He forsook the law of the Lord, and all Israel with him. 2 Chronicles 12:1, 2 Rehoboam, first king of Judah Monday Club Sermons. Individual lives attract and reward attention; hence the interest and fascination of fiction and history. What others have experienced and done comes to us as a revelation of a life in which we share. I. ITS WASTE OF OPPORTUNITIES EXCEPTIONALLY GRAND. 1. He was the first king of Judah. Unless forfeited by misconduct, special honour and grateful appreciation are the inheritance of the founders of a dynasty. Conspicuous in time and relative position, they have an acknowledged leadership, though dead for centuries. 2. He inherited institutions and traditions of a prestige sacred and commanding. His was the city of David, with all its history, radiant with the Divine presence; his the temple, of which God was the architect and his father the master builder; his the unbroken priesthood, exalted to a genuine mediatorship between God and His people; his all the costly and sacred relics upon which the Queen of Sheba looked with amazement; about himself centred the hope of a coming prophet, ruler; his the sole honour of continuing the royal line. 3. He was of mature age and superior abilities. 4. He had the best material of all Israel as well. Jeroboam and his sons had cast off the Levites from executing the priest's office unto the Lord, and they emigrated to Jerusalem in a body, "and after them, out of all the tribes of Israel, such as set their hearts to seek the Lord God of Israel, came to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their fathers." Thus all the land of Canaan was sifted for his benefit. 5. The very smallness of Judah was an element of strength. He could and did intrench himself in his central fortress on Zion, and surround himself with a chain of fortresses mutually supporting from their proximity. His people were homogeneous, and not liable to the jealous rivalries which imperilled the ten divisions of Israel. But alas! the example of Rehoboam reveals the insufficiency of opportunities, however golden, to command a wise improvement. II. HIS INABILITY TO BEAR PROSPERITY. When strengthened in his little kingdom of Judah, he at once repeated the folly which had only recently dispossessed him of the grand unbroken empire left by Solomon. Like multitudes, before and since, he was willing to use God's help when in extremity, but when successful, when apparently sailing in smooth waters, he and all Israel forsook the law of the Lord. How inexplicable that blindness which increases with added light, that moral and spiritual weakness which grows when supplemented with all Divine help, that confidence in self built out of dependence and gracious gifts! Rehoboam and his numberless imitators in all time illustrate this. Left to himself, he mars and almost ruins the grandest schemes of infinite wisdom, and foils the gracious designs of a long-suffering God for his own rescue and elevation. III. CHASTISEMENT BROUGHT PARTIAL REPENTANCE AND HUMILITY. There is such a thing as "final permanence of character," upon which all Divine warnings or dealings are unavailing except to harden. All moral character is voluntary, but the absoluteness of moral inability is only the measure and result of obdurate wilfulness. We are inclined to credit the humility of Rehoboam, because it vindicated God in the midst of His judgments. He and his princes said, "The Lord is righteous." Their lips, and possibly their hearts, may have been free from murmuring when city after city crumbled before invading hosts. Repentance is safe to the degree in which it acknowledges and enthrones God. We cannot omit passing mention of the superior inheritance of those who submissively suffer. The tragedy of life comes from hopeless, helpless opposition to the irresistible. IV. NEVERTHELESS, RELIGION WAS NOT ITS CONTROLLING INFLUENCE. Though he never quite cast off God, he "did evil because he fixed not his heart to seek the Lord." When the service of God dominates affections, plans, and deeds, then, and not until then, is true and steady progress possible. There can be no harmony, no worthy enthusiasm, nor any noble elevation to life which enthrones self. We live in a time of special peril, because of its wealth of opportunity. Never were the resources of the world so placed at man's disposal. But this wealth of opportunity brings a corresponding peril. Nothing but a heart "fixed to seek the Lord" can withstand its temptations to indulgence, to pride of power, to high looks and vain imaginations. V. A CHANGE OF MASTERS FOR THE WORSE. This change of masters, and opportunity to compare their respective service, which was thus true of Rehoboam, has a perfect parallel in the lives of all wanderers from God. Man will have some master, and he cuts loose from glad allegiance to God — the only true liberty — only to give servile obedience to a tyrant. It is one of the reassuring signs of progress to-day that man as an individual — his rights, his essential worth, and dignity — is valued and talked about more than the collective State or nation; but danger lurks in the shadow of the gain. That individuality is in danger of becoming overweening and imperious. The ego may, and sometimes does, glory in a self-sufficiency that looks almost patronisingly upon the Divine existence, or denies it altogether. Virtue is a queen whose subjects note her faintest wish, but their service is perfect liberty. It springs from the gladness of pure hearts, and knows no compulsion but sweet willingness. ( Monday Club Sermons. ) Established in life J. Parker, D.D. An accursed word is that sometimes — "established" or "strengthened," or prospered, or succeeded. It was the mark of the place where we turned hell-ward. We prayed when we were poor. We went to the sanctuary when we were weak. Who can stand fatness, sunshine, all the year round? Where are the rich? How delicate in health they became when their riches multiplied! How sensitive to cold when they rolled round in gorgeous chariot drawn by prancing and foaming steeds! How short-tempered when they became long-pursed! What a change in their public prayers when they became the victims of social status and reputation! ( J. Parker, D.D. ) Because they had transgressed against the Lord Transgression against the Lord J. Parker, D.D. See how religious the Bible is! We should now say that men are punished because they have transgressed the laws of nature; men are suffering because they have transgressed the laws of health; men are in great weakness because they have tempted debility, and brought it upon themselves by neglect or by indulgence. Even atheists have explanations. They cannot treat life as a piece of four-square wood, the whole of which can be seen at once; even they have laws, ministries, spectral actions, physiological explanations; it would seem as if the Bible gathered up all these and glorified them with a Divine name, and said, "This is the Lord's doing." ( J. Parker, D.D. ) Nevertheless they shall be his servants. 2 Chronicles 12:8 Servitude or service -- which ?— I. THAT THERE ARE SOME WHO HAVE ALREADY CHOSEN THE SERVICE OF THE KINGDOMS OF THE COUNTRIES. Some have chosen — 1. To be the slaves of open sin. 2. To be the votaries of money-making. 3. To be lovers of fashion, lovers of society, admirers of the world. 4. To become the devotees of "culture." 5. To be the seekers of self-righteousness. II. SOME SEEM TO BE PINING TO GIVE UP THE SERVICE OF GOD, AND TO GO TO THE SERVICE OF THE KINGDOMS. Some want to change — 1. Out of sheer love of change. 2. Because of the outward aspect of the new thing. 3. Because of their loss of joy in the service of God. 4. Because of the flagging of others. 