appointed work-. Was it intended thai they should be idle during this period? Were they actually idle? They had no territorial posses-ions to cultivate. The cities assigned to them and to the Levites gave but scanty pasturage to their docks. To what employment could they turn? 1. The more devout and thoughtful found, probably, in the schools of the prophets that which satisfied them. The history of the Jews presents numerous instances of the union of the two offices. See Levite. They became teaching-priests (2 Chron. xv. 3), students, and interpreters of the divine law. From such as these, men might be chosen by the more zeal- ous kings to instruct the people (wii, 8), or to admin- ister justice (xix, 8). 2. Some, perhaps, as stated above, served in the king's army. We have no ground for transferring our modern conceptions of the peacefulness of the priestly life to the remote past of the Jewish peo- ple. Priests, as we have seen, were with David at He- bron a- men of war. They were the trumpeters of Abi- jah's army (xiii. 12). The Temple itself was a great armor} (xxiii, 9). The heroic struggles of the Mac- cabees wen- sustained chiefly by their kindred of the same family (2 Mace. vii. 1). 3. A few chosen ones might enter more deeply into the divine life, and so re- ceive, like Zechariah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, a special call to the office of a prophet. 4. We can hardly escape the conclusion that many did their work in the Temple of Jehovah with a divided allegiance, and acted at other time- as priests of the high-places (Ewald, Gesck. iii. 704). Not only do we read of no protests against the sins of the idolatrous kings, except from prophets who stood forth, alone and unsupported, to hear their wit- ness, hut the priests themselves were sharers in the worship of Baal (Jer. ii. 8), of the sun and moon, and of the host of heaven (viii, 1, 2). In the very Temple itself they " ministered before their idols" (Ezek. xliv, 12), and allowed others, " uncircumcised in heart and nncircumcised in flesh," to join them (ibid.,7). They ate of unclean things and polluted the Sabbaths. There could he no other result of this departure from the true idea of the priesthood than a general degradation. Those who ceased to he true shepherds of the people found nothing in their ritual to sustain or elevate them. They became as sensual, covetous, and tyrannical as Cver the clergy of the Christian Church became in its darkest period-; conspicuous as drunkards anil adulter- ers (Isa. xxviii. 7, H; hi, 10-12). The prophetic order. instead of acting as a check, became sharers in their corruption (Jer. v. 31 : Lam. iv, 13; Zeph. iii, 4). For the most part, the few efforts after better 1 1 1 i 1 1 u s are not the result of a spontaneous reformation, but of conform- ity to the wishes of a reforming king. In the one in- stance in which they do act spontaneously —their re- sistance i.. the usurpation of the priest's functions by
I'zziah their protest, however right in itself, was yet only ton compatible with a wrong use of the office which they claimed as belonging exclusively to them- selves i 2 Chron. xxvi. 17 i. The discipline of the Cap- tivity, however, was not without its fruits. A large proportion of the priests had either perished or were
content to remain in the land of their exile; but those
who did return were active in the work of restoration. Under Ezra they submitted to the stern duty of re-
pudiating their heathen wives (Ezra x, 18, 19). They took part— though here the Levites were the more prominent— in the instruction of the people (iii. 2: Neb. viii, 9-13). The root-evils, however, soon reappeared. The work of the priesthood was made the instrument of covetousness. The priests of the time of Malachi re- quired payment for every ministerial act. and would not even ••.-hut the doors" or "kindle tire" for naught iMal. i. 10). I ley "corrupted the covenant of Levi" i ii. 8). The idea of the priest as the angel, the messenger, of i lie Lord of Hosts was forgotten (ibid. 7; com]). Eccles. v. til. The inevitable residt was that they again lost their influence. They became "base and contemptible before all the people" (Mai. ii. 9). The office of the scribe ro-e in repute a- that of the priest declined (Jost, Judenth. i, 37, 148). The sects that multiplied during the last three centuries of the national life of Judaism were proofs that the established order had failed to do its work in maintaining the religious life of the people. No great changes affected the outward position of the priests under the Persian government. When that monarchy fell before the power of Alexander they were ready enough to transfer their allegiance. Both the Persian government and Alexander had. however, re- spected the religion of their subjects, and the former had conferred on the priests immunities from taxation (Ezra vi. X. 9; vii. 21 : Josephus, Ant. xi. 8). The de- gree to which this recognition was carried by the im- mediate successors of Alexander is shown by the work of restoration accomplished by Simon the son ofOnias (Ecclus. 1, 12-20); and the position which they thus