III. THAT THERE MUST BE NO SACRIFICE OF TRUTH OR COMPROMISE OF PRINCIPLE FOR THE SAKE OF CONCILIATING HERETICS. Asa, like Rehoboam, was only too glad to welcome deserters from Jeroboam's Church and kingdom; his action with respect to Ramah proves that. But neither of them ever thought of accommodating the worship or polity of Jerusalem to suit the wishes or prejudices of the schismatic Israelites. To neither of them did it occur to allow that calf worship was right worship; neither would admit that there was any true Church but that of Judah, or any sanctuary but that of Jerusalem; neither could or would recognize the orders or ministrations of Jeroboam's man-made priests. In fact, it would have been impolitic, as well as unfaithful, to have done so. It was because Judah was true to its convictions, and consistently repudiated the schism, and stood resolutely on the old paths, that such numbers of pious Israelites came over to its side. Even so now, nothing but harm can come of sacrificing one iota of principle for the sake of the union of Christendom. We may be branded as illiberal and bigots if we ask for the credentials of every soi-disant minister of Christ; if we deny the name of "Church" to each of the manifold sects and societies of human origin; if we repudiate an unorganic Christianity, a religion of mere emotionalism. But all the same, we have no right to exercise a spurious charity and to give what is not ours; we have no right to surrender one jot of Catholic truth for the sake of conciliating outsiders. That would be indeed to "make a solitude and call it a peace." In that way our religion might soon be watered down so that truth and life and efficacy would all be gone, and the thin residuum would be stale, fiat, and unprofitable. Only the infidel could ultimately gain by such a process. Our answer, then, to the separatist must be his: "All that thou desirest of me I will do, but this thing I may not do." Deeply as we desire unity, we dare not purchase it at such a price. "Amicus Plato, amiens Socrates, sed magis amica veritas."
IV. THAT THERE MUST RE NO CALLING IN THE AID OF UNBELIEVERS AGAINST SEPARATED BRETHREN. This was done more than once in Jewish history, but the result was always disastrous. If Jeroboam called in the aid of Shishak against Rehoboam, he suffered himself, as we have seen (note on 1 Kings 14:25), from the Egyptian invasion. Nor was Asa's appeal to Ben-hadad less ill-advised. In the first place, it betrayed a lack of faith in God; then
V. THAT NO OBSTACLES MUST BE RAISED IN THE PATH OF REUNION. That this should be done by the separatists need cause us no surprise. Baasha could not afford to have the highway to Judah open. His occupation would be gone if the breach were healed and the nation or the Church again became one. And, alas! there are similar "vested interests" in the perpetuation of division amongst Christians. But just as it was Asa's care to pull down the frontier fortress of Ramah, just as the stones and timber were carried away bodily by the labour of all his subjects, so should it be the great concern of the Church and of every Christian to remove the barriers which separate those for whom Christ died. The national Church, for example, should be as wide and comprehensive as possible. Sects must of necessity have narrow and restricted boundaries; for their raison d'etre is almost invariably to he found, not in the propagation of error, but in the assertion of some forgotten or neglected truth, which they have made their peculium, and treat as if it were the sum total of revelation to the neglect of the "proportion of faith." But why should we multiply our tests and articles of membership? The Apostles' Creed was thought to embody everything of necessity to salvation in the first age of the Church; and when at a later period truth had become mixed with error, the Nicene symbol was still the only test of the Christian layman. Why should it not be a sufficient test of Catholicity now? Why must we refine and define, and so make intercommunion almost impossible?
"Must it be Calvin, and not Christ?
Must it be Athanasian Creeds,
Or holy water, books, and beads?
Must struggling souls remain content
With councils and decrees of Trent?"
It is partly because we have built Ramahs round our Zion that our schisms are so many. We have insisted on forcing our shibboleths on those who could not receive them, forgetting that, however true any dogma may be in itself, still, if it is not of necessity to be believed, and we make it an essential part of our system of doctrine, it may straightway become a source of discord and division. There are many such barriers and obstacles of our own creation—sometimes in the shape of practical abuses—which require to be removed, and no Christian should be "exempt" from the work of "building silver bridges for flying enemies and golden bridges for returning friends."
