious change in Judas.
It is not enough to say that he loved
money; not much better to say that he
had lost his faith. What seems to us to
have taken place in the soul of this man
is this: Judas had proclaimed the gospel,
he had cast out demons, he had looked for
ward to the kingdom and prepared for its
coming. From the first hour he had been
an enthusiast. And, after all, nothing
that he was expecting had taken place;
and instead of believing for all that, like
Peter and the others, and yielding him
self to the unwavering influence of Jesus'
faith, which no exterior events ever had
power to unsettle, he permitted himself to
be influenced by events, to be dominated
by them. After having like the others ex
pected a throne from which to judge one of
the twelve tribes, he had ceased to expect
anything; he had fallen from these lofty
heights, and the fall had been terrible.
In this mood of mind he had heard the
Master speak of renunciation, sacrifice, a
violent death; he had seen the fruitless
triumph of Palm Sunday. Jesus had

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 85
not been acclaimed, the priests were
against him, the city was indifferent! If
the others remained faithful to him, it was
only because they were attached to Jesus'
person; but to believe in his Messianic
claim was to be deluded indeed. If they
were still under the influence of his claim,
he, Judas, was so no longer. What! he
saw Jesus taking precautions, seeking to
avoid his enemies, hiding himself from
death ! Oh, now he hated him, hated him
for having deceived him, for having
charmed, enchanted him, hated him for
the delusion in which for nearly three
years he had held him; the thought was
agony that he had once believed and
permitted himself to be deluded through
his belief. And so at last he came to hate
even to death him who had thus disap
pointed his hopes ! And from this hate he
drew strength to put on a semblance of
fidelity until he should have given him up
to death. Add to this a sort of fear that
took possession of him, of being involved
in difficulties with the Jewish authorities
if anything happened to Jesus. He must
dissociate himself from him ; let him place
himself on the side of the strongest.

86 THE DEATH AND
This is certainly what took place in
Judas. His hatred of Jesus impelled him
to go to the Sanhedrin and say, "I will
give him up to you if you will pay me for
it."1 . It is easy to understand the mean
ing of this remark. Judas knew that the
Sanhedrin dared not arrest Jesus before
the last day of the Feast, and he said to
them, "It is risky to wait; he may go
away before the close of the Feast, he may
escape you. If you wish, I will show you
his hiding-place. The Twelve alone know
it, and I am one of the Twelve. I will
choose my own time for it, the very best
possible. One of these nights I will come
to you, and will clandestinely guide the
men whom you will send to take him."
Judas must have made his proposition in
these terms, and it was received with
eagerness. That Jesus died at this time is therefore
due to Judas. Judas accepted money in
exchange ; 2 then quietly, still keeping up
1 Matt. xxvi. 15.
2 A sum of a little more than one hundred francs,
equivalent in actual value to five or six hundred francs
of our money (one hundred or one hundred and twenty
dollars).

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 87
the appearance of fidelity, he sought a
favorable occasion, a propitious night.
The imagination is bewildered by the
infamy of this man. He had faUen to this
point; so much is certain, and it is so mon
strous that we can understand those who, in
pity for the wretch, have sought for extenu
ating circumstances ; but there are none.
It was Wednesday, the eve of the day
on which the Passover must be eaten, and
Jesus decided to give orders for the prepa
ration of the paschal meal. To this end
he doubled his precautions. This was
necessary, for on that evening he would
not be able to leave Jerusalem as early as
usual. The paschal meal was a long one ;
it closed with the singing of several
psalms, and it would not be possible to
leave the city before ten or eleven o'clock
at the earHest.
Jesus made arrangements with a friend
whom the apostles themselves did not
know; in this matter he acted as he had
acted with regard to his entrance into
Jerusalem. Having reason to suspect
some one of the Twelve, he told none of
them in advance ; but it had been decided
that at a certain hour in the course of

88 THE DEATH AND
Thursday this friend would send some
one, doubtless one of his servants, to a
place agreed upon, and that, as a means
of recognition, this person should carry a
pitcher of water.
Two of the apostles, sent by Jesus, were
to recognize him by this sign, and to fol
low him without speaking. Following
him, they were to enter the house which
he entered, and there, safe from indiscreet
observers, they would be brought before
the master of the house, to whom they
were to say : " The Rabbi says, ' Where is
my chamber, where I may eat the Pass
over with my disciples ? '" 2 The master
would then show them a large chamber, a
dining-room furnished with rugs, couches,
and all that was necessary for a meal.
In thus confiding in only three persons,
the master of the house and two apostles
of whom he was entirely sure, Peter and
John, Jesus could be certain that this
house would not be pointed out to the
emissaries of the Sanhedrin, and that in it
he might pass a few quiet hours.2
1 Mark xiv. 13, 14.
2 Matt. xxvi. 1 ff. ; Mark xiv. 12; Luke xxii. 7 ff.;
John xiii. 1 ff.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 89
Everything took place as had been fore
seen. The two designated disciples pre
pared the Passover, and Thursday evening
having come, the Master and the twelve
apostles repaired to the appointed house.1
1 A grave question arises here. Was it indeed the
Jewish Passover which Jesus celebrated on this night,
eating the paschal lamb with his disciples 1 It is evi
dent that we have here two historic problems to solve.
The first is the nature of the meal partaken of by
Jesus on Thursday, the evening before his death : was
it at an ordinary meal that Jesus instituted the Lord's
Supper, or was it after celebrating the Jewish Passover
that he instituted the Christian Passover ? The second
problem is that of date. Was this Thursday the 13th
or the 14th Nisan, and Jesus being crucified on the next
day, Friday, was he crucified on the 14th or the 15th 1
We shall not go over the history of these two ques
tions, which have been answered now in one way, now
in another, and always with plausible arguments in favor
of the solution proposed. If it is decided that Jesus
kept the feast of the Jewish Passover, with all his race,
on the 14th Nisan, and that this date fell on Thursday,
the Fourth Evangelist is in error, for he gives the date
of the supper as the 13th Nisan, and speaks not of the
Passover, bnt of an ordinary meal ; further, he says that
Jesus was crucified in the afternoon of the 14th, at the
hour when in the Temple the lambs were being slain
that were to be eaten by the Jewish families that same
evening. Notwithstanding the great value which we attach to
the historic statements of the Fourth Evangelist, we
believe that he is here in error, and we accept the
Synoptic tradition that Jesus celebrated the Jewish

90 THE DEATH AND
Passover on Thursday, which in that year fell on the
14th, and that he was crucified on the 15th Nisan.
One principal motive is the indisputable authenticity
of the details given by the Synoptics as to what oc
curred at this paschal feast. The story of the myste
rious preparations, as they have just been reviewed,
was not invented, and such an utterance as " With de
sire have I desired to eat this Passover with you before
I suffer " (Luke xxii. 1 5) is certainly authentic.
The only real difficulty is that Jesus should have been
crucified on the great day of the Feast, since, as is sup
posed, a capital execution was impossible on that day.
This difficulty has appeared to be so great that it has
been supposed that Jesus, celebrating the Jewish Pass
over, antedated by a day the custom of his people, and
ate the paschal lamb twenty-four hours earlier than the
other Jews ; but this supposition is wholly inadmissible.
The paschal lamb was never slain in the Temple before
the appointed day ; it would have been a sort of sacri
lege. Furthermore, Jesus had no motive for anticipat
ing the day, since he did not certainly know that his
death was imminent.
There remains the supposed impossibility of a capi
tal execution on the 15th Nisan: there was no such
impossibility. The 15th of Nisan was indeed the first day of the
Feast, and it is very true that the repose of this day
was observed as strictly as that of the Sabbath. It is
difficult to picture to one's self the rigor with which the
cessation of all work on that day was regulated : it was
a capital crime to kill even an insect. It is impossible
then to admit that the Jews could have proceeded to
an execution. In saying all this, only one thing has
been overlooked, that is, that it was not the Jews who
put Jesus to death, hut the Romans; and the latter
would not be in the least displeased at pouring ridicule

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 91
upon the Jews by crucifying one of them on the very
day of the Feast. Pilate, who took special pains to
mock the Sadducees by affecting to call Jesus their
king, and to insist upon his royalty in the inscription
placed above his head, might very easily have pushed
the raillery which was intended to vex them so far as
to make a special point of crucifying Jesus immediately
after his condemnation, on the very day of the Feast,
the day when Jerusalem was most crowded. Yes ; it is
very true that the Jews executed no one on a feast
day ; hut the cross was not a Jewish mode of execution,
it was exclusively Roman. Thus a difficulty which
to many still seems to be insurmountable is entirely
removed. Besides, occur when it might, the execution of Jesus
was a very small matter. Nothing was more common
at that time than executions commanded and carried
out by the Romans. Thirty years before, Varus had
caused two thousand insurgents to be crucified. During
the war of the year 70, Titus crucified five hundred
prisoners a day. In the face of such facts what was the
crucifixion of three men only 1
Finally, it has not been considered that a crucifixion
would have been much more difficult on the eve of the
15th, in the afternoon of the day when the lambs were
being slain in the Temple, than on the day following.
On the afternoon of the 14th the entire population was
occupied with preparations for the great festival of the
evening, and much more absorbed by the latter than by
anything that could occur the next morning, the 15th,
when they had so much the less to do because on that
day rest was absolute.
Let us further notice that when Nicodemus, Joseph
of Arimathea, and the holy women were preparing the
body of Jesus for burial, they all hastened the work be
cause the Sabbatic rest was about to begin (Mark xv.

92 THE DEATH AND
42 f. et parall.), and not at all because they were in haste
to go to eat the paschal lamb with their families. They
had eaten it on Thursday evening. The sacred feast
had already been celebrated.
For us, then, this much-controverted question is
settled. It results, therefore, that St. John was mistaken.
Whence could his error have arisen ? It is due to a
dogmatic prepossession. He who usually is so exact
when he traces the outlines of the life of Jesus, and
whose chronology is generally worthy of confidence, is
much less so when he gives precise figures. Thus he
says that when Pilate took his seat upon his tribunal
and presented Jesus to the crowd with the words, " Be
hold your king," it was noon (John xix. 14). Without
any doubt he is mistaken ; and the Synoptic tradition,
which places the crucifixion at nine o'clock and the
death of Jesus at three in the afternoon, appears to be
more worthy of confidence. It is entirely impossible
that Jesus, presented to the people at noon, could have
been condemned, led away to execution, crucified, and
buried before sunset of the same day. What, then, is
the dogmatic prepossession of the Fourth Evangelist ?
This : he shows Jesus as put upon the cross on the 13th
Nisan, at the very hour when the paschal lambs were
slain, because he sees a connection between the two
acts. In his mind Jesus is " the Lamb who takes away
the sins of the world" (John i. 29). His intention here
is too evident to permit us, on this point, to give historic
value to his testimony.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 93

CHAPTER VI
THE LAST EVENING
"VK 7E have arrived, therefore, at Thurs-
day evening, April 6, of the year
30, according to a chronological calculation
which, though not entirely certain, has im
portant elements of probability. Accord
ing to the Jewish calendar, as we have
shown, it was the 14th Nisan, the sacred
evening which Jesus piously celebrated
every year.
The apostles and the Master were half
extended, in Oriental fashion, upon cush
ions and rugs.1 Jesus, presiding by right,
broke the great flat cakes which served for
bread, the dough of which had not fer
mented; he piled the broken pieces one
upon another. Before the Master, cut
into equal pieces, was the lamb which the
two disciples whom Christ had chosen
had caused to be killed a few hours earlier.
1 Mark xiv. 15.

94 THE DEATH AND
It had been roasted; and beside this dish
of meat was a dish of lettuce or wild
chicory, called "the dish of bitter herbs."
Finally there was the charoseth, the sauce,
of a reddish color, in which each in turn
dipped his piece of unleavened bread.
Four times Jesus passed the cup around.
After the first, they sang together the first
part of the Hallel ; l after the fourth, they
sang the second part,2 intoning the sacred
words with full voices and full hearts.
Yet Jesus felt the darkest forebodings.
All possibility of escape seemed to him to
be lost. If it was known that he was
there, in that house, that, contrary to his
habit, he had not left the city at nightfall,
how easy it would be to arrest him !
And then, to go away, to put himself
out of the reach of his enemies, would be
merely an expedient. Oh, this Passover
which he had so desired to celebrate
without hindrance!3 It had come now!
But afterward? How much longer would
he still be there? The new year just
opening (for the religious year begins at
this time, according to the Jewish calendar)
i Psalms cxiii., cxiv. 2 Psalms cxv., cxviii.
8 Luke xxii. 15 f.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 95
would not find him there at its close.
And yet he was sustained by his indomita
ble hope ; never had he been firmer in his
faith. The kingdom would shortly ap
pear; he would not again drink of this
fruit of the vine, this Passover wine, be
fore the banquet of the kingdom.1
So with the lamb and the unleavened
bread, he was not again to eat them until
the coming of the kingdom. He expected
the kingdom then, that very year; he who
knew not the hour appears in this place to
point out at least the year, that very year.
Then he spoke of the festival that was to
come ; the apostles were to be seated at his
table, in his kingdom, and very soon the
Twelve would be sitting on thrones, at his
side,2 judging the twelve tribes. He then
had perfect faith in his work, and aU the
hopes that he had thus far cherished were
stiU his.
He spoke also of his sufferings. He had
desired to celebrate this Passover " before
he suffered." Ah, how clearly he saw
what great sufferings were awaiting him !
But anything so unforeseen as a sudden
1 Matt. xxvi. 29 ; Mark xiv. 25 ; Luke xxii. 18.
2 Luke xxii. 29, 30.

96 THE DEATH AND
arrest that very night, followed by con
demnation and immediate execution all in
less than twenty-four hours, was far from
his thought. We offer only one proof of
this : in the first century a criminal process
was not thus conducted; the guilty were
never arrested, judged, and condemned
the same day, especially not in the night.
The existing law formally opposed it. It
was obligatory that twenty-four hours
should elapse between the judgment and
the giving of sentence.1 Who then would
have supposed that in this case the law
would be broken, that Jesus would be put
to death more after the manner of an as
sassination than of a lawful execution ?
We have said that it was Judas, by the
decision which he made that very evening
in the upper chamber, who fixed the day
of Jesus' death, or at least the night of his
arrest. It was he who, by going to the
Sanhedrin that very night, caused them to
modify their plan of waiting, caused them
to hasten things to such a point that,
1 At least so affirms the Mishna. Sanhed. iv. 1, 2,
v. 1, iv. 3 el passim. There remains still a doubt, how
ever, since Moses commanded the stoning of the se
ducer of his people even without trial (Deut. xiii. 1 ff.) .

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 97
though on Thursday evening Jesus was
stiU at liberty, at sunset of Friday he was
already buried.
Two interests occupied Jesus during
that evening, — his sufferings and his
kingdom. His disciples were to remain
humble and insignificant, as a preparation
for the kingdom; there must be no
struggle for precedence; their present
duty was to serve.1 At this point St.
John preserves a particularly touching
detail. Jesus washed his disciples' feet
before sitting down to table with them;
showing them by a symboHc act what
they were to understand by service. He
told Peter that he should soon perceive the
significance of this act, evidently aUuding
to an approaching humiUation, a supreme
service, perhaps a sacrifice. He would
obey as far as the Father should bid him
obey. At another moment he said that it was
needful that they should provide them
selves with swords. 2 He asked the apostles
if they had wanted for anything when in
Galilee he had sent them on a mission
1 Luke xxii. 24, 27. Cf. John xiii. 4 ff.
2 Luke xxii. 35-38. 7

98 THE DEATH AND
bidding them take neither purse, nor scrip,
nor a change of footwear. "We wanted
for nothing," replied the disciples. "But
now," added Jesus, "let him who has a
purse take it, and likewise him who has a
scrip ; and he who has no sword, let him
sell his cloak and buy one, for I say unto
you, that this Scripture must be fulfilled
in me, And he was numbered with the
transgressors. For the things which con
cern me are drawing to an end." The
apostles produced two swords which they
had with them : one was Peter's, the other
belonged to one of his fellow disciples.
"Lord, here are two swords." "It is
enough," replied Jesus.
What does this mean ? Jesus speaking
of buying swords to defend themselves
and him ! And when they show him two,
declaring that two will be enough ! They
would not have been enough if he had
really intended to seek the defence of
arms; and he knew it well, since he had
just asked them all to arm themselves,
saying that he preferred a sword even to a
cloak, a necessary garment! All this is
highly inexpHcable. It is probable that
the reminiscences of the witnesses are

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 99
not very clear on this point; they recall a
dialogue which their memories have only
half preserved.
This is not surprising. At a later time
the apostles recalled to mind this last
meal, and understood its exceptional
grandeur, which they had not at the time
perceived, believing that Jesus was yet to
be for a long time with them. The memory
of this evening then became precious above
aU others, as the last hours spent with a
beloved friend are always precious when
he has been suddenly taken away from us.
We seek to recall every one of the words
of that last day; we take note of every
thing, fragments of phrases return to our
memories, and rather than one should be
lost, we preserve phrases which do not
easily fit into others, and often are not
easy to understand.
No doubt Jesus told his disciples that
the situation was no longer what it had
been in GaHlee; that they must give up
the Essenian customs in which they had
Hved from day to day, with no change of
garments, and no arms for self-defence
against probable attacks of robbers when
on their journeys. Was his thought about

100 THE DEATH AND
swords connected with the dangers with
which the near future threatened himself?
Perhaps. But when he said that two
swords were enough, it was with the
meaning "are useless; " it was an ironical
phrase, meaning " That will do, let it go. "
Jesus certainly had no desire that they
should make use of swords; he had no
thought of an armed defence, if he and his
friends should be surprised by an ambush.
Such a thing would be so contrary to all
that we know of him, that we cannot bring
ourselves to admit it.
Jesus then at once abandoned his first
thought of buying swords ; it was a mere
fleeting impulse. Peter, however, declared
that, if necessary, he would die for him,
saying, "I will never be offended."1
Jesus, who knew him, and was aware how
completely he yielded to the impulse of the
moment, declared that he would go so far
as to deny him, even to deny him three
times — that is to say, several times — if
the occasion presented itself. Peter pro
tested, and the ten others who heard him
protested in their turn.2
1 Matt. xxvi. 33 ; Mark xiv. 29.
2 In Hebrew the number three is indeterminate and

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 101
What else took place that evening?
The apostles remembered afterward that
Jesus had been oppressed by the thought
that there was a traitor among them, and
that he had said, " One of you will betray
me." * When he uttered the words Judas
remained unmoved. John, at a sign from
Peter, asked, "Who is he?" Jesus, who
merely had his suspicions, simply gave to
Judas a bit of bread dipped in the charoseth,
saying in a low tone, " Observe to whom
I give this."
Not long after Judas went out; he was
going to propose to the priests that he
should immediately conduct them to the
hiding-place at Gethsemane and arrest
Jesus. It is possible that he perceived
that his former Master had found him out,
and that he feared to be too late if he did
not act at once. In any case it is certain
that even while Christ was in the very act
signifies several (2 Cor. xii. 8). Ought this saying of
Peter to be placed later, on the way to Gethsemane,
and was it only then that Peter protested his devotion
to his Master'! We cannot tell; this detail is one of
those upon the order of which the Gospels are not in
harmony. l Matt. xxvi. 21-25; Mark xiv. 18-21; Luke xxii.
21-23 ; John xiii. 21-30.

102 THE DEATH AND
of discerning and almost proclaiming his
infamy, Judas was able to maintain the
tranquil bearing of the criminal who coldly
calculates and chooses his time.
As to Jesus, it is very evident that he
had only a suspicion; if he had felt entire
certainty, if he had known in advance that
Judas was to betray him that very night,
he would not, by silence, have given him
the means of accomplishing his crime; to
have done so would have been to become
his accompHce. He had, therefore, only
a suspicion, a dread, a painful apprehen
sion ; and if Judas went out at that precise
moment, it was because the idea of betray
ing Jesus that very night suddenly swept
over his mind.
He calculated his time : at such an hour
Jesus would leave the house; at such
another he would be in the olive garden,
his usual retreat; there was not a minute
to lose.
When the traitor had gone out, Jesus
began to talk, and he talked a long time.
St. John has preserved for us the echo of
his words, but only their echo; for we
must look for the words themselves behind
the Johannean form and the habitual

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 103
amplifications of the writer of the Fourth
Gospel. Nevertheless these three chapters
(xiv., xv., xvi.) and the sacerdotal prayer
(chapter xvii.) are full of expressions
that are certainly authentic, both as to
their meaning and as to their very form.
Though we have only their echo, it is a
singularly faithful echo, notwithstanding
that all these chapters are Johannified, if
we may use the expression. As Clement
of Alexandria has said, " The first evange
lists gave us the letter of the story, St.
John expressed its spirit." To say even
this is not to say enough; here and there
in the farewell discourse of chapters xiv.,
xv., xvi. we find the very letter itself.
The prediction of the coming of the Holy
Spirit, that of persecutions to come, the
counsel as to the conduct they were to fol
low when he should be no longer there,
are very certainly the words of Jesus. We
must not only accept the general spirit of
this discourse, but a great number of its
utterances; for example, these: "Love
one another, as I have loved you;" "A
new commandment give I unto you, that
ye love one another ; " "I call you not
servants, but I call you friends;" and

104 THE DEATH AND
many other similar expressions which tra
dition did not invent, any more than it
invented the incident of Jesus washing
the apostles' feet. If not on that even
ing, at least on one of these last days, he
repeated a saying that he had already
uttered: "Whosoever will save his life
shall lose it, and he that will lose his life
shall save it." This aphorism is certainly
by Jesus, and when he uttered it anew,
before his suffering, he was thinking of
himself as well as of his disciples. It is
not sufficiently recognized that Jesus must
first have made application to himself of
most of his precepts. They came out of
the depths of his own personal experience ;
he had lived them ; and he gave them to
his disciples only after having personally
tested their truth, and found their applica
tion in his own life.1
1 With regard to the Johannean form in which the
Fourth Gospel clothes the words of Jesus, let us con
sider how the author of this book wrote it. He desires
to make a faithful, vivid, authentic portrait of Jesus ;
and to this end he composes, putting into the lips of
Jesus words which he did not actually speak, but which
he might have spoken; and he makes him do things
which he did not always actually do, but which he might
have done, and which are therefore in the writer's eyes

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 105
What else was he thinking ? One utter
ance has been preserved to us which seems
to show his thoughts with regard to the
future : " After I am risen again I will go
as if he had done them. He desires to give an idea of
what was said and done, — or of what might have been
said and done, for the two were one in his mind, —
by " the Word made flesh and dwelling among us, full of
grace and truth " (John i. 14) ; and he shows him speak
ing and working. Thus it is with the farewell discourse
in the upper chamber. The sublime unknown who was
the friend of St. John, and who received from him most
of the historic details of his narrative, the mystic of the
school of Ephesus, who wrote the Fourth Gospel, desires
to show us Jesus at that solemn hour. He enters, there
fore, into his frame of mind, says only what Jesus might
have said, and he is certain to have given us a very faith
ful and entirely authentic picture of the state of his soul.
Every word that he puts into his lips expresses what
Jesus thought, felt, and experienced at this solemn hour.
It is to this end that he makes him utter these words
to himself. In our day we go to work in another way.
When we write a biography, we write it as objectively as
possible, and when we publish the words of a man who
is no more, we add nothing to those which he left behind ;
we respect the incomplete and even incorrect phrases
which remain to us from him, and are scrupulous not
to modify them in any manner whatever. To attribute
to him words or acts which were not his would be to
produce a work in the highest degree apocryphal. The
writer of the Fourth Gospel had an entirely different
notion of what a biography ought to be. He gave
another sense than ours to the words historical and
authentic; that is all.

