It has been mentioned that one of tiie striking things about leprosy is that it occurs so sporadic- ally. It is not the rule in Palestine, at any rate, that wliole villages or families become leprous, but a case arises here and there. To illustrate this, we give a list of villages from which came some 60 cases tiiat were in tlie Moravian Hospital during 1903. They are as follows :— From Ramallah and 'Ain Arik, 3 cases each ; from Zeta, Bait Amniar, Nahalin, Saidna Ali, ed-Dir, Deir Diwan, and Nazareth, 2 cases each ; from Abu Dis,' Ain Kairem, Bir Zait, Bait Unimar, Bait Jebrin, Bettir, Beita, Biddu, Bait Hanina, Bait Jala, Bait Safafa, 'Asireh, Dflra, Jerusalem, Feddar, Yasineh, 'Alhtr, Mesar'a, Fara'un, Marassa, Kefrenji, Kefr Akab, Kefr Haris, ShafAt, es-Salt, and Jummain, 1 each. In addition there were 3 Bedawin from scattered tribes, one gipsy, one case from Mosul, and two from Greece. Any one who will consult a map of modern Palestine will appreciate from how wide an area, both W. and E. of the Jordan, these cases come. Probably there is no district that does not furnish cases at some time.
Tlie only kind of treatment that can alleviate the disease is a well-managed Leper Home. In the Jerusalem Leper Hospital (founded in 1867 and formally taken over by the Moravian Brethren in 1881) all that medical science and Christian kind- ness can accomplish is done.
Leprosy n\ the GosPELS.—lt has been often pointed out that, whereas the cure of disease in general is called 'healing' {iaadai), that of the lepers is called 'cleansing' (KadapV^eiv). This was, no doubt, appropriate on account of the very evident restoration of cleanness of skin, but primarily because the miracle enabled the leper to become ceremonially clean. Doubtless the lepers drifting about the land had intractable skin diseases, and as tiiey were shut out from the temple, the synagogues, certainly in all the towns, and to a large extent from the social life of their fellow-beings, their lot was truly pitiable. Their ' cleansing ' meant much more than getting rid of
a disagreeable and often, doubtless, painful disease, repulsive to all their fellow-men ; it meant restora- tion to the worship and service of God.
Of lepers mentioned in the NT we have but one named, Simon of Bethany (Mt 26", Mk 14^), prob- ably a grateful recipient of the Saviour's mercy. Tradition has made the Lazarus of the parable a leper, and the terms la.zzaro for leper and lazar- house for leper hospital were a result of this. Also the order of the Knights of Lazarus, founded during the Crusades, made the care of lepers one of their special duties, and they had always a leper as their Grand Master. But though Lazarus was ' full of sores,' the very account in the parable that he lay in such intimate contact with passers-by would, apart from the express omission of the statement in the jjarable, make his being a leper highly improbable.
In spite of the great prominence given to the cleansinff of lepers both in Jesus' account of His own woiTcs (Mt IP, Lk 7"'^) and in His directions to His disciples (Mt 10**), we have only two actual incidents described. (1) The incident of the man whom Jesus touched, with the words, ' I will, be thou clean,' and whose grateful excess of zeal pre- vented Jesus from entering that ' certain city,' and drove Him to seek seclusion in the wilderness (Mt 8^ II Mk P2 II Lk 5'2). (2) The story of the nine thankless lepers and the grateful tenth, who was a Samaritan (Lk 17^'^-). It is noticeable that he turned back because he was healed (laadaL) ; but he was not yet finally cleansed {Kadapifeiv), because he had not yet been to the priest ; unless, indeed, it is because he was a Samaritan that he is spoken of as healed rather than cleansed.
Literature. — This is enormous. Here only a selection of modern articles in English is given, which will furnish all neces- sary information and references for foUowinnf up the subject : — P. S. Abraham, an. ' Leprosv ' in Allbutt's System, of Medicuie, ii. 41; J. R. Bennett, Diseases of the Bible, R.TS. 1887; T. Chaplin, 'Diseases of the Bible,' Proceedinqs of Victoria Insti- tute, vol. xxxiv. ; C. V. Carter, Leprosy and Elephantiasis, 1874 ; Hansen and Looft, Leprosy in its Clinical and Pathological Aspects, 1895 ; A. Macalister, art. ' Leprosy ' in Hastings' DB ; do. by C. Creighton in EBi ; Report of the Lepros.\' Commission to India, 1893 ; A. S. Waldstein, art. ' Leprosy ' in Jeu'ish En- cyclopedia. On the moral asi)ects of leprosy in NT, see Eders- heim. Life and Times, i. 491 ff. ; Expositor, iv. vi. [1892] 443 ff.
E. W. G. Masterman.
LETTERS.— The word ypdfifjLara (Jn 7^^) may be intended to indicate literature in general, as it might do in Ac 26''''. But to the ordinary Jew yp. were practically constituted exclusively by the Sacred Scriptures, certain esteemed Apocryphal books, and the Rabbinical commentaries upon them. The surprise of the question recorded in the reference suggests consideration of the amount of human learning Jesus possessed.
With the rudiments of the Law every Jew was made thoroughly and intimately conversant from his earliest intelligent years (see Education). The education of the Jewish child had the primary purpose of enabling him to read the passages whicn it was essential for him to know for the proper discharge of his religious duties. Beyond this elementary knowledge comparatively few carried their studies. It was, indeed, the ideal of Judaism that every Israelite should have a professional acquaintance with the Law in its details. But only a small fraction attended the schools of the scribes at which advanced instruction was given in its more recondite matters and the commentaries upon them contained in the Midrash and other Rabbinic books. It would seem from the surprise expressed in this question that Jesus had not prosecuted such studies, at least in the recognized schools, whether from disinclination or from poverty which prevented Him from paying the fees exacted in spite of the understanding that such instruction should be gratuitous. There are convincing indica-