nny part 0f the request of Moses; but, if he must yield to some extent, he wouid snve hi~ dignity and his interest, be thought, by yielding less than what was demanded. Ou Juur occasions he makes four different offers. I. THEY MA y 'll'ORSHIP Gon WHEREVER THEY PLEASE WITHIN THE LIMITS OF EaYPT (eh. viii. 25). A foolish offer, which, if accepted, would certainly have led to a riot and possibly to a ci,il war (ib. 26). But Pharao!! had only thought of his own dignity, not of the consequences. So civil rulers frequently ask the Church of Christ to concede this or that for the honour of the State, when the concession would do the State the greatest possible injury. ln their short-sightedness they do not see that in striking at the Church they will wound themsel\'es. In their zeal for their own honour, they do not rare how much the Church, or even how much the State suffers. JI. 'l'HEY MAY WORSHIP Gon IN THE WILDERNESS, ONLY TREY MUST NOT GO VERY IIAII AWAY (eh.viii. 28). This offer was an improvement; it did not require a plain violation of the express command of God. But it was insidious. It was made with the view of compelling a return. Pharaoh suspected from the first that the message, "Let my people go," meant "let them go altogether." This, until stunned by the dread infliction of the last plague, he was fully resolved not to do. He would let them go as a cat lets a mouse go, so far but not further-not out of his reach. So kings will give their people liberty, or the Church liberty, but only within narrow limits-in seeming rather than in reality-to such an extent as will not interfere with their being the real master, and re-asserting their absolute power at their pleasure. Once more Pharaoh was :short-sighted. Had bis offer been accepted, and had he then attempted to compel a return, he would only have precipitated some such catastrophe as befel bis army at the Red Sea. ill. THEY MAY GO THE THREE DAYS' JOUllli""EY INTO THE WILDERNEBS,•ONLY THEY MUST LEAVE THEIR FAMILIES BEHIND (eh. x. 8--11). The rejection of his first and second offers left Pharaoh no choice but to allow of the Israelites departing beyond his reach. So he devises a compromise, by which he thinks to lure them back. They shall leave their families behind. But God had said, "Let my people go," and children are as essential an element in the composition of a nation as either women or men. This offer was therefore more contrary to the Divine message which he had received than his second one. Worldly-minded men will frequently, while pretending to offer a better compromise, offer a worse; and, both in private and public dealings, it behoves prudent persons to be on their guard, and not imagine that every fresh bid that is made must be an advance. The law of auction does not hold good either in private or in parliamentary bargaining. JV. THEY JllAY GO THE THREE DAYS' JOURNEY INTO THE WILDERNESS, AND TA.KE THEm FA..IDLIES, IF THEY WILL ONLY LEAVE THEm CATTLE BEHIND (eh. x. 24). This was the ir.ost crafty suggestion of all. The cattle had not been mentioned in the Divine message, nor could it be said that they were part of the nation. The king could require t!ie detention of the cattle without infringing the letter of the Divine co=and. But he secured the return of the nation to Egypt as certainly by this plan as by the retention of the families. A nomadic people could not subsist for many weeks-scarcely for many days, without its flocks and herds. The Israelites would have been starved into surrender. Moses, however, without taking this objection, was able to point out that the terms of the message, rightly weighed with reference to all the circumstances, embraced the cattle, since sacrifice was spoken of, unaccompanied by any limitation. Once more, therefore, he was enabled to decline the compromise suggested as an infraction of the command which he had received, when its terms were rightly under- stood. W oddly men are continually placing their own construction on the words ot God's messages, and saying that this or that should be given up as not plainly contained in them. The example of Moses ju.stifles Christians in scanning narrowly the whole bearing and intention of each message, and insisting on what it implies as much as upon what it expres:ses. True wisdom will teach them· not to be driven to a compromise by worldly men's explanations of the Divine Word. They will study it for themselves, and guide their conduct by their own reading (under God's guidance) of the commands given them. Further, the example of Moses in rejecting all the four offers of Pharaoh, may teach us to suspect, misdoubt, and carefully examine every proposed corn promiHe; the essence of compromise in religion being the surrender of something Divinely ord1m1d l'J. x. 21-20.J TIIE BOOK OF EXODUS. 2'11
or instituted for tho sako of some supposed temporal convenience or advanta11c. H can rcnlly never be right to give up the smallest fragment of revealed truth, or~ allow the infracUon of the lea~t of God's commandments for even the greatest conceivable amount of tempornl benefit eHher to ourselves or others. Ver. 25.-Bad men, when unable to overcome good men's scruples, throw off the ma.~k of friendliness, and show themselves in their true colours. The circumstances of human life are continually bringing good men and bad men into contact and intercourse. 'l'hree results may follow :-1. The bad may corrupt the good. Thii,; is the result t{Jo often. "Evil communications corrupt good manners." Few can touch pitch and not be defiled. 2. The good may convert the bad. The first Christians converted a world that lay in wickedness. Esther softened the heart of Abasuerus. St. Ambrose, by long withstanding his will, converted Theodosius. 3. Neither may make any impression upon the other. In this case, while the good man merely regrets his inability to tum the bad man to righteousness, the bad man, baffled in his attempts to overcome the scruples of the good man and lead him astray, is apt to be greatly provoked, and to threaten, or even proceed to violence. "Take heed to thyself-in the day thou seest my face thou shalt die." What a spring of bitterness wells up from the evil heart of the sinner who feels himself opposed successfully, thwarted in his schemes, and baffled! While he still hopes to succeed all is smooth speaking. "I have sinned." "Forgive my sin this onnA only." "Go ye, serve the Lord." When he finds that he cannot prevail, there is a sudden and complete change. Benefits are forgotten ; friendliness is a thing of the past; even the prescribed forms of politeness are set aside. The wild beast that lies hid in each unregenerate man shows itself, and the friendly acquaintance of months or years is ready to tear his opposer to pieces.