The duties of priests and Levites in the Temple may be gathered from Scripture, and will

be further explained in the cours e of our inquiries. Generally, it may here be stated that

on the Levites devolved the Temple -police, the guard of the gates, and the duty of

keeping everything about the sanctuary clean and bright. But as at night the priests

kept watch about the innermost places of the Temple, so they also opened and closed

all the inner gates, while the Levites discharged this duty in reference to the outer gates,

which led upon the Temple Mount (or Court of the Gentiles), and to the 'Beautiful Gate,'

which formed the principal entrance into the Court of the Women. The laws of Levitical

cleanness, as explained by the Rabbis, were most rigidly enforced upon worshippers

and priests. If a leper, or any other who was 'defiled,' had ventured into the sanctuary

itself, or any priest officiated in a state of 'uncleanness,' he would, if discovered, be

dragged out and killed, without form of process, by 'the rebels' beating.' Minor

punishments were awarded to those guilty of smaller offences of the same kind. The

Sabbath-rest was strictly enforced, so far as consistent with the necessary duties of the

Temple service. But the latter superseded the Sabbath law (Matt 12:5) and defilement on

account of death. If the time for offering a sacrifice was not fixed, so that it might be

brought on one day as well as another, then the service did not supersede either the

Sabbath or defilement on account of death. But where the time was unalterably fixed,

there the higher duty of obedience to a direct command came in to supersede alike the

Sabbath and this one (but only this one) ground of defilement. The same principle

applied to worshippers as well as priests.

Each 'course' of priests and of Levites (as has already been stated) came on duty for a

week, from one Sabbath to another. The service of the week was subdivided among the

various families which constituted a 'course'; so that if it consisted of five 'houses of

fathers,' three served each one day, and two each two days; if of six families, five served

each one day, and one two days; if of eight families, six served each one day, and the

other two in conjunction on one day; or, lastly, if of nine families, five served each one

day, and the other four took it two in conjunction for two days. These divisions and

arrangements were made by 'the chiefs' or 'heads of the houses of their fathers.' On

Sabbaths the whole 'course' was on duty; on feast-days any priest might come up and

join in the ministrations of the sanctuary; and at the Feast of Tabernacles all the twenty-

four courses were bound to be present and officiate. While actually engaged on service

in the Temple, the priests were not allowed to drink wine, either by day or by night. The

other 'families' or 'houses' also of the 'course' who were in attendance at Jerusalem,

though not on actual duty, were, during their week of ministry, prohibited the use of

wine, except at night, because they might have to be called in to assist their brethren of

the officiating 'family,' which they could not do if they had partaken of stro ng drink. The

law even made (a somewhat curious) provision to secure that the priests should come

up to Jerusalem properly trimmed, washed, and attired, so as to secure the decorum of

the service.

It would be difficult to conceive arrangements more thoroughly or consistently opposed

to what are commonly called 'priestly pretensions,' than those of the Old Testament. The

fundamental principle, laid down at the outset, that all Israel were 'a kingdom of priests'

(Exo 19:5,6), made the priesthood only representatives of the people. Their income,

which even under the most favourable circumstances must have been moderate, was, as

we have seen, dependent on the varying religious state of the nation, since no law

existed by which either the payment of tithes or any other offerings could be enforced.