5. Because religion now has brought them to a point where it entails some extra self-sacrifice. III. THERE IS A GREAT CONTRAST BETWEEN THE SERVICE OF GOD AND ANY OTHER SERVICE. The service of God is delightful. Remember, young man, if you are about to engage in the service of God — 1. There is nothing demanded of you that will harm you. 2. There is nothing denied you, in the service of God, that would be a blessing to you. 3. That in the service of God strength will always be given according to your day. 4. That there is no threat made to hang upon it. 5. All the while that you are a servant of God, you have a sweet peace in reflecting upon what you have done. 6. There is, above all this, a hope of the eternal reward which is so soon to come. ( C. H. Spurgeon . ) Comparative service W. L. Watkinson. It is an old failing of human nature not to know when it is well off, and the text furnishes an illustration of that failing. There is a great lesson here for to-day. Adam was discontented with Paradise, Israel with Canaan, and many now are despising the goodly inheritance we have in Christ. We are fond of comparing the service of God with alternative services, to the disparagement of the former. I. Compare THE FAITH OF CHRIST WITH THE FAITH OF SCEPTICISM. I say the faith of scepticism, for the sceptic has a creed just as truly as the Christian believer has. Many are greatly dissatisfied with the Christian revelation; they are anxious to set it aside, to find substitutes for it. The proverb says: "The cow in the meadow, knee-deep in clover, often looks over the hedge and longs for the common." So, many are now looking over the hedge of revelation, and longing for the bare wastes and the wild growths of infidelity. 1. If we renounce revelation, shall we be better off intellectually? It must be remembered that if revelation is rejected, all the dark problems of nature, all the perplexing enigmas of human life, will still be left. Revelation has not created the confusions, the cruelties, the calamities of the world. You will not make a black sky blue by smashing the weather-glass; you will not turn cruel winter into glorious summer by throwing out the thermometer; neither will you get rid of sorrow and mystery and death by rejecting the Bible. Can you, having rejected revelation, give that dark world any clearer or happier interpretation? 2. If we renounce revelation, shall we be better off as pertaining to the conscience? Take away the Bible, and conscience is left — an accusing conscience is left. To what terrible beliefs and deeds an accusing conscience drives men the history of paganism clearly shows. A guilty conscience built the wicker-basket of Druidism; it doomed the children to pass through the fire to Molech. "Yes," you reply, "but it is impossible for these tragedies of superstition to be repeated; Druidism, for instance, can never come back again." Who can say what may, or may not, come back again? Theosophy teaches that through endless reincarnations we must be purged from our sins. Our sorrows in this life are the results of the sins and errors of past incarnations, and before us is a dreary vista of fresh incarnations in which we are again to sin and suffer. It is terrible to think of the monstrous intellectual and religious systems which must arise when men no longer know the mercy of God in Jesus Christ our Lord. The guilty conscience will not go to sleep; it will have blood and tears. 3. If we renounce revelation, shall we be better off touching character? If unbelief triumphed, and Christ were rejected as the pattern and perfecter of character, would anything be gained? The whole world of thoughtful men acknowledges the marvellous, the incomparable moral beauty of Jesus Christ. II. Compare THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST WITH THE DOCTRINE OF THE WORLD. Thus many now are inclined to prefer the worldly life to the Christian life. It seems so much more free. Men feel that the Christian law retards their youth, cramps and foils their appetites and curiosities. But is this so? "The doctrine of Jesus is hard, men say. But how much harder," exclaims Tolstoy, "is the doctrine of the world!" Take its doctrine of glory. Cruel doctrine! What blood, groans, tears, it implies! And not only on the battlefield is the doctrine of glory seen to be merciless; it works woe in a thousand subtle ways in all spheres of human life and action. Take its doctrine of gain. How that principle of selfishness, which is the doctrine of the world, grinds men to powder! Take its doctrine of fashion. What a terrible price the world exacts for its empty shows, its vain titles, its purple and gold! Take its doctrine of pleasure. Millions have been ruined by following in its paths of roses and music and beauty. How cruel! Ah! the world has far more martyrs than the Church has. And what is the doctrine of Jesus that men call hard? Instead of the doctrine of glory, He teaches the doctrine of humility and service; for the doctrine of gain, the doctrine of equity and love; for the doctrine of fashion, the doctrine of simplicity and truth; for the doctrine of pleasure, the doctrine of purity and peace. Well may Jesus dare to say, "My yoke is easy, and My burden is light." III. Compare THE LAW OF CHRIST WITH THE SERVICE OF SELF-WILL. A man says: "I will not be restrained; I will determine my own path, choose my own pleasures, shape my own character, be the architect of my own fortune. It shall throughout be according to my own preferences and determinations." Is, then, the self-willed man happy? Is he happy as he sets himself against nature? You tell your boy not to play with fire; but he is self-willed, and takes the opportunity to sport with matches and gunpowder, and probably repents ever after. It does not pay to set up our will against the grand ordinances of nature. Is the self-willed man happy as he opposes himself to the laws and institutions of society? To outrage the judgments, the feelings, the rights of society is to be keenly miserable. Is the self-willed man happy within himself? You say proudly, "I am my own master." Could you have a worse? It is a terrible thing to setup our will against the Divine will as that will is expressed in the physical universe, in society, or as it seeks to fulfil itself in our personal nature and life. Self-will is captivity and ruin: loving obedience to the will of God in Christ, with its self-control and self-denial, is health and peace. To be His slaves is to be kings. Surrender yourselves to Him, and prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. "The service of the kingdoms of the countries." The Jews often heard delightful things about this foreign service. They remembered the fish which they did eat in Egypt freely, the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic. Nothing to do in Egypt but to regale themselves with piquant viands, and to stroll under the palms on the banks of the Nile. They heard of the attractions of Babylon, of its hanging gardens, its luxuries and delights. And the ambassadors of Sennacherib painted for them in glowing colours the life of Assyria: "A land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards." No more work, no more worry, no more worship. Getting away from Jerusalem, they were to get away from temple and law, from priest and prophet, and to taste the pleasures of an unfettered life. But did they find captivity so desirable? You who are tempted to despise God's Word, beware. Young men, weary of the order and restraint of a godly home, and ever hankering after a looser life, be wise, and stay thankfully where you are. Discontented Englishmen, ever protesting against narrowness and austerity, against Protestantism, Puritanism, and bumbledom, and ever looking with longing eyes to laxer civilisations, be content; subdue your murmurings and wantonness, lest God spoil you of your rich inheritance. Discontented Christians, ever casting lingering glances at the life you have left, be content; see to it that there is in you no evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God. ( W. L. Watkinson. ) Instead of which king Rehoboam made shields of brass. 2 Chronicles 12:9, 10 The downward grade J.Parker, D.D. See how deterioration follows all character that goes down in its religious aspects. This deterioration marks the whole progress of human development. Is it not so with regard to all personal service? How ardent we once were! How devoted to the house of God, how punctual in attendance, how zealous in worship! How we longed for the hour of praise to double itself, that we might have long intercourse with the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost! Now how soon we become uneasy, how we long to be released, how patience becomes sensitive, and yields in angry surrender because too much tried! You never bring gold for brass when you leave God. The prodigal never brings any treasure back with him. When men go away intellectually from the Bible they bring back brass for gold. When they leave the Bible morally they bring back brass for gold. When they leave sympathetically they bring back artifice for inspiration, mechanics for vital communion. ( J.Parker, D.D. ) And when he humbled himself, the wrath of the Lord turned from him. 2 Chronicles 12:12 Prosperity H. Hollis. I. THE PLACE IN WHICH THERE WAS THIS PROSPERITY. 