Occupied in the eyes of the people, not less than the
devotion with which his zeal inspired them, prepared them doubtless for the great struggle which was coming, and in which, under the priestly Maccabees, they were the chief defenders of their country's freedom. Some, indeed, at that crisis were found among the apostates. Under the guidance of Jason (the heathenized form of Joshua) they forsook the customs of their fathers: and they who as priests were to be patterns of a self-re- specting purity left their work in the Temple to run naked in the circus which the Syrian king had opened in Jerusalem (2 Mace, iv, 13, 14). Some, at an earlier period, had joined the schismatic Onias in establishing a rival worship (Josephus. Ant. xii. :'.. 4 I. The major- ity, however, were true-hearted: and the Maecabrean struggle which left the government of the country in the hands of their ow n enler. and. until the Roman con- quest, with a certain measure of independence, must have given to the higher members of tbe order a posi- tion nt security and influence. The martyr-spirit showed il-elf again in the calmness with which they carried on the ministrations in the Temple, when Jerusalem was besieged by Pompey, till they were slain even in the act of sacrificing (Josephus. Ant. xiv. 1. 3; War, i. 7. 5). The reign Of Herod, on the other hand, in which the high-priesthood was kept in abeyance, or transferred from one to another at tbe will of one who was an alien by birth and half a heathen in character, must have tended to depress them.
(3.) Closing Period.— It will be interesting to bring together the few fact- that indicate the position of the priests in the New-Ti-t. period of their history. The division into four-and-twenty courses is still maintained (Luke i. 5 ; Josephus, Life, 1 >. and the heads of these courses, together with those who have held the high-
priestl d (the office no longer lasting for life '.are -chief
prie-ts" (dpxiiptic) by courtesy (Carpzov. .1/7'. ('ill. p. 102), and take their place in the Sanhedrim. The num- ber scattered throughout Palestine w a-. as ha- been slated, very large. < if these the greater number were poor and ignorant, despised by the more powerful members of iheir own order, not gaining the respect or affection of the people. The picture of cowardly selfishness in the priest of the parable of Luke x. 31 can hardly be thought of as other than a representative one. indi- cating the estimate commonly and truly formed of the
PRIEST
581
PRIEST
character of the class. The priestly order, like the na- tion, was divided between contending sects. The influ- ence of Hyrcanus, himself in the latter part of his life a Sadducee (Josephus, Ant. xiii, 10, 6), had probably made the tenets of that party popular among the wealthier and more powerful members, and the chief-priests of the Gospels and the Acts, the whole dpxttpariKov yivoQ (Acts iv, 1, 6; v, 17), were apparently consistent Sad- dueees, sometimes combining with the Pharisees in the Sanhedrim, sometimes thwarted by them, in persecuting the followers of Jesus because they preached the resur- rection of the dead. The great multitude (oxXoc), on the other hand, who received that testimony (vi, 7) must have been free from or must have overcome Sad- ducean prejudices. It was not strange that those who did not welcome the truth which would have raised them to a higher life should sink lower and lower into an ignorant and ferocious fanaticism. Few stranger contrasts meet us in the history of religion than that presented in the life of the priesthood in the last half- century of the Temple— now going through the solemn sacrificial rites and joining in the noblest hymns, now raising a fierce clamor at anything which seemed to them a profanation of the sanctuary, and rushing to dash out the brains of the bold or incautious intruder, or of one of their own order who might enter while under some ceremonial defilement, or with a half-hu- morous cruelty setting fire to the clothes of the Levites who were found sleeping when they ought to have been watching at their posts (Liglitfoot, Temple Service, cli. i). The rivalry which led the Levites to claim privileges which had hitherto belonged to the priests has already been noticed. See Levite. In the scenes of the last tragedy of Jewish history the order passes away, with- out honor, "dying as a fool dieth." The high-priest- hood is given to the lowest and vilest of the adherents of the frenzied Zealots (Josephus, War, iv, 3, G). Other priests appear as deserting to the enemy (ibid, vi, 6, 1). It is from a priest that Titus receives the lamps, and gems, and costly raiment of the sanctuary (ibid, vi, 8. 3). Priests report to their conquerors the terrible utterance " Let us depart" on the last Pentecost ever celebrated in the Temple (ibid, vi, 5, 3). It is a priest who fills up the degradation of his order by dwelling on the fall of his country with a cold-blooded satisfaction, and finding in Titus the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies of the Old Test. (ibid, vi, 5, 4). The destruction of Jerusa- lem deprived the order at one blow of all but an honor- ary distinction. Their occupation was gone. Many families must have altogether lost their genealogies. Those who still prided themselves on their descent were no longer safe against the claims of pretenders. The jealousies of the lettered class, which had been kept under some restraint as long as the Temple stood, now had full play, and the influence of the rabbins increased with the fall of the priesthood. The position of the priests in mediaeval and modern Judaism has never risen above that of complimentary recognition. Those who claim to take their place among the sons of Aaron are entitled to receive the redemption-money of the first- born, to take the law from its chest, and to pronounce the benediction in the synagogues (Ugolino, xii,48).