invested with the priestly cfce (Ex. ch. 28); and only at a later time were the Levites the substitutes for the first-born) given to them as their ministers, "to do the service of the Tabernacle Neh. 3), yet in such a manner as not to come into direct ecntact with the sacred things.

The hieramy of P culminates in the High Priest whose office, as it here ermes to view, is new and peculiar. In the greater preexille sanctuaries, which often had a considerable body of priests, there was need of course of a chief priest, having the authority of a presiding officer; but he was only first aming his equals, with no higher priestly rank than that of his fellow priests. The postexilic High Priest, however, is supreme in all things. He is invested with the highest authority of the priesthood. He alone is permitted to come into the presence of Jahveh in the Holy of Holies, and to wear the ephod with the Trim and Thummim. He is the one legitimate head of the theocratic state. Before the Exile the King held unlimited sway in the sphere of worship; the temple was his, and the priest was his servant. After the Exile, P leaves no room for a secular prince beside the high priest. The latter is the supreme head of the church-nation, bearing on the shoulder-pieces and the breast-plate of his ephod the names of the twelve tribes engraved on stones. Indeed, as the sole representative of the people, who bears their welfare on his shoulders and his heart, he is invested with almost royal dignity; he is anointed; he wears the purple; above all, his head is encircled with a tiara, on the forefront of which stands the inscription: Holiness to the Lord; for the high priest must "bear the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel shall hallow in all their holy gifts; and it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before the Lord" (Ex. 28: 36-38).

It was our intention to take up other features of Israel's cultus, especially the sacrifices and the festivals, and to show the manifold changes they underwent in the long course of the history from the settlement in Canaan to the elaboration

of the Priests' Code; but space forbids. Nor is it necessary. What has already been said is amply sufficient to prove that the higher criticism, so far from being destructive, except of unwarranted traditions, is historically constructive, and is the only method by which we can trace out the real development of the religion of Israel from its lowest to its highest stage.*

Those who are interested in the subject may be referred to an article by the present writer entitled, "The Idea of Sacrifice as Developed in the Old Testament," REFORMED CHURCH REVIEW, January, 1900, pp. 1–34.

III.

SOME ELEMENTS IN THE TEACHING OF JESUS CONCERNING HIMSELF.

BY H. M. J. KLEIN.

Modern theology has revived a remarkable interest in the teaching of Jesus. This voice of the world saying "Tell us what He taught " does not have its origin in the belief, as some may suppose, that He was simply a great teacher. His own teaching forbids such a limitation. It is felt, however, that the words of Jesus were not an incidental feature of His career, but were most vitally connected with His revealing and redemptive work and life. It is the increasing conviction of many that this renewed emphasis on the historical teaching of Jesus not only makes the Christian religion more clear and intelligible, but is, in addition, a means of helping men religiously by bringing them back directly to the first principles of our faith. In every age when the Church has gotten back to the pure, simple teaching of her Lord, wonderful things have happened; and, further, whenever men fully realized that He still spoke from the Mount there has been a new breath in the air, and the spring time of a higher moral life in the world.

But

Just how this renewed emphasis on the words of Jesus came about in our day it is not easy to say. Like every movement in history we hardly know just when or whence it came. it is here. It seems to be a part of that spirit, historical, critical, scientific, which seeks to get at the source of things and gain touch with reality. But not only that. It is a part also of that other spirit of growing admiration for the Person of Christ which has been so characteristic of the nineteenth century, of that renewed interest in Jesus of Nazareth which has given to the world during the past fifty years a

legion of biographies of our Saviour. This close study of all pertaining to the life and person of Jesus has brought Him so vividly in breathing reality before the eyes of men that they have been led to feel that all that they need to know is what Jesus believed and they would believe the same. This emphasis on the historical teaching of Jesus is perfectly compatible with the truth of the ever-living Christ just as the fountain is capable of coexisting with the stream. The teaching of the historic Jesus is the pure fountain from which our thought of Him must be drawn.

In this study of the teaching of Jesus concerning Himself there must be several presuppositions. (1) We go on the assumption that the words of Jesus are not scientific statements, but personal convictions, warm outbursts of experience and emotion, intensely full of life, movement and color; and therefore to be interpreted in terms of life and spirit, and not simply of metaphysics. (2) Again, the sources for the teaching of Jesus are the four Gospels; and these are records of historic fact. Owing to the great difference, however, between the Synoptists and John in the style and manner in which Jesus speaks of Himself we shall keep in mind the teaching as it is taken from one or from the other. In the first three Gospels Jesus' teaching concerning Himself is found in scattered fragments, in occasional hints, in isolated enigmatical phrases, rather than in clear assertions and definite claims. In John, on the other hand, the personal claims of Jesus stand out as the most marked and original feature of the Gospel. (3) An a priori speculation as to what Jesus must have said, or thought or believed concerning Himself cannot be fruitful. The only thing we can do is reverently to approach these Gospels as sources, and ask ourselves what references to Himself are found there, and what do these references mean in terms of history, of spirit and of life. (4) Christ's inner consciousness could not be fully revealed in His teachings. Hence the limitations of this subject must be recognized. Words are always an inadequate expression of

a man's soul. The speaker himself is always infinitely more than the thing he says. A personal being's inner self is a temple into the holy of holies of which we may not enter. We can but stand at the threshold and make crude childish attempts to gain a reverent glimpse here and there as the veil is lifted in word or deed. In one sense the inner consciousness of a person always remains his own secret. For that reason we must not attempt or expect to build up a systematic psychology of our Lord or of His person by a study of His words. His inner consciousness in the last analysis is His own secret. No one will ever know its mystery who has not had a parallel experience. Nevertheless, it is true too that words are a revelation of personality, and the words of Jesus concerning Himself are, as such, a revelation worthy of the most earnest and reverent consideration of every student of His life. We feel that there is one who can tell us more about the person of Jesus than anyone else, and that is Jesus Himself. We assume that Jesus thought of Himself in the truest, worthiest, highest way, and that we can not go far wrong when we adopt the conception of Himself which He sought to impart to His disciples in His teaching.

It will not do to take each statement of Jesus separately and interpret it without reference to any of the others. It is a question whether we would find Him by patching all His self-expressions together; whether we could find the precious ore of His personality by simply collecting all the residuum when everything that strikes us as of a local or temporary nature had been strained off. It is generally agreed, however, that there are two self-designations that contain in them the self-consciousness of Jesus crystallized. They are the titles "Son of Man" and "Son of God." These are not theological terms on the lips of Jesus, but we believe, designedly chosen expressions that reveal the life, the mystery, the glory, the humiliation, the personality, the meaning of Jesus, as He understood Himself. These are the elements in His teaching concerning Himself which we would especially consider.