the Talmud, not only every such offering, but even the wood with which the sacrificial
fire was kindled, was sprinkled with salt.58 Salt symbolised to the Jews of that time the
incorruptible and the higher. Thus, the soul was compared to the salt, and it was said
concerning the dead: 'Shake off the salt, and throw the flesh to the dogs.'59 The Bible
was compared to salt; so was acuteness of intellect.60 Lastly, the question: 'If the salt
have lost its savour, wherewith will ye season it?' seems to have been proverbial, and
occurs in exactly the same words in the Talmud, apparently to denote a thing that is
impossible.61 62
58. Menach. 20 b.
57. Lev. ii. 13.
59. Nidd. 31 a.
60. Kidd. 29 b.
61. Bekhor. 8 b, lines 14 and 13 from bottom.
62. hl yxlm y)mb `yrs yk )xlym -'the salt, when it becomes ill-savouring, with what shall it
be seasoned?' The passage occurs in a very curious Haggadah, and the objection that
salt would not become ill-savouring, would not apply to the proverb in the form given it by
Christ.
Most thoroughly anti -Pharisaic and anti -Rabbinic as all this was, what St. Matthew
further reports leads still farther in the same direction. We seem to see Jesus still
holding this child, and, with evident reference to the Jewish contemp t for that which is
small, point to him and apply, in quite other manner than they had ever heard, the
Rabbinic teaching about the Angels. In the Jewish view,63 only the chiefest of the
Angels were before the Face of God within the curtained Veil, or Pargod, while the
others, ranged in different classes, stood outside and awaited his behest.64 The
distinction which the former enjoyed was always to behold His Face, and to hear and
know directly the Divine counsels and commands. This distinction was, therefore, one of
knowledge; Christ taught that it was one of love. Not the more exalted in knowledge,
and merit, or worth, but the simpler, the more unconscious of self, the more receptive
and clinging - the nearer to God. Look up from earth to heaven; those representative, it
may be, guardian, Angels nearest to God, are not those of deepest knowledge of God's
counsel and commands, but those of simple, humble grace and faith - and so learn, not
only not to despise one of these little ones, but who is truly greatest in the Kingdom of
Heaven!
64. Chag. 12 b; Pirké de R.
63. See the Appendix on 'Angelology and Demonology.'
Eliez. 4.
Viewed in this light, there is nothing incong ruous in the transition: 'For the Son of Man is
come to save that which was lost.'65 This, His greatest condescension when He became
the Babe of Bethlehem, is also His greatest exaltation. He Who is nearest the Father,
and, in the most special and unique sense, always beholds His Face, is He that became
a Child, and, as the Son of Man, stoops lowest, to save that which was lost. The words
are, indeed, regarded as spurious by most critics, because certain leading manuscripts
omit them, and they are supposed to have been imported from St. Luke xix. 10. But
such a transference from a context wholly unconnected with this section66 seems
unaccountable, while, on the other hand, the verse in question forms, not only an apt,
but almost necessary, transition to the Parable of the Lost Sheep. It seems, therefore,