whole given more offence than that of Joab were other ways of recovering them; or, i1 or even Adonijah. He, at any rate, was he must pursue them in person, his proper not " a murderer whom vengeance suffereth course was evidently to ask the king's per- not to live," nor had he taken o.ny part in miBBion. That he did not do so is in itself recent conspirBOies. On the contrary, he a auspicious circumstance, and Solomon seems to have lived quietly enough under might reasonably think that the flight of the eye of the king. And it consequently the slaves was but a feint, and that Shimei's has the appearance of cruelty o.nd malevo- visit to a foreign court had really a political ~ence that Solomon should " press the object. But, be that as it may, the king letter of a compa.ct against him," especially had protested unto him that if he went any when, by returning to Jerusalem, he placed whither, he should most certainly die. his µfe at Solomon's mercy. But it is not When he went, when he despised the royal difficult to offer a complete justification of command and disregarded his sacred oath, Solomon's action in this matter. In the how was it possible for Solomon to break first plo.ce, it is to be remembered that his word ? To do so would have been cruelty had no part in his character. In inevitably to compromise himself with his his long reign of forty years there are subjects, and to forfeit their reverence and absolutely no evidences of a brutal and trust. Besides, there was a duty he owed tyrannical disposition. There is a strong to his dead father, and above all, one which presumption, consequently, that he was not he owed to the living God. He had now actuated by cruelty on this occasion, a pre- the opportunity for which his father bade sumption which finds support in the con- him wait, of putting into force the provisions sideration that Solomon was much too of the Mosaic law, of requiring the death of sagacious to prejudice himself in popular the blasphemer, of showing his subjects estimation at the commencement of his that the law could not be defied with im- reign by proceedings which would have the punity, that though vengeance was not least suspicion of vindictiveness. And (2) executed speedily against evil works, still with this probability the facts of the case retribution was certain in the long run, and entirely agree. Shimei's life, as we have so of teaching them a much needed lesson seen, was forfeited to Jewish law. As he had of obedience and respect of authority. so long been spared, however, the king gave Every consideration, therefore, of justice, him a gracious respite. The conditions morality, filial piety, and religion warrnnted imposed were not onerous. Shimei had but him in putting Shimei to dea.th. Every to keep his parole and he would live; to imputation of weakness, irresolution, dis- break it and he would assuredly die. He regard of his plighted word, compromise of did .break it; not without provocation, it his royal dignity, and indifference to religion may be, but he broke it, and broke too his might justly have been levelled against him, ,;olemn oath. It may be said it was hard had he interfered between Shimei and the he should lose his slaves, but better, surely, sword of Justice. lose them than his life. Besides, there
HOMILETICS. Vera. ~6.-The End of the Tranagressor. Such was the end of Shimei- violent, sanguinary, shameful. Old man as he is, he may not die in peo.ce : his hoar hairs must be crimsoned with his blood. What does this teo.ch ? what its message to Christian men? It is twofold. It speaks (1) OF THE Sm, (2) OF THE RETRIBUTION, I. It teaches (1) The sin of treaaon. He had offered insult and defiance to his lawful king. Rebellion against constituted authority can onfy be jllStifted by in• tolerable tyranny and outrage. He who 11 dares to wield The regicidal steel " &ust a.newer to Him by whom kings govern. We are to "honour the king," to "be subject to the higher powers." "They that resist shall receive to themselves damnation," as did this rebel Benje.mite. 2. The sin of blasphemy. '' A grievous curse." Aimed o.t the king, it reached the King of kings •. It wo.s not _only de- structive of authority; not only an affront offered to the maJesty of_law; ~t ~a.s an indirect blow at the Majesty of Heaven. Men cannot " speak evil of digmties ·• wj.thout sin. Those who'' curse God" will" die" (Job ii 9). How little do men 48 THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. [ CB. II. 86-46,