VI. THAT, INSTEAD OF RAISING BARRIERS BETWEEN BRETHREN, WE SHOULD STRENGTHEN OUR DEFENCES AGAINST THE COMMON ENEMY. The stones and timber of Ramah, Asa used to build Geba of Benjamin and Mizpah. Thereby the road to Jerusalem was left open to friends, whilst these two fortresses commanded it against foes. Against Baasha, if he would wage war against his kinsmen; against the Assyrian at a later date (Isaiah 10:28, Isaiah 10:29). And is there no lesson for Christians here? Too often they are fighting amongst themselves about the "infinitely little"—about the date of Easter, about unleavened bread, about the "five points," about lights and vestments, about wafer bread, or about unfermented wine in the Holy Communion—while the enemy is marshalling his forces. Intemperance, sensuality, devilry in every form, are destroying the Church's children by thousands, and her watchmen the while are fencing with each other. The siege of Jerusalem (Jos; Bell. Jud. 1 Kings 5:1) is reproduced amongst ourselves. The enemy is thundering at our gates, and the Church is paralyzed by factions. We keep raising barricades in the streets of Zion whilst hostile legions are swarming on the adjoining heights. We have our Geba, our Mizpah to build, and we perversely build Ramahs instead.
VII. THAT A HOUSE DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF CANNOT STAND. First Samaria, then Jerusalem fell before the enemy. Christianity is now comparatively powerless for aggressive purposes; indeed, it hardly keeps pace with the population; and its enemies are asking how much longer it can stand on its defence. Divide et impera, thus have many empires fallen. True, the Catholic Church cannot perish, but national Churches have fallen again and again. There has been some talk amongst the Brahmins of sending a mission to England. And we may see in France, in Germany, a foreshadowing of what is in store for us here. "The class which has recently attained supreme political power is alienated from Christianity in its present forms." Are the Church and the seers alike to be broken up one by one? Or shall we lay aside our "fratricidal dissensions," and combine against the legion of foes—Atheism, Agnosticism, Socialism, and the rest? Of one thing we may be sure, that as long as our "unhappy divisions" last we shall never win England, much less the world, for Christ.
HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD
1 Kings 15:1-8
The succession of Abijam
to the throne of Judah appears to have had one limiting principle, viz; that the successor should be of the house and lineage of David (see 2 Chronicles 13:8). Within this limit it seems—
I. IT WAS DETERMINED BY THE WILL OF THE REIGNING KING.
1. The principle of primogeniture was not considered.
2. Abijam represented Rehoboam by walking in his sins.
II. THE CHOICE OF REHOBOAM HAD THE DIVINE SANCTION (2 Chronicles 12:4).
1. Primogeniture, therefore, cannot plead Divine right.
3. God had respect to His servant David.
3. Therefore for David's sake Abijam reigned.
1 Kings 15:9-15
Reformation.
The moral condition of Judah was fearful when Asa came to the throne. The apostasy of Solomon had inaugurated a retrogression which was aggravated in the reigns following, so that for three generations the abominations of the heathens were increasing. The condition of Israel was even worse, under the system introduced by Jeroboam, to which the successors of that monarch tenaciously held. When the Holy Land was in such a state of degeneracy, what was the condition of the world at large! There was, therefore, the greatest need for reformation.
I. OF THIS ASA BECAME THE SUBJECT AND SPECIMEN. Reformations have ever been inaugurated by individuals who have embodied and exemplified their principles. Witness Luther in Germany, Knox in Scotland, etc. Such also was Asa.
1. He "did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord."
2. In this he is compared with David.
3. Such commendation was eminently creditable to Asa.
II. OF THIS ALSO HE BECAME THE INSTRUMENT. This is God's order (1 John 1:3). What he felt he tried to promote.
1. Beginning with his own house.
2. Then influencing the nation.
1 Kings 15:16-24
The War Policy of Asa.
"Forty and one years reigned he in Jerusalem" (1 Kings 15:10). The evil kings of Judah were about as numerous as the good, but their reigns were shorter. "The wicked do not live out half their days." But though the reign of Asa was long and glorious, his war policy with Baasha was not creditable.
