self (John xix. 31). The phrase in John xix. 14 may thus be understood as the preparation of the Sabbath which fell in the Passover week. Thus the day of the preparation mentioned in the Gospels might have fallen on the day of holy convocation, the 15th of Nisan.

lest they should be defiled and so not | tially connected with the Sabbath itable to "eat the Passover" (xviii. 28). When our Lord is before Pilate, about to be led out to crucifixion, we are told that it was "the preparation of the Passover" (xix. 14). After the crucifixion, the Jews are solicitous, “because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, for that Sabbath day was a high day" (xix. 31).

We have to show that the passages in St. John may be fairly interpreted in such a manner as not to interfere with our own conclusion.

1. John xiii. 1, 2. πρò τñç έopτñs. The words are of doubtful extent; and we may regard the first verse as incomplete in itself, understanding its purport to be that "Before the Passover, in the prospect of his departure, the Saviour's love was actively called forth toward his followers, and he gave proof of his love to the last."

2. John xiii. 29. It is urged that the things of which they had "need against the feast" might have been the provisions for the Chagigah, perhaps with what else was required for the seven days of unleavened bread. The usual day for sacrificing the Chagigah was the 15th, which was then commencing.

"That Sabbath

5. John xix. 31. day was a high day." Any Sabbath occurring in the Passover week might have been considered "a high day," as deriving an accession of dignity from the festival. But the special dignity of this day may have resulted from its being that on which the Omer was offered, and from which were reckoned the fifty days to Pentecost.

6 The difficulty of supposing that our Lord's apprehension, trial, and crucifixion took place on the day of holy convocation has been strongly urged. But we have better proof than either the Mishna or the Gemara can afford, that the Jews did not hesitate, in the time of the Roman domination, to carry arms and to apprehend a prisoner on a solemn feast-day. We find them at the Feast of Tabernacles, on the "great day of the feast," sending out officers to take our Lord, and rebuking them for not bringing him (John vii. 3245). St. Peter also was seized during the Passover (Acts xii. 3,*4). And, again, the reason alleged by the rulers for not apprehending Jesus was, not the sanctity of the festival, but the fear of an uproar among the multitude which was assembled (Matt. xxvi. 5).

3. John xviii. 28. The Jews refused to enter the Prætorium, lest they should be defiled and so disqualified from eating the Passover. The words may either be taken in a general sense as meaning "that they might go on keeping the Passover,' or that rò Táoxa may be understood specifically to denote the Chagigah. 4. John xix. 14. "The preparation of the Passover" at first sight would seem as if it must be the preparation for the Passover on the 14th. But while there was a regular "prep-tained without some artificial theory, aration" for the Sabbath, there is no having no foundation either in Scriptmention of any "preparation" for ure or ancient testimony. the festivals. It seems to be essen

In fine, due weight should be given to the antecedent probability that the meal was no other than the regular Passover, and the reasonableness of the contrary view can not be main

(C.) CRUCIFIXION.

above our Lord's head, and from the almost unanimous tradition; it is re

The Romans unanimously consid-peatedly found on the coins and colered crucifixion the most horrible form of death, worse even than burning, since the "cross" precedes "burning" in the law-books. Hence it is called crudelissimum teterrimumque supplicium (Cic. Verr. v. 66), and to a Jew it would acquire factitious horror from the curse in Deut. xxi. 23. Among the Romans also the degradation was a part of the infliction, since it was especially a servile punishment, so that even a freedman ceased to dread it; or if applied to freemen, it was only in the case of the vilest criminals, thieves, etc. Indeed, exemption from it was the privilege of every Roman citizen,

The cross was of various forms, of which the following are the principal:

