1 Kings 13:2-8

Protest and Excommunication.

The sin of Jeroboam, the schism which he inaugurated in person at the first feast of tabernacles held in Bethel, was not consummated without protest. When the king, possibly in the "golden garments" of the priesthood, mounted the altar platform and stood before the vast multitude assembled to witness this first great function of the new regime, a messenger of God, sent from Judah, the seat of the true religion, lifted up his voice and witnessed against these irregular and impious proceedings, against the unsanctified altar, the unhallowed sacrifice, and the intrusive priesthood. It must have been pretty clear beforehand that any protest addressed to Jeroboam, who had devised and elaborated this corruption of Mosaic worship, would be unavailing, but nevertheless it must be made. It was probably in part because Jeroboam was beyond the reach of remonstrance that the warning was addressed to the altar itself In other words, it was made for the sake of the people rather than of their king. They should be mercifully, and therefore distinctly, taught that this calf worship had not and could not have the sanction of the Most High. Whether they would hear, or whether they would forbear, they should see that God had not left Himself without witness; they should know that at this crisis there had been a prophet amongst them. The breach should not be made without due warning of its sinfulness and its consequences. "For a testimony unto them" the man of God addresses the dumb altar, the sign and centre of the new system, and proclaims not only its overthrow but the destruction of Jeroboam's house and the defeat of all his schemes.

And as, under such circumstances, mere threats, of whatsoever character and by whomsoever spoken, would have had but little weight without "signs following," the message straightway receives the confirmation of a miracle. That the man of God "came from Judah" was in itself reason enough why the men of Israel should not listen to him, unless he compelled their attention by prodigies. "A partizan," they would say, "perhaps a hireling of Rehoboam, it was natural such a one would prophecy evil of the Northern Church and kingdom," and so his words would have been unheeded, even if his life had been spared. Besides, one who professed to come as he did, "in the word of the Lord," they had a right to ask for his credentials, and those credentials could only be miraculous. Had not Moses and Aaron "wrought signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, before Pharaoh and all his servants?" Had not Samuel, too, supported his message by a portent? ( 1 Samuel 12:18 .) If the denunciation of the schism, consequently, was not to be inoperative, he must "give a sign" the same day.

And to these "two witnesses"—"the "sure word of prophecy" and the "sign following"—the rashness and impiety of Jeroboam procured the addition of a third, or rather of two more—silent, but eloquent attestations, each of them, that the prophet had not spoken in his own name. For, enraged at this bold, this most unwelcome and sinister interruption of his ritual, and fearing the effect of this brave protest on his audience and the thousands of Israel to whom the news would ultimately come, and forgetting at the moment the sacred character of the speaker and the unseen panoply which protected him, he stretches forth his hand intuitively, as if to detain the prophet, and thunders his commands to the attendant soldiery to arrest him. But that hand, really raised against the Most High, suddenly becomes rigid and powerless, and he must needs stoop to beg the prophet's prayers that it may be restored to him again. And so it came to pass that the heretic king furnished in his own person, much against his will, two powerful proofs that the "man of God" did indeed speak the word of God and was supported by the power of God. It is thus that God makes the wrath of man to praise Him.

Such, then, was the PROTEST , in word and deed, which marked the first great service of the schismatic Church. But that was not all. The protest was to be followed by an INTERDICT . The man of God was commissioned at the same time to put the city and inhabitants of Bethel under a ban. He was to treat them as lepers, as so tainted with heresy, so polluted and unclean in the sight of God, that he could neither eat of their bread nor drink of their cup. For this was clearly the object of the injunction, "Eat no bread nor drink water there;" it was to show that all who participated in this unhallowed worship were thenceforward to be treated by Divine command as heathens and publicans. And to the children of the East this public disclaimer of fellowship, this practical excommunication, would have a significance such as with our altered conditions of society we can hardly conceive, though the "Boycotting" of our own time may help us to understand its operation. Every citizen of Bethel, every worshipper of the calves, would feel himself branded as unclean. The "scarlet letter" which the Puritans of New England printed on the bosom of the adulteress hardly involved a greater stigma. It was for this reason, therefore, that when the king bade the man of God to his palace and promised him a royal recompense for the service he had rendered him, the latter flung back his invitation in his face, and swore that half the king's house would not tempt him to eat of his dainties. Jeroboam, and his people through him, should learn that if they would persist in their wanton defiance of Divine law; if they would have two churches and three sanctuaries where God had decreed there should in either case be but one; if they would sacrifice before the works of their own hands, and by ministers of man's ordaining, and at times of man's devising, then the pious Hebrews who preserved inviolate the ancient faith should wipe their hands of them, and treat them as renegades and aliens from the commonwealth of Israel

The lessons of this history are manifold. Two, however, occupy a position of pre-eminence above the rest.

