the grave all the sixteenth; and he could not have risen again until the seventeenth in which case not one of the above circumstances could have any thing to do with his Passion.

The judgment of the primitive church upon these points is decidedly expressed in the following passages.

Τὸ γὰρ ὀπτώμενον πρόβατον, σχηματιζόμενον ὁμοίως τῷ σχήματι τοῦ σταυροῦ ὀπτᾶται· εἰς γὰρ ὄρθιος ὀβελίσκος διαπερονᾶται ἀπὸ τῶν κατωτάτω μερῶν μέχρι τῆς κεφαλῆς, καὶ εἰς πάλιν κατὰ τὸ μετάφρενον, ᾧ προσαρτῶνται καὶ αἱ χεῖρες τοῦ προβάτου-Καὶ ὅτι ἐν ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ πάσχα συνελάβετε αυτ τὸν, καὶ ὁμοίως ἐν τῷ πάσχα ἐσταυρώσατε, γέγραπται 4 Et non est numerum dicere in quibus a Moyse ostenditur Filius Dei cujus et diem passionis non ignoravit; sed figuratim prænuntiavit eum, Pascha nominans : et in eadem ipsa, quæ ante tantum temporis a Moyse prædicata est, passus est Dominus, adimplens Pascha '-Quæ passio . . perfecta est . . temporibus paschæ . . die prima azymorum, quo agnum ut occiderent ad vesperam a Moyse fuerat præceptum. itaque omnis synagoga filiorum Israel eum interfecit, dicentes ad Pilatum-et quæ sequunturs—Τοῖς μὲν οὖν παρεληλυθόσιν ἔτεσι τὸ θυόμενον πρὸς Ἰουδαίων ἤσθιεν ἑορτάζων ὁ Κύριος πάσχα· ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐκήρυξεν, αὐτὸς ὢν τὸ πάσχα . . . αὐτίκα ἐδίδαξε μὲν τοὺς μαθητὰς τοῦ τύπου τὸ μυστήριον τῇ ιγ'. ἐν ᾗ καὶ πυνθάνονται αὐτοῦ· Ποῦ θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμέν σοι τὸ πάσχα φαγεῖν; ταύτη οὖν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ὁ ἁγιασμὸς τῶν ἀζύμων, καὶ ἡ προετοιμασία τῆς ἑορ τῆς, ἐγίνετο . . . . πέπονθε δὲ τῇ ἐπιούσῃ ὁ Σωτὴρ ἡμῶν, αὐτὸς ὢν τὸ πάσχα, καλλιερευθεὶς ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων. And again ; ταύτῃ τῶν ἡμερῶν τῇ ἀκριβείᾳ καὶ αἱ γραφαὶ πᾶσαι συμφωνοῦσι, καὶ τὰ εὐαγγέλια συνῳδά. ἐπιμαρτυρεῖ δὲ καὶ ἡ ἀνάστασις· τῇ γοῦν τρίτῃ ἀνέστη ἡμέρᾳ, ἥτις ἦν πρώτη (ita

ων

q Justin Martyr, Dialogus, 218. 1. 26–219. l. 1 : 374. 1. 19-22. r Irenaeus, Operum 309. 1. 20. Lib. iv. cap. 23. s Tertullian, Operum ii. 300. Αdversus Judæos, 8.

....

legendum) τῶν ἑβδομάδων τοῦ θερισμοῦ, ἐν ᾗ καὶ τὸ δράγμα ἐνομοθετεῖτο προσενεγκεῖν τὸν ἱερέα _Ἡ ιδ'. τὸ ἀληθινὸν τοῦ Κυρίου πάσχα, ἡ θυσία ἡ μεγάλη usque ad καὶ ὁ ταφεὶς ἐν ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τοῦ πάσχα, ἐπιτεθέντος τῷ μνήματι τοῦ λίθου Ὧι καιρῷ ἔπασχεν ὁ Χριστὸς οὐκ ἔφαγε τὸ κατὰ νόμον πάσχα· οὗτος γὰρ ἦν τὸ πάσχα, τὸ προκεκηρυ γμένον, καὶ τὸ τελειούμενον τῇ ὡρισμένῃ ἡμέρα. And again ; ὁ πάλαι προειπὼν ὅτι Οὐκέτι φάγομαι τὸ πάσχα, εἰκότως τὸ μὲν δεῖπνον ἐδείπνησεν πρὸ τοῦ πάσχα· τὸ δὲ πάσχα οὐκ ἔφαγεν, ἀλλ ̓ ἔπαθεν. οὐδὲ γὰρ καιρὸς ἦν τῆς βρώσεως αὐτοῦ.