1. The crux simplex, or mere stake "of one single piece without transom," was probably the original of the rest. The criminal was tied to the stake (ad palum deligare, Liv. xxvi. 13), from which he hung by his arms. Trees were naturally convenient for this purpose, and we read of their being applied to such use in the Martyrologies. 2. The crux decussata is called St. Andrew's cross, although on no good grounds, since, according to some, he was killed with the sword. It was in the shape of the Greek letter X. 3. The crux commissa, or St. Anthony's cross (so called from being embroidered on that saint's cope, Mrs. Jameson's Sacred Art, i. xxxv.), was in the shape of a T. This shape is often alluded to by the Fathers as "the mystical Tau." 4. The crux immissa (or Latin cross) differed from the former by the projection of the upright above the cross-bar, and was in the form of t. That this was the kind of cross on which our Lord died is obvious from the mention of the "title," as placed

umns of Constantine. There was a
projection from the central stem, on
which the body of the sufferer rested.
This was to prevent the weight of the
body from tearing away the hands.
Whether there was also a support to
the feet (as we see in pictures), is
doubtful. An inscription (titulus or
elogium) was generally placed above
the criminal's head, briefly express-
ing his guilt, and carried before him.
It was covered with white gypsum,
and the letters were black.
It is a
question whether tying or nailing to
the cross was the more common
method. That our Lord was nailed,
according to prophecy, is certain
(John xx. 25, 27, etc.; Zech. xii. 10;
Ps. xxii. 16). It is, however, ex-
tremely probable that both methods
were used at once.

The punishment commenced with scourging, after the criminal had been stripped; hence in the common form of sentence we find " summove, lictor, despolia, verbera,” etc. (Liv. i. 26). It was inflicted not with the comparatively mild virga, but the more terrible flagellum (Hor. Sat. i. 3; 2 Cor. xi. 24, 25), which was not used by the Jews (Deut. xxv. 3). Into these scourges the soldiers often stuck nails, pieces of bone, etc., to heighten the pain. The scourging generally took place at a column, and the one to which our Lord was bound was seen by several of the Fathers, and is still shown at several churches among the relics. In our Lord's case, however, this infliction seems neither to have been the legal scourging after the sentence, nor yet the examination by torture (Acts xxii. 24), but rather a scourging before the sentence, to excite pity and procure immunity from further punishment (Luke xxiii. 22; John xix. 1); and if this view be correct, the scourging

in Matt. xxvii. 26 is retrospective, as this guard, the persons might have so great an anguish could hardly been taken down and recovered, as have been endured twice. How se- was actually done in the case of a friend vere it was is indicated in prophecy (Ps. xxv. 15; Is. 1. 6). The scarlet robe, crown of thorns, and other insults to which our Lord was subjected were illegal, and arose from the spontaneous petulance of the brutal soldiery. The criminal carried his own cross, or at any rate a part of it. Hence the term Furcifer-cross-bearHe was sometimes scourged and goaded on the way.

er.

of Josephus (Vit. 75). Among the Convulsionnaires in the reign of Louis XV. women would be repeatedly crucified, and even remain on the cross three hours; the pain consisted almost entirely in the nailing, and not more than a basinful of blood was lost. Fracture of the legs was especially adopted by the Jews to hasten death (John xix. 31), and it was a mitigation of the punishment. GenThe place of execution was out- erally the body was suffered to rot on side the city ("post urbem," Cic. the cross, by the action of sun and Verr. v. 66; "extra portam," Plaut. | rain, or to be devoured by birds and Mil. Gl. ii. 4, 6; Acts vii. 58; Heb. beasts. Sepulture was generally xiii. 12; and in camps extra val- therefore forbidden, though it might lum "), often in some public road or be granted as a special favor or on other conspicuous place like the grand occasions. But in consequence Campus Martius, or some spot set of Deut. xxi. 22, 23, an express naapart for the purpose. Arrived at tional exception was made in favor the place of execution, the sufferer of the Jews. was stripped naked, the dress being

66

SEPULCHRE.

the perquisite of the soldiers (Matt. (D.) THE SITE OF THE HOLY xxvii. 35); the cross was then driven into the ground, so that the feet of the condemned were a foot or two above the earth (in pictures of the crucifixion the cross is generally much too large and high), and he was lifted upon it, or else stretched upon it on the ground, and then lifted with it. Before the nailing or binding took place a medicated cup was given out of kindness, to confuse the senses and deaden the pangs of the sufferer. Our Lord refused it, that his senses might be clear (Matt. xxvii. 34; Mark xv. 23).

