VIII. Some Errors concerning the Jesuits. — As the Jesuits, by their systematic fanaticism, provoked a vio- lent opposition on the part of all opponents of idtra- montane Catholicism, it is not to be wondered at that occasionally groundless charges were brought against them, and that some of these were readily believed. Among the erroneous charges which at one time ha^•c had a Avide circulation, but from which the best histo- rians now acquit them, are the following: 1. That they are responsible for the sentiments contained in the fa- mous volume Monita Secreta (q. v.). This work was not written by a Jesuit, but is a satire, the author of which was, however, as familiar with the movements of the Jesuits as with their history (see Gieseler, Kirch- enffesch. iii, 2, 656 sq.). 2. That the superior of the or- der has the power to order a member to commit a sin. It is now generalh' admitted that the passage of the constitution on Avhich the charge is based {visum est no- bis nullas constitutioms dcclurationes vd ordinem nllum Vivendi posse obligationem ad peccatum inducere, nisi Superior eajiiberei) has been misunderstood. 3. That the order holds to the maxim that " the end justifies the means." Although many works of Jesuits (in particu- lar those on tyrannicide) were well calculated to instil such an opinion into the minds of the reader, the order has never expressly taught it.
IX. Literature. — The number of works on the Jesuits is legion. The titles of most ma}- be found in Carayon, Bibliofjraphie hist, de la Comp. de .Jesus (Paris, 1864). The most important work in favor of the Jesuits is Cre- tineau-Joly, Hhit. de la Comp. de Jesus (3d ed. Par. 1859, 6 vols.). The best that has been written on the subject are the chapters concerning the Jesuits in Kankc's -work on the Roman jiopes, (A. J, S,)
JESURUN
Jes'unin (Isa. xliv, 2). See Jeshurux.
873
JESUS CHRIST
Je'sTis (h](Toi'c, Gen., Dat., and Voc. -ov, Ace. -ovv; from the Ileb. yvj^i Yeshu'd, " Jeshua" or "Joshua;" Syr. Yeshu), the name of several persons (besides our Saviour) in the New Testament, the Apocrypha, and Jo- sephus. For a discussion of the full import and applica- tion of the name, see Jesus Christ.
1. Joshua (q. v.) the son of Nun (2 Esdr. vii, 37 ; Ecclus. xlvi, 1 ; 1 Mace, ii, 55 ; Acts vii, 45 ; Heb. iv, 8 ; so also Josephus, passim).
2. Joshua, or Jeshua (q. v.) the priest, the son of Jehozadak (1 Esdr. v, 5, 8, 24, 48, 56, 68, 70 ; vi, 2 ; ix, 19 ; Ecclus. xlix, 12 ; so also Josephus, .1 nt. xi, 3, 10 sq.).
3. Jeshua (q. v.) the Levite (1 Esdr. v, 58; ix, 48).
4. JESUS, THE SON OF SIRACH (IrjaovQ vVoq "ZiiQax-^ Yulgnte Je.ms filiiis Sirach), is described in the text of Ecclesiasticus (1, 27) as the author of that book, which in the Sept., and f^enerally in the Eastern Church, is called by his name — the Wisdom of Jesus, the Son of Sirach, or simply tlie Wisdom of Sirach, but in the Western churches, after the Vulgate, the Book of Eccle- siasticus. The same passage speaks of him as a native of Jerusalem, and the internal cliaracter of the book con- firms its Palestinian origin. The name Jesus was of frequent occurrence (see above), and was often repre- sented b}^ the Greek Jason (see Josephus, A nt. xii, 5, 1). Ill the apocryphal list of the seventy-two commissioners sent bj'Eleazar to Ptolemy it occurs twice (Aristophanes, Ilist. ap. Hody, De Text. p. vii), but there is not the slight- est ground for connecting the author of Ecclesiasticus with either of the persons there mentioned. The vari- ous conjectures wliich have been made as to the posi- tion of the son of Sirach from the contents of his book — as, for instance, that he was a priest (from vii, 29 sq. ; xlv; xlix, 1), or a phj^sician (from xxxviii, 1 sq.) — are equally unfounded. The evidences of a date B.C. cir. 310-270, are as follows : 1. In ch. xliv, 1-1,21, the praises of the ancient worthies are extolled down to the time of Simon, who is doubtless Simon I, or " the Just" (B.C. 370-300). 2. The Talmud most distinctly describes the work of Ben-Sira as the oldest of the apocryphal books (comp. Tosefoth Idaim, ch. ii). 3. It had a general cur- rency, and was quoted at least as early as the 2d centu- ry B.C. (comp. A both, i, 5 ; Jerusalem Nazier, v, 3), which shows that it must liave existed a considerable period to have obtained such circulation and resjiect ; and, 4. In the description of these great men. and throughout the whole of the book, there is not the slightest trace of those Ha- gadic legends about the national worthies which were so rife and numerous in the second century before Christ. On the other hand, the mention of the "38th year of king Euergetes" (translator's prologue) argues a later date. See Ecclesiacticus.
Among the later Jews the " Son of Sirach" was cele- brated under the name of Ben-Sira as a writer of prov- erbs, and some of those which have been preserved offer a close resemblance to passages in Ecclesiasticus; but in the course of time a later compilation was substituted for the original work of Ben-Sira (Zunz).