1. Things will go on well in our own country — (1) When the intelligence of its inhabitants shall keep pace with their means of information. (2) When their conduct shall keep pace with their increasing knowledge. (3) When the Christian Church shall employ all those means for the salvation of the world which are placed within her power. 2. Things may be said to go on well in a Church when there is a unanimous desire to — (1) Understand; (2) practise; (3) and spread the gospel. II. THE TIME WHEN THERE WAS THIS PROSPERITY in Judah. "And when he humbled himself," etc . When the Church shall humble herself for her sins, she will realise an amount of prosperity hitherto unknown. 1. Some of the sins which should induce this humiliation. (1) Ignorance. (2) Persecution. (3) The profanation of the Sabbath. (4) Drunkenness. (5) Covetousness. (6) Infidelity. 2. The character of that repentance which is necessary. It must be — (1) Deep. (2) Universal. (3) Daily. ( Zechariah 12:10 -18). III. THE ACKOWLEDGMENT OF THIS PROSPERITY. Lessons: We may learn — 1. That one individual may be the source of incalculable good, or incalculable evil. 2. The importance of a knowledge of history, which illustrates the dealings of God with men. 3. The gratitude we owe to God for having given us the means of prosperity. ( H. Hollis. ) He prepared not his heart to seek the Lord. 2 Chronicles 12:14 Rehoboam the unready I. HE DID NOT BEGIN LIFE WITH SEEKING THE LORD. II. HE SHOWED NO HEART IN SEEKING THE LORD AFTERWARDS. III. HE WAS NOT FIXED AND PERSEVERING SEEKING THE LORD. IV. HE HAD NO CARE TO SEEK THE LORD THOROUGHLY. ( C. H. Spurgeon . ) Rehoboam S. A. Browning. I. IMPLIED OBLIGATION. To seek the Lord is the obligation of all This is suggestive — 1. Of the loss sustained. How is God lost to man? He has lost — (1) The true knowledge of His character. (2) The conscious enjoyment of His favour. (3) The blessedness of communion with Him. 2. Of its retrievableness. For this purpose — (1) God has revealed Himself to man in His own nature. (2) The redemptive work of Christ is made known. (3) The Holy Spirit performs His beneficent functions. 3. Of the importance of its recovery. II. MENTAL CONVICTION. In Rehoboam we see mental conviction arising from knowledge of duty, promptings of conscience, consciousness of guilt. This is a mental state of frequent occurrence. It may be observed — 1. As the effect of truth. The Word of God is "a discoverer of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Felix. There are many Felixes. 2. As intensified by circumstances. 3. As critical in its results. How much depends on moments of conviction! They are often the turning-points of destiny. It does not seem that Rehoboam ever paused in his downward career from this time forward. III. MORAL INFIRMITY. There was want of decision in Rehoboam. He did not prepare his heart to seek the Lord. This may be traced — 1. To sensual habits ( 2 Chronicles 11:18-23 ; 1 Kings 14:21-24 ). 2. To evil companionship. 3. To Satanic temptation. IV. ACCUMULATED GUILT. "He did evil because," etc. This sin was parent of a host. He sinned in this neglect of known duty, and in what resulted from it. So do all who pursue a like course. They sin — 1. In resisting their convictions. 2. In self-depravation. "Beware lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin." 3. The depravation of others. Through his guilty conduct the people were corrupted. "One sinner destroyeth much good." ( S. A. Browning. ) A heart not fixed J. T. Davidson, D.D. The marginal reading is, "He fixed not his heart upon the Lord." This was a favourite expression of David's. "My heart is fixed, O God, my heart is fixed." "His heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord." Perhaps it was intended to draw a contrast between the character of Rehoboam and his far worthier ancestor. Religion is not a thing that can be taken up in a loose, careless manner. It claims the whole purpose and energy of the heart. In the "Pilgrim's Progress," Prudence wished to know from Christian how he was enabled to overcome his temptations and to persevere in the good and holy way. Christian's reply was, "When I think of what I saw at the Cross, that will do it; when I look upon my broidered coat, that will do it; when I look into the roll that I carry in my bosom, that will do it; and when my thoughts wax warm about whither I am going, that will do it." I cannot do better than follow in the line of the great dreamer's allegory. I. THE FIRST CONDITION OF A FIXED HEART IS A SIGHT OF THE CROSS. The world's religion ends with forgiveness; God's religion begins with it. There is nothing that imparts such solidity to character, and such strength and dignity to life, as conscious peace with Heaven. II. The next thing is to LOOK UPON YOUR "BROIDERED COAT" — the righteousness that is "unto all and upon all them that believe." III. Bunyan's pilgrim looked also oftentimes into the ROLL WHICH HE CARRIED IN HIS BOSOM. Habitual study of the Bible is indispensable to a healthy condition of the soul. McCheyne would not speak to any one in the morning till he had first of all heard the voice of God. It gives a tone to the whole day, when we begin the day with Him. IV. "WHEN HIS THOUGHTS WAXED WARM ABOUT WHITHER HE WAS GOING," THAT GAVE FIXEDNESS TO CHRISTIAN'S HEART. You may be none the less shrewd as to the interests of time because you are wise as to the concerns of eternity; like a trusty pilot, who, though his eyes are on the stars, keeps his hand upon the helm. ( J. T. Davidson, D.D. ) True and false seeking John Kerr Campbell, D.D. I. There is what one may call NATURAL SEEKING. Seeking is the language of human want. The cravings of life will always demand attention. All the industries of the world, with their ten thousand beneficent developments, are the products of human wisdom to supply human wants. Human life is but a seeking in so many ways, from the cradle to the grave. II. SEEKING THE LORD. This is not born of nature, but of grace. Seeking the Lord implies a conscious sense of weakness and insufficiency. III. HEART PREPARATION. All true and successful seeking of the Lord comes of prepared hearts. The heart is always the part that makes our hearing, believing, praying, and doing right or wrong. As soon as the sun rises in the morning the birds are ready to go forth from their nests to sing. So it is with all the moral forces or faculties of the soul when the heart is prepared to seek the Lord. The heart is to the whole man what the main-spring is to the watch — it sets all the other powers in motion. "But as the bowl," says one, "runs as the bias inclines it, and as the ship moves as the rudder steers it," so man seeks as the heart prompts him. A prepared heart is a loving heart, "believing true and clean." It enters into the secret place of the Most High as a loving child enters into his father's home. Whence cometh this preparation? There must be some efficient cause to account for the differences we see among men. The difference between the common field and the garden to-day has been brought about by the application of human thought and manual skill. It is even so with respect to differences among men. As the garden did not enclose itself, or of itself become more fertile than the field, neither have men become different among their fellows or before God except by different resolutions of will and energy of character. Those who exercise no forethought or natural sagacity become as the man who built his house upon the sand. IV. THE EVIL OF NEGLECTING TO PREPARE THE HEART. Men may do evil by failing to do well. Mere neglect is sufficient to ruin a man. A man need not be openly profane or wicked to be excluded from God's presence; he has but to neglect the means of grace, or to prepare his heart to seek the Lord while He may be found, to call upon Him while He is near. ( John Kerr Campbell, D.D. ).