106 THE DEATH AND
before you into Galilee. " x We have already
alluded to this. What does it mean ? Shall
we see in it a plan already formed to leave
his apostles, to change his plans, to vanish
for a time from view? Perhaps; in any
case, is it not permitted to conclude from
these words that shortly before bis death,
but not knowing death to be so near, Jesus
had resolved to escape from his enemies
by hiding himself for a time, retiring into
some solitude unknown to any one, even
to the Twelve? When telling them in
veiled language of this approaching with
drawal of himself, he would also appoint a
meeting for a later time, in Galilee, and
even "upon a mountain" in Galilee, a
mountain which he would expressly desig
nate,2 although in the words spoken in
the upper room nothing was said about a
mountain. Then, after a temporary re
treat, when the passions now raging about
him should have been calmed, they would
meet, and together resume their common
work.3 1 Matt. xxvi. 32 ; Mark xiv. 28.
2 Matt, xxviii. 16.
8 Matt. xxvi. 30-32 ; Mark xiv. 26-28, xvi. 7 ; Matt.
xxviii. 7, 10, 16.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 107
It seems to us in fact probable, if not
certain, that in the words, "I will go
before you into Galilee," we have a frag
ment of an utterance of Jesus appointing
a place of meeting with the apostles after
a temporary separation rendered necessary
by the plots of his adversaries. In any
case, he gave them a positive appointment;
and the apostles, recalHng these words to
mind at a later day, very naturally took
them for a prophecy of his resurrection.

108 The death and

CHAPTER VII
THE LORD'S SUPPER
""THERE was for the disciples one mo
ment least of all to be forgotten in this
never-to-be-forgotten evening, — that of the
institution of the Eucharist.
Jesus had long thought of such a thing.1
It might even be asked whether he did
not earlier institute this sacred rite, and
whether the apostles, by a very natural
optical illusion, which has already been
observed, did not at a later time place it
in this last evening. But the testimony
of St. Paul is explicit. Jesus instituted
the Eucharist "on the night in which he
was betrayed."2
Baptism was not so much a new insti
tution as a ceremony, which he permitted
to remain after modifying it, for baptism
1 See "Jesus Christ During his Ministry," pp. 171 ff.
and pp. 215, 216.
2 1 Cor. xi. 23.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 109
was practised before Jesus Christ came.1
The Lord's Supper was really a new
creation.2 By what steps did Jesus come to the
institution of this ceremony, and to its
institution on that very day? This is
what we have now to ask.
The work of regenerating his people,
the work of preparing by repentance and
poverty of spirit for the coming of the
kingdom, had failed. The tears which
Jesus shed the day of his entrance into
Jerusalem had been wrung from him by
the contrast between what was and what
might have been. What was, — the
acclamations of children, of friends of
GaHlean peasants, the mass of the people
indifferent, the Pharisees more and more
hostile. The kingdom would come by and by;
he would inaugurate it on his return ; but
now, just now, what ought he to do ? He
must always be preparing for the coming
of the kingdom — that was his mission,
1 See, on baptism and its origin, " Palestine in the
Time of Jesus Christ," pp. 197, 377.
2 It, however, may also be connected by filiation with
the meals of the Pharisaic confraternities, as we shall
presently show.

110 THE DEATH AND
and he had never for an instant doubted
his mission; but would not his people
always reject him, whatever he might do ?
It seemed so to him; from this time he
became more and more convinced that it
was so.
On the other hand, Judaism appeared to
be certainly passing away ; the time-worn
routine, the debased priesthood, the Law
changed into casuistry, the mechanical
ritualism of formaHstic institutions, — all
these must pass away. Jesus continually
felt himself to be more and more outside
of these things and entirely above them;
the old Covenant was subverted; a new
Covenant was needed between God and
men. He knew the passage in Jeremiah about
the new Covenant.1 It was for him to
fulfil this prophecy, for him to found this
new covenant.
Up to this time his originality had con
sisted in teaching that the kingdom of
God is prepared for by a change in men's
hearts, and not by waiting, as did the
Jews, for a sudden catastrophe, giving
the kingdom to the elect people as of
1 Jer. xxxi. 31 ff.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 111
right; now, like Jeremiah, he declared
— and it is always the same order of
ideas — that the covenant would be in
the heart, that the new law would be
written in the hearts of men.
But he had beHeved that he could bring
about this covenant by his preaching,
and now he saw that the change of men's
hearts must be sealed with his blood.
If he had lost his Jewish faith, he stiU
did not condemn the reHgion of his people
in the sense of deeming it to be bad in
itself. It was the starting-point of the
new law, the origin of what he was about
to found, the preparation for it.
He must do this foundation work at
once, for his death was now certain. He
hoped indeed that arrest might be avoided ;
and yet — could they not find him wher
ever he might be? And what would
become of bis disciples ? Would not they
be discouraged? He must be put to
death. This "must," which during the
last few months he had so often repeated,
rose up anew before him. "Father, thy
will, not mine." Ah, in this filial sub
mission he never wavered, and these
words, which would shortly sum up his

112 THE DEATH AND
last prayer, were always in his heart; for
they were the inspiring principle of his
whole life, they had been his law from
the first, from the days of his pious child
hood in Nazareth.
As to his future triumph and that of his
work, he still believed in it; he was as
sure of it now as in his time of success in
Galilee ; he had predicted triumph, and he
still predicted it. But since he must first
die, and since it was necessary that his
disciples should remain bound to him,
that his disciples' faith in him should
abide, or if it must pass through an eclipse,
that it should again become what it had
been, he instituted the Holy Communion.
It would be a ceremony that they could
observe during his absence ; when he was
no longer with them it would recaU his
presence and take the place of it.
The pictorial language which he had
so often used was to be used yet once
again, and this time it would be a parable
in action. When he should be no longer
there it was needful that his own should
live with him in thought, that his example,
especially the example of his sacrifice,
should be daily before their eyes ; and he

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 113
perceived that meal-time was the best time
for them to commemorate his presence.
In fact, when they should come together
for the common meal and find their
Master's place empty, would not their
meeting be bitterly sad? Would not the
memory of the meals of former days, of
those joyful hours of confidence, come
back as a heavy weight upon their hearts ?
Well, at such times they must do as if
he were still there; better still he would
be there, present in their midst, for they
would have assembled in his name;1 he
would not leave them orphans, he would
come to them,2 and their sorrow should be
changed into joy.3
During these three years, the happiest
hour of the day for Master and disciples
had been that of the common meal; they
must keep it up ; it must be their hour of
intimate fellowship; and every day, when
they took this meal, they must eat the
bread and drink the wine in memory of
him. Yet more : the bread, necessarily broken
before being eaten, the wine, necessarily
1 Matt, xviii. 20. 2 John xiv. 18.
8 John xvi. 20.

114 THE DEATH AND
poured out before being drunk, would
remind them of their Master's sacrifice;
his death, his shed blood.
And finally, when they ate the one and
drank the other, they should be fed by
him ; they should commune with him ; his
person would be present to them, his
example would be Hving before their eyes.
Far from being saddened by this sacred
meal, they would draw from it an immense
spiritual power.
They were to renew this act every time
they took a meal in common, and keep it
up until their Master came again; for he
would come again.
"I will come again! I will come again! "
Who shall say what these words, repeated
by Jesus from the depth of his soul, with
unwavering conviction, brought him of joy
and strength in the last dark hours !
Thus, then, Jesus told his disciples that
while waiting for the kingdom of God in
which they should drink new wine, and
during the period that separated his death
from his coming again, they were to recall
his person to mind every time they took a
meal together, were to put themselves in
spiritual communion with him by think-

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 115
ing of his return and of that blessed day,
when forever reunited they should enjoy
the eternal banquet in the kingdom of the
Father. Thus understood, the words of institu
tion seem to us very clear. " This is my
body, this is my blood;"1 "The blood of
the new Covenant, which is shed for many
for the remission of sin."2
To the Hebrew the blood was the seat of
life. To pour out one's blood was to die,
to give one's Hfe. The expression flesh
and blood (bachar vedam; in Greek, aapi;
teal alfia, or alfia teal crdp^, flesh and blood) 3
was a locution frequently employed by the
rabbins for the entire person, the whole
living man. The Eucharist was then in
the thought of Jesus the sensible image
of the gift of his entire being; but he
never considered his death as a Levitical
sacrifice. He simply said: "I give my-
1 Without verb in Aramaic. Literally, Jesus said:
" This, my body ; this, my blood."
2 Here we cite Matthew (xxvi. 28) without asking
which of the four texts (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
Paul) is the best, for all four differ, and the problem is
practically insoluble.
8 See Matt. xvi. 17 ; Gal. i. 16 ; 1 Cor. xv. 50; Heb.
ii. 14, etc.

116 THE DEATH AND
self, body and soul; I sacrifice myself, and
this sacrifice creates a new Covenant, a
new relation between God and man. By
this Covenant sins shall be remitted, par
doned, effaced." The old Covenant was
sealed with blood; the new one should be
also; and it was his own blood, his, Jesus'
blood, which should seal it with this final
and sacred seal.
His blood was shed for the remission of
sins ; that is to say, God would remit the
sins of those who were united by faith
with their crucified Saviour.
The institution of the Eucharist is there
fore explained by the desire of Jesus to
perpetuate his memory and to remain alive
in the thoughts of his own; and if he chose
this form of repast, it was not simply be
cause of the touching symbolism of the
bread broken and eaten, of the wine poured
out and drunk by all of them, but also
because before all other times he preferred
the precious moment of the common meal.
The Jewish Passover had always been
the type of their family dinners, because
with it was mingled a religious and patri
otic souvenir. In fact, the simple every
day meal was always for an IsraeHte a

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 117
beloved time. The Jews cared greatly for
these family gatherings, and the Pharisees
used to form spiritual fraternities, with a
common meal and conversations on reHgious
subjects.1 Jesus and the Twelve had formed one
of these associations, perfectly united and
perfectly happy. At a later time, when
the apostles desired to recaU the memory
of their Master as they had known and
loved him, they would not first think of
him as healing the sick or preaching on
the mountain. It was not the picture of
Jesus casting out demons and inspiring
the multitudes with enthusiasm that would
first present itself to their eyes; they
would see him breaking the bread at the
evening meal, in the upper chamber, when
the doors were closed; he had so loved
these times of privacy with his own!
Their association, their confraternity,
whether Pharisaic or Essenian, had been
so happy, so sweet, so united ! The even
ing meal had been for Jesus the time above
all others for intimate communion, the
time of rest, far from the thronging crowd,
the time for self revelations and confi-
1 See "Jesus Christ During his Ministry," p. 172.

118 THE DEATH AND
dences; it was then that he would speak
most unreservedly, and that relations of
most entire confidence were estabHshed
between him and his disciples.
More than this, the common meal, taken
in accordance with Pharisaic custom,
always had a sacred character. Jesus
always began it by giving thanks, as has
become the excellent custom of Christian
households; thanking God for the food
before partaking of the meal. The Jews,
indeed, always did so, and even thanked
God for each new dish placed upon the
table; but it was especially at the begin
ning that they gave thanks, and again at
the moment when the bread was broken,
the great round flat cakes which had to be
broken into pieces and distributed. It
was the habit of Jesus to break the bread
at the time when he said grace, at the
same time making a gesture of adoration
pecuHar to himself, which no one made
but he. "Oh, those meal-times with
Jesus!" the apostles would say to one
another in later days; "oh, the moment
of the breaking of bread when he was with
us! " They would remind one another
how happy they had been, and how happy

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 119
he too had been at those blessed times!
He used to look forward to them; he
desired them " with a great desire ; " 1
and when afterward they saw him, returned
from the dead,2 it was often at meal-time
that he appeared in their midst; and it
was especially in the breaking of bread
that they recognized him.
This is why on that Thursday night, the
night in which he was betrayed, knowing
that he was very soon to be parted from
bis own, Jesus in a definitive way conse
crated the solemn moment of the breaking
of bread. He desired that the apostles
should still come together, still break the
bread, still drink in turn from the cup, as
at the paschal meal; should do it all for
him, in memory of him, until his coming
again; for his absence was to be only an
absence, a brief separation. And when they
should reproduce the scene of the upper
chamber, they would be drawing near to
him ; he would put himself into relations
with them, and thus they would keep
alive his memory.
1 Luke xxii. 15.
* We shall return to this remark when discussing the
return of Jesus to life.

120 THE DEATH AND
More than this, he said that the memory,
not of his Hfe only but also of his death,
was to be kept alive by this sacred cere
mony. The bread was his body, broken,
put to death. The wine was his blood,
poured out for the remission of sins.
Since he was to drink no more of this fruit
of the vine with his own, until the king
dom should have come; since they were
to have no more of these common meals,
with the broken bread and the cup passed
from lip to lip; since he was to die, — he
desired that his death, which was to be
so important, should be connected, by a
sacred rite, with the celebration of the
meals which the apostles would take after
he was gone.
Besides, he was to come back again.
Very well, until his return let the little
spiritual family not be scattered; let his
friends keep up the common evening meal ;
and every time that they ate the bread and
drank of the cup, they would be proclaim
ing his death; they would be preaching
him ; they would be telling the world that
his death had not been a defeat but a
victory, an act wiUed by God, an act of
redemption.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 121

CHAPTER VIII
THE ARREST
rT",HE evening was wearing away; it was
time to go; the hour had come for
repairing to their night refuge in Gat-
Chamena,1 at the foot of the Mount of
Olives. They therefore went forth after singing
the last psalms and passed along the dark
and silent streets. In each one of those
closed houses they were finishing the cele
bration of the paschal meal, and the last
chords of the hymns floated out from these
homes as they passed before them; per
haps they also heard joyous bursts of
laughter, for this feast of the Passover
was always a very happy time.
They reached the open country; the
moon was full 2 and lighted up the slopes
1 See above, p. 79, note 1.
2 That it was moonlight that night is certain because
the Jews celebrated the Passover the 15th Nisan, that

122 THE DEATH AND
of the Mount of Olives. Its rays fell
white on the tombs and on the rocks,
leaving the rest in shadow. They met no
one on the road; they heard no sound
except of their own footsteps ; below them
was the deep valley; before them, on the
opposite slope of the hill, lay the quiet
place where Jesus believed that he might
pass the night without fear. From afar
its olive-trees showed like dark blots, and
the whole scene was enwrapped in the wan
radiance which lighted up the mountain.
They went down into the valley, crossed
the Kedron by a Httle bridge, the precise
place of which is known, climbed the
other slope by a footpath, and one by one
entered the garden.
No one would look for them there under
the trees. On the other side of the valley,
directly opposite, uprose the high walls
of Jerusalem, from which they were sepa
rated only by the ravine. The gigantic
Temple overtopped these lordly walls with
is, fifteen days after the new moon, which always
marked the beginning of the month. We at the pres
ent time follow a like custom ; the Christian festival of
Easter is celebrated on the first Sunday that follows the
first full moon after the vernal equinox. It thence re
sults that the moon is always full during Holy Week.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 123
their one hundred and twenty feet of ele
vation, and their enormous foundation
stones, which still rest in their places even
to this day. Around them was the rocky
hiU all flooded with the white light from
the skies, the white radiance bringing out
the huge black shadows of the old olive-
trees. The apostles disposed themselves for the
night, and fell asleep wrapped in their
mantles. But Jesus desired to watch; he
begged Peter, James, and John to come
and pray with him, and all four went
farther under the shadow of the trees.
Perhaps Jesus proposed to pass the
whole night in Gethsemane; in any case
he intended to begin it by praying, per
haps for an hour. He probably deemed it
imprudent to spend this night in a house,
even in that of his friends of Bethphage
or Bethany, and preferred to remain in the
open air. He had often done this, in his
youth in Nazareth, and during his ministry
in Galilee.1
But this night he was not entirely at
ease, for though his retreat was known
only to the Twelve, one of them, Judas,
1 Luke vi. 12 ; John vi. 15 f.

124 THE DEATH AND ¦
the very one whom he suspected, was not
with them. He had gone out abruptly in
the midst of the Passover feast.
To the suspicions caused by the conduct
of Jesus were joined presentiments; he
felt that misfortune was coming, and soon
an immense distress took possession of his
entire being. It was for this reason that
he had begged bis three most intimate
disciples to watch with him, near him ; in
general he used to go alone to pray, but
this night he was overwhelmed with sad
ness, he dreaded solitude.
Yet he was not spared solitude. The
three apostles who had gone with him
soon slumbered like the others, being over
come with sleep. Then Jesus went a few
steps farther; and kneeling down, his face
to the earth, he was alone.
Oh those nights of solitude and medita
tion, how he had loved them ! But here,
for the first time, solitude was painful; he
was "sorrowful even unto death."
And why? What was it that over
whelmed him? Had he not often passed
such nights? — in Nazareth, before his
ministry, and during the last three years,
on the hills that surround the Lake of

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 125
Tiberias. AU around him would be the
quiet of an infinite adoration; from the
depths of the valley a silent hymn would
arise toward him, and toward the stairy
sky. Was it not the same on this night?
Yes ; externally this night resembled those
of long ago ; but how did it differ from them
by the thoughts that oppressed his soul !
What were these thoughts? Many
strange conjectures have been made;
Jesus has been represented as at this hour
regretting Galilee, Nazareth, and the des
tiny that had impeUed him to take up
his mission. It has been said that perhaps
he was seized with a longing for home, for
the spot where he was born, the town
where he had lived so long; that he
recalled his youth, the shop of Joseph, his
happy childhood; that he saw again the
familiar mountains around his viUage and
heard in memory the yodel of the shep
herds, who at this very hour were calling
their flocks to the quiet pasturages of the
plain of Esdraelon; and that comparing
these sweet memories with his fruitless
efforts, his broken hopes, and the hatred
of his enemies, he was asking himself,
"Was I not mistaken?"

126 THE DEATH AND
What an error ! and how deeply this is
to misunderstand Jesus ! They who thus
think, they who explain the agony of
Gethsemane by a selfish return of Jesus
upon himself, are to be found, it is need
less to say, only among unbelievers. And
not a word in the Gospels confirms their
purely gratuitous assumption.
But among Christians another explana
tion, if not like this, at least very near to
it, has been proposed. It has been said
that in Gethsemane Jesus was passing
through a crisis of doubt as to his mission.
They who give this explanation of the
anguish of Jesus in the Garden of Olives
are to be found among the most believing
and most pious of his worshippers. They
do not indeed think that Jesus at this
moment regretted having obeyed his
Father, but they think that the hour
spent in Gethsemane was an hour of
moral hesitation and transient weakness.
We cannot admit it; at no moment was
there any weakness, any doubt, any hesi
tation in the soul of Jesus, save, perhaps,
when he uttered the cry, "My God! my
God! why hast thou forsaken me ? " But
this cry was uttered only on the cross, it
was not spoken in the olive garden.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 127
His unalterable union with his Father
gave to him, as well in this solemn hour in
Gethsemane as at any other time, the cer
tainty that he was doing the will of God
and that he had nothing to regret.
Why not take the Gospel story in all its
simplicity ? Why seek to add to the text,
and to find in it what is not there ? We
have already had occasion, in our first
volume,1 to explain this sublime scene.
In the Garden of OHves Jesus asked his
Father that his work might be accom
plished without the violent death that he
saw approaching, without its defeat, its
ignominy, its public execution. This was
the cup that appalled him! This was
why he was seized with dread, and an
immense anguish took possession of him !
Once again he had the clear intuition
of approaching death ; the appalling vision
of an imminent, fatal end; a criminal's
death, a pubHc execution ! My work ; yes,
my entire work, my mission without doubt
or shrinking or weakening; obedience, and
obedience to the end. But is it not possi
ble that obedience may not lead by way of
such a death?
1 See "Jesus Christ Before his Ministry," p. 153.