Our Lord, when crucified, was watched according to custom by a party of four soldiers (John xix. 23), whose express office was to prevent the stealing of the body. This was necessary from the lingering character of the death, which sometimes did not supervene even for three days, and was at last the result of gradual benumbing and starvation. But for

The site of the Holy Sepulchre has been a fruitful subject of controversy. Its discovery by Constantine is related by Eusebius, who tells us that certain impious persons had heaped earth upon the sacred cave and erected a temple of Venus upon the site; that Constantine caused the temple to be demolished and the earth to be removed; and that as soon as this was done, there appeared immediately beneath the covering of earth the cave in which our Saviour had been buried (Euseb. Vit. Const. iii. 25-28).

This is not the place to give an account of the controversy. We can only mention the three principal views that have been held upon the subject.

1. The first of these theories maintains that the present Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which is situate in

2. Professor Robinson, on the

all the arguments which from the time of Korte have been accumulating against the authenticity of the sites. He comes to the conclusion that the site of the Holy Sepulchre is now, and must in all probability forever remain, a mystery.

the heart of the modern city, is the | Williams in his work on the Holy site of the actual sepulchre of our City, and with the assistance of ProLord. The first person who ventured fessor Willis all has been said that publicly to express his dissent from can be urged in favor of its authenthis view was Korte, a German print- ticity. er, who traveled in Palestine about the year 1728. On visiting Jerusa- other hand, in his elaborate works lem he was struck with the apparent on Palestine, has brought together impossibility of reconciling the site of the present Church of the Holy Sepulchre with the exigencies of the Bible narrative, and on his return home published a work denying the authenticity of the so-called sacred locality. His heresies excited very little attention at the time, or for 3. The third theory is that put forlong afterward; but the spirit of ward by Mr. Fergusson. It agrees inquiry which has sprung up during generally with the views urged by all the present century has revived the those, from Korte to Robinson, who controversy which has so long been doubt the authenticity of the present dormant, and many pious and ear-site of the sepulchre; but instead of nest men, both Protestant and Catho-acquiescing in the desponding view lic, have expressed with more or less distinctness the difficulties they feel in reconciling the assumed locality with the indications in the Bible. The arguments in favor of the present locality being the correct one, are well summed up by the Rev. George

taken by the latter, it goes on to assert that the building now known to Christians as the Mosque of Omar, but by Moslems called the Dome of the Rock, is the identical church which Constantine erected over the rock which contained the tomb of Christ.

§1. First Day of the next week: the 17th of Nisan, Sunday, April 8th, EASTER DAY-Difficulties in the Harmony-(i.) The RESURRECTION OF CHRIST Its time-The "three days" in the tomb-(ii.) Visit of the women to the Sepulchre, which they find empty-(iii.) Mary Magdalene carries the news to Peter and John-(iv.) Vision of an angel to the women-(v.) First Appearance of Jesus, to the women on their return (vi.) Peter and John go to the Sepulchre-Order of the graveclothes (vii.) Second Appearance of Jesus, to Mary Magdalene at the Sepulchre-(viii.) Third Appearance of Jesus, to Peter(ix.) His Fourth appearance, on the journey to Emmaus-(x.) His Fifth Appearance, to the assembled Apostles, except Thomas-Their commission and inspiration. § 2. Sunday, the 24th of Nisan, April 15th-(xi.) Christ's Sixth Appearance, to all the Apostles-Confession of Thomas. § 3. The disciples depart into Galilee-(xii.) Christ's Seventh Appearance, to the Apostles at the Lake of Galilee - Peter's avowal of his love: his new commission given, and his death foretold-(xiii.) Christ's Eighth Appearance, to the great body of his disciples on the Galilean Mount-His great commission, and promise of the Holy Spirit-(xiv.) Christ's Ninth Appearance, to James. § 4. (xv.) Holy Thursday, the 3d of Sivan, May 17th-His Tenth and Last Appearance, to the Apostles at Jerusalem-Promise of the Holy Spirit-He leads them out to