Benson Commentary 2 Chronicles 12:1 And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him. 2 Chronicles 12:1 . When Rehoboam had established the kingdom — Israel was very much disgraced and weakened by being divided into two kingdoms; yet the kingdom of Judah, having both the temple and the royal city, both the house of David and the house of Aaron, might have done very well if they had continued in the way of their duty: but here we have all out of order there. For Rehoboam forsook the law of the Lord, and all Israel with him — That is, all his people, all Judah, here called Israel, because they walked in the evil ways into which Jeroboam had drawn the kingdom of Israel. Of this defection from God and his service, see 1 Kings 14:22-24 . Observe, reader; as long as he thought his throne in an insecure state, he kept to his duty, that he might make God his friend; but when he judged that he was established in his kingdom, he acted as if he thought he had no more occasion for religion. Thus the prosperity of fools destroys them. 2 Chronicles 12:2 And it came to pass, that in the fifth year of king Rehoboam Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, because they had transgressed against the LORD, 2 Chronicles 12:2 . In the fifth year Shishak came up against Jerusalem — Presently after the apostacy of the king and people, which was in the fourth year. As this great calamity came upon them so soon after they began to desert the worship of God, and by a hand they had so little reason to suspect, having had a great deal of friendly correspondence with Egypt in the last reign; and as it came with so much violence, that all the fenced cities of Judah, which Rehoboam had lately fortified and garrisoned, and on which he relied much for the safety of his kingdom, fell into the hands of the enemy without making any resistance, it plainly appeared that the Lord had sent it, because they had transgressed against him. And doubtless God brought this unexpected trouble upon them so soon after their departure from him, not only to manifest his displeasure at, and to punish them for, their crime, but also and especially to recover them to repentance before their hearts were hardened. 2 Chronicles 12:3 With twelve hundred chariots, and threescore thousand horsemen: and the people were without number that came with him out of Egypt; the Lubims, the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians. 2 Chronicles 12:3 . The Lubims — The people of Lybia, a famous country of Africa, adjoining to Egypt. And the Sukkiims were the Troglodytes, a people who lived on the western side of the Red sea, and had that name from their dwelling in dens and caves of the earth, which is also the meaning of the Hebrew word ????? , succhiim, here used. As for the people called Cush, which we translate Ethiopians, they were either those to the south of Egypt, or the Scenitæ in Arabia. 2 Chronicles 12:4 And he took the fenced cities which pertained to Judah, and came to Jerusalem. 2 Chronicles 12:5 Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam, and to the princes of Judah, that were gathered together to Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said unto them, Thus saith the LORD, Ye have forsaken me, and therefore have I also left you in the hand of Shishak. 2 Chronicles 12:5 . Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam and the princes of Judah — Lest they should not readily or rightly understand the meaning of this providence, God sends a prophet to explain it, namely, the same Shemaiah that had brought them an injunction from God not to fight against the ten tribes, who plainly tells them, that the reason why Shishak prevailed against them was, not because they had been impolitic in the management of their affairs, but because they had forsaken God. 2 Chronicles 12:6 Whereupon the princes of Israel and the king humbled themselves; and they said, The LORD is righteous. 2 Chronicles 12:6 . Whereupon the princes and the king humbled themselves — They penitentially acknowledged their sin, and patiently accepted the punishment of it, saying, The Lord is righteous — We have none to blame but ourselves: let God be clear when he is judged. Thus it becomes us, when we are under the rebukes of divine providence, to justify God, and judge ourselves. “Even princes and kings,” says Henry, “must either bend or break; either be humbled or ruined.” 2 Chronicles 12:7 And when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves; therefore I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance; and my wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak. 2 Chronicles 12:7 . They have humbled themselves — Which though they did by constraint and with reluctance, yet God was pleased so far to regard it, as to mitigate their calamity. I will not destroy them — Such a vast, and now victorious army as Shishak had, having made themselves masters of all the fenced cities, what else could be expected, but that the whole country; and even Jerusalem itself, would in a little time be theirs? But when God says, Here shall the proud waves be stayed, the most threatening force strangely dwindles, and becomes impotent. I will grant them some deliverance — I will give some stop to the course of my wrath, which was ready to be poured forth upon them to their utter destruction. Those who acknowledge God is righteous in afflicting them, shall find him gracious. They that humble themselves before him, shall find favour with him. So ready is the God of mercy to take the first occasion to show mercy. Reader, if thy heart be humbled, and made contrite under humbling and distressing providences, the affliction has done its work, and it shall either be removed, or the property of it altered. 2 Chronicles 12:8 Nevertheless they shall be his servants; that they may know my service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries. 2 Chronicles 12:8 . They shall be his servants — That is, they shall be much at his mercy, and put under contribution by him, and some of them taken prisoners, and held in captivity by him: that they may know my service, and the service of the kingdoms, &c. — That they may experimentally know the difference between my yoke, and the yoke of a foreign and idolatrous prince. The more God’s service is compared with other services, the more reasonable and easy it will appear. And, whatever difficulties or hardships we may imagine there are in the way of obedience, it is better, a thousand times, to go through them, than to expose ourselves to the punishment of disobedience. Are the laws of temperance thought hard? The effects of intemperance will be much harder. The service of virtue is perfect liberty, the service of vice perfect slavery. 2 Chronicles 12:9 So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king's house; he took all: he carried away also the shields of gold which Solomon had made. 2 Chronicles 12:9-10 . Shishak took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and of the king’s house — He plundered both the temple and the exchequer, the treasuries of both which Solomon had left full. David and Solomon, who walked in the ways of God, filled the treasuries, one by war, and the other by merchandise; but Rehoboam, who forsook these ways, emptied them. Respecting the taking away of the golden shields, and substituting brazen ones in their place, see notes on 1 Kings 14:25-28 . 2 Chronicles 12:10 Instead of which king Rehoboam made shields of brass, and committed them to the hands of the chief of the guard, that kept the entrance of the king's house. 2 Chronicles 12:11 And when the king entered into the house of the LORD, the guard came and fetched them, and brought them again into the guard chamber. 