128 THE DEATH AND
It rose up hideous before him; for a
long time it had been drawing near, slow,
implacable, always more certain. At first
doubtful, it had become less and less so,
and at this very moment perhaps it was
being determined upon.
To accomplish his work, to be faithful
to his mission, this had always been his
will; and this he still willed, without a
shadow of hesitation. His faith in his
Work, in his Father and in himself, had
never wavered, and it did not waver now.
"Father, if it be possible let this cup
pass from me ; nevertheless, not as I will,
but as thou wilt! " He accepts God's
will, yet only to offer this prayer a second
time. He accepts it again ; yet still to pray
again, pleading the third time his wish
against his Father's will, and beseeching
him to bend his will if that were in any
wise possible. His anguish is so great
that he utters loud cries,1 calling his
Father "Abba! Abba!" The tragic tone
in which he pronounced these two sylla
bles struck the ears of the three apostles
heavy with sleep, yet still capable of
hearing. i Heb. v. 7.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 129
Pascal, with his intuitive genius, has
given the true meaning of the scene in
Gethsemane; it is all summed up in his
fine observation : —
"Jesus prayed in uncertainty of the
Father's wiH, and in dread of death; but
having learned that will, he went forward
and offered himself to death."1
This says it all; Jesus did dread death;
Jesus was uncertain as to the Father's will,
— he, whose life and joy were in that will,
whose meat it was to do it; and his uncer
tainty explains his agony.
Jesus, then, was hoping with an invin
cible hope that death might be avoided.
Rising from his prayer, he drew near
to his disciples and perceived that they
were asleep. He had aHeady twice re
turned to them, begging them to watch
with him. Now he said to Peter, " Sleepest
thou? Couldst thou not watch with me
one hour? The spirit indeed is willing
but the flesh is weak." Jesus was speak
ing of himself as well as of his disciples.
He had said for the last time, " Not as I
will, but as Thou wilt." Now he was the
1 Pascal, " Pensees : Le Mystere de Jesus," Hanet's
edition, p. 398. 9

130 THE DEATH AND
victor; these words are the secret of his
life ; it was his meat to do and to accept
the will of the Father; to give himself up
entirely to him who alone knows what he
is doing.
He, Jesus, did not understand, but he
did know with an absolute certainty that
he had been living in the truth all his
life, and that he still was doing so; he
had the approbation of his conscience,
was entirely at peace with it, that is, with
his Father; and therefore, when all were
cursing and crushing him, he could say,
"Father, thy will! " He wept; but there
was neither bitterness in his tears nor
despair in his heart ; submission to God's
will had given him back hope and peace.
The peace of God, that infinite peace that
is born of unmurmuring obedience, stole
upon his soul and filled it utterly.
Suddenly the silence of the night,
which nothing had disturbed, was inter
rupted by a slight noise which grew ever
louder. It was the hurried footsteps of
men running down the declivity of the
hill. Lanterns, torches, lights were com
ing; the clinking of arms was heard. In
a moment Jesus understood it all. " It is

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 131
for me; I have been betrayed; they are
coming to arrest me; it is aU over."
What was happening was the work of
Judas. We may thus picture to ourselves
what this man had been doing. He knew
that the Sanhedrin were reluctant to move
during the Feast, and were waiting for
the days of unleavened bread to be ended ;
but he had undertaken to do whatever
was best for their interests. He was in
the pay of the Sanhedrin, and Judas knew
that they expected their money's worth.
Thursday night seemed to him a favorable
time; he knew where to find Jesus. By
acting at night they would avoid a popu
lar uprising. Therefore on going out
from the upper chamber he went to the
Sanhedrin with words to this effect: "If
you choose, we can at once bring this
matter to a close. I can give him up to
you this night, and in twenty-four hours
you can have him executed; thus you will
avoid tumult."
His plans were well conceived. To arrest
Jesus in the upper room would have been
to provoke an uprising of the whole
quarter. Besides, Judas did not know in
advance where Jesus would eat the Pass-

132 THE DEATH AND
over; his Master had taken all precautions,
admitting only two disciples into the secret.
Had Jesus mentioned in the course of the
evening that he was going to pass the
night in Gethsemane? It is possible; in
any case Judas was confident of this, and
he led the officers there without hesitation.
If he had heard Jesus speak of a meet
ing with his disciples in Galilee, he may
have feared that Jesus might thus escape
him ; and it is not impossible that he had
also said to the Sanhedrin, " I will not be
responsible if you wait until after the
Feast; he will have quitted Jerusalem;
the surest way is to proceed this very
minute." The Sanhedrin yielded to his
arguments and gave him the requisite
number of men ; he led them away, walk
ing at their head.1
The order of arrest had been given by
Caiaphas, carrying out the decisions of
that section of the Sanhedrin which was
eharged with juridical affairs. How was
the company composed which Judas led?
According to Matthew and Mark, of
Levites of the inferior orders of the clergy,
1 Matt. xxvi. 47 ; Mark xiv. 43; Luke xxii. 47; John
xviii. 3 ; Acts i. 16.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 133
agents of the Sanhedrin, a sort of police
under the high priest's orders. It is
hardly probable that among them were,
as Luke says, temple officers and priests
properly so called; and there certainly
were no Roman soldiers in the party, as
the Fourth Gospel states, going so far as
to say that the whole garrison of Jerusalem
was there with the Tribune in person.
This is certainly an error; the Roman
troops could have been there only by order
of Pilate, and for that it would have been
necessary to consult Pilate. But the
Roman Procurator heard of the proceed
ings against Jesus only on the morrow,
when the Jews brought Jesus before him
and insisted that he should crucify him.
It was the Sanhedrin alone who arrested
Jesus, and Pilate's troops were not at the
Sanhedrin's orders. The unknown writer
of the Fourth Gospel introduces here a
detail which he beHeved to be correct, but
which shows that he was unfamiHar with
the manners and customs of Palestine at
that time.
There were in the party therefore only
the poHcemen who had charge of the
Temple and were at the orders of the

134 THE DEATH AND
priesthood, a few agents of Caiaphas, and
even certain slaves, who had only staves
by way of weapons.
The apostles awaked in terror. Jesus
said to them, not without irony, " Sleep on
now and take your rest; the hour is at
hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into
the hand of sinners."
At that moment a man approached, —
he who was walking at the head of the
company. He hastened toward Jesus and
gave him a kiss. Jesus, in extreme sur
prise, recognized Judas, and addressed
him by the familiar and affectionate term
which the word " friend " only very im
perfectly renders.1 The appellation, the
surprised question, "Wherefore hast thou
come?" show clearly that Jesus became
certain of Judas 's treachery only at this
moment. Up to this time no doubt he
had not been able to bring himself to admit
such black perfidy.
The kiss had been a signal; in a few
moments Jesus was surrounded, seized,
bound; that is to say, his hands were
tightly bound and his feet so tied as to
permit him to walk but not to run, and in
1 Matt. xxvi. 50 ; iratpe, companion, comrade.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 135
consequence to take away from him aU
possibility of escape.
As to the apostles, they at once fled in
dismay. Everything was going to pieces
about them, — their faith, their hope, their
trust in Jesus ; all that they had believed
was disappearing. He whom they had
called the Christ was only a man Hke any
other, and self-deceived. Their despair
may easily be understood.
Peter alone remained. He did more:
he remembered his promise and proposed
to keep it. He had brought with him one
of the two swords which they had showed
to Jesus in the upper room. Suddenly
he rushed forward, sword in hand, and
tried to deliver a heavy blow on the head
of the foremost of the aggressors; the
sword glanced aside and cut off the un
lucky man's ear. It was Malek, one of
the slaves of Caiaphas.1 Jesus bade Peter
put up his sword into its sheath.
No one, however, struck back, and no
attempt was made to arrest Peter; singu
larly enough, since he had committed an
act which fell under the ban of the law.
Probably the order had been given to
1 Malchos in Greek ; John xviii. 10.

136 THE DEATH AND
arrest Jesus alone and to let his disciples
go, whatever might be their attitude, to
avoid everything which might provoke a
struggle, and in consequence a tumult.
The purpose of the Sanhedrin was to dis
pose of Jesus as promptly as possible, but
in a lawful way; the rest mattered little.
Besides, the wounded man was only a
slave; according to the custom of the
time Peter's act was therefore of no
consequence. Thus Peter remained. He had the
courage not to run away even when he
had reason to dread lawful reprisals; he
loved his Master too sincerely to abandon
him. Jesus, entirely submissive to the Father's
will, was further than ever from saying,
" I have been mistaken ; " he felt assured
that since the Father willed that he should
die, his death was a true part of his work,
and that his blood would be shed for the
remission of the sins of those who believed
on him. He permitted himself to be led
away, simply protesting against the coward
ice and brutaHty of this clandestine arrest.
"You arrest me by night, in an ambus
cade, as if I were a robber, and every day

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 137
I have been with you in the Temple ; you
ought to have arrested me there."1
It has been asked how this scene of the
arrest, and that which preceded it, the
agony of Jesus in prayer under the olive-
trees of the garden, could have been nar
rated with so much precision since the
apostles were either asleep or absent. A
slight incident recorded by Mark perhaps
gives the key of this enigma.2 He says
that a very young man, a boy, was in bed,
perhaps in the country house adjoining the
Garden of OHves, perhaps in the oil press
itself, keeping guard, no doubt, over the
tools and the oil-making apparatus. He
was sleeping profoundly when he was
awakened by a noise. He arose in terror
and ran out, having only his night gar
ment around him. The policemen sur
rounded and would have seized him, but
he fled, leaving in their hands the single
garment with which he was covered. No
doubt it was he who witnessed the scene
of Gethsemane, and aU that preceded and
foUowed it; it was he who heard Jesus
exclaim three times, "Father, not as I
1 Matt. xxvi. 55 ; Mark xiv. 48 ; Luke xxii. 52.
2 Mark xiv. 51, 52.

138 THE DEATH AND
wiU but as thou wilt; " and who at a later
time could affirm that he had uttered cries
and shed tears, as one of the oldest tradi
tions relates.1
We are incHned to believe that this
young man was Mark himself; it may
with no improbability be so supposed.
This John Mark had a mother in Jerusa
lem. She and her son were no doubt
among the disciples unknown to us who
lived in the city, and who seem to have
formed a pretty numerous group.
In any case, it is certain that the Gat-
Chemena property belonged to a friend of
Jesus. It is only a conjecture, but a per
fectly allowable one, that it belonged to
the father of John Mark, and that the
young man in charge of the oil press who
witnessed all that occurred was his son,
and that he himself at a later time told
the story when he wrote his Gospel.
We have said that Jesus was tried and
condemned according to law. The apos
tles — for example, St. Paul, who was
thoroughly acquainted with the legislation
of his time — nowhere say that the death
of Jesus was not in conformity to law.
1 Heb. v. 7.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 139
Everything was in fact done according to
legal forms, except with regard to one
point, — the precipitancy with which the
accused was condemned to death, without
waiting for a second vote of the assembly
on the morrow, as the rigor of the law
demanded.1 This detail excepted, the
general procedure was correct and in con
formity with the law of that time. Jesus
was a mesith, a seducer;2 it was as such
that he was arrested, and the intention
was to put him to death on that ground.
The common procedure so wiUed, and his
judges conformed themselves to it.
The procedure, as the Mishna describes
it, began with a trap, pure and simple.
Two eye-witnesses were necessary; the
law required it, and to meet this require
ment it was the custom to secrete two
people in some lurking-place, to entice
the suspected person as near them as pos
sible, and so arrange matters that he should
be heard and seen. The Talmud recom
mends that two candles be lighted near the
accused, in order that the witnesses may
be literal eye-witnesses. If the attempt
1 Mishna, Sanhedrin, iv. 6, v. 1.
2 Id. iv. 5.

140 THE DEATH AND
to make the suspected man repeat his
blasphemy was successful, the witnesses
hastened to denounce him, and he was
condemned to die by stoning.
We may beHeve the Talmuds when they
affirm that this was the proceeding with
Jesus. He was accused of seduction;1
the witnesses were hidden, we know not
where nor how; and he was convicted of
the crime of which he was accused. It is
noteworthy that the account in the Tal
mud of the procedure followed in the
case of seducers answers on almost every
point to the accounts in the Gospels.
Let us follow the trial of Jesus and we
shall be convinced of this fact.2
l Matt, xxvii. 63 ; John vii. 12, 47.
2 Jerus. Talm. Sank, ii., iii., iv. ; Babyl. id. 43a, 67a ;
Schabbath, 104, 6.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 141

CHAPTER IX
THE TRIAL
HTHEY led the prisoner to the house of
Annas. He lived on the summit of
the Mount of OHves, at the Khaneioth;
that is, the Bazars, the revenue of which
belonged to him ; 1 there he had his country
house. This Annas was, as has been said, a
great personage. Notwithstanding the
lateness of the hour (it must have been
the middle of the night), he was awaiting
his victim. The proximity of the place
of arrest was very favorable to his pur
pose, and the old priest had very shrewdly
planned it all in advance. It was certainly
at his instigation that every detail had
been adjusted, and perhaps it was Annas
himself with whom Judas, on going out
1 Here the Fourth Evangelist makes no mistake, but
gives a very remarkable proof of the accuracy of his
information. See " Jesus Christ During his Ministry,"
p. xxvi, note.

142 THE DEATH AND
from the upper chamber, had made arrange
ments the evening before.
In any case it was probably he who bad
directed everything; he who had com
pacted with the traitor, had sent the squad
of police, had advised that Pilate should
be brought to condemn Jesus to death by
crucifixion. He knew his people, and
how to so manage them as to avoid a
public disturbance. The important thing
was to carry the matter through as rapidly
as possible; no doubt he would have pre
ferred to do nothing during the Feast, but
since the opportunity had presented itself
he had taken advantage of it, and it
required the greatest promptitude.
Annas was no longer an official person
age, but whatever he said his son-in-law
hastened to ratify; and besides, on this
question there had long been perfect agree
ment between the two. It is easy to
picture the scene that took place in the
atrium of Annas's villa. Jesus, led quietly
into this country house about two o'clock
in the morning, was introduced, securely
bound, into the presence of the former
high priest, the actors in the drama being
made visible by the light of torches.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 143
Annas began by questioning the accused.
Judas no doubt had instructed him, and
he was desirous himself to speak with
Jesus, that he might learn how best to
conduct the legal procedure. He there
fore put to him several questions concern
ing his teachings and his disciples.
Jesus, who knew himself to be con
demned beforehand, had resolved to say
nothing; in fact he kept silence during
the entire trial. He simply declared, in
answer to Annas's first question, that he
had nothing to explain ; that he had always
worked publicly, never in secret, and con
sequently there was need only to ask
those who had heard him. They would
all have come to some conclusion as to
what he thought and desired; and since
he had concealed nothing, he had nothing
to confess.
This reply was considered insolent, and
one of the subalterns stationed near Jesus,
desiring to show his zeal, gave him a
blow. Jesus, whose self-possession never
failed him for a moment, replied gently, " If
I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil;
but if well, why smitest thou me?"1
J John xviii. 23.

144 THE DEATH AND
It was in the viUa of Annas that the
denial of Peter took place.1 John and he
had followed afar, and it appears, singu
larly enough, that John was acquainted
with the servants of Annas. He had pos
sibly some relatives among them; he
gained entrance for Peter, and the latter
was daring enough to mingle with the
servants who were warming themselves at
a fire in the court. He would perhaps
have passed unnoticed had he not con
ceived the unlucky idea of protecting
himself from suspicion by talking. Un
fortunately he had the accent of a GaHlean
peasant, an accent very displeasing to Ju-
dean ears, and one which betrayed him
with every word he spoke. A Galilean in
Jerusalem would reveal his origin even
1 Matthew says that it was at the house of Caiaphas
(xxvi. 57 ff. ) ; Mark and Luke, at the high priest's house
(evidently also Caiaphas) ; John says, at the house of
Annas (xviii. 18 ff.), — one of the innumerable disagree
ments of the Evangelists in matters of detail. We pre
fer the evidence of John, not only because these details
show the eye-witness, but because it is much more nat
ural to think of Peter as having immediately followed
Jesus, and having entered the house on the Mount of
Olives, than to make him go to Jerusalem, to the palace
of Caiaphas. Where would he have been during the
examination before Annas?

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 145
more quickly than a southerner in Paris.
He confused certain letters in a way that
gave rise to the most laughable intonations
and even to plays upon words and puns ;
saying one word, he seemed to say another.
Twice a maid-servant, crossing the court,
remarked upon Peter's accent; upon this
the servants began to investigate him,
putting questions to him. Peter hastened
to protect himself by a falsehood; but to
utter it he must speak, and the more he
spoke, the more he showed wbat he was.
He tried to change his place, but the ques
tioning was kept up; he denied again. A
third time he was called " GaHlean, " and
a third time he denied; this time he com
mitted perjury, denying with an oath,
declaring that he knew not "that man."
"That man" was Jesus. At the same
moment a cock crew,1 and Jesus, who was
not far away and who had heard all,
recaUed to his disciple by a glance what
he had said to him a few hours before.
Peter, startled, humiliated, tortured by
that glance, by the memory of his promises,
1 The crowing of a cock becomes much more natural
placed at the country house of Annas, than at Jerusa
lem, in the palace of Caiaphas. 10

146 THE DEATH AND
his assurances, his protestations, sprang
up, hastened out, and, throwing the comer
of his mantle over his head,1 went away
sobbing. The interview with Annas could lead to
nothing final, and consequently could not
be greatly prolonged. The members of
that section of the Sanhedrin which was
in charge of juristic matters, having been
aroused in the middle of the night, had
had time to assemble at the palace of
Caiaphas in Jerusalem. The necessity
of haste, and of acting by night because
of the Feast, had been made clear to
them. The party therefore set out, conducting
Jesus to the city with as little noise as
possible ; and aU was ready when he was
ushered into the hall where his judges
awaited him. These, to the number of
twenty-three, forming the Beth-Bin (house
of justice), were sitting in their places.
Here again the procedure was rapid.
As Caiaphas always acted only at his
father-in-law's instigation, Annas con-
1 Throwing the corner of his mantle over his head to
hide his face ; this is the most probable translation of
the enigmatic word, ertBaXkv. Mark xiv. 72.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 147
tinued to manage everything with his in
fernal abiHty. The end to be attained was
to put Jesus to death as promptly as pos
sible ; but still according to law, that they
might afterward say, in case of a popular
movement in his favor, that his condem
nation had been deserved, and that he had
been tried in strict accordance with all the
forms. It has already been remarked that
never did a single one of the apostles
claim that the law had been violated in
their Master's trial.
It must have been four or five in the
morning when Jesus arrived at the palace
of Caiaphas. The important thing was to
capture the vote of the assembly, and here
again the tact of Annas made itself felt.
It is possible that Caiaphas also was a
wily diplomatist. A man who was able
to retain the high priesthood ten years in
succession cannot have been wanting in
cleverness. The trial of Jesus of Nazareth was evi
dently carried on according to a pre
arranged plan. First of all it was impor
tant to turn against him several priestly
members of the Sanhedrin. For this pur
pose use was made, not of the purification

148 THE DEATH AND
of the Temple,1 but of the saying, "De
stroy this Temple, and in three days I will
build it again." They began by discuss
ing this utterance ; its sense was not clear ;
the witnesses who were summoned, accord
ing to the law, were not in accord as to its
true signification. There were those who
spoke of a very rapid, material rebuilding
of the Temple, whereas Jesus had spoken
of an invisible, spiritual Temple, of the
true worshippers of his Father.
Nevertheless this expression, whatever
might be its true meaning in the eyes of
the Sadducean priests, profoundly irritated
them. The bare mention of a possible
disappearance of the sanctuary by which
they lived exasperated them. The mere
citation of this saying therefore won them
over to the side of the condemnation of
Jesus, and that was all that Caiaphas asked
of them.
There remained those who were not
priests, — in particular, the Pharisees.
1 A very weighty proof that this took place at the
opening of Jesus' ministry, and that it had been for
gotten (see "Jesus Christ During his Ministry," p. 130),
for if it had occurred on Palm Sunday they could not
have failed to make use of it.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 149
Many of these certainly found nothing
subversive in the words of Jesus concern
ing the Temple, as they were cited by the
witnesses. But Caiaphas desired a unani
mous condemnation; and to obtain the
adhesion of the Pharisees he had prepared
a direct question, which he had held in
reserve, and now abruptly put to Jesus,
"Art thou the Christ?"1 If, in fact,
contempt of the Temple sufficed for the
Sadducees, it was needful, in order to
gain the approbation of the Pharisees,
that Jesus should be a false Messiah.
Now Caiaphas was sure that Jesus would
reply in the affirmative ; he had informed
himself on this subject; perhaps it was
Judas himself who had informed him.
And furthermore, and this was the
supreme craftiness of the question, if
Jesus declared himself to be the Messiah,
he could be handed over to Pilate as hav
ing aspired to royalty; and when Pilate
once took charge of the matter they would
be quit of it.
At the direct and formal question of
Caiaphas Jesus departed from his rule of
silence and replied, " Thou hast said [the
1 Matt. xxvi. 63 ; Mark xiv. 61 ; Luke xxii. 70.

150 THE DEATH AND
words are synonymous with yes] ; and fur
thermore (jr\r)v) I declare unto you, from
this present time (air apri) ye shall see
the Son of man sitting on the right hand
of the power of God and coming in the
clouds of heaven."1
Jesus was here reminding his judges of
a passage of Scripture which they well
knew.2 In this passage, Bamascha, as the
Aramaic of Jesus' time called him, the
Son of man, draws near to Jehovah to
1 Matt. xxvi. 64 ; Mark xiv. 62 ; Luke xxii. 69. The
text of Mark, the oldest of the three, does not include
the words dir' Apri, and Luke replaces them with iirb rov
vvv, " from this time forward." It is truly inconceiv
able how the advocates of the allegorical theory, the
exegetes who affirm that Jesus predicted merely a series
of spiritual returns, can insist that they find a confirma
tion of their fantastic exegesis in these words (far' &prt).
Jesus simply declares that from the moment then pres
ent he may be expected at any hour returning in the
clouds of heaven. This expression shows that even at
that terrible moment his faith in himself and in his
words did not waver. He was expecting the kingdom ;
it might appear at any minute, from the present time
(laf Uprt), from this time forward (airb rov vuv). Upon
the cross Jesus said, " My God, my God, why hast thou
forsaken me '! " Save perhaps in that second of moral
anguish in which he uttered this cry of despair, he was
always, as has already been said, sure of himself, sure
of his Father, and sure of the truth.
"- Daniel vii. 13.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 151
receive from him dominion over the world.
Now Jesus was convinced that he was the
Barnascha, the ideal Son of man, the
Messiah, the future king of the coming
kingdom, and he was affirming his Mes-
siahship, and in consequence his triumph,
in a future which was to be expected from
this time forth, at any moment.
No doubt he had said, "Its coming is
delayed." He had said this more than
once these last weeks, and in several
parables. But now events were hastening,
and Jesus declared that the great day was
very near. How natural it is ! He said,
" It delayeth its coming, " when he believed
that his work upon earth was still to last
for a certain time. The previous evening,
in the upper chamber, he had spoken of
the Passover which he was celebrating as
the last before the coming of the kingdom ;
that is to say, he spoke of it as coming
in the year then beginning; and now he
speaks of it as "from this time," at any
moment. No doubt Jesus intended to continue the
sentence and give some explanation of
what he had just said; but Caiaphas in
terrupted him; a tumult arose, the high

152 THE DEATH AND
priest making a pretence of indignation,
declaring his horror of the blasphemy that
they had just heard. We say, "making
a pretence," for the Sadducees concerned
themselves little with Messianic hopes,
and it was necessary to simulate indigna
tion in order to carry the Pharisees who
were members of the assembly. The
death sentence was voted at once, and
unanimously.1 It is pleasant to believe that Joseph of
Arimathea and Nicodemus were not mem
bers of the juristic section of the Sanhe
drin, and that they were not of those who,
from cowardice, were unwilling to form a
minority. Jesus was condemned ; it was necessary
now to wait for daybreak and take him
before the Procurator. To fill in the
time they heaped insults upon him; they
bHndfolded him, and each came in his
turn to smite him, saying, "Come, play
the prophet! Who smote thee ? Guess ! " 2
Did the members of the Sanhedrin in
person so abase themselves, or did they
1 This was legal; blasphemy was punished with
death. Lev. xxiv. 10 f. ; Deut. xiii. 1 f.
2 Matt. xxvi. 67, 68 ; Mark xiv. 65; Luke xxii. 63-65.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 153
content themselves with permitting their
retainers to indulge in this infamous con
duct ? It is impossible to know ; the texts
are not at one on this subject.
At early dawn they set out for the house
of Pilate.
But why Pilate? Annas and Caiaphas
had only to cause Jesus to be secretly
stoned at once, in some retired corner. It
was easy ; they had at hand the necessary
agents, well accustomed to such work.
This would have had the advantage of
keeping the populace in ignorance of his
death, and would have been the surest
way of avoiding an uprising.
They had the power to do it ; and when
they asserted that they were not allowed
to put any one to death,1 they lied: they
were aUowed. Why then Pilate? Be
cause they were too wily to take upon
themselves the execution of Jesus.
We have already referred to this last
device of the Jewish authorities. The
Galileans, Jesus' partisans, were in con
siderable force in the city, which further
more was crowded with strangers. Since
Annas and Caiaphas had been obliged to
1 John xviii. 31.

