Jewish estimation, this publican had not maintained the sanctity of his name.* He was no true Zaccheus. His wealth was ill gotten. His Gentile rank was a stigma of disgrace, the price paid by Rome for his apostasy. In no city of Palestine were social lines drawn more sharply than in Jericho. Those lines Zaccheus, with all his wealth, could never pass.

This man had heard of Jesus, and desired to see him. But he was small of stature, and could not get at him for the throng. He was bandied to and fro by the crowd. Democracy often delights thus to avenge itself upon its dignitaries. To get a better view of the coming king of the Jews, he ran forward to climb a neighboring tree. That the crowd hugely enjoyed the nimble climbing of this Roman knight, and made him the butt of their rude jokes, is as certain as that human nature was the same in the first century that it is in the nineteenth. That something more than idle curiosity prompted him to face this derision is at least a reasonable surmise. Christ seems to have recognized his allegiance in the act. He seized the opportunity to rebuke the exclusiveness of "best society." He singled out this man, called him by name, and publicly announced his purpose to be his guest. He passed by the Rabbis and priests of Judaism, and passed the night at Zaccheus's house.

That Christ preached to publicans and sinners excited little comment. That on his way to assume his kingdom he should choose a publican for his companion and entertainer, shocked the Pharisaic sensibilities. They murmured, saying that he was gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner. They were as little able to comprehend this act as were the aristocracy of Europe the spirit that led Peter the Great, Frederick of Prussia, and Napoleon the First frequently to disregard the conventional distinctions of society. "A man's a man for a' that," the lesson that Jesus taught the Jews in Jericho, the world has not yet learned, despite the lapse of ages. To eat with social sinners is scarcely less pardonable

*The word Zaccheus means pure.

in the "best society" of Christendom in the nineteenth century than it was in that of Judaism in the first. Social democracy is the last, as it is the ripest form of democracy.

At the same time, Jesus exemplified the power of a true social life. It may well be doubted whether any sermon would have affected Zaccheus as did the simple fact of this visit of Jesus. What the social penalties of Judaism could not accomplish, the proffered love of Jesus wrought. Zaccheus confessed the errors of his life, promised reform, and assured the genuineness of his repentance by his acts. A tax-gatherer, he had been the willing instrument of Rome in impoverishing the community. He promised, so far as he could ascertain the victims of his extortion, to restore to them fourfold. But such an exacter can not accurately retrace his steps. He promised in addition, therefore, to give one half his goods to feed the poor, whose substance had contributed to his ill-gotten wealth. To Jesus such practical acts of restitution were the best evidences of a genuine repentance. He declared that by this promise Zaccheus constituted himself a true child of Abraham. He was now, in very truth, Zaccheus once more.*

The following day Jesus resumed his journey. The distance from Jericho to Jerusalem is about sixteen miles. It is easily traversed in a day. The journey of Jesus and his disciples was a triumphal procession. The Galilean pilgrims to the feast, afraid of being polluted by passing through Samaria, usually made a detour east of the Jordan, recrossed the river at Bethabara, and, ascending the western hills of the Jordan valley, passed through Jericho on their way to the Passover. Thus Jesus was accompanied by the caravans of his own countrymen, proud of their Rabbi, and doubly ready, since the resurrection of Lazarus, to do him honor. The people, who had murmured because he went in to eat with a publican, admired the conversion he had wrought. They could not fully comprehend the genuineness of Zac*Luke xix., 1-10.

cheus's repentance. But they had no difficulty in appreciating the generosity of his gifts and the completeness of his restitution. He had pledged one half of his fortune to the poor; it is indicated that he had already commenced its distribution. The common people rightly considered Christ the real author of their good fortune. And if the gift awakened in them any thing like the enthusiasm which a generous baksheesh arouses in an Oriental rabble now, it is not difficult to comprehend the kind of homage they paid to Jesus in return for his royal provision. The very beggars in the street caught the popular enthusiasm, and hailed him as the "Son of David." As he went out of the city, attracted by the cry of two such who were blind, he stopped, hushed the tumult of the accompanying crowd, called the unfortunates to him, and, with a word, gave them back their sight.* Such an act intensified the popular feeling. The people praised not less the condescension of their king than his miraculous power. They were certain that the kingdom of God would immediately appear. They believed that Jesus was at last going up to Jerusalem to assume his royal rights as king of the Jewish nation.t