2 Chronicles 12:12 And when he humbled himself, the wrath of the LORD turned from him, that he would not destroy him altogether: and also in Judah things went well. 2 Chronicles 12:12 . In Judah things went well — Hebrew, There were good things. The meaning is either, 1st, Though there were many corruptions in Judah, yet there were also divers good things there, which were not in Israel, as the word, and ordinances, and pure worship of God, prophets and ministers of God’s appointment, and divers truly religious people. And thus, this was an additional reason why God would not destroy them. Or, 2d, Notwithstanding this loss, they began to recruit themselves, and to regain some degree of their former prosperity. In Judah, things went ill when all the fenced cities were taken; but when they repented, the posture of the affairs altered, and things went well. If at any time things do not go so well as we could wish, yet we have reason to take notice of it with thankfulness, if they go better than they have done, and better than we expected or deserved, and to own God’s goodness, if he do but grant us some deliverance. 2 Chronicles 12:13 So king Rehoboam strengthened himself in Jerusalem, and reigned: for Rehoboam was one and forty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother's name was Naamah an Ammonitess. 2 Chronicles 12:13 . King Rehoboam strengthened himself in Jerusalem — He recovered so much strength that he reigned with some authority: or, finding that his fenced cities of Judah did not answer his expectation, he now made it his business to fortify Jerusalem, and render that impregnable. And there he reigned seventeen years, in the city which the Lord had chosen to put his name there. 2 Chronicles 12:14 And he did evil, because he prepared not his heart to seek the LORD. 2 Chronicles 12:14 . He prepared not his heart, &c. — Directed not, or settled not, &c. That is, although he humbled himself, and seemed penitent for a season, and professed the true religion and worship of God; yet he quickly relapsed into his former sins, because he was not sincere and serious in his actions, and his heart was not right with God. To seek the Lord — He did not serve the Lord, because he did not seek the Lord. He did not pray to the Lord, as Solomon did, for wisdom and grace. Or he did not consult the word of God, did not seek to that as his oracle. Hence, what little goodness he had, passed away like the morning cloud, and he did evil because he was not fully determined for that which was good. Those are easily drawn aside to evil by Satan, who are wavering and inconstant in that which is good, and are not persuaded to make religion their business. 2 Chronicles 12:15 Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, are they not written in the book of Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo the seer concerning genealogies? And there were wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually. 2 Chronicles 12:15 . Of Iddo the seer concerning genealogies — In an historical account, written by him, of the genealogies and actions of the kings of Judah. 2 Chronicles 12:16 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David: and Abijah his son reigned in his stead. Benson Commentary on the Old and New Testaments Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.

Expositor's Bible Commentary 2 Chronicles 12:1 And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him. REHOBOAM AND ABIJAH: THE IMPORTANCE OF RITUAL 2 Chronicles 10:1-19 ; 2 Chronicles 11:1-23 ; 2 Chronicles 12:1-16 ; 2 Chronicles 13:1-22 THE transition from Solomon to Rehoboam brings to light a serious drawback of the chronicler’s principle of selection. In the history of Solomon we read of nothing but wealth, splendor, unchallenged dominion, and superhuman wisdom; and yet the breath is hardly out of the body of the wisest and greatest king of Israel before his empire falls to pieces. We are told, as in the book of Kings, that the people met Rehoboam with a demand for release from "the grievous service of thy father," and yet we were expressly told only two chapters before that "of the children of Israel did Solomon make no servants for his work; but they were men of war, and chief of his captains, and rulers of his chariots and of his horsemen." ( 2 Chronicles 8:9 ) Rehoboam apparently had been left by the wisdom of his father to the companionship of headstrong and featherbrained youths; he followed their advice rather than that of Solomon’s grey-headed counselors, with the result that the ten tribes successfully revolted and chose Jeroboam for their king. Rehoboam assembled an army to re-conquer his lost territory, but Jehovah through the prophet Shemaiah forbade him to make war against Jeroboam. The chronicler here and elsewhere shows his anxiety not to perplex simple minds with unnecessary difficulties. They might be harassed and disturbed by the discovery that the king, who built the Temple and was specially endowed with Divine wisdom, had fallen into grievous sin and been visited with condign punishment. Accordingly everything that discredits Solomon and detracts from his glory is omitted. The general principle is sound; an earnest teacher, alive to his responsibilities, will not wantonly obtrude difficulties upon his hearers; when silence does not involve disloyalty to truth, he will be willing that they should remain in ignorance of some of the more mysterious dealings of God in nature and history. But silence was more possible and less dangerous in the chronicler’s time than in the nineteenth century. He could count upon a docile and submissive spirit in his readers; they would not inquire beyond what they were told: they would not discover the difficulties for themselves. Jewish youths were not exposed to the attacks of eager and militant skeptics, who would force these difficulties upon their notice in an exaggerated form, and at once demand that they should cease to believe in anything human or Divine. And yet, though the chronicler had great advantages in this matter, his own narrative illustrates the narrow limits within which the principle of the suppression of difficulties can be safely applied. His silence as to Solomon’s sins and misfortunes makes the revolt of the ten tribes utterly inexplicable. After the account of the perfect wisdom, peace, and prosperity of Solomon’s reign, the revolt comes upon an intelligent reader with a shock of surprise and almost of incredulity. If he could not test the chronicles narrative by that of the book of Kings and it was no part of the chronicler’s purpose that his history should be thus tested-the violent transition from Solomon’s unbroken prosperity to the catastrophe of the disruption would leave the reader quite uncertain as to the general credibility of Chronicles. In avoiding Scylla, our author has fallen into Charybdis; he has suppressed one set of difficulties only to create others. If we wish to help intelligent inquirers and to aid them to form an independent judgment, our safest plan will often be to tell them all we know ourselves and to believe that difficulties, which have no way marred our spiritual life, will not destroy their faith. In the next section the chronicler tells how for three years Rehoboam administered his diminished kingdom with wisdom and success; he and his people walked in the way of David and Solomon, and his kingdom was established, and he was strong. He fortified fifteen cities in Judah and Benjamin, and put captains in them, and store of victuals, and oil and wine, and shields and spears, and made them exceeding strong. Rehoboam was further strengthened by deserters from the Northern Kingdom. Though the Pentateuch and the book of Joshua assigned to the priests and Levites cities in the territory held by Jeroboam, yet their intimate association with the Temple rendered it impossible for them to remain citizens of a state hostile to Jerusalem. The chronicler indeed tells us that "Jeroboam and his sons cast them off, that they should not execute the priest’s office unto Jehovah, and appointed others to be priests for the high places and the he-goats and for the calves which he had." It is difficult to understand what the chronicler means by this statement. On the face of it, we should suppose that Jeroboam refused to employ the house of Aaron and the tribe of Levi for the worship of his he-goats and calves, but the chronicler could not describe such action as casting "them off that they should not execute the priest’s office unto Jehovah." The passage has been explained to mean that Jeroboam sought to hinder them from exercising their functions at the Temple by preventing them from visiting Judah; but to confine the priests and Levites to his own kingdom would have been a. strange way of casting them off. However, whether driven out by Jeroboam