1. That corruptions of religion are not to be consummated without PROTEST on the part of the Church . That Christianity, as well as Judaism, should have its heresies and schisms was distinctly foretold by St. Paul himself ( 1 Corinthians 11:19 ; Acts 20:29 , Acts 20:30 ). But if they are inevitable, because of the frailty of our nature and the hardnesss of our hearts, they are none the less sinful, and it is none the less our duty to strive and to witness against them. If God did not suffer that first great schism to pass unreproved, can we do better, or do less, than follow His example? It may be said that we cannot always distinguish between heresy and orthodoxy—that we "call our doxy orthodoxy, and other people's doxy heterodoxy," and this is quite true. But individual opinion is one thing and the teaching of the Church another. Has the Church, then, no teaching office? Is she or is she not "the pillar and ground of the truth"? Has she or has she not the promise of our Lord's guidance and illumination? ( Matthew 18:17 , Matthew 18:18 ; Matthew 28:20 .) Or can the Church universal err? ( Matthew 16:18 .) Is her " Quod semper, quod ubique, " etc; no test of truth? It is not for the private Christian to claim any infallibility, but it is for the Church to say what is in and what is against her depositum fidei . And furthermore it is her duty, in her synods and by her officers, to protest against all corruptions of the faith. "A man that is a heretic … reject," Titus 3:10 ; cf. Titus 1:9-11 ; 1 Timothy 6:3-5 ("From such withdraw thyself"); Romans 16:17 ; Matthew 18:17 ; Matthew 8:1-34 , John 9:1-41 , John 10:1-42 ; Galatians 1:8 ; Galatians 2:11 . The Christian verity is not less dear to God than was the teaching of Hoses. The preacher is as much bound to preserve the faith whole and undefiled as was the prophet. And it is idle to say, as it sometimes is said, that mere protests are worse than useless. They may not avert a schism—this protest did not—but they may have their use nevertheless, as this had. Or if they are entirely futile as regards others, they are not forgotten of God. Besides, who shall say that success or non success is to alter the standard of Christian duty? It is surely something to be able to say, whatever the issue, Liberavi animam meam . It is to be remembered that God knew beforehand that this His protest, though enforced by signs and wonders, would be comparatively unavailing.

2. That certain crimes against morality and religion are still to be visited by EXCOMMUNICATION . Not the excommunication of bell and book and candle— that finds no place in Holy Scripture—but social excommunication such as that described to us in this history. Indeed, there is also an ecclesiastical excommunication which must sometimes be wielded. There are persons with whom we have no right to eat and to drink at the Table of our Blessed Lord—persons who must be repelled at any cost from Holy Communion, lest we should indirectly make ourselves "partakers of other men's sins" ( 1 Timothy 5:22 ). When Jn Wesley once proposed to give a note of admission to the Lord's Table to a man of dubious character, Henry Moore, one of his preachers, bluntly said that if that man were admitted he should refuse to attend. "Sir," said Wesley, "I should attend even if the devil came to Holy Communion." "So should I," was the answer; "but not if John Wesley gave him a note of admission." For it is obvious that the Eucharist, the closest rite of fellowship—the rite which makes and proclaims us members one of another ( Romans 12:4 , Romans 12:5 )—if knowingly administered to the "notorious evil liver" is a virtual condoning of his sin; it is equivalent to bidding him God speed ( 2 John 1:10 , 2 John 1:11 ), and so it makes the Church "partaker of his evil deeds." "Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person" ( 1 Corinthians 5:1-13 :15). But our history points rather to social than ecclesiastical interdict. And it must be distinctly understood that the refusal to eat and drink with notorious and incorrigible evil livers is a part of Christian duty (see 1 Corinthians 5:9-11 ; 2 Thessalonians 3:14 , 2 Thessalonians 3:15 ; Matthew 18:17 ). We are not permitted to know them and to treat them like other men. The story of St. John's hurriedly leaving the bath because of the presence there of the heretic Cerinthus, is one for which the so called tolerance of the age can only afford a contemptuous smile; but the age is often wiser in its own conceit than Christ and His apostles. Only let us remember, if we must treat any as heathens and publicans, how Christ treated the penitent publicans (cf. Luke 15:1 , Luke 15:2 ); and then let us not shrink from discharging this painful duty both to our country, our Church, and our God. Among the secondary lessons of our story are these:

