Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 05.pdf/487

 450

sees and Priests condemned him, Nicodemus called their attention to the law : " Doth our law judge any man before it hear him, and know what he doeth? " They brought the woman taken in adultery, also the law of Moses, which commanded that she should be stoned, and asked, "What sayest thou?" Came the answer, " He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." He raised Lazarus from the dead in violation of no law, but in conjunction with the Father rising superior to all law. And Caiaphas, with the Council of the Chief Priests, prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; and from that day forth they took counsel to gether to put him to death. What for? Not for blasphemy, for which he was tried and sen tenced, but in the language of the Sanhedrim, "For this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him; and the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation." Thus for the law of the New Commandment, "Love ye one another," was he to die. It is not neces sary to note the other occasions when they counselled together how they might take him. The instances noted are sufficient to show, and none others contradict them, that his life was not sought as the lawful forfeit for crime, but through a conspiracy, itself unlawful, to prevent the loss of place and power. Not only did they conspire among themselves, but through Judas, who was cor rupted by money to betray him. Jesus had taught openly in the synagogues and Tem ple; but they did not dare, for fear of the populace, to arrest him, but counselled to use subtlety that they might take and kill him. And finally upon the night before the Feast of the Passover, Judas having received a band of men and officers from the Chief Priests, led them to the Garden of Gethsemane, and there indicated Jesus to the officers by a kiss; the band took Jesus and bound him. Thus we see that the arrest of Jesus was in further ance of a conspiracy of the High Priest and Sanhedrim, consummated by the corruption of Judas by the use of money.

There is a slight difference in the account of the Evangelists as to where Jesus was immediately taken after his arrest. Mat thew, Mark, and Luke state that he was taken to Caiaphas, or to the house of the High Priest, where the Sanhedrim was as sembled; and John states that he was taken to the house of Annas in the first instance, and was by him sent bound unto Caiaphas. It is alleged by some that the only reason for taking him to Annas is that he was father-in-law of the High Priest, and by others, that Annas having been High Priest possessed more influence than Caia phas. However this may be, it is only material as bearing upon the number of irregularities committed in the transaction. It is clear that Annas had no more juris diction over the person of Jesus than any other unofficial person in Jerusalem, and it is equally clear that the house of the High Priest was not the place of meeting of the Sanhedrim, so that in either aspect this pro ceeding was exceptional and fatally irregular; for by Jewish law no verdict of guilty could issue from such place. It is, however, in harmony with the theory of conspiracy to commit a crime under the form of law. It further appears by Matthew and Mark that immediately the Chief Priests, elders, and all the Council sought false witnesses to put him to death, but found none; and at last came two witnesses, and said, "This fellow said, ' I am able to destroy the Temple of God, and to build it in three days. ' " Mark says, "But neither so did their witnesses agree to gether." And it is evident that the testi mony of these witnesses was disregarded, as the High Priest said, " ' Answerest thou noth ing? What is it which these witness against thee? ' But Jesus held his peace." It is noticeable that the testimony disclosed no crime. It was no offence to say he could de stroy the Temple of God and in three days rebuild it, and that Caiaphas so understood it is made plain when he asked, "What'is it which these witness against thee? " —• allowing the inference to be drawn that by