from all this. It was the innermost shrine in the Sanctuary of His Mission, to wards which

He steadily tended; it was also, at the same time, the living corner -stone of that Church

which he had builded, and its spire, which, as with uplifted finger, ever pointed all men

heavenwards. But of such thoughts connected with His Resurrection Jesus could not

have spoken to the Sadducees; they would have been unintelligible at that time even to

His own disciples. He met the cavil of the Sadducees majestically, seriously, and

solemnly, with words most lofty and spiritual, yet such as they could understand, and

which, if they had received them, would have led them onwards and upwards far

beyond the standpoint of the Pharisees. A lesson this to us in our controversies.

The story under which the Sadducees conveyed their sneer was also intended co vertly

to strike at their Pharisaic opponents. The ancient ordinance of marrying a brother's

childless widow27 28 had more and more fallen into discredit, as its original motive

ceased to have influence. A large array of limitations narrowed the number of those on

whom this obligation now devolved. Then the Mishnah laid it down that, in ancient

times, when the ordinance of such marriage was obeyed in the spirit of the Law, its

obligation took precedence of the permission of dispensation, but that afterwards this

relationship became reversed.29 Later authorities went further. Some declared every

such union, if for beauty, wealth, or any other than religious motives, as incestuous,30

while one Rabbi absolutely prohibited it, although opinions continued divided on the

subject. But what here most interests us is, that what are called in the Talmud the

'Samaritans,' but, as we judge, the Sadducees, held the opinion that the command to

marry a brother's widow only applied to a betrothed wife, not to one that had ac tually

been wedded.31 This gives point to the controversial question, as addressed to Jesus.

A case such as they told, of a woman who had successively been married to seven

brothers, might, according to Jewish Law, have really happened.32 Their sneering

question now was, whose wife she was to be in the Resurrection. This, of course, on

the assumption of the grossly materialistic views of the Pharisees. In this the

Sadducean cavil was, in a sense, anticipating certain objections of modern materialism.

It proceeded on the assumption that the relations of time would apply to eternity, and

the conditions of the things seen hold true in regard to those that are unseen. But

perchance it is otherwise; and the future may reveal what in the present we do not see.

The reasoning as such ma y be faultless; but, perchance, something in the future may

have to be inserted in the major or the minor, which will make the conclusion quite

other! All such cavils we would meet with the twofold appeal of Christ to the Word33 and

to the Power of God - how God has manifested, and how He will manifest Himself - the

one flowing from the other.