"Others, less biased in their views, have re-produced with little reserve all they have found in Josephus, considering him as a sure guide for the study of the opinions and parties of Judea. They have seen, thus, with this historian, in the Pharisees, only a religious and philosophical sect professing a species of fatalistic doctrine, the consequence of an extreme view of Providence, although by a strange contradiction they proclaimed the responsibility of the individual in this and in the other world, admitting the immortality of the soul, the punishments and rewards of the future life, while they distinguished themselves by their knowledge, virtue, and professions even to stoicism of a devotion to duty and to the paternal faith. Is this, then, the all of Pharisaism? Has it been in truth only a school of hypocrisy or a doctrine purely speculative? I believe that this is not the real thought of Jesus, nor that of Josephus, and that there has been given to their words a meaning which they never intended."

We cite below, in part, the author's explanations of the severe denunciations of the Evangelists upon the character of the Scribes and Pharisees :

"It is sufficient merely to read carefully the language of the Evangelists to be convinced that Jesus has intended to castigate only the hypocrites, who, profiting by the popularity and universal consideration which the Pharisaic doctors enjoyed, exaggerating in public the superficial rigor of religious practices, have sought to acquire a renown for sanctity and learning. The illustrious masters of Pharisaism have never themselves interpreted the just remonstrances of him whom they called the prophet of Nazareth,' only as a purpose to brand publicly the Pharisees tainted' (Peruschim Cebuim), as they are spiritually designated in the Book of Traditions.' We shall read also hereafter, the severe judgments pronounced against the hypocrites of Judea, the pious idiots (Hassid-Schoteh), as they were otherwise called, who discredited and compromised the holy cause, of which they professed to be the champions (Talmud, Tract Sota. 22b. The passage describes seven classes of false Pharisees in terms as picturesque as severe)." 4

6

Nearly all Christian writers, from the days of the Apostles down to our own times, have understood the language of Jesus 8 Les Pharisiens. 1. Introduction. pp. 1-4. 4 Ibid., pp. 5, 6.

in denunciation of the Pharisees, as intended to apply generally to the Pharisaic sect instead of to a particular class of hypocritical devotees, who attempted to profit by the esteem in which, for the most part, this sect was held by the masses. But M. Cohen shows that there did exist just such a class, who were regarded by the better portion of the Sect as unprincipled hypocrites and were denounced and even ridiculed as such, by the Pharisees themselves. This important fact is fully confirmed by M. Munk also, who remarks:

"These usages and rules, which for the most part were attached to the text of the (written) law by means of the interpretation (so-called), concerned as well the social as the religious practices. It is true that the Pharisees considered these practices only as aids to the development of the religious sentiment, and that they recommended a life of humility and austere morality which Josephus compares to that of the stoics. But as they attached great importance to external ceremonies as the ablutions, fasts, and prayers, there was a great number of men who, without being animated by the true sentiments of piety, affected the external life of the Pharisees, excelling even the prescribed observances with a view to impress the ignorant masses, giving themselves in the eyes of the public the appearance of a holy life. They abused often the influence which they exerted upon the public in the furtherance of their political views. In the New Testament we often meet with these false Pharisees, the number of which had become very great, and whose conduct seriously compromised the reputation of the sect, and of its principles, insomuch that the term Pharisee become a synonym of hypocrite. The Talmud itself, which may be regarded as the expression of the Pharisaic doctrines in their fullest extent, sometimes ridicules these false professors; it enumerates seven classes of Pharisees, jesting upon their arrogance and hypocracy, only one among the seven being animated with a sincere love of God and of virtue (Tract Sota. 22 b.)." 5

As will be seen, M. Munk refers to the same Talmudic passage which M. Cohen has already cited, and which in another place he gives entire as follows:

6 See Palestine, etc. p. 514.

"There are seven classes of Pharisees: 1st, Les forts d'épaules. They write their acts upon their backs in order to be honored of men. 2nd, Les broncheurs who go dragging along the streets, their feet shuffling in the dirt and knocking against the stones to attract notice to themselves. 3rd, Les cognetêtes, who shut their eyes so as not to look upon the women, and beat their foreheads against the walls. 4th, Les humbles renforcès, who walk bent over double. 5th, Les Pharisiens de calcul, who observe the law only for the reward which it promises. 6th, Les Pharisiens de la peur, who do good out of fear of the punishment of the wicked. 7th, Les Pharisiens du devoir, ou les Pharisiens d'amour. These alone are the true devotees. Among the others not one is worthy of esteem.'