or escaping from him, they came to Jerusalem and brought with them from among the ten tribes other pious Israelites, who were attached to the worship of the Temple. Judah and Jerusalem became the home of all true worshippers of Jehovah; and those who remained in the Northern Kingdom were given up to idolatry or the degenerate and corrupt worship of the high places. The chronicler then gives us some account of Rehoboam’s harem and children, and tells that he dealt wisely, and dispersed his twenty-eight sons "throughout all the lands of Judah and Benjamin, unto every fenced city." He gave them the means of maintaining a luxurious table, and provided them with numerous wives, and trusted that, being thus happily circumstanced, they would lack leisure, energy, and ambition to imitate Absalom and Adonijah. Prosperity and security turned the head of Rehoboam as they had done that of David: "He forsook the law of Jehovah, and all Israel with him." "All Israel" means all the subjects of Rehoboam; the chronicler treats the ten tribes as cut off from Israel. The faithful worshippers of Jehovah in Judah had been reinforced by the priests, Levites, and all other pious Israelites from the Northern Kingdom; and yet in three years they forsook the cause for which they had left their country and their father’s house. Punishment was not long delayed, for Shishak, king of Egypt, invaded Judah with an immense host and took away the treasures of the house of Jehovah and of the king’s house. The chronicler explains why Rehoboam was not more severely punished. Shishak appeared before Jerusalem with his immense host: Ethiopians, Lubim or Lybians, and Sukiim, a mysterious people only mentioned here. The LXX and Vulgate translate Sukiim "Troglodytes," apparently identifying them with the cave-dwellers on the western or Ethiopian coast of the Red Sea. In order to find safety from these strange and barbarous enemies, Rehoboam and his princes were gathered together in Jerusalem. Shemaiah the prophet appeared before them and declared that the invasion was Jehovah’s punishment for their sin, whereupon they humbled themselves, and Jehovah accepted their penitent submission. He would not destroy Jerusalem, but the Jews should serve Shishak, "that they may know My service and the service of the kingdoms of the countries." When they threw off the yoke of Jehovah, they sold themselves into a worse bondage. There is no freedom to be gained by repudiating the restraints of morality and religion. If we do not choose to be the servants of obedience unto righteousness, our only alternative is to become the slaves "of sin unto death." The repentant sinner may return to his true allegiance, and yet he may still be allowed to taste something of the bitterness and humiliation of the bondage of sin. His Shishak may be some evil habit or propensity or special liability to temptation, that is permitted to harass him without destroying his spiritual life. In time the chastening of the Lord works out the peaceable fruits of righteousness, and the Christian is weaned forever from the unprofitable service of sin. Unhappily the repentance inspired by trouble and distress is not always real and permanent. Many will humble themselves before the Lord in order to avert imminent ruin, and will forsake Him when the danger has passed away. Apparently Rehoboam soon fell away again into sin, for the final judgment upon him is, "He did that which was evil, because he set not his heart to seek Jehovah." David in his last prayer had asked for a "perfect heart" for Solomon, but he had not been able to secure this blessing for his grandson, and Rehoboam was "the foolishness of the people, one that had no understanding, who turned away the people through his counsel." ( Sir 47:23 ) Rehoboam was succeeded by his son Abijah, concerning whom we are told in the book of Kings that "he walked in all the sins of his father, which he had done before him; and his heart was not perfect with Jehovah his God, as the heart of David his father." The chronicler omits this unfavorable verdict; he does not indeed classify Abijah among the good kings by the usual formal statement that "he did that which was good and right in the eyes of Jehovah," but Abijah delivers a hortatory speech and by Divine assistance obtains a great victory over Jeroboam. There is not a suggestion of any evil-doing on the part of Abijah; and yet we gather from the history of Asa that in Abijah’s reign the cities of Judah were given up to idolatry, with all its paraphernalia of "strange altars, high places, Asherim, and sun-images." As in the case of Solomon, so here, the chronicler has sacrificed even the consistency of his own narrative to his care for the reputation of the house of David. How the verdict of ancient history upon Abijah came to be set aside we do not know. The charitable work of whitewashing the bad characters of history has always had an attraction for enterprising annalists; and Abijah was a more promising subject than Nero, Tiberius, or Henry VIII The chronicler would rejoice to discover one more good king of Judah; but yet why should the record of Abijah’s sins be expunged, while Ahaziah and Amon were still held up to the execration of posterity? Probably the chronicler was anxious that nothing should mar the effect of his narrative of Abijah’s victory. If his later sources had recorded anything equally creditable of Ahaziah and Amon, be might have ignored the judgment of the book of Kings in their case also. The section to which the chronicler attaches so much importance describes a striking episode in the chronic warfare between Judah and Israel. Here Israel is used, as in the older history, to mean the Northern Kingdom, and does not denote the spiritual Israel- i.e. , Judah-as in the previous chapter. This perplexing variation in the use of the term "Israel" shows how far Chronicles has departed from the religious ideas of the book of Kings, and reminds us that the chronicler has only partially and imperfectly assimilated his older material. Abijah and Jeroboam had each gathered an immense army, but the army of Israel was twice as large as that of Judah: Jeroboam had eight hundred thousand to Abijah’s four hundred thousand. Jeroboam advanced, confident in his overwhelming superiority and happy in the belief that Providence sides with the strongest battalions. Abijah, however, was nothing dismayed by the odds against him; his confidence was m Jehovah. The two armies met in the neighborhood of Mount Zemaraim, upon which Abijah fixed his camp. Mount Zemaraim was in the hill-country of Ephraim, but its position cannot be determined with certainty; it was probably near the border of the two kingdoms. Possibly it was the site of the Benjamite city of the same name mentioned in the book of Joshua in close connection with Bethel. { Joshua 18:22 } If so, we should look for it in the neighborhood of Bethel, a position which would suit the few indications of place given by the narrative. Before the battle, Abijah made an effort to induce his enemies to depart in peace. From the vantage-ground of his mountain camp he addressed Jeroboam and his army as Jotham had addressed the men of Shechem from Mount Gerizim. { Jdg 9:8 } Abijah reminded the rebels-for as such he regarded them-that Jehovah, the God of Israel, had given the kingdom over Israel to David forever, even to him and to his sons, by a covenant of salt, by a charter as solemn and unalterable as that by which the heave-offerings had been given to the sons of Aaron. { Numbers 18:19 } The obligation of an Arab host to the guest who had sat at meat with him and eaten of his salt was not more binding than the Divine decree which had given the throne of Israel to the house of David. And yet Jeroboam the son of Nebat had dared to infringe the sacred rights of the elect dynasty. He, the slave of Solomon, had risen up and rebelled against his master. The indignant prince of the house of David not unnaturally forgets that the disruption was Jehovah’s own work, and that Jeroboam rose up against his master, not at the instigation of Satan, but by the command of the prophet Abijah. { 2 Chronicles 10:15 } The advocates of sacred causes even in inspired moments are apt to be one-sided in their statements of fact. While Abijah is severe upon Jeroboam