of the original members of the American " Vegetarian Society," and was one of its most earnest supporters. On the death of Dr. William A. Alcott, the tirst presi- dent of the society, in 1859, Dr. ^letcalfe was elected his successor. He rendered efficient service also in the cause of temperance, and may be termed one of the pio- neers of tlic movement in this country. "As a preach- er," we are told by his biographer, " he was not what is called an orator, l)ut his delivery was easy, plain, dis- tinct, and impressive. His action was moderate and graceful. He was never boisterous, never sensational, and seldom allowed his imagination to display its pow- ers in the pulpit. His sermons were suggestive and in- structive, always including some teaching on practical, every-day duties. He sought all fields for the illustra- tion of Bible truths, especially availing himself of the lights of modern science and of ancient history in the elucidation of his subject." Seventeen of his Discourses were lately iiiii)lisheil by his son Joseph, under the title Out ofilo'ci,„i,h h,in ;h,- I.;,,ht (Phila. 1872, 12mo). See Xew J,rn.<,il, i„ .)/, ss, I,./, r. ( »ot. 23. 1872; Memoir of the Per. ]Vi//iaiN M.tculjh M.JJ., by his son Joseph (PhUa. 1866, 12ino,).
Metel (Lat. MeteUus), IIuguks, a French canon, was born at Toul, in Lorraine, about 1080. He was the offspring of wealthy parents. While yet a child he lost his father, and was indebted to the solicitude of his mother for a liberal education. He studied theology at Laon under the celebrated teacher Anselm, and embraced Christianity at Toul about 1118, when he was entered a member of the regular canons in the abbey of Saint- Leon. He remained in that institution until his death, which occurred near 1157. Fifty-five noted epistles bear his authorship. The first of them is addressed to St. Bernard, whom Hugnes Metel calls a ^' clarissima laiiipas," while to himself he attributes the humbler qualifications oi't/nomldnt iiii<ii<ii-niJii.<, nunc c/'iicis Christi bajnlns. See Calnict. ///x/'<// « (A la Lorraine,!, CKyii;
i Fortin d'Urban. //i.</,un ,f (Knir<u/es de Iluyues Metel
, (Paris, IKJ'.i, Svo).
Metenip.sychosis. See Ti:ansmtoratiox.
I Mete'ius (MiTiipovg v. r. Ba.mj/ooi'c.Vulg. omits),
1 given (1 Esdr.v, 17) among those whose "sons" returned from the captivity with Zernbbabel: but the Heb. lists (Ezra ii ; Xeb. vii) have no corresponding name.
Mete-yard (nT3, »^^(/(/«/^', Lev. xix, 35; measure simply, as elsewliere rendered).
Meth, EzECiiiET., a noted leader of a mystic sect t who at the l)oginning of the 17th century created great excitement in Thnringia. Jleth was practicing medi- cine in the city of Langensalza, Thnringia, when his uncle, a merchant in the same town, who had become an enthusiastic mystic, presented him with his pecul- iar conceptions of Christian fellowship and responsibil- ity. Jleth was readih' won in favor of the lieretical doctrines, and became one of the leaders of a sect which soon became numerous. He afterwards moved to Leip- sic, where he died in 1610. Stiefel and ]Meth found their first followers among their own relatives and friends at Langensalza and Erfurt. They also gained access to the house of count Hans Ludwig de Gleichen, whose wife, the countess Juliana, became so ensnared in their mystic doctrines that she was finally excluded from the Lord's table. But matters did not rest here. She im- agined she was a second A'iriiin !Mary, and was to give birth to the new Messiah. Slie therefore separated her- self from tlie count, anil to the day of her death (Jidy 28, 1633) remained steadfast in her hopes that she woidd bring forth tlie ^Messiah. The authorities tried in va- rious ways to bring these enthusiasts to their senses, but kindness as well as punishment proved in vain, imtil at last Stiefel died— Sticfd who h.ad been considered im-
• mortal by ^Meth and all his followers. A change took
I place in Stiefel's mind, and he is said to have died a
I truly converted Christian.
I The doctrines of Stiefel and Jlcth were for the most
METHEG
151
METHODISM
part identical with the mysticism of the Anabaptists and of Schwenkfeld, as specified and condemned in the Formula of Concord. Only Christ, the living 'Word, is recognised, while the revealed Word, i. e. the Bible, is despised, the ministry, with all its officers, rejected, and tlie sacraments — baptism and communion — are declared works of witchcraft. They further taught that as the law of God has been fulfilled by Christ, the true Church can neither sin nor err; that no resurrection can take place, nor eternal life be hoped for, as all true Christians are already dead to the world, and feel the promised joys of eternity in their lives, to the fullest extent pos- sible. See Arnold, Kirchen u. Keizer Hisiorie (see In- dex). See Stiefel.
Metheg. See Metheg-amxiaii.
Me'tlieg-ani'mah {Heh.me'theff Iia-ammah', i.t^^>2 n^xn, bridk' [as in 2 Kings xix, 28, etc.] of the mother [i. e. mother-city = DX, in 2 Sam. xx, 19] ; Sept. i) a p uj p lai-ii VI I, \ulg.f7-enum ?nJ«^i), a figurative term for a cliief city, occurring in the statement (2 Sam. viii, 1), " David took the bit of the metropolis (Auth. Yers. ' Me- theg-Ammah') out of the hand of the Philistines," i. e. he subdued their capital or strongest town, meaning Gatii, as is ex])ressly affirmed in the parallel passage (1 Chron. xviii, 1). Other interpretations may be seen in Glassii Ph'dol. Sacr. ed. Dathc, p. 783. Gesenius {Thes. Ileb. p. 113) compares the Arabic proverb, " I give thee not my bridle," i. e. I do not submit to thee (see Sohultens ad Job, xx, 11; and Hariri Cons, iv ; Hist. Taiiurl. p. 243 ; Vit. Tim. i, 50). On the other hand, Ewald {Gesc/i. iii, 190) less naturally takes Ammah as meaning the " forearm," and treats the words as a meta- phor to express the perfect manner in which David had smitten and humbled his foes, had torn the bridle from their arm, and thus broken forever the dominion with which they curbed Israel, as a rider manages his horse by the rein held fast on his arm. He objects to the other interpretation that Gath had its own king still in the days of Solomon; but it may be replied that the king in Solomon's time may have been, and probably was, tributary to Israel, as the kings '"on this side the Euphrates" (1 Kings iv, 24) were. It is an obvious objection to Ewald's interpretation, that to control his horse a rider must hold the bridle, not on his arm, but fast in his hand.