Christ in vain endeavored to check their enthusiasm by a parable drawn from contemporaneous history. Archelaus, though appointed to the succession in Judea by the will of his father, Herod the Great, had been obliged, before assuming his throne, to leave his province and journey up to Rome, there to secure from the senate their confirmation of his appointment. Some of the citizens had sent thither a delegation to protest against this confirmation, but in vain. And Archelaus had now returned, and had not been slow to take the vengeance of a Herod on his foes. To this fact, fresh in the popular recollection, Jesus referred.

The kingdom of heaven, he said, was as one going thus into a far country, and leaving servants and subordinates to carry * Matt. xx., 29-34; Mark x., 46-52; Luke xviii., 35-43.

+ Luke xix., 11.

BB

on the affairs of government during his absence. The Lord is about thus to leave his kingdom. He will, to human vision, be absent from the earth. Many even would begin to scoffingly cry out, “Where is the promise of his coming ?" But he will return again, his throne and sceptre assured to him, to summon to account his professed servants, to administer justice to all idlers, and to punish those who have availed themselves of his seeming absence to plot treason against his authority.*

The people, however, were in nowise inclined to receive such teaching. Belief in a temporal kingdom was too firmly inwrought into the Jewish mind to be eradicated by a single

sermon.

To his own disciples Christ had just, on the eve of this journey, spoken even more clearly. He had declared in detail what should be the circumstances of his death; that he should be betrayed by one of his own disciples, arrested by the chiefs of his own nation, condemned by their supreme tribunal, delivered, king as he was, to the hated Gentiles, mocked, scourged, spit upon by them, and finally put to death to rise again. Such warnings cast a momentary gloom over the party. But it lasted but for a moment. If we consider how coming events still cast their shadows before, and yet how little accustomed we are to read their prophecies; how few are prepared, for example, for the long-expected death of their friends; how surprised at last the American people were in 1861 at the first alarm of war, notwithstanding for years violent men had threatened and wise men had prophesied it, it will seem less surprising to us that the disciples, living in an atmosphere of Oriental enthusiasm, perceiving the supernatural powers of their master, and unable to comprehend his still more supernatural love, should be unable to understand the meaning of these prophecies, notwithstanding they seem so plain to us after their fulfillment.

Indeed, there is that in Christ's own teaching which *Luke xix., 12-27.

strengthened their erroneous faith. In his conferences with them at Ephraim he had told them that they should sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. He had promised them that, if they left houses, lands, friends, they should have a hundred fold in this life, besides life eternal in the world to come.* He had already conferred upon them the miraculous powers which he exercised himself. He had long since promised them the keys of the kingdom of heaven, whose gates they were to open and close at will. These promises we interpret as parables. History gives the prophecies of his death a literal interpretation. Let us not wonder that, in the full tide of popular enthusiasm, they reversed the process, and interpreted his warnings as parables which they understood not, his promises as assurances to be immediately and literally fulfilled. How little the disciples appreciated the future how still less, therefore, the common people did so, is indicated by a single and significant incident.

In the caravan with the twelve disciples was Salome, the mother of James and John. The few scattered hints of her character which the evangelists afford indicate that she was a woman of courageous, ambitious, almost masculine character. Though she had heard Jesus's parable, she little understood its import. Though certainly her sons, and perhaps she herself, had heard his distincter prophecies, they did not comprehend their meaning. The kingdom they had waited for so long seemed now close at hand. Salome had accompanied Jesus ever since his early ministry. Of her wealthfor the family was one of means-she had contributed generously to his support, and to that of his little Church. Her sons had been the first to join their fortunes to his own, and for that purpose had left not only a competence and a comfortable calling, but home and friends as well. She now seized the opportunity to demand for them distinguished honors in the new era. "Grant," said she," that these my. two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on * Matt. xix., 27-29. + Matt. x., 1; xvi., 19.