and his accomplices and calls them "vain men, sons of Belial," he shows a filial tenderness for the memory of Rehoboam. That unfortunate king had been taken at a disadvantage, when he was young and tender-hearted and unable to deal sternly with rebels. The tenderness which could threaten to chastise his people with scorpions must have been of the kind- "That dared to look on torture and could not look on war"; it only appears in the history in Rehoboam’s headlong flight to Jerusalem. No one, however, will censure Abijah for taking an unduly favorable view of his father’s character. But whatever advantage Jeroboam may have found in his first revolt, Abijah warns him that now he need not think to withstand the kingdom of Jehovah in the hands of the sons of David. He is no longer opposed to an unseasoned youth, but to men who know their overwhelming advantage. Jeroboam need not think to supplement and complete his former achievements by adding Judah and Benjamin to his kingdom. Against his superiority of four hundred thousand soldiers Abijah can set a Divine alliance, attested by the presence of priests and Levites and the regular performance of the pentateuchal ritual, whilst the alienation of Israel from Jehovah is clearly shown by the irregular orders of their priests. But let Abijah speak for himself: "Ye be a great multitude, and there are with you the golden calves which Jeroboam made you for gods." Possibly Abijah was able to point to Bethel, where the royal sanctuary of the golden calf was visible to both armies: "Have ye not driven out the priests of Jehovah, the sons of Aaron and the Levites, and made for yourselves priests in heathen fashion? When any one comes to consecrate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, ye make him a priest of them that are no gods. But as for us, Jehovah is our God, and we have not forsaken Him; and we have priests, the sons of Aaron, ministering unto Jehovah, and the Levites, doing their appointed work: and they burn unto Jehovah morning and evening burnt offerings and sweet incense: the shewbread also they set in order upon the table that is kept free from all uncleanness; and we have the candlestick of gold, with its lamps, to burn every evening; for we observe the ordinances of Jehovah our God; but ye have forsaken Him. And, behold, God is with us at our head, and His priests, with the trumpets of alarm, to sound an alarm against you. O children of Israel, fight ye not against Jehovah, the God of your fathers; for ye shall not prosper." This speech, we are told, "has been much admired. It was well suited to its object, and exhibits correct notions of the theocratical institutions." But like much other admirable eloquence, in the House of Commons and elsewhere, Abijah’s speech had no effect upon those to whom it was addressed. Jeroboam apparently utilized the interval to plant an ambush in the rear of the Jewish army. Abijah’s speech is unique. There have been other instances in which commanders have tried to make oratory take the place of arms, and, like Abijah, they have mostly been unsuccessful; but they have usually appealed to lower motives. Sennacherib’s envoys tried ineffectually to seduce the garrison of Jerusalem from their allegiance to Hezekiah, but they relied on threats of destruction and promises of "a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land of oil olive and honey." There is, however, a parallel instance of more successful persuasion. When Octavian was at war with his fellow-triumvir Lepidus, he made a daring attempt to win over his enemy’s army. He did not address them from the safe elevation of a neighboring mountain, but rode openly into the hostile camp. He appealed to the soldiers by motives as lofty as those urged by Abijah, and called upon them to save their country from civil war by deserting Lepidus. At the moment his appeal failed, and he only escaped with a wound in his breast; but after a while his enemy’s soldiers came over to him in detachments, and eventually Lepidus was compelled to surrender to his rival. But the deserters were not altogether influenced by pure patriotism. Octavian had carefully prepared the way for his dramatic appearance in the camp of Lepidus, and had used grosser means of persuasion than arguments addressed to patriotic feeling. Another instance of a successful appeal to a hostile force is found in the history of the first Napoleon, when he was marching on Paris after his return from Elba. Near Grenoble he was met by a body of royal troops. He at once advanced to the front, and exposing his breast, exclaiming to the opposing ranks, "Here is your emperor; if any one would kill me, let him fire." The detachment, which had been sent to arrest his progress, at once deserted to their old commander. Abijah’s task was less hopeful: the soldiers whom Octavian and Napoleon won over had known these generals as lawful commanders of Roman and French armies respectively, but Abijah could not appeal to any old associations in the minds of Jeroboam’s army; the Israelites were animated by ancient tribal jealousies, and Jeroboam was made of sterner stuff than Lepidus or Louis XVIII Abijah’s appeal is a monument of his humanity, faith, and devotion; and if it failed to influence the enemy, doubtless served to inspirit his own army. At first, however, things went badly with Judah. They were outgeneraled as well as outnumbered: Jeroboam’s main body attacked them in front, and the ambush assailed their rear. Like the men of Ai, "when Judah looked back, behold, the battle was before and behind them." But Jehovah, who fought against Ai, was fighting for Judah, and they cried unto Jehovah; and then, as at Jericho, "the men of Judah gave a shout, and when they shouted, God smote Jeroboam and all Israel before Abijah and Judah." The rout was complete, and was accompanied by terrible slaughter. No fewer than five hundred thousand Israelites were slain by the men of Judah. The latter pressed their advantage, and took the neighboring city of Bethel and other Israelite towns. For the time Israel was "brought under," and did not recover from its tremendous losses during the three years of Abijah’s reign. As for Jeroboam, Jehovah smote him, and he died; but "Abijah waxed mighty, and took unto himself fourteen wives, and begat twenty-and-two sons and sixteen daughters." His history closes with the record of these proofs of Divine favor, and he "slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David, and Asa his son reigned in his stead." The lesson which the chronicler intends to teach by his narrative is obviously the importance of ritual, not the importance of ritual apart from the worship of the true God; he emphasizes the presence of Jehovah with Judah, in contrast to the Israelite worship of calves and those that are no gods. The chronicler dwells upon the maintenance of the legitimate priesthood and the prescribed ritual as the natural expression and clear proof of the devotion of the men of Judah to their God. It may help us to realize the significance of Abijah’s speech, if we try to construct an appeal in the same spirit for a Catholic general in the Thirty Years’ War addressing a hostile Protestant army. Imagine Wallenstein or Tilly, moved by some unwonted spirit of pious oratory, addressing the soldiers of Gustavus Adolphus:- "We have a pope who sits in Peter’s chair, bishops and priests ministering unto the Lord, in the true apostolical succession. The sacrifice of the Mass is daily offered; matins, lauds, vespers; and compline are all duly celebrated; our churches are fragrant with incense and glorious with stained glass and images; we have crucifixes, and lamps, and candles; and our priests are fitly clothed in ecclesiastical vestments; for we observe the traditions of the Church, but ye have forsaken the Divine order. Behold, God is with us at our head; and we have banners blessed by the Pope. O ye Swedes, ye fight against God; ye shall not prosper." As Protestants we may find it difficult to sympathies with the feelings of a devout Romanist or even with those of a faithful observer of the complicated Mosaic ritual. We could not construct so close a parallel to Abijah’s speech in terms of any Protestant order of service, and yet the objections which any modern denomination feels to