154 THE DEATH AND
act at so unfavorable a moment, they
must at least make the best of it, and with
little short of genius they conceived the
idea of profiting by the presence of Pilate,
— not simply to ratify their sentence, as
has commonly been said, there was noth
ing for Pilate to ratify; but to lay the
condemnation of Jesus upon him. Then
if at a later time the nation reproached
Caiaphas with having killed a patriot, he
could reply, "I did not do it; it was the
Procurator." And it was as the result of
this odious and cowardly calculation that
Jesus was crucified and not stoned. Is
not this the invariable conduct of all relig
ious potentates ? — to seek a condemnation
from the secular arm, thus sheltering
themselves. Clerical fanaticism begs the
civil power to cover its violences, and then
makes it responsible for them, going even
so far as to upbraid it for them. What
Caiaphas did the Church often did at a
later time, or at least it followed an
analogous course.
Pilate's palace was contiguous to the
Tower of Antonia.1 It was the former
1 The seraglio of the Pacha of Jerusalem now occu
pies the precise spot.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 155
palace of Herod.1 The Praetorium, the hall
of justice, was on the ground floor. But
this was Gentile ground, and so impure, and
the Jews refused to enter it; 2 to step upon
Gentile ground was to incur uncleanness.
Pilate had another tribunal in the open
air,3 an elevated structure, probably a gal
lery with a colonnade. The pavement was
of mosaic; this tribunal was called the
Bima.*
l Phil. Leg. ad Caium, § 38 ; Jos. D. B. J. 2, 14, 8.
2 "That they might eat the Passover," says the
Fourth Gospel (John xviii. 28). This is a mistake ; the
Jews had already eaten the Passover the evening before,
and it was not in the least necessary that it should be
the day on which the Passover was eaten for them to
refuse to step upon Gentile ground. Strict Jews always
considered such an act as incurring uncleanness, and
that from one end of the year to the other. The author
of the Fourth Gospel, making Jesus die on the very day
on which the lamb was slain and eaten, attributed to
this motive the refusal of the Jews to enter the Prseto-
rium. This mixture of inaccuracy and precise detail,
of data of remarkable historicity, and data not less fla
grantly erroneous, confirms us more and more in the
opinion that we have in the Fourth Gospel, not the work
of an eye-witness, but of one unknown, the intimate
friend of an eye-witness (St. John), writing from verbal
indications or notes of the latter.
8 Jos. D. B. J. 2, 9, 3 ; Matt, xxvii. 27 ; John xix. 13.
* The Bima in Aramaic; a word drawn from the
Greek By/ia.

156 THE DEATH AND
Pilate was surprised on being disturbed
at so early an hour, and before taking his
seat he complained of being called to
judge in such a case. He would have
much preferred that the Jews should take
this execution upon themselves; he fore
saw much annoyance in the matter. Here
was another of those disagreeable cases in
which he would have to yield to the
objurgations of the Jews without the
approval of his own conscience; and he
began by going into the Praetorium with
Jesus alone.
There an interview took place, the
character of which has been preserved for
us by John, although it is not possible
that he can have known its details; but
the general color of his account appears
to be very authentic.
As for Pilate, his visits to Jerusalem
were insupportable, and his task as Procu
rator at the Feast times was a very delicate
one. The Jews were intractable, and he
was very much annoyed at being forced to
show himself cruel during the few days
that he was obliged to spend in the capital.
His interview with the accused shortly
enlightened him as to his character. To

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 157
put this man to death would be an
iniquity, an act contrary to all usages of
Rome, which wisely permitted conquered
peoples to work out their reHgious quar
rels according to their own ideas.
He therefore sincerely desired to save
Jesus. The Sadducees speedily became
aware of this, and thought for a moment
that their prey was about to escape them.
It was evident that Pilate was seeking all
possible means of acquitting him ; in vain
might they shout, "Crucify him! crucify
him!"1 Jesus was now in the hands of
Rome, and guarded by Roman soldiers.
Annas and his party no longer had the
slightest power over him ; they had given
him over to the Romans, and the Romans
were his keepers.
The Sadducees uneasily consulted to
gether. To work upon Pilate they must
leave the crime of seduction in the back
ground, and undertake to accuse Jesus of
revolutionary projects. But as he had
had none, they invented them, trying what
calumny would do. He who had said,
"Render unto Caesar the things that are
1 Matt, xxvii. 22, 23 ; Mark xv. 13, 14 ; Luke xxiii.
21 ff.

158 THE DEATH AND
Caesar's," was now accused of having
claimed to be King of the Jews, though
he had never taken that title; and they
added, "He forbids to give tribute."1
The He was flagrant. But a little while
before Jesus had publicly said precisely
the contrary; but the Sadducees were
driven into a corner and trembled lest
Pilate should acquit Jesus; he had only
to say a word, — not even that, had only
to make a gesture, — and Jesus was free.
But if the other accusations had produced
little effect upon Pilate, this one produced
still less. It was too much to ask him to
take it seriously; this working-man, this
Galilean, a king! At most he was a
dreamer, and a very inoffensive one.
Pilate therefore reappeared outside, and
this time he seated himself upon the Bima ;
he proposed to finish with the matter and
pronounce the acquittal. His seat was a
lofty one; overhead were the four letters
S. P. Q. R. (Senatus populusque Romanus);
at his feet stood Jesus, his hands bound;
farther away the multitude, restrained by
a Roman soldier who held his lance hori
zontal by way of barrier. The multitude
1 Luke xxiii. 2-5.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 159
were vociferating "Crucify him! crucify
him ! " and behind them were the priests
directing and urging them on.1
For a moment Pilate thought that he
had found a way out of the difficulty. It
was Passover-tide, and the custom was at
this time to set at liberty a prisoner, whom
soever the people themselves might choose.
He proposed to the crowd to release " the
King of the Jews,"2 using the words
intentionaUy, in derision of the priests,
to make them feel that he was not their
dupe, and that he put no faith in the accu
sation of pretensions to royalty that they
had preferred against Jesus.
Once again the Sadducean priests be
lieved that their plan had failed; but
1 We say the multitude, for since daylight the news of
the arrest had spread through the city, and the multi
tude must have hastened en masse to the Praetorium.
The Sanhedrin had feared an uprising in favor of Jesus.
They had, alas ! no longer anything of that kind to dread.
The people, who had been sympathetic with Jesus, were
now turning against him. Such change of mood often
takes place in popular masses. The losing side is al
ways wrong in their eyes, and among those who cried
"Crucify him! crucify him!" were perhaps some of
those who, the previous Sunday, had most loudly sung
"Hosanna! Hosanna!"
2 Mark xv. 9.

160 THE DEATH AND
happily for them a certain Bar-Rabban1
was in prison at the time; he had com
mitted a murder and attempted an upris
ing. " Ask for Bar-Rabban ! " The word
went round; it was repeated from lip to
lip, and presently the cry uprose as from
one voice, " Not this man, Bar-Rabban ! "
Pilate was caught. He had said,
"Whomever ye will;" he was bound to
deliver to them whatever criminal they
might choose. And yet so great was his
desire to save Jesus that he would not yet
give up for beaten; he made a last effort.
He condemned Jesus to be scourged, a
relatively insignificant penalty, and in
formed the Jews that this would be all.
"Afterward," he said, "I will let him
go."2 Flagellation was always the pre
liminary to the suffering of the cross,3 but
this was not what Pilate meant. He was
resolved to set the prisoner at liberty im
mediately after having had him scourged.
This flagellation was accompanied with
revolting acts. Pilate had at Jerusalem
only auxiliary troops, soldiers who were
l Matt, xxvii. 16 ff. 2 Luke xxiii. 16.
8 Jos. D. B. J. 2, 14, 9 ; 5, 11, 1 ; 7, 6, 4 ; Titus Livius,
xxiii. 36 ; Quintus Curtius, 7, 11, 28.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 161
not true legionaries, and not one of whom
was a Koman citizen. Picked up from
among coarse and brutal creatures, recruited
more or less from anywhere, they made
the Jews pay dear for their obfigation of
keeping garrison in this unknown land of
Judea. They put upon Jesus an old red
chlamys, made him a crown of thorny
branches, and placed a reed in his hand.
Pilate let them have their way; he even
suffered Jesus to be led before the people
in this accoutrement. Each of the soldiers
in turn gave him a buffet, prostrating
themselves before him in succession, say
ing, "Hail! King of the Jews!" It is
even said that Pilate joined them, crying
"Behold the man!"
He hoped that this sort of horse-play
would suffice, and this is his excuse for
having let it go on. To ridicule Jesus, to
change the whole affair into a grotesque
pageant, was, he thought, to save him.
He was mistaken; the Sadducees took
new hope, and their cries "Crucify him!
crucify him!" uprose continually.
Then Pilate, to gain time, sent Jesus
to Antipas, who also had come to Jerusa
lem for the Feast. But Jesus said no

162 THE DEATH AND
more to Antipas than to Caiaphas, and
was silent also before Pilate, when he was
once more brought before him.
The situation was threatening to be
prolonged, when the priests were struck
with an idea which was a veritable inspira
tion. They took Pilate on the side of his
personal interest, saying to him, " If thou
let this man go thou art not the emperor's
friend."1 Now Pilate was a functionary,
and the thing the functionary loves most
in the world is his place. Hearing these
words, he feared the loss of his place ; he
knew himself to be in peril of denuncia
tion by these Jews whom he despised.
They had already written once to Tiberius
complaining of him, and Tiberius had
justified them. . . . "The priests," Pilate
thought, "will complain again; they will
write." It seemed to Pilate that he could
read their report in advance; he said to
himself, "I am already in bad odor; I
shall lose my place." Lose his place!
He could not go as far as that; and so
he yielded, though in yielding he dis
claimed responsibility. He said to the
Jews, " You are responsible for the blood
1 John xix. 12.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 163
of this man ; " and they replied, " His
blood be on us and on our children."1
Horrible wish, which has been only too
Hterally fulfilled ! The malediction which
has weighed upon the Jews during so many
centuries is not yet soon to vanish. We
have finished with religious intolerance,
but in vain is liberty of conscience respected ;
the Jew bears an indeHble stigma. That
odious thing, anti-Semitism, has from cen
tury to century a perpetual renascence.
The true author of the death of Jesus
was not Pilate, but the Sadducean party.
Was there not another author even older
than they? Assuredly; the Sadducees
did no more than apply the law, and the
law is the true culprit. The passages are
explicit; 2 every innovator was to be stoned
without trial. Terrible law, odious fanati
cism; to desire to change the established
forms of worship was to invoke death.
The saying, " We have a law, " 3 was only
too true ; it was the law that pronounced
sentence upon Jesus. He abolished it;
but to do this he must suffer its penalty.
1 Matt, xxvii. 25.
2 Dent. xiii. 1 f. ; Lev. xxiv. 16.
8 John xix. 7.

164 THE DEATH AND
As for him, he did not again break
silence. What was he thinking during
this long trial, during that struggle before
Pilate which lasted more than two hours ?
We picture to ourselves a mute dialogue
between him and his Father. Seeing
himself alone, a victim of the fury of
some, the cowardice of others, certain that
death was very near, on that same day, he
called upon his Father, and was always
certain that his Father was near him.
Man of sorrows, he was no longer think
ing of Galilee, of the preaching of the
kingdom, of the sympathy of the crowds ;
he was thinking of the prophets, of that
Servant of God dying for the sins of his
people of whom Isaiah had spoken, and
the conviction of his Messiahship grew
even stronger in his soul; he knew, he
was certain, with an immovable certitude.
Let them utter cries of rage against him,
rain blows upon him, he would respond
only by silence, — a silence that was the
supreme dignity of the last hours of his
life.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 165

CHAPTER X
THE EXECUTION
A NNAS and Caiaphas had accompHshed
"^ their ends, had succeeded in every
thing: an arrest without a popular tumult,
a trial according to legal form, and finally
a condemnation pronounced by Pilate for a
crime against the State. Henceforth they
might rest quiet; they had sheltered them
selves on all sides. They can be criti
cised only on one point, — the precipitation
of their acts.1 But in this detail they
could also be without fear ; they had only
to affirm that the procedure had been
long, and that Jesus had been arrested a
long while before. This is what they
failed not to do, and the Talmuds tell us a
1 See above, p. 147.
2 Mishna, Sanh. vi. 4; Talm. JerusaL Sanh. xi. 4.
Nevertheless Rabbi Judas advocated an immediate exe
cution, not to make the condemned suffer by the expec
tation of death. The desire to be just and kind to
criminals is evident all through the tractate of the San-

166 THE DEATH AND
that the condemned always remained in
prison a long time before being executed.
Therefore, they would conclude, it was
thus with Jesus.
The sentence was to the cross ; this was
inevitable, since it was the Roman author
ity that had pronounced it. The Jews on
their part had desired this manner of
death, and for long hours they had been
crying by the voices of their tools, " Crucify
him! crucify him!"
Death upon the cross was, Cicero says,
"the most cruel and the most hideous of
deaths ; " 1 a peculiar ignominy was at
tached to it; not only were Roman citi
zens dispensed from it, but it was only
to highway robbers bandits and thieves
hedrin. Such exaggerated kindliness is the act of men
who feel the responsibility of Jesus' death weighing
upon their race, and who try to disculpate their ances
tors. In the Babylonian Gemara they have dared to
write that Jesus was hanged on the evening of the Pass
over; that during forty days before the execution the
Sanhedrin caused his execution to be proclaimed, de
claring that he was to be put to death for having se
duced Israel, and that whoever had anything to say in
his defence was invited to say it ; and that not one de
fender presented himself. Talm. Babyl. Sank. 6, 2.
(See Lightfoot, Horos, etc., p. 490.)
1 " Crudelissimum teterrimumque supplicium," Cic.
Verr. 5, 64.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 167
that the Romans refused death by the
sword.1 It was also inflicted upon slaves
when they became guilty of some particu
larly atrocious crime.
The penalty being Roman, the execu
tion must be Roman; commanded by
Romans, done by Romans, with a military
escort. Jesus was thus to be abandoned
"to the wicked," as they said in those
days. In ancient times there were no execu
tioners, properly speaking. Oriental sover
eigns, who were every day commanding
decapitations, constantly kept executioners
near them, among their guards,2 and the
Romans put their condemned to death by
means of soldiers. Those of Jerusalem
pertained, as has been said, to the auxil
iary troops, always very ill made up ; and
it was to this brutal soldiery, habituated
to cruelty, indifferent to suffering from
constantly witnessing it, and inaccessible
to the sight of moral greatness and submis
sion, that Jesus was given up.
1 Jos. Ant. Jud. 17, 10, 10; 20, 6, 2; D. B. J. 5, 11,
1 ; Apulius, Metam. iii. 9 ; Suetonius, Galba, 9 ; Lam-
prid. Al. Sev. 23.
2 Mark vi. 27.

168 THE DEATH AND
His robe and mantle, which had been
taken from him when he was huddled in
the red chlamys, were given back to him,
and they set forth with two thieves, whose
execution was to take place at the same
time with his.
It was between eight and nine in the
morning when the very small and insignifi
cant procession of the three condemned
men went out from the Tower of Antonia
by the great iron gate which closed its
entrance l through which they passed, each
one bearing his cross, or dragging it over
the pavement of the Roman road. The
day had long since begun, and oi; the in
habitants of Jerusalem, some were at their
necessary tasks, others were quietly giving
themselves to the repose obligatory on this
day. The Httle company can hardly have
attracted much attention; and we may
imagine that those who met the three
condemned men did not so much as turn
i Jesus cannot have gone directly from the Praeto
rium to execution. Once condemned, he must have
been led by inner doors into the Tower of Antonia,
which joined the Praetorium. There were the centu
rions, the soldiers, and the two thieves, who, since their
condemnation, had been imprisoned in the tower. Acts
xxi. 34 passim.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 169
to look after them. Two scoundrels and
a madman who were to be done away
with, — what was there interesting in
that? Simon of Cyrene, who was coming
toward them, would no doubt have gone
on his way, indifferent to the procession
that he had just passed, if the soldiers had
not requisitioned him;1 and those critics
are very iU advised who think that an
execution of this kind could not be carried
out by the Romans on the morning of the
15th Nisan because of the feast.2 A
mounted centurion went first, accompanied
by only four soldiers ; the party then con
tained merely eight persons in all. The
written scroll to be placed above the head
of each condemned man was carried before
him as they went.3 We have three differ
ent texts of that of Jesus. The shortest,
which is also the oldest, is the most prob-
1 It is true that Luke speaks of a great crowd (xxiii.
27), but this is one of the amplifications usual with this
author. 2 It has also been said that Simon of Cyrene was
coming out of the fields, and that men did not work in
the fields on feast days. But the text simply states
that Simon the Cyrenian was coming in from the coun
try, and says nothing about work.
8 It is not so said, but it was always done.

170 THE DEATH AND
able, "King of the Jews."1 Instead of
writing Seducer, or Rebel, Pilate made a
point of making the Jews ridiculous to
the end, to revenge himself on them for
insisting that he should condemn the
Nazarene. The Sadducees sent to ask him
to modify the inscription; he refused point
blank. The condemned, carrying their crosses,
walked behind the soldiers who bore the
inscriptions. Wood was scarce in Judea,
and a certain number of these "trees of
justice," always the same, were certainly
kept in reserve and used several times
over. Perhaps a troop of vagabonds fol
lowed the condemned with insults ; behind
them came St. John and a few women,
timid, anxious, overcome with fatigue and
sorrow. The event which has made the world
new was, on the day that it occurred, only
an obscure crime, a hurried execution,
a petty wrong, carried out as rapidly as
possible, and passing almost unperceived in
a city of sixty thousand inhabitants, not
one of whose daily habits it in the least
disturbed. 1 Mark xv. 26. Cf. Luke xxiii. 38.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 171
Usually executions took place at Gol
gotha, outside the wall, northeast of the
city, upon a bare hillock in the midst of
an open common. Jesus, worn out by the
fatigues and suffering of the previous
night, probably faint with hunger, perhaps
less robust than his companions in wretch
edness, was incapable of carrying his
cross to the end. He had not even the
strength to drag the two thick beams, after
the usual custom of the condemned.
The first comer, an unknown individual
who was coming in from the fields, and
whose name was Simon of Cyrene, was
called to his aid. The soldiers roughly
requisitioned him, with the coolness of
conquerors in a conquered country. In
deed it was necessary, for they themselves
would not have carried the cross; the
Romans never carried the accursed tree.
To this duty, imposed upon Simon, we
no doubt owe our knowledge of the last
hours of Jesus.
When they finally arrived at the place
of execution it was nine o'clock.1
Before nailing the condemned to the
1 This is the hour given by Mark, and the most
probable one. See above, p. 92.

172 THE DEATH AND
cross an attempt was made to deaden their
sensibilities ; the Jews had introduced this
custom to mitigate the atrocious sufferings
of the victims' last hours by dulling their
consciousness, at least in part. They were
given wine mingled with strong aromatics,
which benumbed them.1 Jesus tasted the
beverage and at once refused it; he de
sired to retain consciousness to the very
last, and at the cost of greater suffering to
keep full possession of himself.
The soldiers planted the three larger
beams in three of the numerous holes
which they found already made, serving
for any crucifixion. The further proceed
ings might be in one of two ways: the
smaller piece of wood, which was to be
placed horizontally across the top of the
other, lying still on the ground, the exe
cutioners might lay the victim down, and
extending his arms, nail or fasten the
hands to the two extremities of this beam,
then raising the whole, fix it transversely
at the top of the larger. Or they could
adopt another way : the smaller beam might
be first placed in position, and when the
cross was completed and set upright, they
1 Babyl. Sanh. 43a ; Prov. xxxi. 6.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 173
could fasten or nail the condemned man
to it.1
The cross not being high it was easy
to proceed thus; and it is probable that
the latter method was most often adopted.
They must have nailed the hands while
the feet of the victim, who was standing
upright, were still upon the ground ; then
they lifted the feet a little and fastened
them to the lower part of the upright.
When fixed in position and nailed, they
barely escaped the ground.
When the feet were nailed the knees
were naturally bent outward, and in order
that the weight of the body should not
tear the hands, the former was supported
by a billet of wood upon which the victim
was half seated.
The three crucifixions were very easily
and quickly performed. The soldiers no
doubt accomplished their horrible task
mechanically, with the calm indifference
of those who often do the same thing.
Jesus uttered no complaint; he kept per
fect silence. Yet in the early part of his
suffering he said, and the words are cer-
1 Jos. D. B. J. 7, 6, 4 ; Cicero, Verr. 5, 66.

174 THE DEATH AND
tainly authentic, "Father, forgive them,
for they know not what they do!"1
What he must have been suffering at
this moment is indescribable. The wounds
in his hands and feet were giving him
acute and atrocious pain; the blood was
trickHng from them drop by drop to the
ground. It is true that this hemorrhage
was soon checked; but then a sort of
numbness took possession of his limbs and
a violent fever began to rage.
The pannicularia,2 that is, the personal
effects of the victims, the little that they
left behind them, were given to the execu
tioners. They shared among themselves
the garments of Jesus, and drew lots for
his seamless robe. All these smaU details,
minutely related, presuppose an eye-wit
ness. The Fourth Gospel states that St.
John was there, as well as the mother of
Jesus, who had the courage to be pres
ent at her son's execution, accompanied
by the Galilean women; the presence of
Simon the Cyrenian, who has already
been mentioned, appears to be also most
probable. 1 Luke xxiii. 34.
2 Dig. 47, 20 ; De bonis damnat. 6.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 175
When all the preliminaries were com
pleted, the soldiers seated themselves to
watch their three victims;1 jokes, puns,
coarse insults rained upon the unhappy
sufferers. Jesus especially was the butt
of the most odious witticisms.
What were his dying words? Here
again the Gospels are not entirely in
accord, but nowhere are their divergences
more natural. The last words of cele
brated criminals are almost never pre
served in authentic form; usually the
accounts of the most trustworthy eye-wit
nesses differ sensibly. The reason is per
fectly simple : the emotion, the agitation,
the grief of the friends who are present
prevent their hearing clearly or remember
ing accurately; and on the other hand the
hatred of enemies often distorts these last
farewells. The fact is that we do not know pre
cisely what were the last words of Jesus.
His recommendation of his mother to St.
John and of St. John to his mother is
most touching; and as it is found in a
Gospel which is directly connected with
the apostle John we have no reason for
1 Matt, xxvii. 36. Cf. Petr. Satyr, ill, 112.