It is a fact, then, that the Pharisaic sect had been greatly discredited in our Saviour's time by a crowd of hypocrites, of selfish, unprincipled men who had workedt hemselves into the party, for the purpose of taking advantage of its popularity with the masses, and the reputation of its leaders for wisdom and virtue. It was to these men and not the sect indiscriminately, to which Jesus addressed his scathing denunciations. The general ignorance among Christian writers of these facts, newly brought to light, have occasioned great injustice to the majority of the most numerous and influential party in ancient Judea. We are the more forcibly conducted to these conclusions by M. Cohen's characterization of the true Pharisees, which is in part as follows:

"The true Pharisees, whose lives were so pure, and moral, and elevated as to excite above all an admiration and respect, had nothing in common with these devotees of a false alloy. The true Pharisees, indeed, were the men of the great Synod,' the co-laborers with Ezra and the inheritors of the Hebrew prophets, who laid the foundation of the reform of Judaism (after the exile); they were the members of the 'great Sanhedrin,' who infused into the manners and the laws the liberal spirit, of which their predecessors had transmitted the inspiration. They were Hillel, the gentle, pacific doctor who possessed so much affinity with Jesus; Schammai, the • (Talmud. Sotu. 226.) See Les Pharisiens. II. p. 30. Note.-The irony expressed in the epithets can hardly be put into English.

profoundly learned and austere; Gamaliel, the man of justice and of toleration, who had the Apostle Paul for a disciple. They were of that list of masters, of the élite of whom the Treatise of the Fathers' (Pirke-Aboth) has preserved to us the names and the beautiful maxims, and who filled the period between the construction of the second temple and the fifth century of the Christian era. They were the chief and eminent doctors of the Academies of Yabne and Tiberias in Palestine, of Sura and Pumbedita in Babylon. The words so justly indignant, employed by Jesus, were certainly never addressed to these superior men." 7

Together with these characterizations of the distinguished men of the Pharisaic 'party our author describes, also, the great influence exerted, and the important work accomplished by them in behalf of Judaism:

66

During all the period from the second temple, that is to say, during more than five centuries, Pharisaism exercised upon Jewish society, and even beyond it, a great power of opinion. It had rarely possessed the official power, but on the contrary had submitted to terrible persecutions on the part of the chiefs of Judea, the kings and high priests, sustaining often fierce battles both of deeds and principles; yet it had never ceased to give the sole impulsion to the social, moral, intellectual and religious movement, and that with an indomitable firmness and constancy. When it had not possessed the political government it had always held the spiritual government of Judaism, sustained by the unalterable sympathy of the entire popular element, which saw in it the incarnation of its own sentiments, of its interests, and of its belief. Afterwards, when all else had crumbled around it, when the nationality of Israel was annihilated in the ashes of Jerusalem, it alone remained standing on its ruins. It alone possessed enough influence, prestige and authority, to group around itself the scattered remains of the race of Juda. It alone inspired enough confidence to become the centre of the Judaism of the dispersion, and to give to it a new law, a new culture, an original and powerful organization which saved

7 Ibid. I. Introd. pp. 5-7. Note.-Hausrath not only confirms M. Cohen's opinion, that Josephus's account of Pharisaic doctrines is unreliable, but remarks that, "In order to a correct understanding relative to the Pharisees and Sadducees, it is above all necessary to divest one's self of the inherited popular types of them" (Schenkel's Bibel-Lex. IV. p. 518).

the principle of monotheism, from the immense disaster which engulfed the national power." Evidently, however accomplished in their art they may be supposed, hypocrites could never (for so long a period) fashion and conduct at their will the spirit of a nation. The triumph of evil principles is never aught but an ephemeral occurrence. The public conscience soon corrects itself, and conducts into the right path those societies which have been by surprise led astray. If Pharisaism thus had been only the embodiment of hypocrisy and falsehood, its (long) secular domination would have been a phenomenon the most strange, the most unheard of, that the world has ever produced." 8

The foregoing statements relative to the mission and work of Pharisaism in Israel, together with many other facts of equal importance and of like bearing, are abundantly supported by the evidences which the author has introduced into the body of his work. Thus it is evident that the Saviour's withering rebuke of the hypocrites of his time was never intended to apply to those who had been instrumental in that important labor, which is only briefly hinted, as it were, in the foregoing extracts. 9

We pass briefly to Josephus' descriptions of the Jewish sects respecting which M. Cohen remarks:

"The opinion which has been based upon the observations of Josephus, rests equally upon an erroneous conception. Desirous of persuading the Romans and the Greeks, that there existed in Judea, as at Athens, great philosophical schools,

8 Ibid. pp. 4, 5.

9 Note. In addition to the facts presented by M. Cohen, showing the popularity of the Pharisaic party, and the sympathy of the masses with it, as due to its benevolent and liberal spirit; see the statements of other writers, as Munk, Palestine, etc. p. 515; Mosheim, Commentary on the Affairs of the Christians, etc. Vol. I. p. 84. Note (o), thus: "The Pharisees were ever ready to relieve the wants of the poor and the wretched" (Cf. Josephus. De Bell. Jud. Lib. II. ch. VIII. Sec. 14); Prideaux, Connections, etc, as follows: "During the whole time of Hyrcanus' government, all things went well with him .. till his unfortunate breach with the Pharisees. when he lost the love of the common people, for they, being wholly attached to the Pharisees," etc. Vol. II. p. 218. It would be impossible to account for this attachment of the masses to the Pharisees, if the sect generally had taken on the character set forth in the Saviour's denunciations of the Scribes and Pharisees. We can only explain the facts, by the supposition that the Saviour's words applied to the false devotees, "the Pharisees tainted," to which M. Cohen has called attention.