I. THE OBJECT WAS RIGHT.
1. The war was provoked by the enemy.
2. It was provoked by impious intention.
II. THE MEANS WERE WRONG.
1. They were human.
2. They were unworthy.
III. THE SUCCESS WAS PARTIAL.
1. The end was answered.
2. But the price was too great.
Note: Asa's blunders followed upon his prosperity. Few abide this test. Loss of spirituality and religious zeal accompanies the growing worldly prosperity of churches!—J.A.M.
HOMILIES BY J. URQUHART
1 Kings 15:1-8
Beloved for the father's sake.
I. THE STORY OF A MISUSED OPPORTUNITY. Even in a three years' reign much might have been done. Israel had its troubles, the past its lessons of wisdom; but there was no ear to hear the one, and no heart to attempt redress of the other.
1. The secret of failure.
2. The sinful was also a troubled reign: "there was war," etc; and it was war with brethren.
3. The opportunity was soon ended: "he reigned three years." Opportunities abused may be soon removed. The life which sin has marred death may swiftly seal.
II. A RIGHTEOUS LIFE AN UNDYING POWER WITH GOD. "For David's sake did the Lord his God give him," etc. Our good does not die with us or with our generation. The memory of it dwells, and prevails, with God.
1. The sinful king has a son to succeed him, and one whom God directs and blesses.
2. The city is preserved and the flood of evil driven back—"to establish Jerusalem." God's promises, our prayers, and our purposes are alike remembered. They bloom amid our dust. Our love and loyalty to God will fall in blessing upon ages yet to come.
III. SIN LEAVES ITS STAIN ON THE FAIR RECORD OF A RIGHTEOUS LIFE. "Save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite." God will not wink at or cloak our iniquity. Is there any matter of which thou and all will hear when the books are opened? If there be, is it not a call for humiliation and for prayer?—J.U.
1 Kings 15:9-24
Zeal without trust.
AN OPPORTUNITY RECOGNIZED AND USED. The need of the time was manfully met. Brought up in an idolatrous home, he nevertheless saw that this sin was sapping the foundation of the nation's stability and strength, and he set himself to root it out.
1. The land was cleansed from.filthy abomination, from legalized, and even sanctified, sin ("And he took away the Sodomites," etc.) The nation that legalizes sin will reap corruption and shame: that which suppresses it by righteous enactment will pass up into purity and strength and truest glory.
2. He put down idolatry with unflinching faithfulness. He "removed ALL the idols which his father had made.', "And also Maachah his mother, even her he removed from being queen," etc. Neither reverence for the dead not tear of the living was suffered to stand in the way of his obedience to God. It is easy to condemn sin in the abstract. It is hard to stand face to fete with him who is its servant and say, "Thou art the man." Is our faithfulness afar the pattern of Asa's?
3. His failure was one of ability, not of will (1 Kings 15:14). We may not be able to accomplish all we desire, or that is needful, but if our heart be "perfect with the Lord" all is well.
4. He did not keep back the Lord's portion. The "silver and gold and vessels," which his father and he himself had vowed, were brought into the Lord's house. His faithfulness was shown in what he gave as well as in what he condemned.
II. THERE MAY BE ZEAL FOR GOD WITHOUT PERFECT TRUST IN GOD. The man of action is not always a man of prayer.
1. Baasha's attempt (see 2 Chronicles 16:7, etc.) The danger was great, but to the politician there seemed a way out of it. He was not shut up to God's help, as in the invasion by the Ethiopian king, and therefore God was not sought.
2. The disease which embittered his latter days. "Nevertheless in the time of his old age he was diseased in his feet." Here, again, his faith was tried and found wanting. "In his disease he sought not to the Lord but to the physicians" (2 Chronicles 16:12); and he found no relief. There is a limit to God's forbearance even with His people. How much is there of our weakness and trouble and distress over which the words are written, "Ye have not, because ye ask not"!—J.U.
HOMILIES BY A. ROWLAND
1 Kings 15:14
Religious sincerity.