176 THE DEATH AND
doubting its authenticity. According to
Luke, one of the malefactors was con
verted,1 but Matthew and Mark positively
state that the thieves insulted Jesus with
the others.
Little by little darkness came over his
soul; he felt himself sinking in an abyss
of despair, and passed through a moral
agony so black that even the face of his
Father was veiled from him. The cer
tainty that had never left him for a single
instant, sustaining him in all his trials,
the assurance that he was one with the
Father and the Father with him, that he
was accomplishing his will, doing his
work, that he was going down into only
such depths as his Father bade him pass
through, and suffering only what the
Father willed that he should suffer, — this
certainty vanished, and he cried out, " My
God! my God! why hast thou forsaken
me ? " a The horror and terror that such a
1 Luke xxiii. 39-43.
2 Matt, xxvii. 46 ; Mark xv. 34. There is no room
to doubt the authenticity of this utterance. Who indeed
could have invented it ? Preserved in its Aramaic form
in our Greek Gospels we have it just as Jesus uttered it,
just as the witnesses heard it: "Eli, Eli, lama sabach-
thanif"

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 177
cry indicates are unspeakable. Jesus be-
Heved himself to be forsaken by his
Father! It has been questioned whether he was
not simply repeating the Twenty-second
Psalm to fortify himself, but without
strength to go beyond the first verse. One
would be glad to befieve it, but the
hypothesis of despair is too plausible not
to be made.
Why, then, did he utter such a cry?
Because he had expected a miracle that
did not take place? Did he doubt his
mission, the love of the Father; he who
had never doubted either? These ques
tions remain unanswered, and we can only
bow with pitying and anguished heart
before the intensity of moral suffering
which such words reveal, adding to them
no word, and sincerely sorry for those who
have the courage to discuss this dying cry,
and draw dogmatic conclusions from it.
One of the tortures of the infernal agony
of the cross was a burning thirst which
devoured the sufferer. The desire to
drink became with Jesus so intolerable
that he exclaimed, " I thirst ! " x A soldier,
1 John xix. 28.
12

178 THE DEATH AND
more humane than the others, went to the
leather bottle of posca 1 which he ordinarily
used. It had a sponge; he dipped it in
the liquid, and sticking it on the end of a
reed he lifted it to the lips of Jesus, who
could thus drink a little.2
His despairing cry had lasted only for
the space of a lightning flash; he had
regained all his serenity. But the life of
the body was rapidly becoming exhausted ;
death was approaching with long strides ;
and in his increasing physical weakness
his moral strength was continually re
newed. The conviction that he was ful-
filHng his mission again became entirely
his, and there on the cross he recovered
that sense of perfect communion with his
Father which made up to him for all the
rest. It was three o'clock in the afternoon;
six hours, therefore, that the victims had
been hanging on the cross, and their
1 Posca was the name of a mixture of water and
vinegar which the Roman soldiers always had with
them on their expeditions, among which were included
capital executions. (Spart. Vie d'Adrien X. ; Vulcatius
Gallicanus, Vie d'Avidius Cassius, 5.)
2 Matt, xxvii. 48; Mark xv. 36; Luke xxiii. 36;
John xix. 28-30.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 179
sufferings had hardly begun, for men
often lived several days in this appaUing
condition. Men of good constitution died
only of hunger, and in general death was
produced simply by the arrested circula
tion resulting from the abnormal position
of the body; but Jesus succumbed to
sudden death. AU at once he uttered a
terrible cry; a blood-vessel had broken in
his heart,1 his head was seen to faU upon
his breast; he was dead.
What had been his last words ? Accord
ing to Luke's Gospel,2 he had said,
"Father, into thy hands I commend my
spirit." According to another text,8 he
had cried, "It is finished." We shall not
choose between these two utterances ; both
of them are true. Jesus bad indeed fin
ished everything; his work was complete
and perfect, lacking nothing. And it was
certainly to his Father that, dying, he
committed the care of his soul, that soul
that never, save perhaps for a single
1 The hypothesis of the rupture of a blood-vessel is
the only one that explains how death could have oc
curred so suddenly and so promptly.
2 Luke xxiii. 46.
8 John xix. 30. Matthew and Mark say only, " He
cried with a loud voice."

180 THE DEATH AND
moment, had ceased to be profoundly
united to his Father.
The two malefactors were, however, still
full of life, and their lives would appar
ently have been considerably prolonged,
perhaps for several days, if the day had
not been Friday. At six o'clock the
Sabbath would begin, and the Law1 for
bade that a body, living or dead, should
remain upon the cross on the day of
rest. The Romans had no motive for refusing
to respect this custom. It was necessary,
then, to finish the wretches who still lived,
make certain that Jesus was really dead,
and hasten to take down the bodies from
the crosses.
To put an end to the thieves, they were
subjected to a second torture, — the break
ing of the legs (crurifragium). In gen
eral this was not done ; when it was desired
to give the finishing stroke to one cruci
fied, they struck him on the head, or they
pierced him through the heart, to bring on
immediate death. The crurifragium was
a special torture, distinct from that of the
1 Dent. xxi. 22, 23 ; Josh. viii. 29, x. 26 f . ; Jos. D.
B. J. 4, 5, 12 ; Mishna, Sanh. vi. 9.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 181
cross, and generally applied to slaves and
prisoners of war; it was not necessarily
mortal, but it here appears that it sufficed
to cause the immediate death of the two
malefactors, for their bodies were taken
down from the cross before six o'clock
and thrown into the common sewer, or
some other shameful place destined for the
burial of suicides.1 This was the Jewish
law. According to Roman law, the three
bodies would have remained upon the
crosses till they were eaten by birds of
prey.2 When the soldier came to break the legs
of Jesus he saw that this was useless, as
he was already dead; still, for greater
security, he gave him the true finishing
stroke, piercing his side with a lance in
the region of the heart.
What became of the body? As has
been said, it could not remain upon the
cross to be eaten by birds, because upon
this point the Romans let the Jews have
their own way. The latter would cer-
1 Mishna, Sanh. vi. 9.
2 Horace, Epistles, 1, 16, 48 ; Juvenal, 14, 77 ; Lucan,
6, 544; Plautus, Miles Gl. 2, 4, 19; Artemidorus, Onir.
2, 53 ; Pliny, 36, 24 ; Plutarch, Life of Cleomenus, 39 ;
Petronius, Sat. Ill, 112.

182 THE DEATH AND
tainly have thrown the body of Jesus into
the sewer with that of the other malefac
tors if they had been masters of it, for it
was to their interest to make away even
with his body; they would not really be
done with this man until nothing was left
of him, not even his corpse. If they gave
it honorable burial, people would come to
visit his tomb. Legends would very soon
cluster around his sepulchre; and it is
probable that Annas and Caiaphas were
very greatly chagrined when they learned
that the body of Jesus was not to be given
over to them.
In fact the Roman law permitted and
even commanded that the body of an exe
cuted man must be delivered to any one
who claimed it ; 1 and one of the unknown
friends in Jerusalem (we have already met
with several), a secret disciple, a certain
Joseph Ha-ramathaim,2 begged the body
from Pilate. It was the more readily
accorded that he was a well-known person
age, a member of the Sanhedrin, rich and
esteemed. Nicodemus joined him. They
1 Digest, xlviii. 24, De cadaveribus punitorum.
2 Joseph of Arimathea. Matt, xxvii. 57 ; Mark xv.
43 ; Luke xxiii. 50 ; John xix. 38.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 183
desired to embalm the body, not accord
ing to the Egyptian manner, for indefinite
preservation, but after the Jewish fashion,
which consisted simply in wrapping it
around with small bandages with myrrh
and aloes.
There was need of haste. It was draw
ing near to six o'clock, and if this hour
arrived before aU was finished, the Sabbath
would be profaned. To complete their
task before six o'clock, they resolved
upon a provisional burial.1 Joseph of
Arimathea had lately prepared a tomb for
himself in a garden belonging to him,
only a few steps from Golgotha.
There was no time to lose. Nicodemus
and he drew out the nails supporting the
bleeding body, that it should not fall on
being taken down; their pious hands
washed and wiped the wounds before
wrapping it in a winding-sheet which they
had brought with them. Then they car
ried it away, followed by faithful friends,
the Galilean women uttering the strident
cries which were a necessity at funerals,
however sincere and profound might be
the grief. All was done most hastily; it
1 John xix. 41, 42.

184 THE DEATH AND
may be said that the burial too was
hastened. The tomb of Joseph of Arimathea was
a grotto forming a small chamber; in the
farthest wall an alcove had been hewn out
and surmounted by an arch.
The men extended the body in this
alcove and closed the entrance with a
stone which was set in a groove, and so
large that it was very difficult to handle it.
The Sabbath began at the very moment
when all was finished, and those who had
taken part in it dispersed, after having
promised one another to return «arly Sun
day morning to finish the still incomplete
embalming. Every one returned home, hurrying to
light the Sabbath lamp. Around the sepul
chre where no one remained night grad
ually came down, and the great silence of
the tomb set in.
The doleful day was over, everything
had returned to its usual order; things had
resumed their course, if indeed they had
been interrupted.
The three deaths which have just been
described were three casual executions,
such as had occurred the day before, such

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 185
as would be repeated on the morrow; and
the entire Jewish people with perfect
tranquillity prepared for the Sabbath rest,
which would be all the more profound
that it fell upon one of the days of the
Feast.

186 THE DEATH AND

CHAPTER XI
THE RESURRECTION NARRATIVES
The Gospel Narratives
T T P to this point, except in minor de-
tails, we have made no critical
studies. We have almost exclusively con
fined ourselves to setting forth historic
certainties. Side by side with this narra
tive of events we have had an essential
purpose, — to learn what was going on in
the soul of Jesus, what was the order of
his thoughts before and during his min
istry. This work is completed in the very
imperfect degree in which it may be done.
At present a study of an entirely differ
ent order is imposed upon us; a minute
study which the reader may consider as
an appendix to our work,1 but a necessary
appendix, since we have to treat of ques
tions such as this : What took place dur-
1 See Preface, p. xi.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 187
ing the days that followed the burial of
Jesus, and what are we to understand by
what is caUed his Resurrection?
Let us begin with a very important
preliminary remark: the question of these
chapters is of an historic fact. We admit
that its consequences are immense; they
have taken on colossal proportions. But in
itself there is simply a fact of the past to
establish (if indeed it is possible to estab
lish it), nothing more and nothing less;
and to establish it according to the ordi
nary methods of historic criticism as our
age has brought them to Hght and made
them potent. Our means of knowledge,
our requirements and our processes of
meeting these requirements, have been
made new within a hundred years. Well,
let us make use of these processes, let us
put forward these requirements and study
this fact of history, weighing the pros and
cons without the least a priori.
It is the more necessary to say this,
because in no case has a priori been given
freer course than in this question of the
resurrection of Jesus. "This must have
happened. It is altogether impossible that
that did not take place." Let us leave

188 THE DEATH AND
these ways of proceeding, carefully guard
ing against them. It is truly strange that
men continually assume to know what
must have taken place instead of seeking
for what actually did take place ; and that
they always conclude that facts must have
been thus and so, instead of simply dis
covering what they were.
On Sunday morning, April 9th of the
year 30 (if our method of reckoning is cor
rect), a Httle before sunrise, the tomb was
empty. It was the women who had been
present at the burial who made known the
disappearance of the body. They had
come, as had been agreed, as soon as the
Sabbath was ended, to proceed with a sort
of embalming more complete than that of
Friday evening, which had necessarily
been insufficient.
Their desire to embalm a body already
in the tomb appears to have been in no
sense extraordinary. It seems, therefore,
that for persons who died on Friday even
ings, at an hour when it was impossible to
give the usual care to the body without
profaning the Sabbath, the necessary atten
tions were given on Sunday morning at
the tomb itself. It needed only to roll

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 189
away the stone which closed the entrance
to the tomb, and that done, any one might
go freely into the sepulchre, which was a
grotto entered on the level, and perform
the usual embalming.
The women came, then, at the earliest
dawn, to the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea.
They were asking themselves who would
roll away the stone for them, when from
afar they perceived that the stone was no
longer in its place ; it had been rolled on
one side, and the door of the sepulchre was
yawning. They drew near, trembling
with emotion and grief; they leaned over
and peered in; no one was there — Jesus'
body was not there. What had become
of it? Some one had taken away their
Master's body, and they knew not where
he had laid it.1
This is the first fact that stands out,
certain, authentic, undeniable, from all
the narratives. There is not the slightest
doubt that the tomb was empty on the
morning of the third day after Jesus'
death ; that is, the first day of the week.
What had happened ?
To this question the four Gospel narra-
1 John xx. 2.

190 THE DEATH AND
tives are unanimous in replying that Jesus
had returned to life, and that, having
arisen from the dead, he appeared to a cer
tain number of persons on the third day
and the days following; but all four
differ, and are even contradictory, as to
the details.
If we read attentively, we see that the
Gospels are the echoes of two entirely dis
tinct traditions, which no doubt became
confounded in the end, but which were
at first distinct and separately developed.
According to one, the appearances of Jesus
were all in Galilee; this is the Galilean
tradition. According to the other, they
took place in Jerusalem and its immediate
environs ; this is the Judean or Jerusalem-
ite tradition.
Let us first study the Galilean tradition.
It is reproduced in its oldest form in the
Gospels of Mark and Matthew. The
latest form of this tradition and the last
stage of its development known to us is
set forth in the apocryphal Gospel of
Peter, discovered a few years ago.
This is the story of the resurrection
given by this tradition; it attempts to
describe the very act. It says that in the

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 191
night between Saturday and Sunday the
soldiers who were guarding the tomb
heard a great voice from heaven. They
raised their eyes ; the heavens were opened,
and two shining angels descended from
heaven and came to the sepulchre. The
stone which served as a door rolled away of
itself. The two angels entered the tomb,
and the soldiers made haste to awaken
their captain and the elders of the Jews,
who were with them watching the tomb
but who had fallen asleep. While they
were telling them what they had seen, be
hold three men came forth from the tomb,
— that is, Christ, supported by the two
angels ; the cross on which he had suffered
followed them. The angels were so taU
that their heads touched the sky. Jesus
was taUer stiU, and his head passed
through the sky. A voice was heard
from heaven, saying, " Hast thou preached
to them who are asleep?" and a reply
came from the cross, saying, "Yes." The
whole company ran to report the fact to
Pilate. Meanwhile, at daybreak, Mary
Magdalene came to the tomb, with several
other women, to embalm the body. An
angel appeared to them, announced to

192 THE DEATH AND
them the resurrection, and they fled,
affrighted. The angel had said to them,
"He is risen, and gone thither from
whence he was sent," that is, to heaven.
It is seen that the Pseudo-Peter placed
the ascension immediately after the com
ing forth from the tomb. This, however,
did not prevent the return of the Risen
One to earth; for the lost conclusion of
the Gospel of Peter apparently included
the narrative of an appearance on the shore
of the Lake of Tiberias.
According to Mark,1 this is what took
place: Three women, whom he names,
Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of
James, and Salome, went into the tomb,
saw there an angel, who announced to
them the resurrection of Jesus, and bade
them inform Peter and the other apostles,
telling them that the Risen Jesus would
precede them into Galilee, where they
should see him as he had said. Terrified,
the women fled, and said nothing to any
one. The close of the Gospel of Mark is lost,
but it is evident that what followed, no
more than the Gospel of Peter, related the
1 xvi. 1-8.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 193
appearances in Judea, for the angel bade
the apostles "go to Galilee."1
According to Matthew, two women only,
Mary Magdalene and the other Mary,
came " to see " the sepulchre. An angel
descended from heaven, rolled away the
stone from the door of the sepulchre, and
sat upon it; he spoke to the women in
nearly the same words as the angel in
Mark's Gospel, the latter being, however,
within the sepulchre: "Jesus is arisen; he
goes before the apostles into GalUee, there
they shall see him." The women, at once
trembling and joyful, far from saying
nothing, as Mark affirms, ran to carry the
news to the apostles. Then Jesus appeared
to them, and he also told them that it was
in Galilee that the apostles should see
him. The eleven therefore repaired to
Galilee, "unto the mountain where Jesus
had appointed them" (though there had
not before been any allusion to a moun
tain). Jesus appeared to them, and — a
curious detail — some disciples doubted,
though they saw him before them, alive.
Jesus, however, spoke to them, command
ing them to preach the gospel to all nations.
1 Mark xvi. 7.
13

194 THE DEATH AND
He instituted baptism, giving its ecclesias
tical formula, " Into the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,"
and he declared to his disciples that he
would remain with them even to the end
of the world.
Thus closes the Gospel of Matthew,
without the slightest allusion to the ascen
sion into heaven. This Gospel, notwith
standing the brief apparition of Jesus near
the tomb, belongs then also to the Galilean
tradition. According to it, Jesus showed
himself to his disciples only once,1 upon a
mountain in Galilee.
According to these narratives of the
Galilean tradition, the Risen Jesus, not
withstanding the interview mentioned in
Matthew xxviii. 9,2 appeared only in GaH-
lee. More than this, it was not on the
third day that he showed himself to his
disciples; it was at least a week after
the crucifixion that Peter and the other
apostles saw Jesus.
Finally, these were true apparitions,
1 Matt, xxviii. 16.
2 This interview, in fact, confirms our assertion, since
Jesus himself there says that it is in Galilee that he
will show himself to his apostles (verse 10).

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 195
the apparitions of a being who no longer
dwells on earth; they are in no sense a
continuation of the life of Rabbi Jesus, a
Hfe interrupted by death for a few hours or
a few days, to be resumed afterward such
as it had been before. No ; Jesus appears
and disappears. According to the Gospel of
Peter, he even had a celestial body, and a
very extraordinary one. The Galilean tra
dition then tells of four apparitions.
It is evident that stories of this sort
would lead the incredulous to say: That
which appeared to you was simply a phan
tom without Hfe or reaHty. Befievers
would reply: Not at all; it was indeed
the body which we knew that appeared to
us; and the proof is that the body is no
longer in the tomb. The sepulchre has
been officiaUy recognized by the authori
ties as empty, and that after they had
sealed the door and placed a guard before
it. Besides, adds the Pseudo-Peter, the
Roman soldiers and the Jews saw the
Ascension of the Risen One ; he went up
into heaven before their eyes, supported
by angels, with his cross following him.
In Jerusalem and Judea the resurrection
of Jesus was otherwise described.

196 THE DEATH AND
This is how Luke narrates it: Several
women (he names three of them, Mary
Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of
James, but there were others) come to the
tomb and find it empty. Two angels tell
them of the resurrection, but without
informing them where they are to see the
Risen Lord. They run to tell the news to
the eleven apostles, who do not believe
them. That very evening Jesus appears to two
disciples who are going to Emmaus. He
shows himself to them, using a sort of
dissimulation. A divine power further
hinders these disciples from recognizing
him. He was no doubt recognizable, but
a higher will, which could be none other
than that of God, held their eyes. As
for Jesus, he acts as though he were some
one else ; he appears not to know why the
disciples are sad, and asks what is the
matter with them, although he knows
perfectly well. He makes as if he would
go beyond the village of Emmaus. Finally
he makes himself known to them, and at
that very moment he disappears, the vision
vanishes. The two disciples at once
return to Jerusalem, and there are told

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 197
that Peter has seen him also. Then sud
denly Jesus appears. The disciples be
lieve that they are seeing a disembodied
spirit; but Jesus shows them his wounds
and begins to eat. Then he leads them
to Bethany (all this, apparently, the same
evening, Sunday, the first day of the
week) and disappears, being parted from
them in a final manner, while in the act
of blessing them.
Luke thus offers us another series of
appearances. According to him there
were none in Galilee, and the scenes of
the resurrection took place in Jerusalem
or its immediate neighborhood. It was
upon the Mount of Olives, near Bethany,
that Jesus was seen for the last time;
from there he arose into heaven,1 the same
day according to the Gospel; forty days
later the same author says, in so many
words, in the first chapter of the Acts of
the Apostles.
Such, then, are the two independent
and distinct traditions of the resurrec
tion of Jesus Christ held in the early
days. The Fourth Gospel unites them. It
1 Acts i. 12.

198 THE DEATH AND
tells how Mary Magdalene went alone to
the tomb on the morning of the third day ;
it was empty. She ran to apprise Peter
and the other disciple whom Jesus loved.
They came, made certain that the body of
Jesus was no longer there, and went away.
Mary remained alone ; two angels appeared
to her, and finally Jesus himself, who
would not permit himself to be touched.
On the evening of that day he appeared,
the eleven apostles being assembled, then
disappeared. A week later they saw him
again, and this time he permitted Thomas
to touch him. A supplementary chapter,
added to the Gospel at a later time, shows
us Jesus taking a meal with his disciples
on the shore of Lake Tiberias, but it was
difficult to recognize him. He spoke to
Peter three times, putting to him the
question, "Lovest thou me?" Then he
reinstated him in his place as apostle.
Thus the Fourth Gospel unites the two
currents, the Galilean and the Judean,
but without losing one in the other. We
are approaching the time when the two
traditions were definitively placed side by
side to form a continuous narrative. But
this juxtaposition was artificial; it was

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 199
made after the event. The two traditions
were developed each in its own sur
roundings. The reader has already perceived the
great, the fundamental difference between
them. According to the Galilean tradi
tion the Risen One had but a fugitive
life, and made only brief appearances.
According to the Jerusalem tradition, on
the contrary, the life of the Risen One
was the continuation pure and simple of
his earthly Hfe. The latter, interrupted
during the space of three times twelve
hours, recommenced such as it had left
off. The Resurrection days are days sup
plementary to those of the earthly ministry
of Jesus, and must be added to it. This
ministry was continued. No doubt there
are two points of difference. Jesus was
not constantly present and was not always
recognizable. He could be instantane
ously transported from place to place ; he
appeared and disappeared ; but he had the
very body which had been put in the tomb,
the body which died upon the cross and
became a corpse. This body, this physical
organism, had become alive again; it ate
and drank and walked. The Risen Jesus

200 THE DEATH AND
had interviews with his apostles just as
before. It is interesting to observe that the
Jerusalemite form of the tradition became
ever more affirmative in the sense of the
materialization of the body of Jesus. It
is easy to follow the progress which it has
made in this respect. When the apostles
saw Jesus the first time they thought they
saw a spirit.1 But Jesus spoke to them;
he replied in advance to objections, and
finally he ate fish and honey before them.
This continuation of the Master's life with
his friends lasted precisely forty days. The
figure is fixed, and at his last appearance
the material body of Jesus was detached
from earth and rose toward heaven, toward
the abode of God, who is overhead in the
blue sky, above the clouds. From that
day they never again saw Jesus. He
is no longer corporeally present on the
earth. He had been up to this time;
but from that time forth he has been
seated in heaven at the right hand of
God, and he will not reappear until the
Last Judgment.
Furthermore, during the forty supple-
1 Luke xxiv. 37.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 201
mentary days Jesus was seen only by his
disciples and friends; that is, by those
who believed in him.
Such are the gospel stories of the resur
rection of Jesus.

202 THE DEATH AND

CHAPTER XII
THE RESURRECTION NARRATIVES
The Narrative of Saint Paul
HTHE reader has no doubt observed that
up to this point we have not yet
heard a single eye-witness of the resurrec
tion of Jesus. Not one of the four Evan
gelists says : " I have seen the Risen One ;
he appeared unto me." On the contrary,
all four bring only indirect witness, —
the statement of others and not their own
experience. It is especially interesting to note that
we have not the direct testimony of a sin
gle one of the eleven apostles, and so far
as St. John is concerned, if he is the
author of the Fourth Gospel, this is most
extraordinary. If this book was written
by him, if it is entirely from his hand, it
is most strange that he does not say in
speaking of the Risen Jesus, as he did of

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 203
Jesus crucified, " He who saw bare witness,
and he knows that he saith true." This
would have been Johannean language.
But these words, applied to the Christ as
returned to life, are not found in the
Gospel by St. John. He, like the others,
knows of the resurrection of Jesus only
by hearsay, and gives us only the testimony
of others, especially of Mary Magdalene.
It is true that he relates the appearances
to the Eleven, those of the first two Sun
days, and being one of the Eleven he was
present. But why does he not say " I
was there " ? He remains impersonal,
and expresses himself as if he were speak
ing of other persons than himself.1
Have we then the testimony of no single
direct witness of the resurrection of
Jesus ?
We have : we possess the writings of a
man who says, I have seen him. These
writings are certainly authentic, and this
man is the greatest among all the disciples
of Jesus Christ. We refer to the testimony
1 This remark confirms us in the opinion that John
himself did not write the Fourth Gospel. Besides, the
book, while continually speaking of an eye-witness,
never claims to have been written by him. See Jesus
Christ during his Ministry, Introduction, p. xxvii.

