do with them, and so moved the proper persons to summon the
Sanhedrin. In all haste, then, a session was called for next morning.
'Rulers, elders, and scribes' made up the constituent members of the
court, and the same two 'high priests' who had tried Jesus are there,
attended by a strong contingent of dependants, who could be trusted
to vote as they were bidden. Annas was an _emeritus_ high priest,
whose age and relationship to Caiaphas, the actual holder of the post
and Annas's son-in-law, gave him an influential position. He retained
the title, though he had ceased to hold the office, as a cleric
without a charge is usually called 'Reverend.'

It was substantially the same court which had condemned Jesus, and
probably now sat in the same hall as then. So that Peter and John
would remember the last time when they had together been in that
room, and Who had stood in the criminal's place where they now were
set.

The court seems to have been somewhat at a loss how to proceed. The
Apostles had been arrested for their words, but they are questioned
about the miracle. It was no crime to teach in the Temple, but a
crime might be twisted out of working a miracle in the name of any
but Jehovah. To do that would come near blasphemy or worshipping
strange gods. The Sanhedrin knew what the answer to their question
would be, and probably they intended, as soon as the anticipated
answer was given, to 'rend their clothes,' and say, as they had done
once before, 'What need we further witnesses? They have spoken
blasphemy.' But things did not go as was expected. The crafty
question was put. It does not attempt to throw doubt on the reality
of the miracle, but there is a world of arrogant contempt in it, both
in speaking of the cure as 'this,' and in the scornful emphasis with