A beautiful flower often springs from the midst of corruption. The more we realize the moral condition of Asa's surroundings the more we wonder at the grace which made him what he was. His father was Abijam (or Abijah), the second king of Judah, of whom it is said, "He walked in all the sins of his father, which he had done before him." His education appears to have been entrusted to Maachah, his grandmother, a daughter of Absalom the rebel, and herself a gross idolatress. The remembrance of these facts makes the statement respecting this young prince the more surprising—"Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, as did David his father." An independent spirit and a resolute will must have been coupled with his piety. [Show from this the possibility of triumphing over the most adverse circumstances by those who sincerely seek to serve God.] It is not, however, to his manly resolution, to his vigour, or to his political wisdom that our attention is specially called by the text, but to his RELIGIOUS SINCERITY.
I. RELIGIOUS SINCERITY ASSERTS ITSELF IN REFORMING ZEAL (1 Kings 15:12, 1 Kings 15:13). It was only twenty years since the death of Solomon, yet irreligion and vice had corrupted the nation. Evil spreads more rapidly than good in a fallen world. The deadly fungus springs up in a night, the fruit tree grows slowly to perfection. A half-hearted or timid man would have been content to worship Jehovah himself, and thus silently rebuke the idolatry of his people; but Asa, being an earnest man, could not content himself with any laissez faire principle. With a strong hand he would put down evil wherever he could reach it. Often in God's sight to leave evil alone, unrebuked, and uncombated is to share the guilt of those who commit it. It is the spirit of Cain, and not of Christ, that asks, "Am I my brother's keeper?" Asa's reforming zeal contains lessons to rulers, to employers, to parents, indeed to all who can mould the circumstances of others. See, therefore, how it made itself felt.
1. Opportunities for sin were diminished. 1 Kings 15:12 implies that there were those in Judah who made a traffic of vice. Corrupt themselves, they corrupted others. There are places in Christian cities which should be swept away by the strong hand of law.
2. Incentives to sin were destroyed. The idol referred to (in 1 Kings 15:15) is literally "the horror." The obscene rites connected with its cultus will not bear investigation. Suffice it to say that this so-called worship provoked to vice of the most hideous kinds. Against provocations and incentives to sin how earnestly should parents guard their children, and masters and mistresses their servants. Impure literature is in the forefront of these; not only that which offends by its grossness, but that which secretly stains by its suggestions.
3. Influences for sin were removed. Sometimes vice is made popular by leaders of fashion or of policy. The unrighteousness of a clever man, the impurity of a leader in society are woefully far-reaching in their effects. Maachah, the queen-mother, was one of the most potent in Asa's court, was his near relation, his early instructress; yet, with as much wisdom as courage, "he removed her from being queen," and destroyed her idol publicly and shamefully. It might be said that he was indebted to her, that she was aged and should be respected, or that she could not live long, and might therefore be tolerated. Such pleas would not avail with man whose "heart was perfect with the Lord." (Apply this.)
II. RELIGIOUS SINCERITY PROCLAIMS ITSELF BY CONFIDENCE IN GOD. This confidence was at tile heart of Asa's courage. Read our text in the light of the fuller history of the king (given in 2 Chronicles), and see how his confidence displayed itself.
1. He found rest in God in peril. Many adversaries would be raised by a reformation which was ruthless in its rigour. Idolatrous priests, the party led by Maachah, etc; would rebel; but Asa was not perturbed. God was his refuge and strength.
2. He offered prayer to God in his difficulty. As an example read 2 Chronicles 14:1-15. Describe the incursion of the Ethiopian host, and this prayer of the king, "Lord, it is nothing with thee to help, whether with many, or with them that have no power: help us, O Lord our God, for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude." A victory followed which was unique in the history of God's people. Conquest waits on prayer in every struggle with evil
3. He consecrated himself and his people to God after their deliverance (see 2 Chronicles 14:15, and compare with it 2 Chronicles 15:1-19.) He renewed the covenant, and afresh dedicated all he possessed to the Lord. So he deserved the high commendation, "Asa's heart was perfect with the Lord all his days." It remains yet to be observed that—
III. RELIGIOUS SINCERITY MAY BE ASSOCIATED WITH IMPERFECT SERVICE. He failed to remove the high places. This Hezekiah and Josiah did. To leave them was to provide a way of return to the idolatrous practices he had put down. Beware of leaving lesser sins unconquered, after victory has been attained over grosset crimes.—A.R.