204 THE DEATH AND
of St. Paul in his First Epistle to the
Corinthians. In this letter Paul writes in so many
words, Kapol &<p0rj: "To me also he ap
peared."1 Let us study this testimony
and ascertain its value.
In the passage in which he thus speaks
St. Paul relates not merely the appearance
with which he had been favored, but all
the others, at least those with which he
was acquainted, and gives a fifth narrative
of the resurrection of Jesus, widely dif
ferent from those of the four Gospels, and
much older than theirs.
In this narrative Paul contradicts the
Gospels, and especially the Synoptics, be
fore they were written. Between them
and Paul, since we must choose, there is
no room for a moment's hesitation. Paul
wrote in the year 57. Not only are his
statements much earlier than those of the
Synoptics, they are also earlier than the
development which the traditions that be
came fixed in the Gospels finally received.
Paul is a direct witness. The Synoptics
simply repeat what they have heard from
one or another ; Paul tells what he has seen.
1 1 Cor. xv. 8.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 205
The following are the points on which
the Evangelists and Paul differ. Accord
ing to Paul, the appearances covered a
considerable time ; they might stiU occur,
and they occurred anywhere ; while Mat
thew, Mark, and Luke declare that the
appearances have come to an end, and that
when they did occur it was at a given place
and no other. They locaHze them, placing
them only where Jesus had been in Hfe.
These two differences are not the only
ones ; the list of appearances as given by
St. Paul hardly accords with what the
EvangeHsts say, and it is of great impor
tance. He gives the complete catalogue,
in their order, of the appearances, as it was
accepted in Jerusalem during his lifetime.
We cannot go back of this.
Paul was acquainted with the Jerusalem
tradition, and this is what he says : Jesus
appeared (they were apparitions, mcpdrj) —
1, to Peter ; 2, to the Twelve ; 3, to more
than five hundred brethren ; 4, to James ;
5, to aU the apostles (that is, no doubt, to
the Twelve and to others bearing the
name of apostles, Hke Barnabas) ; 1 6, " to
me, as to one born out of due time." 2
1 Acts xiv. 14 passim. 2 1 Cor. xv. 8.

206 THE DEATH AND
Six appearances, then. The first ob
servation to make is that Paul saw no
difference between the appearances to the
Twelve and the one with which he had
been favored;1 quite the contrary, he
treats them all as precisely the same.
Let us also observe that of the six
appearances of which Paul speaks, the
first and second are mentioned in the
Third Gospel ; but the third, that to five
hundred brethren, is nowhere mentioned,
nor is that to James. More than this,
Paul omits the appearance to the women
at the tomb, notably that to Mary Magda
lene ; neither does he refer to the appear
ance upon a mountain in Galilee, nor to
that to the disciples of Emmaus.
Let us more closely examine the appear
ance to Paul ; it is evidently that which
took place on the road to Damascus, and
which, in the Epistle to the Galatians, 2 he
caUs a revelation of the Son " in him." In
none of the narratives of Paul's conver-
l In another Epistle, not less certainly authentic
than the First to the Corinthians, his Epistle to the
Galatians (i. 15, 16), Paul thus defines the appearance
vouchsafed to him : " It pleased God to reveal his Son
in me." 2 Gal. i. 15.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 207
sion which we find in the Acts of the
Apostles 1 is it said that he saw Jesus ;
he was dazzled, he was blinded, and he
heard a voice. Nor had he touched the
Being who appeared to him ; but he was
convinced that it was Jesus himself, that
he was there and speaking to him.
Here there is a witness who fulfils the
conditions generaUy required of a witness ;
his attestation is contained in an undis
puted letter ; and not only does he affirm
the Resurrection like the others, but he
writes in so many words, " He appeared
to me " (tca/tol wepdrj).
The appearance with which he was
favored presents peculiar characteristics
which the others do not present, and such
testimony as this is very different from all
that we have hitherto coUected. AU the
others, as has been observed, are, without
a single exception, merely hearsays. Mary
Magdalene did not write the story of the
appearance of which she was a witness;
nor did the disciples of Emmaus, nor any
one of the Eleven. It is most surprising
that Peter in his Epistle does not say, like
St. Paul, " He appeared to me." The ap-
1 There are three, chapters ix., xxii., xxvi.

208 THE DEATH AND
pearance to Peter, the first day, was held
in the primitive Church to be of capital
importance ; but he himself does not say so.
Nor does John say anything, as we have
already observed. We have, then, only the
word of Paul; but we have this word,
and Paul is not a mere casual witness;
his word has more value than would have,
if we possessed it, the testimony of a
formerly demonized woman like Mary
Magdalene, though written by her own
hand. M. Renan made faith in the re
surrection to rest upon the testimony of
Mary Magdalene, and this gave him
ground for writing, " The enthusiasm of a
hysterical woman has given a Risen God
to the world." It is not solely to Mary
Magdalene, it is also and above aU to St.
Paul, that we owe the Risen Christ.
St. Paul's conviction was wholly based
upon the perfectly clear recoUection which
he cherished of all that took place upon
the road to Damascus. Now the conver
sion of Saul of Tarsus, transformed into
St. Paul, is an evident historic fact, and
Paul was convinced that on that day he
had heard the Lord ; that he had been in
communication with Jesus Christ; that

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 209
Jesus had spoken to him, uttering words
in the Hebrew tongue. Such is the
testimony of the great apostle, and such
were the motives for his beHef in the res
urrection of Jesus.
Let us study more closely this testimony
of St. Paul. Like all the Jews, he believed
in the possibiHty of a resurrection. The
Jews did not clearly hold the doctrine
of the immortality of the soul, according
to which death is deHverance from the
body which fetters the spiritual part of
one's being ; without which the spirit can
live, and indeed without which it is more
happUy circumstanced. The Jews under
stood Httle or nothing of this doctrine,
according to which man is composed of
two more or less inimical substances. In
their view the world was to be trans
formed, the death of the body done away
with, and the kingdom of God thus set up.
St. Paul had been brought up in these
ideas ; he not only admitted a future res
urrection, but beHeved that partial or
individual resurrections took place now
and again. He found it in no sense "in
credible that God should raise the dead." 1
1 Acts xxvi. 8.
14

210 THE DEATH AND
Thus belief in the resurrection of a dead
man met in his mind (and for that matter,
in the mind of any one of his time) no
such objection as it would everywhere
meet at the present day ; it was a miracle,
but at that period miracles occurred every
day. St. Paul wrote, " If the dead rise not,
Jesus Christ is not risen; and if Jesus
Christ is not risen, your faith is vain." l
He takes his stand, then, on the fact that
there are dead men who arise from the
dead. That has happened. In Paul's
view Jesus is not the only risen one, and
he did not arise simply because he is the
Son of God, the Messiah : he arose be
cause there are dead who rise, Jesus
among others, and like the others.
A general resurrection was expected.
It was a widely held Pharisaic doctrine,
and Paul was a Pharisee. At the Palin
genesis all the dead would rise. And the
PaHngenesis was imminent; it was there
fore perfectly simple and natural that
even at that present time the bodies of
some of the saints should be resuscitated.
They were the precursors, the heralds
1 1 Cor. xv. 13, 14, 17, etc.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 211
of the great renovation, the catastrophe
which would make all things new, the
eternal dream of man.
How did Paul picture to himself the
Risen Jesus? He believed that he had
had an exterior vision, but it had only
stunned him ; he had, however, heard a
voice, and at the same time he had had
an interior vision, a drama had taken
place in his soul. He was convinced
that Jesus had really appeared to him.
But it was not the material body of Jesus
of Nazareth that had been shown him;
God had revealed Jesus Christ " in him."
He says this in the most explicit manner
and without opening a possibility of at
tributing another meaning to the term of
which he makes use.1 In this regard
Paul had the true faith in the resur
rection, as we shaU presently set it forth.
He tells clearly how he pictured to
himself the Risen Jesus.2 In his mind
the future resurrection of the dead and
the resurrection of Jesus Christ are iden
tical. But the future final resurrection
1 Gal. i. 15. It pleased God to reveal his Son in me
(rov vlbv aurov iv ifioi).
2 1 Cor. xv. 1-58, and especially 35 ff. But it is
necessary to read the entire chapter.

212 THE DEATH AND
wiU not be that of the body that was put
into the ground, any more than the ear
of wheat is the very seed that was sown.
That seed is dead, it has decayed in the
ground and disappeared. The resurrec
tion wiU be the birth of a new body,
superior to the organism that formerly
Hved, and very different from it ; it will
come forth from it, will be born of it, as
the plant is born of the seed.
Thus is it with Jesus : he arose on the
third day, but it was not the flesh that
formerly lived that returned to life ; it
was a spiritual and celestial body coming
forth from the material and earthly body,
which died upon the cross.
Paul very distinctly denies that the
Risen Jesus had the same body as the
Crucified Jesus. His resurrection body
has neither flesh nor blood; it is incor
ruptible. " Flesh and blood cannot inherit
the kingdom of God." l Paul knows noth
ing of a Risen One eating and drinking;
he no longer knows Christ " according to
the flesh," 2 nor does he know anything
of the guard stationed at the tomb by
the Jews. He belongs neither to the
i 1 Cor. xv. 50. 2 2 Cor. v. 16.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 213
Jerusalemite nor to the Galilean tradi
tion. He wrote before tradition had been
formed ; he is earlier than any tradition.
Furthermore, as he puts the appearance
to himself upon the same rank as those
to the Twelve, he knows nothing of an
ascension on the fortieth day, putting an
end to the appearances, after which there
were none, because, materially speaking,
Jesus had returned into heaven. In St.
Paul's idea the appearances were not dis
continued at the end of forty days, for
there had been one much later, and, as
has been observed, he nowhere says that
others may not occur.
In his mind the body of the Risen
Christ was made of the substance of his
irvevfia; it is in no respect material, and
the only word which expresses the resur
rection is mdidr) (he appeared, he was
seen). There was not then, in St. Paul's
mind, a continuation of Jesus' earthly
life, interrupted for thirty-six hours, then
resumed, and ending on the fortieth day.
No, the earthly Hfe of Jesus ended, in the
apostle's view, upon the cross ; and the
second life began on the third day,
the Hfe of the " glorified " Christ, which

214 THE DEATH AND
will never be modified nor interrupted by
anything which is eternal. " Christ being
risen from the dead dieth no more." a
Such is St. Paul's belief, and such is
the earliest, the oldest, the authentic form
of beHef in the resurrection, — that ac
cepted by the apostle.
St. Paul's statements aid us in choos
ing between the two Gospel traditions of
which we have spoken above; for it is
certain that between these two traditions
we must make a choice. I appeal to the
good faith of my readers. There is no
middle ground; either the Risen Jesus
had the body which had been alive and
had died upon the cross, or he had the
glorified body of which St. Paul speaks.
Very well; of the two traditions, that
which gives to Jesus the very body of
his earthly Hfe, which makes the life of
the Risen Lord a sort of forty-day supple
ment of his ministry, closing it by the
material ascension of his physical organ
ism, rising up to the abode of God, which
is above us in the blue sky ; and that
which makes of the resurrection of Jesus
a series of appearances, indeterminate in
1 Rom. vi. 9.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 215
duration and having no material aspect,
though entirely real, and, as we say, ob
jective, it is certainly the latter which
we must choose ; and St. Paul aids us to
choose ; so to speak, he makes the choice
for us. To the impartial historian, in
fact, Paul's doctrine is the true one. It
is the oldest, and the only one which
forms a part of a direct and authentic
testimony, and it was after the apostle's
time that tradition gave to Jesus a material
and tangible body.
And now, what are the facts gained for
history? The first is this : the Hfe of Jesus had
come to a close. He was no longer in the
world. His reappearances, whatever may
have been their nature, were brief, rapid,
fleeting interviews, which show a supra-
terrestrial existence beyond the tomb.
2. The tomb was empty on the morning
of the third day.
3. It was from this third day forward
that Jesus appeared.1 There were appear-
1 The appearances began on the third day ; hut some
persons had another opinion, and believed that Jesus
remained in the tomb three fall days. We find in the
Gospels some traces of this belief (Matt. xii. 40, John

216 THE DEATH AND
ances during a period of undetermined
length, and they took place where Jesus
had lived, in Judea and Galilee. Some
saw him in Judea, others in Galilee. He
appeared only to those who knew that the
tomb was empty; but beyond this com
mon starting-point each tradition devel
oped independently of the other. These
appearances were special to those for
whom they were designed; they alone
were aware of them.
4. The body of the Risen Lord was
a spiritual body, according to the expres
sion of St. Paul. Later it was found hard
to reconcile the two traditions ; one was
laid over the other, and they were not
to be reconciled. Between the narratives
according to which the body of the Risen
Lord was a material organism which could
partake of food, which bore the print of
the nails, which could be touched, and the
narratives according to which it was in
stantaneously transported from place to
place, passed through closed doors, and
ii. 19, Mark ix. 31, according to the oldest and most
authoritative text). The opinion which prevailed, that
of St. Paul, placed the resurrection on the third day,
that is, Sunday (Luke ix. 22, xxiv. 21).

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 217
was impalpable, there is an irreconcilable
contradiction. To admit this contradiction
is for every reader of the Gospel narratives
a duty of the most elementary good faith.
5. Paul believed in the resurrection,
not only because it was affirmed by the
other apostles, but because he was per
suaded that Jesus had appeared to him
and spoken to him.
6. We may admit as historically proved
the development of the primitive tradi
tion, in the sense of an increasing mate
rialization of the idea of the nature of
the body of the Risen Lord.
Such are the historic conclusions to
which the impartial study of the various
narratives infaUibly leads.

218 THE DEATH AND

CHAPTER XIII
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE RESURRECTION
T ET us now attempt to perceive what
we ought to understand by the Re
surrection of Jesus Christ.
The disciples did see appearances. The
Being which they saw had a body. But
this body was immaterial ; this is affirmed
by St. Paul. St. Paul's affirmation is
confirmed by the pains taken by the Evan
gelists to convince their readers that the
body of the Risen Lord was material.
Several features of the accounts show,
indeed, that it was immaterial and in
tangible. The Evangelists undoubtedly
believed in a tangible reality ; but the
first idea of the witnesses was that they
had before them a spirit, 1 and this idea
prevailed for a very long time. Clement
of Alexandria relates that, according to a
tradition stiU accepted in his time, St.
1 Luke xxiv. 37.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 219
John thrust his hand into the body of
Jesus, and it passed through it without
difficulty.1 According to Jerome 2 the
Gospel of the Nazarenes related that Jesus
appeared to Peter and the other apostles,
after having appeared to James, and said
to them, " Touch me, and assure your
selves that I am not a dcemonium incor
porate " (an incorporeal spirit).
The appearance was of Jesus, but he
was not recognized ; Mary Magdalene, the
disciples of Emmaus, the apostles in
Galilee,3 were not at the first moment
aware that it was Jesus who stood before
them. The statement made, based upon
the accounts of those who narrated the ap
pearances, is that they did not at once
know who was there. It was not until
after a certain time that they recognized
Jesus. The moment of recognition was usuaUy
at a meal-time (the disciples of Em
maus, the meal when Jesus ate fish and
honeycomb, the dinner of John xxi.). This
idea certainly grew out of the fact that
one of the memories most profoundly
1 Adumbrat. ad 1 John i. 1. 2 De vir ill. 2.
8 John xxi.

220 THE DEATH AND
graven upon the hearts of the disciples1
was that of the meals they had been used
to take with their Master, and especially
the moment of the breaking of bread and
the giving of thanks. k
It had always been a blessed hour, that
meal-time of the little community, the
little spiritual family, when they all sat
around the same table, when they sang
the old psalms, when they dipped into the
same dish and drank from the same cup ;
therefore from the earliest days of the
primitive Church the fraternal repasts so
much enjoyed by the Jews were in great
honor. It happened further that as soon as
they recognized Jesus he disappeared;
that the moment when the vision vanished
was precisely that in which some one
said, " It is he ! " So long as the vision
lasted, either they knew not who it was,2
or they were asking one another if it was
he, — yes or no.3
From these facts it results with the
strongest evidence that there is not the
1 We have already had occasion to make this remark ;
see above, p. 118.
2 Luke xxiv. 13-35. 8 John xxi. 12.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 221
least relation between the resurrection of
Jesus and other resurrections narrated in
the Bible; for example, that of Lazarus.
According to the text the resurrection of
Lazarus was the return to physical and
organic Hfe of a corpse in which decom
position had already begun. The body
of Lazarus came " to life again. Lazarus
resumed the existence of a few days pre
vious, in his house, with his sisters ; began
again to feed his body and to Hve the daily
material life, precisely as if his illness,
instead of ending in death, had ended in
recovery. His organism resumed all its
physiological functions, and at a later
time Lazarus died a second time, and this
time, not to live again. If the laws of
France had been operative in Judea, the
risen Lazarus might have demanded the
annulling of his act of decease.
It is entirely otherwise with the Risen
Christ, of whom Paul said, " He dieth no
more ; " 1 and with the documents which
we possess it is absolutely impossible to
estabHsh any Hkeness between the return
of Lazarus to life and the return of Jesus
Christ to life. i Rom. vi. 9.

222 THE DEATH AND
We have now arrived at the foUowing
historic certainties : —
1. There were appearances of Jesus,
sometimes uncertain and unrecognizable,
and always followed by disappearances.
2. He had a body called "glorified"
or " spiritual ; " and we are absolutely
ignorant of what that is, — we only know
that it is not the earthly body.
3. The Risen Christ dies no more;
he has then no organic Hfe, and his
body performs no physiological function
whatever. 4. God revealed his Son in St. Paul.
In the apostle's experience, therefore, to
the exterior vision which dazzled his sight
there was a corresponding inner revelation
of which his soul was the theatre.
5. None of Jesus' adversaries saw him
after his death; his disciples alone saw
him. 6. The succession of the appearances
and their number cannot be perfectly
established. Certain details remain to be elucidated ;
thus, the contradictions in the narratives,
speaking sometimes of a material body,
sometimes of an immaterial body, are in

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 223
the highest degree natural. The apostles
took divers methods of explaining a fact
which in itself was certain. Their faith
expressed itself in images: each had his
own, and each beHeved that this figure
corresponded with a reaHty. But as they
contradict one another we ought not to
seek to restore them to unity.
One says, the Risen Lord had an or
ganic body which partook of food. An
other says, a spiritual body which passed
through closed doors; and sometimes the
same writer says both.
One of them believes that the resur
rection and ascension took place the same
day, and that both were one identical
act; according to this evangelist, with
Jesus to arise from the dead was to as
cend into heaven. Another says, the two
acts were separated by an interval of forty
days. One said, the Lord is the Spirit ; x
the other, he has a body which bears the
mark of the nails. We have shown that
there are several traditions, that is, several
explanations, and nothing is so pitiful as
the effects of certain conservatives to
harmonize all these differences, to bring
l 2 Cor. iii. 17.

224 THE DEATH AND
them aU into unity. While denying ple
nary inspiration, they put all these nar
ratives in the same rank; all are true,
authentic, infalHble, and therefore they
harmonize. We believe that we show
more respect for the Scriptures in not
trying to bring into agreement things that
do not agree, and in not giving forced
harmonizations. It is hard to believe
how many petty manipulations, forced
texts, one-sided explanations, we find
among the conservatives ; arguments of
which in the secret of their souls they
cannot but feel the weakness and noth
ingness, and which, taken aU in all, are
miserable failures.
But if we can sum up all the contra
dictions in the narratives, and show how
very natural they are, there nevertheless
remain many insoluble questions ; for ex
ample, How were the appearances pro
duced? When did they cease? Under
what influences? How did belief in the
ascension into heaven grow up? We do
not know.
What is certain is that the entire Hfe of
Jesus is to be explained only by an inter
vention of God. It is a miracle, if by

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 225
that we understand, not an impossible
abrogation of the laws of nature, but a
creative act of the sovereign God, un
explained and stiU inexpHcable. It is a
miracle of that sort (and this is the only
sort of miracle that is possible, and in
consequence authentic), it is, we say, a
miracle of that sort which is hidden in the
mystery of his birth ; it is another of this
same kind which is hidden in the mys
tery of his resurrection. Miracles of this
kmd are not to be observed by scientific
methods, and the disciples describe them
as they can, by poetic images and popular
symbols, to which, according to the ideas
of their time, they give a historic reaHty ;
but the fact itself, the miraculous fact,
subsists behind figurative explanations
and concrete symbols.
This one thing remains certain, — the
Hfe beyond the tomb is not at all a part
of the earthly life : it is a superior exist
ence, truly supernatural. Its appearances
are always sudden, and last only a brief
time, even in the most realistic traditions.
The Risen Lord did not live in continu
ous and normal relations with the world
in which he had formerly Uved.
15

226 THE DEATH AND
Among the questions which remain in
soluble is this : What became of the body
of the Crucified Jesus ?
On the one hand, the Risen Jesus had
not the same body as during his earthly Hfe ;
and on the other hand, his earthly body,
bis corpse, was not in the tomb on the
third day. What became of the body of
the Crucified One?
To answer this question is impossible
for everyone. It is impossible for those
who deny the resurrection ; it is not less
so for those who believe that there were
visions of a glorified body; it is not
less so for those who, contrary to the asser
tion of St. Paul, affirm a return to life
of the physical organism of Jesus; for
that organism, the body which ate, walked,
slept, in fact lived the earthly life, be
ginning again as that of the risen Lazarus
did, did not, as he did, die a second
time, to be buried again. We know very
well what became of the body of Lazarus
after his second death — it was buried ;
but what became of that of Jesus ?
Shall we be told, " It was that which
went up into heaven on Ascension Day " ?
No, we shaU not be told so, because that

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 227
cannot have been a truly material body
which went up into heaven ; it was not
"flesh and blood," it was a "glorified"
body, as we say. And thus, to the ques
tions, " What became of the crucified body ?
Where was it when the tomb was found
empty on the morning of the third day ? "
— a reply is as impossible for the most
conservative believers as for unbeHevers,
for the partisans as for the opponents of
the resurrection.
It does not suffice to say, the material
body was transformed into a spiritual body ;
for this has no meaning. Matter is mat
ter, and remains matter. Everything is
changed, as we well know, but nothing is
lost, and matter can only be transformed
into matter.
No satisfactory solution has therefore
been found by any one.1
1 Some one will perhaps reply : " The material body
could be transformed into a spiritual body, for nothing
is impossible with God; and besides, who shall say
what is matter and what is spirit ? Why could not the
material body, the corpse of Jesus of Nazareth, have
become the glorified body of the eternal Christ 1 "
Agreed; it might have so become. To the supposition
of this abstract possibility and this appeal to the al
mighty power of God it is evident that we have no
reply to make.