departures from its own forms of worship rest on the same principles as those of Abijah. In the abstract the speech teaches two main lessons: the importance of an official and duly accredited ministry and of a suitable and authoritative ritual. These principles are perfectly general, and are not confined to what is usually known as sacerdotalism and ritualism. Every Church has in practice some official ministry, even those Churches that profess to owe their separate existence to the necessity for protesting against an official ministry. Men whose chief occupation is to denounce priestcraft may themselves be saturated with the sacerdotal spirit. Every Church too, has its ritual. The silence of a Friends’ meeting is as much a rite as the most elaborate genuflection before a highly ornamented altar. To regard either the absence or presence of rites as essential is equally ritualistic. The man who leaves his wonted place of worship because "Amen" is sung at the end of a hymn is as bigoted a ritualist as his brother who dare not pass an altar without crossing himself. Let us then consider the chronicler’s two principles in this broad sense. The official ministry of Israel consisted of the priests and Levites, and the chronicler counted it a proof of the piety of the Jews that they adhered to this ministry and did not admit to the priesthood any one who could bring a young bullock and seven rams. The alternative was not between a hereditary priesthood and one open to any aspirant with special spiritual qualifications, but between a duly trained and qualified ministry on the one hand and a motley crew of the forerunners of Simon Magus on the other. It is impossible not to sympathies with the chronicler. To begin with, the property qualification was too low. If livings are to be purchased at all, they should bear a price commensurate with the dignity and responsibility of the sacred office. A mere entrance fee, so to speak, of a young bullock and seven rams must have flooded Jeroboam’s priesthood with a host of adventurers, to whom the assumption of the office was a matter of social or commercial speculation. The private adventure system of providing for the ministry of the word scarcely tends to either the dignity or the efficiency of the Church. But, in any case, it is not desirable that mere worldly gifts, money, social position, or even intellect should be made the sole passports to Christian service; even the traditions and education of a hereditary priesthood would be more probable channels of spiritual qualifications. Another point that the chronicler objects to in Jeroboam’s priests is the want of any other than a property qualification. Any one who chose could be a priest. Such a system combined what might seem opposite vices. It preserved an artificial ministry; these self-appointed priests formed a clerical order; and yet it gave no guarantee whatever of either fitness or devotion. The chronicler, on the other hand, by the importance he attaches to the Levitical priesthood, recognizes the necessity of an official ministry, but is anxious that it should be guarded with jealous care against the intrusion of unsuitable persons. A conclusive argument for an official ministry is to be found in its formal adoption by most Churches and its uninvited appearance in the rest. We should not now be contented with the safeguards against unsuitable ministers to be found in hereditary succession; the system of the Pentateuch would be neither acceptable nor possible in the nineteenth century: and yet, if it had been perfectly administered, the Jewish priesthood would have been worthy of its high office, nor were the times ripe for the substitution of any better system. Many of the considerations which justify hereditary succession in a constitutional monarchy might be adduced in defense of a hereditary priesthood. Even now, without any pressure of law or custom, there is a certain tendency towards hereditary succession in the ministerial office. It would be easy to name distinguished ministers who were inspired for the high calling by their fathers’ devoted service, and who received an invaluable preparation for their life-work from the Christian enthusiasm of a clerical household. The clerical ancestry of the Wesleys is only one among many illustrations of an inherited genius for the ministry. But though the best method of obtaining a suitable ministry varies with changing circumstances, the chronicler’s main principle is of permanent and universal application. The Church has always felt a just concern that the official representatives of its faith and order should commend themselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. The prophet needs neither testimonials nor official status: the word of the Lord can have free course without either; but the appointment or election to ecclesiastical office entrusts the official with the honor of the Church and in a measure of its Master. The chronicler’s other principle is the importance of a suitable and authoritative ritual. We have already noticed that any order of service that is fixed by the constitution or custom of a Church involves the principle of ritual. Abijah’s speech does not insist that only the established ritual should be tolerated; such questions had not come within the chronicler’s horizon. The merit of Judah lay in possessing and practicing a legitimate ritual, that is to say in observing the Pauline injunction to do all things decently and in order: The present generation is not inclined to enforce any very stringent obedience to Paul’s teaching, and finds it difficult to sympathize with Abijah’s enthusiasm for the symbolism of worship. But men today are not radically different from the chronicler’s contemporaries, and it is as legitimate to appeal to spiritual sensibility through the eye as through the ear; architecture and decoration are neither more nor less spiritual than an attractive voice and impressive elocution. Novelty and variety have, or should have, their legitimate place in public worship; but the Church has its obligations to those who have more regular spiritual wants. Most of us find much of the helpfulness of public worship in the influence of old and familiar spiritual associations, which can only be maintained by a measure of permanence and fixity in Divine service. The symbolism of the Lord’s Supper never loses its freshness, and yet it is restful because familiar and impressive because ancient. On the other hand, the maintenance of this ritual is a constant testimony to the continuity of Christian life and faith. Moreover, in this rite the great bulk of Christendom finds the outward and visible sign of its unity. Ritual, too, has its negative value. By observing the Levitical ordinances the Jews were protected from the vagaries of any ambitious owner of a young bullock and seven rams. While we grant liberty to all to use the form of worship in which they find most spiritual profit, we need to have Churches whose ritual will be comparatively fixed. Christians who find themselves most helped by the more quiet and regular methods of devotion naturally look to a settled order of service to protect them from undue and distracting excitement. In spite of the wide interval that separates the modern Church from Judaism, we can still discern a unity of principle, and are glad to confirm the judgment of Christian experience from the lessons of an older and different dispensation. But we should do injustice to the chronicler’s teaching if we forgot that for his own times his teaching was capable of much more definite and forcible application. Christianity and Islam have purified religious worship throughout Europe, America, and a large portion of Asia. We are no longer tempted by the cruel, loathsome rites of heathenism. The Jews knew the wild extravagance, gross immorality, and ruthless cruelty of Phoenician and Syrian worship. If we had lived in the chronicler’s age and had shared his experience of idolatrous rites, we should have also shared his enthusiasm for the pure and lofty ritual of the Pentateuch. We should have regarded it as a Divine barrier between Israel and the abominations of heathenism, and should have been jealous for its strict observance. The Expositor's Bible Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.