The testimony of St. John, as specified above, taken in its simple and obvious historical sense, as we there observed, ought to be considered decisive; since in a case of this kind the authority of the last Evangelist, writing with an equal knowledge of the truth and of what his predecessors had said, should upon every principle be admitted not as contradictory to, but as merely explanatory of their's. It must be acknowledged too that, in his detail of the same supper, no such expression any where occurs as would suggest the inference that our Lord was celebrating a Passover. This attention to precision resembles the precaution of a writer, who knew that the language of those before him on the same subject had not been sufficiently explicit; the best

t Clemens Alexandrinus, ii. 1017. Apud Fragmenta. u Apollinarius, Hierapolitanus Episcopus, Apud Chronicon Paschale, 14 l. 6—14. v Hippolytus Portuensis, ibid. 13. 1. 5-13. Vide also, Ignatius Ad Trallianos, ix. Justin Martyr, Apologia Prima 98. 1. 27. Polycrates, Rel. Sacræ i. 371. Tertullianus, Adv. Marc. iv. 40. Operum i. 357: v. 7. Ibid. 399: Adv. Jud. 10. ii. 320. Origen, iii. 401-403. In Joh. tom. xxviii. 20, 21. Cyprian, Operum rro. and Epp. 156. Petrus Alexandrinus, Rel. Sacra, iii. 343. Victorinus, ibid. 236. 237. Lactantius, De Ver. Sap. iv. 26.395.396. Eusebius, ap. SS. Dep. i. 169 B.-170. C. Epiphanius, i. 421. A.B.Photii Bibliotheca, Tit. 115. 116. Theophylact, i. 741. D. E. in Joh. xviii. Epiphanius i. 448. Alogi. xxvi. xxvii. has a singular statement, viz. that our Lord celebrated his Passover, and was apprehended, on the evening of the third day of the week, though he is still supposed to have suffered on the sixth. The anticipation of the Passover he endeavours to account for, by shewing that the Jews might be two days wrong in their reckoning of the fourteenth of the moon. The other difficulty he does not explain, viz. what account is to be given of the Thursday morning and night between the apprehension and the death.

apology for which I apprehend to be this; viz. that the connection between the Jewish Passover and the Christian sacrifice, and consequently the necessity that Christ should suffer then and there, when and where the Passover was to be celebrated, appeared to their minds so close and so indispensable that, in whatever terms they might have spoken of the previous supper, no one who, like them, was habitually impressed with the conviction of this truth would mistake it for the regular Passover, and not consider it merely an anticipation of it, produced and justified by the special reasons of the case.

Now

Besides which, it ought always to be remembered that the last Jewish Passover was the first Christian supper; it was not more a Passover than an Eucharist: and to convert the Legal into the Evangelical ceremony was doubtless one great cause of that anxious desire to celebrate the Passover for that time with his disciples, before he suffered, which our Lord expressed". the Christian supper, as an institution expressly and formally commemorative of the death of Christ, if it was established at this time was proleptically established; for the death of Christ was not yet transacted. And the circumstance that it was so instituted is among the other arguments both that the Passover in general, out of which ceremony it arose, was typical of the death of Christ in general, and that this Passover in particular, at which it was proleptically instituted, was proleptically celebrated also.

I shall conclude, therefore, by observing that St. Matthew's, T dè прúτη тŵν àĽúμov St. Mark's, tŷ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων —St. Luke's, ἦλθε δὲ ἡ ἡμέρα τῶν ἀζύμων, ἐν ᾗ ἔδει θύεσθαι τὸ πάσχα"; all which are intended to designate the day when the Apostles came w Luke xxii. 15. x Matt. xxvi. 17. y Mark xiv. 12. z Luke xxii. 7.

