'Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He
hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of
witnesses?'--MATT. xxvi. 65.
Jesus was tried and condemned by two tribunals, the Jewish
ecclesiastical and the Roman civil. In each case the charge
corresponded to the Court. The Sanhedrin took no cognisance of, and
had no concern with, rebellion against Caesar; though for the time
they pretended loyalty. Pilate had still less concern about Jewish
superstitions. And so the investigation in each case turned on a
different question. In the one it was, 'Art Thou the Son of God?' in
the other, 'Art Thou the King of Israel?' The answer to both was a
simple 'Yes!' but with very significant differences. Pilate received
an explanation; the Sanhedrin none. The Roman governor was taught
that Christ's title of King belonged to another region altogether
from that of Caesar, and did not in the slightest degree infringe
upon the dominion that he represented. But 'Son of God' was capable
of no explanation that could make it any less offensive; and the
only thing to be done was to accept it or to condemn Him.
So this saying of the high priest differs from other words of our
Lord's antagonists, which we have been considering in recent pages,
in that it is no distortion of our Lord's characteristics or
meaning. It correctly understands, but it fatally rejects, His
claims; and does not hesitate to take the further step, on the
ground of these, of branding Him as a blasphemer.
We may turn the high priest's question in another direction: 'What
further need have we of witnesses?' These horror-stricken judges,
rending their garments in simulated grief and zeal, and that silent
Prisoner, knowing that His life was the forfeit of His claims, yet
saying no word of softening or explanation of them, may teach us
much. They are witnesses to some of the central facts of the
revelation of God in Christ. Let us turn to these for a few moments.