228 THE DEATH AND
The most widely differing conjectures
have been offered to explain the disappear
ance of the body. It has been asked —
singular conjecture — if the Sanhedrin
might not have taken measures to conceal
the body of Jesus. Although dead, this
man still distressed them. His tomb, as
we have shown,1 might become a place of
pilgrimage. People would certainly visit
it, thought Annas and Caiaphas. Some
women had already spoken of coming back
to embalm the body. The disciples would
take advantage of this weU-known and
respected sepulchre to excite and promote
an uprising of the people. It was neces
sary, then, in the minds of these men that
Jesus should be entirely done away with.
Even his death did not satisfy them ; they
desired the destruction of his body, its
total extinction.
Therefore the Sanhedrin made away
with his body on Saturday night, as soon
as the Sabbath was ended, and had it car
ried somewhere else, hidden, burned, per
haps, saying, We must have done even
with his corpse. They secured the aid of
the Roman soldiers who were guarding
1 See above, p. 182 f.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 229
the tomb, paying them money. Hence the
story related by Matthew, of paying
the soldiers to say nothing. Later, when
the apostles declared that the resurrection
had taken place, the Sanhedrin could not
contradict it, nor offer to produce the
corpse ; they were therefore silent, because
otherwise it would have been necessary to
confess what they had done. According
to a passage in Tertullian,1 certain Jews
said that the gardener had made away with
the body, because he feared that the throng
of comers and goers would injure his
vegetables. They admitted then that the
body might have been carried away by
others than the apostles.
The hiding of the body by the Sanhedrin
is certainly not beyond the limits of possi
bility, but I beg the reader to remark
that this possibility is entirely abstract.
Nothing can be cited to support it ; not an
act, not a text, not an allusion, however
fleeting, appears to give a degree of value
to this hypothesis. It is gratuitous in the
strongest sense of the word. More than
that, it is in the highest degree improbable ;
1 De Spectaculis.

230 THE DEATH AND
for it would have been singularly mala
droit of the high priest to take the trouble,
of his own motion, to furnish the apostles
a reason for believing in the resurrec
tion. And to conclude, as we shall
show in the following pages, it is im
possible that the disappearance of Jesus'
body in such a manner, even if it took
place, should explain the belief in the
resurrection. Besides, it is possible to imagine such
an absurdity as old Annas becoming the
true founder of Christianity. We should
in that case owe him very abundant
thanks. By putting Jesus to death by
cravenly demanding that Pilate should
crucify him, he had already given to the
world a God dying for its sins and expi
ating them upon the cross; now he does
better stiU ; by effecting the disappearance
of the body, by letting loose his rage upon
the sorrowful Man of Nazareth, the hatred
of this unscrupulous priest has given to
the world a Risen God! Jesus is there
fore only one of our brothers in suffering,
and the despairing cry of Mary Magdalene
will remain through all the centuries
the expression of the truth : " They have

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 231
taken away my Lord, and I know not
where they have laid him ! "
No; the wonderful results which fol
lowed the crucifixion are to be explained
only by actual appearances of the Cruci
fied One ; by a real resurrection, therefore.
And as to the disappearance of the body,
we can easily imagine that St. Paul must
have considered this question as entirely
idle. No doubt he knew that the tomb
had been found empty on the morning of
the third day, and he believed that the
incorruptible body of Jesus was derived
from his corruptible body as the plant
is derived from some sort of seed; but
he was little concerned with the material
and earthly body of Jesus. It had been
precisely nothing other than a seed, and
to those who might have asked him what
had become of it he would have re
plied, " Unthinking man ! that which thou
sowest takes not on life unless it first
die! Jesus the Christ according to the
flesh died and was buried; but I know
not the Christ according to the flesh ;
and the third day the Christ according
to the Spirit arose from the dead. The

232 THE DEATH AND
carnal body died and the spiritual body
took on life." Such was, without any
doubt, the doctrine of St. Paul; such is
also our own, and such is the truth about
the resurrection.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 233

CHAPTER XIV
THE CERTAINTY OP THE RESURRECTION
T li 7E are here at the very heart of the
subject, and both impartiality and
scientific probity obHge us to sound it to
the bottom.
For the mere historian the actual state
of the question is this : On the third day
after the death of Jesus and during the
foUowing days, for a space of about six
weeks, something happened which can
not be attributed to the imposture of the
disciples ; namely, a certain number of
persons saw Jesus Christ, and reported
sayings of his. Furthermore, St. Paul, in
an undoubted letter, states that he also
saw and heard him some time, perhaps
several years, later.
Are we authorized by the mental state
of those who had these visions to deem
them purely ecstatic ? The disappearance

234 THE DEATH AND
of the body was no doubt the initial fact,
the generative incident, of the belief in
a return of the Crucified Lord to life ; but
does its disappearance suffice to account
for the visions ?
Could not indeed the apostles and the
women, seeing the tomb empty, have imag
ined the return of Jesus to life, persuaded
themselves that Jesus was risen, and then
had visions created by their imagination ?
To this question we may reply that not
one of the disciples expected Jesus to
return to life. Their despair, their desire
to embalm the body, the stone that they
rolled to the entrance of the cave, are
sufficient proofs of this.
But does this answer suffice? Let us
transport ourselves to the first century;
let us picture to ourselves not men of
to-day, but Jews of that time, and these
Jews disciples of Jesus, standing before
their Master's empty tomb. Is it not
natural that the thought should take pos
session of their hearts, especially since it
was Jesus that was dead, "Perhaps his
body is come to life again ! " For we
must not forget with what facility people
of those times welcomed the report of a

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 235
resurrection. The return of a corpse to
life, even of a corpse in process of decom
position, seemed a very possible thing.
In our days, to the report of such an
event, every one, no matter who, would
unquestionably oppose an immediate ne
gation, without asking for proof, or even
consenting to an attempt to bring proof.
Such things do not happen; the refusal
to beHeve in such a thing in our epoch is
imperative, but formerly it was not so.
Therefore when the rumor of the resur
rection of Jesus began to be spread
abroad, it at once met persons who put
faith in it. A few indeed said, it is a
story ; but they did not long say so, they
only asked to be aUowed to believe it.
No doubt even then a resurrection was
a very extraordinary miracle, the most
extraordinary of all miracles, but it was
in no sense impossible. Sheol was less
rigorously closed for the Jews than the
tomb is for us. In speaking of St. Paul
and the Pharisaic beliefs of his time we
said that the expectation of a general
resurrection made men anticipate the
time, in the case of certain great person
ages. People said, They are returned to

236 THE DEATH AND
Hfe in advance, before the great day.
Antipas said of Jesus Christ, "It is the
Baptist arisen from the dead." 1 The
people had taken Jesus to be "Jeremiah
or one of the prophets " returned to life.2
Certain saints were raised from the dead
at the death of Jesus.8 The Apocalypse
speaks of the resurrection of the witnesses
of Jesus.4 A resurrection from the dead
was then always possible; and if it is
pointed out that we have not for the first
day a single eye-witness, that John him
self (assuming that it was the Apostle
John who wrote the Fourth Gospel with
his own hand) saw nothing but the empty
tomb, was this sight not enough to lead
some one, no matter who, who had the
idea of a resurrection, to at once admit it
as possible, and very soon after, as cer
tain ? And as for this first idea, was not
the view of the empty tomb enough to
suggest it?
Let us add to this that the religious
necessity of a resurrection was impera
tive ; he must have risen again. God was
bound to give this proof of the Messiah-
1 Mark vi. 14. 2 Matt. xvi. 14.
8 Matt, xxvii. 52. * Rev. xi. 3-12.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 237
ship of Jesus. We have said that at this
epoch a miracle was the sign of a direct
mission. The apologetic proof drawn
from miracles has no proving force in our
day, but it had enormous force in the
first century.1 Everything was proved by
miracles. Paul reminds the Corinthians
that to prove to them that he was indeed
an apostle, he had performed miracles
among them, and had never wearied of
performing them, renewing this demon
stration with untiring kindness and pa
tience.2 Therefore that God should raise
up Jesus and give this proof of his Mes-
siahship was in the order of things.
FinaUy, is not the testimony of Paul
himself subject to caution ? Did not Paul
also have an ecstatic vision on the road
to Damascus? Was he not subject to
ecstasies ? Might not an ecstasy also ex
plain the over-excitement of Mary Mag
dalene after the prostration of those first
days, of Peter, of all the others, affected
by the contagion? What one saw and
heard they would all very soon see and
1 1 Cor. i. 22, ii. 4, 5 ; 2 Cor. xii. 12; 1 Thess. i. 5 ;
2 Thess. ii. 9 ; Gal. iii. 5 ; Rom. xv. 18, 19.
2 2 Cor. xii. 12, 13.

238 THE DEATH AND
hear. Does not the miracle of Pentecost
make evident that they were ecstatics?
Cases of this kind are known to history.
After the unjust martyrdom of Savona
rola, after the assassination of Thomas
k Becket, their disciples could not believe
them to be forever departed, could not
resign themselves to their overthrow, ex
pected to see them again in life.
Observations of this sort are certainly
very interesting, and such analogies as
these are most alluring. Notwithstanding
which, we believe that the scrupulous and
impartial historian requires other demon
strations than mere curious resemblances
before accepting such a thing. He must
take into consideration all the facts. Now
we have these ascertained facts. The
vision of Paul on the road to Damascus
is expressly distinguished by himself from
his moments of ecstasy, and from this
vision he emerged a Christian; that is
to say, changed, transformed, converted.
Let the exterior fact which took place on
the road to Damascus be explained by
ecstasy, by bewilderment, by a lightning
stroke, we must nevertheless admit the
interior fact which took place in the soul

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 239
of St. Paul. Saul was thrown to the
ground a Pharisee, and uprose a Christian,
because " it pleased God to reveal his
Son in him." x We may perhaps blot out
other facts of history ; but what fact is
more authentic than the conversion of St.
Paul? The impartial, just, unprejudiced
critic wiU never blot out this fact.
And this story of Paul is only a repro
duction (by one detail) of the great fact
that Christianity was born at that mo
ment. The Christian Church was born
of the certitude of the Resurrection. It
is the foundation on which the apostles
built. Thomas k Becket and Savonarola
brought no new idea into the world when
they reappeared to their disciples. Jesus,
when he reappeared, brought the Church
into the world ; his cause has triumphed
because he has arisen from the dead.
Otherwise it would behoove us to say,
His cause triumphed because the Sanhe
drin stole away his body.
To him who believes that God works
in history the resurrection of Jesus is an
indisputable fact. Let us compare the
first Good Friday on the one side and
i Gal. i. 15.

240 THE DEATH AND
the preaching of the first Pentecost on
the other ; what took place between those
two days ? The former is marked by a de
feat which seems entirely final ; the latter
is the magnificent dawn of the history of
the Church. Between the two something
certainly transpired which transformed the
apostles ; we call this event the Resurrec
tion of Jesus Christ.1
A fraud on the part of the disciples is
as absurd a supposition as the mere vision
of a phantom created by their own imag
inations is impossible.
The Resurrection did take place. It
brought about the birth of a new world.
Jesus is alive ; he is aHve indeed ; he will
die no more. This brilliant sun still en
lightens the world; the third day after
the crucifixion a new horizon was un
folded, a new world was begun.
God has intervened to give us in the
course of human generations him whose
pure and holy life would be inexplicable
without this intervention. He has like
wise intervened by a sovereign act to
i We do not speak of the theory of a syncope, followed
hy apparent death, occurring during the crucifixion;
it has no value whatever.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 241
give us a Risen Christ, without whom
the development of Christianity in history
would certainly not have occurred.
AU trace of the ignominy of Good
Friday has disappeared ; and not only has
it disappeared, but ignominy itself has
been changed into glory, defeat into vic
tory, and the salvation of the world has
been wrought by the cross.
Let it not be forgotten the Christian con
sciousness was then born ; it is not simply
that the disciples believed in the Resur
rection, — the Resurrection transformed
them. It cannot be said they thought
they saw Jesus but were mistaken, for the
transformation which took place in them
cannot be denied, and the transformation
consists in this: it is no more they who
live, but Jesus Christ who Hves in them.1
To use the language of the schools, the
Resurrection of Jesus was at once objective
and subjective. Objective, for " it pleased
God " to do it : it was not the apostles
who created the vision of the Risen Lord,
it was God who raised his Son. Subjec
tive, because it was "in them," in his
apostles, that it pleased God to reveal his
1 Gal. ii. 20.
16

242 THE DEATH AND
Risen Son. The passage, Galatians i. 15,
is of inexorable clearness in this respect.
The Resurrection of Jesus in the souls
of his apostles is the certain proof of his
Resurrection in history.
The Resurrection of Jesus was a creative
act of the living God, of the Father in
whom he had believed without a shadow
of wavering all his days, and into whose
hands, in breathing out his last breath, he
had committed his spirit.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 243

CHAPTER XV
FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION
T^7E have not in the least undertaken
in the preceding chapters, and in
the long discussions upon which we have
entered weighing the pros and cons, to
prove the resurrection of Jesus Christ
historically, to establish by trustworthy
statements che miracle of the return of
Jesus to life. If this had been our design
it would have been very chimerical, and
we should never have succeeded in it.
A miracle is not to be demonstrated ; it
does not even vouch for its own miraculous
character. History can vouch for only the
facts by which the miracle was manifested.
When it goes back to its causes it cannot
grasp them; it remains face to face with
manifestations that are not to be explained.
Why? because this intangible cause of
miracle, if miracle there is, can be only

244 THE DEATH AND
its first cause, and the first cause never
shows itself to us. To the mere man of
learning God remains a hidden God. He
may verify phenomena, he may discover
facts ; if he goes back to their causes, he
finds an interwoven chain of second causes.
The chain is endless, and the first cause
never appears. No one can ever say, "I
have seen God; he appeared to my eyes,"
or "He is proved to my reason." The
well-known utterance of Laplace, declar
ing that in order to describe the celestial
mechanism there was no need of the
hypothesis of God, is not in the least an
atheistic proposition. The direct action
of God is the supernatural. The believer
testifies to the supernatural, but he testi
fies to it by faith and not by sight. If he
prays God to heal a sick person, and the
sick person gets well, he will say that God
healed him, that his prayer has been an
swered, and he will call this answer an act
of God, a miracle; but the learned man
will perhaps discover the second cause of
the recovery, will find it in such or such a
potent medicament, administered by a
clever physician at the opportune moment.
The discoveries of the learned man do not

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 245
rob him of his faith. They simply tell
him what means God is using to answer
his prayer and heal the sick person; and
whether or not he knows how God works,
whether or not he divines the secret of
God, he believes neither more nor less that
God was there and that he was working.
For him, God is not an unknown God.
It foUows that the supernatural is not
to be demonstrated ; it is affirmed by faith.
The resurrection of Jesus is not to be
explained, but that matters Httle; if it
could be explained it would be none the
less a miracle to the Christian, and the
greatest of miracles.
The historian, who speaks only as a
learned man and not as a believer, asks
what took place on the third day. The
apostles saw Jesus Christ; he appeared to
them. Was he then truly arisen from the
dead ? To this question the historian con
fines himself to saying, I do not know; I
do not understand; the data for solving
the problem are wanting. Renan one day
declared that for him to admit a miracle
it would suffice that it was sufficiently
attested. Let a body of learned men,
physicians, members of the Institute, attest

246 THE DEATH AND
a resurrection from the dead, and it must
be admitted, said Renan. Well, no; even
that would not suffice ; Renan is mistaken
when he says that whenever a commission
of the Institute shall speak, declaring that
a resurrection has really taken place, we
must admit that supernatural events take
place. Never will one of our contempo
raries, learned or otherwise, admit a super
natural event. He will admit nothing
more than an unexplained, but not super
natural, event. He will say, The expla
nation escapes me, but there is one. I am
not in presence of a miracle.
If the attempted explanations are erro
neous, untenable (fraud, illusion, lethargy,
etc.), it is because the right one has not
been found. But there is an explanation,
and it is natural. As for the believer, he
utters the word miracle, and says God was
there. He says it by faith and not by
knowledge ; by moral, not by sensible evi
dence. For him the apostles really saw
and heard their Master ; he really appeared
to them.
There is then proof of the resurrection
of Jesus, the religious proof; it is the
most precious of all, or rather it is the

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 247
only one that is worth anything, and it
has the double advantage of being within
the reach of the most humble, and of being
irrefutable. The true beHever has no need of a
demonstration of the resurrection of Jesus
Christ by historic considerations, which
are always refutable; he knows with an
inward certainty that his Saviour has
vanquished death, and he says, "The
Lord is risen indeed." 1 The believer who
uses this language has faith in the Resur
rection, and he alone has this faith.
Others may believe it ; he has faith. Now
one may beHeve in the resurrection and
not be a Christian. One may find the
demonstration of the historic fact to be
sufficient and not be a Christian ; and con
trariwise, one may not be able to resolve
a single one of the questions raised by the
Resurrection, may not be able to say what
became of the body, not be able to say in
what consisted the return of the Crucified
One to life, nineteen hundred years ago,
the third day after he was placed in the
tomb; in a word, one may not be able to
meet the objections to the resurrection,
1 Luke xxiv. 34.

248 THE DEATH AND
and yet be a Christian, because he has
faith in the resurrection of Jesus.
For he alone is a Christian who has faith
in the resurrection of Jesus. The true
believer has experienced his Saviour's
return to life; he knows and he believes,
and his faith no man can take away from
him. Let us explain.
To demonstrate the reality of the Cruci
fied Lord's return to Hfe, to demonstrate
that there is sufficient documentary evi
dence for the historic fact, is to demon
strate that a historic event one day took
place; and to admit the authenticity of
this event is a matter of science and not of
faith.1 Historic belief has no religious value,
and such a belief in this case is not the
same thing as faith in the eternally living
Jesus Christ.
Religious faith, the faith that justifies
and saves, cannot depend upon a historic
fact which may be submitted to a scientific
1 We refer to the remarkable words of M. Lachelier,
cited in our second volume (p. 94). "An historic event,
extraordinary or not, cannot be an object of faith, pre
cisely because it is historic, and by this fact is an object
of knowledge."

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 249
examination, which can be arrived at only
by study, by the critical sense and the
intelligence. The results of criticism are
various and uncertain. As M. Lachelier
has lately reminded us, " A historic event
cannot be an object of faith, precisely
because it is historic, and by this fact is
an object of knowledge." What we have
already asked,1 What could they do who
cannot study and who yet desire to be
lieve, — the laborer, the working-man, the
man of no culture, — if, in order to have
faith in the Risen Christ they were obliged
to weigh arguments, discuss opinions, test
proofs ? What would happen then ? Hav
ing a desire to believe in the resurrection
and being unable to pursue the necessary
studies, an uncultured man would admit
the historic fact, not because he has proved
it (for he is incapable of the study neces
sary to prove it), but because he has need
of it. He decides in advance that it must
have taken place. The resurrection of
Jesus forces itself upon him a priori.
Thus men create the facts of history
before being taught by history that they
have taken place.
1 " Jesus Christ during his Ministry," p. 255, note.

250 THE DEATH AND
We have already directed attention to
the strangeness of the fact that men thus
decide what must have taken place.
Concerning the resurrection of Jesus, if
a verification of the historic fact is pos
sible, it is, in any case, a somewhat long
process, and when it is completed it re
mains an intellectual beHef. Even the
" he appeared unto me " Qcaftol axpdr]) of
St. Paul, which comes so straight to us,
is subject to criticism; for though the
First Epistle to the Corinthians is cer
tainly from Paul, it is still necessary to
prove its authenticity, and to this end to
carry on scientific research. If, then,
belief in the historic fact of the resurrec
tion of Jesus were necessary to a religious
faith in the Christ who ever lives and
reigns in his Church, it would be for
learned men to decide whether or not
Christians ought to believe in the resur
rection of Jesus. Believers would then
be divided into two classes: first, the
learned themselves, whose intellectual
researches would lead them to believe;
second, the immense multitude of the
ignorant and unlearned, who would believe
bHndly on the affirmation of the learned.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 251
But thanks be to God, things are not
thus. Every Christian, the most humble
with the most learned, may have personal
experience of the Hfe of his Saviour.
This personal experience cannot depend
upon historic research. Biblical criticism
is taking away those supports which our
fathers deemed indispensable ; woe unto us
if we think ourselves lost because we have
been robbed of these poor crutches I We
can walk alone because we are not alone;
our Master is with us ; he is truly arisen
from the dead.
From what precedes, it results that one
may doubt the historic fact of the Resur
rection, that one may find even the witness
of Paul insufficient; that with regard to a
question of pure historic knowledge in the
simple verification of a material fact, one
may be of those who are inclined to say
No, and still be a Christian, a true disciple
of Jesus. Let us suppose a person who
believes in Jesus Christ, who has faith in
him, who calls him God manifest in the
flesh, who has found in him his Saviour and
believes in the redemption from his sins
effected upon the cross, but who doubts
the reaHty of the resurrection, — shall we
say that this person is not a Christian ?

252 THE DEATH AND
We have said, let us suppose; but this
supposition is a reality for a large number
of the members of Christian churches.
We are all of our own time; and in our
time it is more difficult than it was in the
time of St. Paul to admit the historic
fact. Well, let us be reassured ; those who say
that Christianity stands or falls according
as the Resurrection is received or rejected
are certainly mistaken if they are speaking
of the historic fact. We have just shown,
and we cannot too much insist upon a
truth so elementary, that the faith that
saves does not depend upon scientific belief.
Jesus himself clearly showed this when he
did not condemn Thomas for asking to see
in order to believe. After his example,
let us not condemn those who doubt on
this point, and who, notwithstanding, love
Jesus and believe in him. One is not
master of this sort of doubt, which bears
upon facts of the past. To doubt a fact
because one cannot honestly admit it,
because material proof of it appears insuffi
cient, this is not religious incredulity.1
1 We appropriate here the remarkable consideration
on this subject of Professor Eugene Menegoz. See
Un doute consolant, Revue Chretienne, 1893.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 253
He who thus doubts is not necessarily
a man without faith; he is a man who
does not give credence to a historic fact.
The true doubter is he who will not turn
from sin, will not humble himself and be
converted ; he is the hardened sinner who
is voluntarily hardened because he wiU
not break with evil.
We have shown how remarkable and
convincing is St. Paul's "he appeared
unto me" Qcap.ol &<p0ri); for if there is
any trustworthy witness he certainly is
one, and the joyful and confident certainty
of Paul explains his whole life. Jesus is
alive; this is the word that illumines a
great number of his sayings : " I live, yet
not I, but Christ liveth in me."1 "To
live is Christ."2 "Christ being arisen
dieth no more. " 3 " Have I not seen the
Lord,"4 etc.
But, finally, some one may say, That is
St. Paul, it is not I. St. Paul's certainty
does not fully satisfy me. I would be
able myself to say "I have seen him," and
to add, "I have touched him."
Let us observe that those who make
1 Gal. ii. 20. 2 Phil. i. 21.
8 Rom. vi. 9. '1 Cor. ix. 1.