to our Lord to inquire about preparing the Passover; understood on the principle laid down by Maimonides", that the proper beginning of any feast-day was reckoned from the night which preceded it, may all be intended to designate the night of the thirteenth of Nisan, the beginning of the Jewish fourteenth*. The whole of this vuxenμepov, from sunset on Thursday to sunset on Friday, was considered and might be called the first day of unleavened bread. Josephus himself makes the Paschal octave an octave of auua, reckoning the fourteenth of Nisan as the first of the number. And it might be truly so reckoned; for the putting away of all leaven, and of every thing leavened, began with the evening of the thirteenth ↳ †.

b

We have but to suppose that the disciples came with their inquiry at sunset on Thursday, and were sent at that time accordingly; and the assertion would be strictly correct. The circumstance that, on entering the city, they were to meet a man returning home with a pitcher of water, is a presumptive proof that they entered it in the evening, at one of the times when water was wont to be fetched. The room too, which they were to find ready éσтρwμévov, must have been set out for that evening's repast; which would consequently be for supper.

Apollinarius of Laodicea (SS. Dep. Vaticana Coll. i. 188. D): ἄρχεται γὰρ ὁ σαββατισμὸς Ἰουδαίοις, καὶ πᾶσα ἑορτὴ νόμιμος, ἀπὸ ἐσπέρας.

Augustin, ii. 8ο. D. Epp. xxxvi: §. 50. Sed Matthæus Evangelista quintam sabbati dicit fuisse primam diem azymorum, quia ejus vespera sequente futura erat coena paschalis, qua cœna incipiebat azymum et ovis

a De Sacris Solemnibus, ii. 5.

immolatio manducari.

+ Suidas, ζύμη· ὅτι λόγος ἔχει ὡς ἀπὸ ς'. ὥρας τῆς ιδ'. τοῦ μηνὸς ἡμέρας, σάλπιγγος φωνούσης, πᾶς ἄρτος ζυμωτὸς, εἴ τις τοῖς Εβραίοις ὑπελείπετο, πυρὶ καιόμενος ἠφανίζετο. So likewise Theodore Metochita, Historia Romana, 34. But this gloss is founded on the literal construction of St. John's statement, ἦν δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα ὥρα δὲ ὡσεὶ ἕκτη.

b Mishna ii. 134. 1.

I prefer this mode of construing these phrases because it applies to each of the three cases alike; and because, by this means, if the Passover was actually got ready on the Jewish fourteenth of Nisan, though not at the legitimate time, which was the end rather than the beginning of that day, still it would be as nearly regular, and as close to the proper time, as the nature of the case would permit. The ordinary supper time, as we saw from Josephus, was probably as late as the first or second hour of the night; and with a view to such a repast as the Passover we may take it for granted it would be for the Passover was always to be killed on the fourteenth and eaten on the fifteenth: in which case the actual business of eating it could not begin until after sunset on that day at least.

Yet St. Luke's expressions in particular may be generally understood to mean that the first day Tv azúμær was come, when the night before it was arrived; and ἐν ᾗ ἔδει θύεσθαι τὸ πάσχα may be referred to that day when it should arrive. St. Matthew's and St. Mark's might be defended in like manner on the principle stated elsewhere, that πρώτη is equivalent to προτέρα. The Greek interpreters understood it in that sense; and therefore considered the exchange of terms no difficulty. Theophylact's comment upon St. Matthew, in loco, is this: πρώτην τῶν ἀζύμων τὴν πρὸ τῶν ἀζύμων φησὶν ἡμέραν· οἷον, τί λέγω; τῇ παρασκευῇ, ἑσπέρας, ἔμελ λον ἐκεῖνοι φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα· καὶ αὕτη ἐκαλεῖτο τῶν ἀζύ μων. ὁ γοῦν Κύριος πέμπει τοὺς μαθητὰς τῇ πέμπτῃ, ἣν ὀνομάζει ὁ Εὐαγγελιστὴς πρώτην τῶν ἀζύμων, ὡς πρὸ τῆς παρασκευῆς οὖσαν, καθ ̓ ἣν παρασκευὴν, τῇ ἑσπέρᾳ, ἤσθιον τὰ ἄζυμα.

c Dissertation xiv. vol. i. 546–549. d Chrysostom, Operum vii. 773. B. in Matt. Homilia 81. I. e Operum i. 145. B. In Matthæum, xxvi: 248. A. In Marcum, xiv: 465. E. In Lucam, xxii.