1. That right shall triumph in the long run . The schism throve for 250 years, but the altar was ultimately dishonoured and overthrown. The Reformer who should desecrate it with bones of men was already appointed in the counsels of God. Even so, sooner or later, "every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up" ( Matthew 15:18 ). "If this work be of men, it will come to nought" ( Acts 5:38 ).

"Our little systems have their day,

They have their day and cease to be."

Magma est veritas, etc. The Babel of sects cannot last forever.

2. The ministers of God are secure so long as they do their duty . Jeroboam, with the ten tribes at his back, was powerless against the unprotected missionary. "He reproved kings for their sakes, saying… Do my prophets no harm" ( Psalms 105:14 , Psalms 105:15 ). The stars shall fall from their courses before a hair of their heads shall be injured. Cf. Daniel 3:27 ; Daniel 6:22 ; 2 Kings 1:10 , etc. But it may be objected, "The saints and messengers of God have often been brutally outraged and murdered" ( Hebrews 11:35-37 ). True, but who shall say that they were not then most secure? "Through much tribulation we must enter into the kingdom of God " ( Acts 14:22 ). It was when Stephen was martyred that he saw "Jesus standing"— i.e; to help—"at the right hand of God." It has been suggested that it was when St. Paul was stoned and taken up for dead ( Acts 14:19 ) that he was caught up into Paradise ( 2 Corinthians 12:4 ). Sic iter ad astra .

3. The wicked cannot dispense with the prayers of the saints . "Entreat the face of the Lord thy God and pray for me" (cf. Exodus 9:28 ; Numbers 12:2 , Numbers 12:13 ; Acts 8:24 ). How often has this history repeated itself; and what a foreshadowing of the world to come! Here was one of the synagogue of Satan worshipping at the prophet's feet, etc. ( Revelation 3:9 ). Observe, too, it is the part of a man of God to answer threats with prayers. "They are mine adversaries, but I, prayer" ( Psalms 109:4 , Heb.; cf. Psalms 35:13 sqq.) It is the very best way of overcoming evil with good.

4. Men are often more concerned about their sufferings than about their sins . Jeroboam's entreaty is, not that his sin may be forgiven, but that his hand may be restored. How many pray, "Heal my body;" how few, "Heal my soul, for I have sinned against thee" ( Psalms 41:4 ). The plague of head or hand extorts more cries for mercy than the plague of the heart ( 1 Kings 8:38 ).

5. " Law and order cannot be violated with impunity by any ruler under any religious pretext " (Maurice). The rent altar teaches the lesson of Psalms 2:2-5 : "Those betray themselves that think by any sin to support themselves."… "He promised himself that the calves would secure the crown to his family, but it proved they lost it" (M. Henry).

6. Let the ministers of God beware of bribery . "Come home with me and I will give," etc. The device of Jeroboam for silencing and conciliating the prophet has often been tried since, and with fatal success. How many men's mouths have been stopped by a sop—by place or pension, nay, by an insignificant present. Men know well—the enemy of man knows well—that the preacher finds it hard to reprove a benefactor. The writer once heard an influential person boasting that he had silenced his clergyman's remonstrances and appeals by a present of game! The world has a shrewd suspicion that the clergy are not incorruptible; that they, like others, have their price. Let us be on our guard against social corruption. How sinister the influence of some homes on the younger clergy. The cordial "Come home with me" was to them a snare of Satan. With the State clergy how strong the temptation to sacrifice independence for a benefice; with Nonconformists, to speak smooth words lest the congregation should "stop the supplies." The man of God thus speaks to all ministers of God.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD