reader of the New
Testament need not be told, and its witness is fully borne out by Josephus [f Ag. Ap. ii. 18.] and Philo. [g In Flacc, ed. Frcf, p. 972; de Vita Mos. p. 688; Leg. ad Caj. pp. 1014, 1035.] Both the Jerusalem and the Babylon Talmud assume it as so common, that in several passages 'Sabbath-observance' and the 'Sabbath-sermon' are identified. Long before Hillel we read of Rabbis preaching, in Greek or Latin, in the Jewish Synagogues of Rome, [h For ex. Pes. 53 b.] just as the Apostles preached in Greek in the Synagogues of the dispersed. That this practice, and the absolute liberty of teaching, subject to the authority of the 'chief ruler of the Synagogue,' formed important links in the Christianisation of the world, is another evidence of that wonder-working Rule of God, which brings about marvellous results through the orderly and natural succession of events nay, orders these means with the view to their ultimate issue.
But this is not all. We have materials for drawing an accurate picture of the preacher, the congregation, and the sermon, as in those days. We are, of course, only speaking of the public addresses in the Synagogues on Sabbaths, not of those delivered at other times or in other places. Some great Rabbi, or famed preacher, or else a distinguised stranger, is known to be in the town. He would, of course, be asked by the ruler of the Synagogue to deliver a discourse. But who is a great, preacher? We know that such a reputation was much coveted, and conferred on its possessor great distinction. The popular preacher was a power, and quite as much an object of popular homage and flattery as in our days. Many a learned Rabbi bitterly complained on finding his ponderous expositions neglected, while the multitude pushed and crowded into the neighbouring bouring Synagogue to hear the declamations of some shallow popular Haggadist. [1 In Sot. 40 a we have an account of how a popular preacher comforted his deserted brother teologian by the following parable: 'Two men met in a city, the one to sell jewels and precious things, the other toys, tinsel, and trifles. Then all the people ran to the latter shop, because they did not understand the wares of the former. A curious instance of popular wit is the following: It was expected that a person lately ordained should deliver a discourse before the people. The time came, but the Methurgeman in vain bent his ear closer and closer. It was evident that the new preacher had nothing to say. On which the Methurgeman quoted Habak. ii. 19: 'Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach !' (Sanh. 7 b). It was probably on account of such scenes, that the Nasi was not allowed afterwards to ordain without the consent of the Sanhedrin.] And so it came, that many cultivated thisbranch of theology. When a popular preacher was expected, men crowded the area of the Synagogue, while women filled the gallery, [a Succ. 51 b.] On such occasions, there was the additional satisfaction of feeling that they had done something specially meritorious in running with quick steps, and crowding into the Synagogue, [b Ber. 6 b.] For, was it not to carry out the spirit of Hos. vi. 3; xi. 10, at least, as Rabbinically understood? Even grave Rabbis joined in this 'pursuit to know the Lord,' and one of them comes to the somewhat caustic conclusion, that 'the reward of a discourse is the haste.' [c Ber. 6 b.] However, more unworthy motives sometimes influenced some of the audience, and a Talmudic passage [d Kidd. 81 a.] traces the cause of many fasts to the meetings of the two sexes on such occasions.
The type of a popular preacher was not very different from what in our days would form his chief requisites. He ought to have a good figure, [e Taan. 16 a. See Duschak, u. s. p. 285.] a pleasant expression,and melodious voice (his words ought to be 'like those of the bride to the bridegroom'), fluency, speech 'sweet as honey,' 'pleasant as milk and honey', 'finely sifted like fine flour,' a diction richly adorned, 'like a bride on her weddingday;' and sufficient confidence in his
own knowledge and self-assurance never to be disconcerted. Above all he must be conciliatory, and avoid being too personal. Moses had addressed Israel as rebellious and hard-hearted, and he was not allowed to bring them into the land of promise. Elijah had upbraided them with having broken the covenant, and Elisha was immediately appointed his successor. Even Isaiah had his lips touched with burning coals, because he spoke of dwelling among a people of sinful lips, [f Yalkut ii. p. 43 a, beginning.] [2 Inconnection with this the proverb quoted in the New Testament is thus used by Rabbi Tarphon: I wonder whether anyone at present would accept reproof. If you said, Remove the mote from thine eye, he would immediately reply, First remove the beam out of thine own eye' (Arach. 16 b). May this not indicate how very widely the sayings of Christ had spread among the people?] As for the mental qualifications of the preacher, he must know his Bible well. As a bride knows properly to make use of her twenty-four ornaments, so must the preacher of the twenty-four books of the Bible. He must carefully prepare his subject, he is 'to hear himself before the people hear him. But whatever else he may be or do, he must be attractive. [1 Even the celebratedR. Eliezer had the misfortune that, at a festival, his hearers one by one stole out during the sermon (Bez. 15 b). On the other hand, it is said of R. Akiba, although his success as a preacher was very varied, that his application to Israel of the sufferings of Job and of his final deliverance moved his hearers to tears (Ber. R. 33).] In earlier times the sermon might have consisted of a simple exposition of some passages from Scripture, or the Book of Sirach, which latter was treated and quoted by some of the Rabbis almost as if it had been canonical, [a Comp. Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. pp. 101-106, 351.] But this, or the full discussion of a single text [2 See Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. p. 352, Note b.] (, to bore), would probably not be so attractive as the adaptation of a text to present circumstances, or even its modification and alteration for such purposes. There were scarcely bounds to the liberties taken by the preacher. He would divide a sentence, cut off one or two syllables from a word and join them to the next, so producing a different meaning, or giving a new interpretation to a text. Perhaps the strangest method was that of introducing Greek words and expressions into the Hebrew, and this not only to give a witty repartee, [b As in Ber. R. 14.] but in illustration of Scripture, [c Shem. R. 15.] Nay, many instances occur, in which a Hebrew word is, from the similarity of its sound with the Greek, rendered as if it were actually Greek, and thus a new meaning is given to a passage. [3 Thus, in Tanch. on Ex. xxii. 24 (ed. Warsh. p. 105 a and b, sect. 15, towards the end), the expression in Deut. xv. 7, 'Meachikha,' from thy brother, is rendered 'un achikha,' not thy brother. Similarly, in the Pesiqta, the statement in Gen. xxii. 7, 8, 'God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt-offering,' is paraphrased. 'And if not a Seh (lamb) for a burnt-offering, my son, (thee) for a burnt offering. It is added, 'se leolah is Greek, meaning, thou art the burnt-offering.' But the Greek in the former passage is also explained by rendering the 'achikha' as an Aramaic form of, in which case it would targumically mean 'Withhold not thy hand from the poor, who is like to thee.' Comp. the interesting tractate of Brull (Fremdspr. Redens. p. 21). A play upon Greek words is also supposed to occur in the Midrash on Cant. ii. 9, where the word 'dodi,' by omitting the second d, and transposing the yod and the vav, is made into the Greek, divine. But I confess I do not feel quite sure about this, although it has the countenance of Levy. In the Midrash on Cant. ii. 15, a whole Greek sentence is inserted, only Aramaically written. See also Sachs, Beitr. pp. 19 &c]
If such licence was taken, it seems a comparatively small thing that a doctrine was derived from a word, a particle, or even a letter. But, as already stated, the great point was to attract the hearers. Parables, stories, allegories, witticisms, strange and foreign words, absurd legends, in short, anything that might startle an audience, was introduced. [4 Thus, when on one occasion the
hearers of Akiba were going to sleep during his sermon, he called out: 'Why was Esther Queen in Persia over 127 provinces? Answer: She was a descendant of Sarah, who lived 127 years' (Ber. R. 58). On a similar occasion R. Jehudah startled the sleepers by the question: 'One woman in Egypt bore 600,000 men in one birth.' One of his hearers immediately replied to the question, who she was: 'It was Jochebed, who bore Moses, who is reckoned equal to all the 600,000 of Israel' (Midr. Shir haSh. R., ed. Warsh., p. lib, towards the end, on Cant. i. 15).] Sometimes a discourse was entirely Haggadic; at others, the Haggadah served to introduce the Halakhah. Sometimes the object of the preacher was purely homiletical; at others, he dealt chiefly with the explanation of Scripture, or of the rites and meaning of festivals. A favourite method was that which derived its name from the stringing together of pearls (Charaz), when a preacher, having quoted a passage or section from the Pentateuch, strung on to it another and like-sounding, or really similar, from the Prophets and the Hagiographa. Or else he would divide a sentence, generally under three heads, and connect with each of the clauses a separate doctrine, and then try to support it by Scripture. It is easy to imagine to what lengths such preachers might go in their misinterpretation and misrepresentations of the plain text of Holy Scripture. And yet a collection of short expositions (the Pesiqta), which, though not dating from that period, may yet fairly be taken as giving a good idea of this method of exposition, contains not a little that is fresh, earnest, useful, and devotional. It is interesting to know that, at the close of his address, the preacher very generally referred to the great Messianic hope of Israel. The service closed with a short prayer, or what we would term an 'ascription.'
We can now picture to ourselves the Synagogue, its worship, and teaching. We can see the leader of the people's devotions as (according to Talmudic direction) he first refuses, with mock-modesty, the honour conferred on him by the chief ruler; then, when urged, prepares to go; and when pressed a third time, goes up with slow and measured steps to the lectern, and then before the Ark. We can imagine how one after another, standing and facing
