by the Divine Being; that whatever has been, must have been ; and that whatever will be, must be ; that all events are preordained by infinite wisdom and un- limited goodness ; that the will, in all its determinations, is governed by the state of mind; that the state of mind is in every instance determined by the Deity ; and that there is a continued chain of causes and effects, of motives and actions, inseparably connected, and orig- inating from the condition in which we are brought into existence by the Author of our being.' On the other hand, it is justly remarked that 'those who be- lieve the being and perfections of God, and a state of retribution, in Avhich he will reward and punish man-
I kind according to the diversity of their actions, will find it difficult to reconcile the justice of punishment with the necessity of crimes punished. And they that believe all that the Scripture says on the one hand of tlie eternity of future punishments, and on the other of God's compassion to sinners, and his solemn assurance that he desires not their death, will find the difficulty greatly increased.' It is doubtless an article of the Christian faith that God will reward or punish every man hereafter according to his actions in this life. But we cannot maintain his justice in this particular, if men's actions be necessary either in their own nature or by the divine decrees. Activity and self-determining pow- ers are the foundation of all morality ; and to prove that such powers belong to man, it is urged that we ourselves are conscious of possessing them. We blame and con- demn ourselves when we do amiss ; but guilt, and in- ward sense of shame, and remorse of conscience are
j feelings which are inconsistent with the scheme of necessity. It is also agreed that some actions deserve praise, and afford an inward satisfaction ; but for this there would be no foundation, if we were invincibly de- termined in every volition : so that approbation and blame are consequent -on free actions only. Nor is the
J matter at all relieved by bringing in a chain of circum- stances as motives necessarily to determine the will.
j This comes to the same result in sound argument as
i if there was an immediate co- action of omnipotent power compelling one kind of volitions only; which is
. utterly irreconcilable to all just notions of the nature and operations of will, and to all accountability. Neces- sity, in the sense of irresistible control, and the doctrine of Scripture, cannot co-exist" (Watson, £ibl. and Theol, Diet. s. v.).
IV. Roman Catholic theologians recognise also two other kinds of necessity, namely, a necessity of means, and a necessity of precept. Baptism they consider as a necessity of means, or absolute necessity, because it is the only means of salvation instituted by Christ; so that no one can be saved who has not been baptized, wheth- er it be by his own fault or not. Communion is only a necessitj' of precept. If a man voluntarily refuses to participate in the Lord's Supper, he is deserving of con- demnation ; but if he was only involuntarily deprived of participating in it, he is not guilty.
See Priestley, A Free Discussion of the Doctrines of MateriuUsm and Philosophical Necessity (Lond. 1778, 8vo); Bray, Philosophy of Necessity; Clarke, Doyle Lectures for 170-1; Crombie, Essay on Philos. Necessity} Toplady, On Christian and Philos. Necessity; Butler, Analogy, ch. vi; Copleston, Inquiry into the Doctrine of N. Graves on Calvinistic Predestination ; Jackson, Defence of Hitman Liberty; Tucker, Light of Nature; Watson, Theol. Institutes, ii, 350; Hodge, Christian Theology (see Index); Amer. Theol. Rev. Jan. 1860; Oct. 18(31; Amer. Presb. and Theol. Rev. Jan. 1865; Noi-th Dritish Rev. vol. x; and the literature under Will.
Necham, Neckham, or Nequam, Alexander, an English monk, noted as a universal scholar, a pro- ficient in the whole circle of science, including canon law, medicine, and theology, was born at St. Albans in 1157; lived and studied at Paris, and after his return to his native country was made abbot of Cirencester, and
NECHO
908
NECHUNJAH
IIieroKlyi)h of Necbo.
dii'diii 1217. Ilfiistheauthorofagreat variety of works roin.iiiiiug in ^IS. But the most important of all his l)ro(luctions, including many theological and philosoph- ical works, is his IM Xatnrls Rerum, which is believed to have had quite a large circulation towards the close of the 12th centur}'. It has recently been edited and pub- lished by the noted English antiquarian,Thomas Wright, who has written much about Necham in the liiog. Brit. Lit. (Anglo-Norman Period), p. 449-50. The Z>e Nuiaris Rerum (Lond. 18G3) aims to interest the student of nature in tlie Author of nature. It is iconoclastic in tendency, and rejects the aid of art in religious cere- monies. See, besides Wright, Biog. Brit. Lit., Piper, Kinliitini;/ in die Monumentale Theoloyie, p. 557-59; Cave, Ilijitoria Lilerarici, s. v.
Ne'cho (Heb. Xeko', 133, an Egyptian name; Sept. and Josephus, N£X«<i' ; fully "-? '^"1'?» J'^i("'"oh- .\erho, 2 Kings xxiii, 29, 33, 34, 35, etc.; once lleb. nb:. XcbiJi', Jcr. xlvi, 2; Herodotus, XsKwr ; on the twufuKl appellation of tliis king on the monuments, see Koselliiii, Monum. Star, ii, 131 sq., tab. 9), an Egyptian king, son and successor (according to Herodotus, ii, 158) of Psammetichus, and con- temporary of the Jewish king Josiah (15.0. 009). The wars and successes of Pharaoh-Necho in Syria are re- corded by sacred as avcU as profane writers, affording a striking instance of agreement between them. On coming to the throne he organized powerful fleets on the Mediterranean and the Ked Sea. Having engaged some Phoenician sailors, he sent them on a voyage of discovery along the coasts of Africa. According to Herodotus (iv, 42, 3), they cir- cumnavigated that continent from the Arabian (iulf by the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar) to Egypt, and related that in the south they had the sun on their right hand, which that historian could not believe. Most modern writers consider this testimony sufficient, and the voy- age attested (see Grote, Jlist. of Greece, iii, 283 sq. ; Beck, ]Velt-Ge.ic/i. i, 595 sq. ; comp. Pliny, I/ist. Xat. ii, G7 : Arrian, Re?: Iiul. ad tin.). Necho undertook to chock the growth of Babylonian power, and with this view collected a powerful army, and entering Palestine, followed the route along the sea-coast of Judiua, intend- ing to besiege the town of Carchemish on the Eu()hrates. But Josiah, king of Judah, offended at the passage of the Egyptian army through his territories, resolved to impede, if miable to prevent, their march. Necho sent messengers to induce him to desist, assuring him that he had no hostile intentions against Judiea, " but against the house wlierewitli I have war; for God commanded me to make haste." This conciliatory message was of no avail. Josiah posted himself in the valley of Megid- do, and prepared to oppose the Egyptians. Megiddo was a city in the tribe of Manasseh, between forty and fifty mik-s to the north of Jerusalem, and within three hours of the coast. It is apparently confounded by Herodotus with Magdolus in Egypt. In this vallev the fui'ble forces of tlie Jewish king, having attacked Necho, were routed witii great slaughter. Josiah being wounded in the neck with an arrow, ordered his attenci- ants to take him from the field. Escaping from the lieavy shower of arrows with which tlieir i)roken ranks were overwhelmed, tliey removed him from the chariot in wiiit'h he had been wounded, and jilaciiig him in a " second one that he had," they conveyed liim to Jerusa- lem, where he died (2 Kings xxiii. 29, 30; 2 Chron. XXXV, 20 sq.\ See Josiah. Necho continued his niarcli to the ICuplirates. But three months ha<l scarce- ' ly elapsed when, returning from the capture of Carche- mish and the defeat of I lie Ciialdicans, he learned that, though Josiah had left an elder son, Jehoahaz had caused himself to be i)roclaimed king on tlic death of his father, without soliciting Necho to sanction his tak- ing the crown. Incensed at this, he deposed Jehoahaz