254 THE DEATH AND
such demands are most often very unfor
tunate. They would be very glad, they
would prefer, not to make them; they
suffer in being obliged to ask to see and
touch; they suffer in not being entirely
sure that Paul was not mistaken!
We know that there are those who
blame such persons ; there are more fortu
nate believers who have not these needs,
to whom the resurrection of Jesus appears
perfectly simple, and who condemn those
who doubt, accusing them as if they were
guilty sinners.
They are certainly in error. We strongly
desire to convince our readers that this is
not a question of historic proof. Some
have an intellectual belief of a fact; the
proofs given for it are for them convinc
ing, their intellects are satisfied. Others
cannot reach this intellectual certainty;
their minds are so constituted that the
proofs brought forward do not satisfy
them. Blessed without doubt are they
who admit the historic fact without having
seen the Risen Lord. But more blessed
still are they who have a true faith in the
Risen One ; who know that his life is con
tinued in the Christian Church and in

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 255
their own souls because they have a per
sonal experience of the resurrection of
their Saviour! These see and touch him
in the true sense of the word. It is true
that they have neither sensible nor intel
lectual evidence; but they have moral
evidence, a thousand times more precious.
He who has this faith feels no need of
going to the bottom of the historic ques
tion. He feels, he experiences, that faith
in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and
the place that this faith occupies in the
life of the Christian are a matter of inward
personal experience, and that such a faith
has nothing to gain by the verification of
a historic fact.
Most idle, therefore, are the intermin
able discussions which can end in nothing,
regarding what took place on the third day
after the crucifixion; questions Hke those
which we lately examined : What became
of the body? Of what nature were the
visions of the apostles? How are we to
reconcile the divergences of the five
accounts, — divergences which indicate
divers sorts of more or less contradictory
traditions? What are we to understand
by this ? What are we to understand by

256 THE DEATH AND
that? These endless questions and discus
sions are more injurious than useful to
faith; and in any case they are entirely
useless, since a historic fact cannot be an
object of faith.
What, for instance, is the use of asking
whether the visions were exterior or inte
rior? One fact is certain, that the dis
ciples heard their Master's voice. Who
could have invented the dialogue of Jesus
with St. Peter,1 the words addressed to
Thomas,2 to Mary Magdalene ? 3 But did
the disciples hear these words with the
material bodily ear, perceiving articulate
sounds striking upon the ear, or did they
hear them sounding in the depths of their
hearts, in those sacred hours when it was
no more they who lived, but Jesus Christ
who lived in them ? 4 The answer matters
little ; one fact is no less supernatural than
the other. The essential thing is that
they really heard their Master. The true
believer can and does say: "I know not
whether it was the bodily ear or the ear
of the soul which received those divine
sounds; but one thing I do know weU,
1 John xxi. 15-19. 2 John xx. 24-29.
8 John xx. 17. 4 Gal. ii. 20.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 257
that Jesus Christ spoke to Mary Magda
lene, to Thomas, to St. Peter; that he
spoke to St. Paul on the road to Damascus ;
that he was still speaking to him when he
said ' My grace is sufficient for thee ; ' J
that he spoke to Pascal on the memorable
and blessed night when he said to him,
' Thou wouldst not have sought me if thou
hadst not already found me ; ' and that he
has spoken to myself."
The true believer has no need of historic
proofs; he has intuitions of heart and
conscience, and those eternal reasons which
lie in the depths of his soul and which the
abstract reason knows not of. He is a
believer, because a group of facts concern
ing Jesus arouse in him impressions and
feelings of which he is not master: his
appearance in history at a precise moment,
just the right one ; his person, of a compel
ling greatness ; his return to Hfe, affirmed
by so many witnesses; so many facts,
insufficient for the historian who will be
only a historian, but sufficient for the man
himself, for him who lets himself be moved
in the inward parts, as our fathers used to
express it, who listens only to the utter-
1 2 Cor. xii. 9.
17

258 THE DEATH AND
ance of his own soul: God has spoken,
God has revealed himself; he has visited
the earth; I cannot not believe, I cannot
otherwise, as Luther said.
The believer obeys an irresistible moral
pressure. The object of his faith is not
perhaps scientifically proven, but it suf
fices him that no scientific proofs can be
opposed to his faith.
Nevertheless, we admit with utmost
frankness, the apologetic proof drawn
from the reality of the resurrection of
Jesus is broken down, as indeed are all
external proofs, that is, those drawn from
miracle. It is remarkable indeed that everybody
is of this opinion. The most strongly
believing orthodox pastors never, except
on Easter Day, take their stand upon the
proof afforded by the resurrection of Jesus
Christ to demonstrate to their hearers the
truth of the gospel.
They still do it on Easter Day. They
reason in this way: "Christ is risen,
therefore Christianity is true ; our faith is
not vain, and we also shall arise from the
dead." But never during the rest of the
year do the most orthodox preachers (with

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 259
possible but certainly very rare exceptions)
draw their arguments from the resurrec
tion of Jesus Christ. It would seem to
them, not without reason, that to make
the demonstration of the future life rest
upon the resurrection of Jesus, which has
to be proved, would be to undertake to
light up a dark room by opening a window
into the night.
More than this, when a pastor conducts
a funeral service, never in his sermon does
the most orthodox (always with very rare
exceptions) make use of the resurrection
of Jesus Christ to console his hearers and
give them the hope of again meeting their
departed friends. He says to them, "It
is not possible that all is ended; your
hearts and your consciences both protest,
and Jesus Christ promises eternal life in
his teaching ; he said, ' Blessed are they
who hunger and thirst after righteousness,
for they shall be filled.'1 Faith in the
justice of God and in his love require a
future life," etc. He says nothing else.
And in the liturgical prayers of the funeral
service we shall hardly find two or three
passages that make brief allusion to the
1 Matt. v. 6.

260 THE DEATH AND
resurrection of Jesus Christ.1 The fif
teenth chapter of the First Epistle to the
Corinthians is read at the cemetery, but
only the close of the chapter where no
mention is made of the resurrection of
Jesus, and the prayer that follows makes
no allusion to the Risen Jesus Christ. It
simply speaks of "the promises full of
consolation which God has caused us to
hear in his blood."
The apologetic value of the resurrection
of Jesus Christ is then recognized to be
nil even by the most conservative. Why
is this ? Because if Christianity is not an
opinion but a life, it is still more true to
say this of the resurrection of Jesus. It
is not an opinion, but a life; it is not
simply belief in a fact of history, it is
above all a life in communion with the
eternal Christ. The resurrection of Jesus
is less a material fact to be historically
proved, than a spiritual reality to be appre
hended by faith. " Blessed are they which
have not seen and yet have believed ! " 2
1 See the late liturgies put forth by the Reformed
Church [of France] ; that of Bersier ; that of the offi
cial Synod.
2 John xx. 29.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 261

CONCLUSION
"\T Y work is done ; and at the moment
of laying down the pen, I feel pro
foundly that which every historian of Jesus
has experienced after having attempted to
describe him, to narrate his life, to read
in his soul, — a profound discouragement.
And if this is the case, if I am discon
tented with myself and my work, I dare
not flatter myself that I shaU satisfy those
who may become acquainted with it.
I had had a vision; the vision subsists
behind the imperfect representation of it
which I have sketched. I knew from the
first that the disappointment which I am
feeling was inevitable; I expected it; it
has continually reappeared in the course
of history for every one who has tried to
fix the picture of Jesus. But the disap
pointment is useful, it is necessary; I may
even -say it is blessed and beneficent, for
by it we comprehend and measure the in
comparable grandeur of the Son of man.

262 THE DEATH AND
I have, however, almost always confined
myself to setting forth facts, ascertained
facts. I have not sought to explain
Jesus, and I shall not attempt to do so
in this concluding chapter. Explanations,
more or less ideal, are inevitably vague
and abstract. On the other hand, I have
tried to sketch a figure which is very
human, very much alive. I have desired
to show, with as much accuracy as pos
sible, the human reaHty of the life of
Jesus. It had seemed to me, and it still seems
to me, that the Christ of history is much
more edifying to know than the Christ of
the Church. It is certain that the Christ
who will save the modern world will not
be the Christ of metaphysical formulas
and more or less satisfectory dogmatics;
it wiU be he the beating of whose heart
we feel, whose hand finds ours in days of
anguish and mourning ; he who has passed
through our struggles, our emotions, and
our tears, and come out conqueror over
doubt by faith and prayer!
I have tried to take the humanity of
Jesus "seriously," as people say, having
observed that everybody says that this

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 263
ought to be done, and no one does it. The
three volumes which I bring to a close
to-day are an attempt at a protest against
the incorrigible docetism of our Christian
ity and our theology.
I thank those believers who have
written to me as my first two volumes
have appeared, to say, "You have edified
us ; you have shown us the Saviour as he
must have been; you have brought him
near to us, and we hope, by the same act
have brought us nearer to him." I am
told that other believers have been scan
dalized by reading what I have written.
I am surprised and grieved to learn it; I
ask myself how these persons picture Jesus
Christ to themselves. Was he, or was he
not, "tempted like us in all things yet
without sin"?1 Did he, or did he not,
" learn obedience by the things which he
suffered " ? 2 Did he, or did he not, " empty
himself " and " take the form of a man " ? 3
If I have succeeded in showing the error
of those who oppose the divinity of Jesus
to his humanity, and artlessly imagine
that whatever one concedes to the latter
1 Heb. iv. 15. 2 Heb. v. 8.
8 Phil ii. 7.

264 THE DEATH AND
one takes away from the former, I shaU
be amply repaid for my trouble.
It is the humanity of Christ that we
need to exalt, for on it is based his true
greatness. I have tried to speak of this
greatness of Jesus; I have tried to bring
it out into the light, and this is why I
have attempted to paint his humanity in
its true lineaments.
In this Conclusion I shall not return to
the three questions which I first posited,
and which form the general title of my three
volumes. I imagine that they have grad
ually answered themselves in the course of
my threefold story.
Of the work of Jesus, I have nothing
more to say than I have said. If a Jewish
sect became the Christian Church of all
civilized peoples, this work was done after
the time of Jesus. As to his own work,
that which was the germ and starting-
point of this sublime evolution, I have
described it.
As for his authority, I have also ex
plained myself, and in detail, in the chapter
entitled The Requirements of Jesus.1
Still, some persons have not entirely
1 " Jesus Christ during his Ministry," p. 238 ff.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 265
understood me. I have said, "Jesus
Christ does not ask us to believe like him ;
he asks us to believe in him." I have been
reproached for this expression. I think it
is because I have not succeeded in making
my thought sufficiently clear. It seems
necessary to return to it here and develop
it; for it seems to me that whoever per
fectly understands me cannot fail to agree
with me.
Jesus did not present himself as a doctor,
a scribe, teaching facts and ideas that
neither the reason nor the conscience can
grasp, or coming to communicate super
natural truths to the world. He came
" to seek and to save those who are lost ; " 1
that is, to modify our personal relations
with God. Jesus did a work; he acted;
and he asks of his disciples to act, to
follow him, to renounce themselves; to
believe, of course, but to believe with a
faith which is also an act, an act of will,
a union with him, and not with a faith
which is nothing but an intellectual belief
in words, in formulas, in doctrines. Jesus
Christ saves; that is, he enfranchises
souls, he feeds and strengthens them by
1 Luke xix. 10.

266 THE DEATH AND
sanctifying them. The " weary and heavy
laden " l experience the power of the gospel
and the authority of Jesus Christ.
In the mind of certain Christians reve
lation is the communication of facts and
ideas which man could not discover by his
own intelligence. Such Christians are in
evident error. Revelation is a communi
cation of the Spirit of God, which acts
upon the conscience to sanctify and en
lighten it. Therefore I can never succeed
in understanding those pious and beHeving
persons who refuse to accept the formula :
man is saved by faith independently of
beliefs. A beHef is an intellectual opinion, and
an intellectual opinion cannot save. There
are the two words, the word faith and the
word belief ; and since there are two words,
it is apparent that there is some shade of
difference in their signification. Was it
not the pious Neander who said, "There
is a faith which saves ; there is not a dog
matic which saves." Well, we fidtists,* as
1 Matt. xi. 28.
2 Fideiste is a word introduced into the French lan
guage hy the school of thinkers headed by Auguste
Sabatier, Me'ne'goz, and Stapfer, of the theological fac
ulty of the University of Paris, to denote those who hold

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 267
we are called, say nothing else, and this
truth is so limpid that it ought to be called
a truth of La Palisse.1
Now Jesus never required of any one a
dogmatic system, a creed of any sort. He
was wiser than the Synods, with their poor
little two-Hned confessions of faith, — very
short, as if they were afraid of confessions
of faith, and feeling that they are commit
ting an error would commit the smallest
one possible.
To beHeve like Jesus Christ — who
indeed could do it in our day ? Jesus be
lieved in demons, and we no longer believe
in them. Formerly it used to be said,
we must not reason with the Scriptures.
That time is far past, and no one now says
the doctrine above formulated, — that a man is saved
by faith without regard to doctrine. — Trans.
1 A self evident proposition. La Palisse was a
doughty captain under Louis XII. Many songs cele
brated his exploits ; the author of the most popular of
these, La Monnoye, quite inadvertently made the last
two lines of each stanza consist of such propositions :
" Fifteen minutes before his death he was still alive,"
" He never gave way to wrath except when he was
angry," etc. The popular fancy, tickled with this con
ceit, kept on adding to this amusing ballad, which now
contains an indefinite number of stanzas, all of this
character. — Tkans.

268 THE DEATH AND
even we must not reason with Jesus
Christ; for every one reasons with him.
Thus, no one takes literally sayings which
he certainly took literally; for example,
these: "Sell all that thou hast and give to
the poor."1 "If a man forsake not all
that he hath he cannot be my disciple." 2
"Sell that ye have and give alms."3
"Give to him that asketh of thee,"4 etc.
We say, these words are to be taken figu
ratively, or " Jesus took them literally and
not figuratively;" in other words, we
reason with him.
But thanks be to God, times change, and
customs with them. What Jesus could
say and did say in his time, and what
would be practical in his time, will not do
for ours, and he would not say it to-day.
This was the error of Francis of Assisi
and the mendicant orders, to have thought
that certain words of Jesus were applicable
to all times and all conditions.
As for us, we are entirely at ease with
these words, because Jesus Christ did not
say that we were to think like him. He
does not cast out those whose intelligence
1 Matt. xix. 21. 2 Luke xiv. 33.
8 Luke xii. 33, xi. 41. * Matt. v. 42 ; Luke vi. 30,

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 269
doubts, those who do not hold his opin
ions and are not Jews, as he inevitably was,
— those, for example, who do not hold his
apocalyptic beliefs ; but he does repel those
who do not follow him, or rather those
who themselves repel him, setting them
selves apart from him. He who does not
come to him and follow him places himself
apart from him, according to his words,
"Him that cometh unto me I will in no
wise cast out."1
Since Jesus Christ shared certain errone
ous opinions of his time, — and no one can
dispute that he did, — it necessarily fol
lows that we make a choice in his sayings ;
there is no way to avoid it. Hence we
accept, we declare authoritative, only what
we consent to accept as such.
I know what people are saying; they
say: "Then you do not believe in the
authority of Jesus Christ; you yourself
are your own authority. If you think
yourself permitted to say, I accept this
and not that, you are the authority; there
is no alternative."
Nevertheless, this is a mistake; for it
was not I who made Jesus Christ, I
1 John vi. 37.

270 THE DEATH AND
did not create him, invent him; he is
there, he comes to me from without, I
find him in history. My experience does
not create the authority of Jesus Christ;
but Jesus Christ enters into contact with
me, and produces in me a moral crisis,
that of conversion and faith. I take my
place on his side ; I believe in him, I obey
him, I love him ; his divine word becomes
authoritative with me. It is not I who
create the truth, but I make it mine by
my experience of it.
If I am asked why I am a Christian, I
reply that it is because of the impression
Jesus Christ has made upon me. I do not
believe in him because he performed mira
cles, nor even because he arose from the
dead, but because he dominates me in the
totality of his teaching, his person, his
work, his entire manifestation.
But there is an inevitable intellectual
element in religious experience, otherwise
religion would become confused with a
vague sentiment and an indecisive religi
osity. As I have said, Jesus Christ modi
fies our relations with God. And this
God is not the Becoming of Hegel nor
the determinism of modern philosophers;

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 271
it is not the fatum of the ancients ; it is
the Father — Spirit, Will, and Love. To
Hve in communion with the heavenly
Father is to pray, and Jesus teaches us
how to enter into relations with him by
prayer. The Father hears the prayer of
his child and answers it. Jesus teaches
us also that we are sinners ; he speaks of a
new birth as necessary, of a conversion,
and he shows us how we can be born again
Dy repentance and faith in him who has
conquered evil and saved us. In him I
discover the normal relations of man with
God, and thus his testimony as to the
relations which we ought to maintain with
God becomes my law, because he was in
perfect relations with God. This is what
I understand by the authority of Jesus
Christ. It is surely his authority; it is
not mine.
As to the very person of the Christ, I
am more and more persuaded of the inanity
of definitions and formulas. We have
seen Jesus of Nazareth proclaiming him
self as the Messiah foretold by the prophets,
as him who was to prepare for the speedy
establishment of the kingdom of God in
Jerusalem and over the whole earth, say-

272 THE DEATH AND
ing that men are to prepare for its coming
by repentance, humility, and faith in the
Son of the Father who is in heaven.
The Jews crucified him who desired thus
to be their Saviour, and he, being entirely
submissive to the will of the Father,
understood that by a violent death he
accomplished that work of salvation which
he had hoped would be different, and
which he would gladly have accomplished
in some other way.
Even upon the cross (save for one short
moment) he was sustained by confidence
that the Father was with him, that he, the
Son, was accomplishing the work that the
Father had given him to do, and that he
would return in the clouds, to found the
Kingdom and judge the living and the dead.
And then what happened ? Already in
the time of the apostles a very curious
union had been formed of Jewish Messi
anic beliefs and Platonic speculations, and
Jesus, that Jesus of Nazareth who had
lived and had been crucified twenty-five
or thirty years earlier, became the person
age whom St. Paul describes in some of
his Epistles1 the first-born of creation,
l Especially in the Epistle to the Colossians.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 273
a divine agent who had produced every
thing, such a one as Justin Martyr later
called a second God. Thus was the doc
trine of the incarnation formed. Then
came stiU other developments of the doc
trine, — those of Fathers and Councils ;
they resolved the difficulties which are in
soluble because they are contradictory, by
setting them over against one another
and making of them "mysteries" which
must be beHeved.1
These were facts which only need to
be stated and accepted, demonstrable evi
dence, historic evidence ; and history is not
to be argued. The Reformers accepted
these doctrines and mysteries of the Roman
Catholic Church, and there is, strictly
speaking, no Protestant Christology. Prot
estantism has never had any other Chris
tianity than that of the great councils;
that is, Roman Catholic Christology. This
is indeed the case with most of the dogmas
of Catholicism anterior to the sixteenth
century. Thus Protestants read the Apos
tles' Creed in their churches. It is a
notorious inconsistency on the part of
Christians who propose, as they say, to
1 See "Jesus Christ before his Ministry," p. 156 f.
18

274 THE DEATH AND
"restore Christianity to its primitive
purity; " for they are the first to recognize
that the Symbol called the Apostles' Creed
owes its history only to a falsehood in
its title, that it is the product of a pain
ful elaboration not completed until the
sixth century, and that it was long be
fore it made good its claim to universal
acceptance. We must admit it: Protestantism is
here singularly powerless by reason of its
very principle. It is easy to say, let us
go back to the sources, let us leave the
metaphysics of the old theology, let us
place ourselves on the moral and reHgious
plane of the gospel. Where is this moral
and religious plane? Where is the basis
of a Protestant dogmatic? The word
"gospel" is continually taken here in a
singularly vague sense. There are differ
ences between the Christological ideas of
the Synoptics, those of the Fourth Gospel,
and the metaphysical notions set forth in
more than one Epistle.
These differences are evident. It is
therefore necessary to choose, and to
choose is to create individual opinions.
For my part, I am not surprised at this ;

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 275
nor do I regret it. I am convinced that
individualism of this sort is the wisest
course, and the only one possible at the
present time. Each believer in Protestant
ism makes his own Christology, because
each beHever represents the divinity of
Jesus Christ in his own way, and it is not
the way of his neighbor.
Let us recall to mind the grand saying
of Jesus : " No man knoweth the Son but
the Father. " x I say on the authority of this
utterance that it is impossible to define
Jesus. He remains above and outside of
all the subtUties, — I say more, of all
the impossibilities of metaphysics, and
by the word, "No one knoweth the Son
but the Father,"2 he retains an incompre-
hensibiHty which is one of the most cer
tain signs of his divinity, and should make
a part of all our adoration of him.
I add that the Christ in whom I believe,
who has revealed his life to me, is the
Redeeming Christ. When Jesus tells me
that his blood was shed for the remission
of sins, I believe him; not only because
he said it, but still more because I have
need of salvation, and because the work
» Matt. xi. 27. 2 Matt. xi. 27.

276 THE DEATH AND
which he accomplishes responds to and
corresponds with the desire of my soul.
Whatever theological explanation may
be found as to the origin of sin and its
nature, sin is a fact. But Jesus Christ
was without sin, and he was at peace with
his Father. He offers us peace ; he leaves
it with us, he gives it to us.1 But shall
we find it by the simple path of moral in
fluence? Does contact with him awaken
in our souls a sentiment of divine son-
ship comparable with his, and does it
give us peace with God, perfect, unalter
able peace, a peace never disturbed? No;
that is impossible, for sin is in us; and
sin is a barrier that separates us from
God. To find repose, we must go to the
foot of the cross of the Redeeming Christ.
There we must "die to sin "and "rise
again, " and begin a new life 2 beside the
empty tomb of the eternally living
Saviour. I am convinced that the modern man,
imbued with the scientific spirit of our
time, who will sacrifice nothing that con
temporary science gives him and which
he with reason holds as a definitive con-
1 John xiv. 27. 2 Rom. vi. 4.

RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST 277
quest, the modern man who looks on
with admiring gratitude at the magnum
opus of science and sees the immense and
magnificent temple of the future arising
from the earth aU around him, — I say I
am convinced that such a man could, and
at the same time ought to, understand that
science does not suffice to satisfy him, and
never wiU satisfy any one. When he has
arrived at this certainty, and it has left
him disturbed and disquieted with the
confusion of his thoughts and sentiments,
he will find peace in pardon, and will find
it nowhere else than there; and he will
find pardon nowhere but in Redemption,
for nowhere else is the succor proportioned
to the distress of his soul.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08540 0100