The Pulpit Commentary — Ecclesiastes — Section 203

of the type described, we should be justified in placing less value upon them than ho did. It is true that more than once he speaks with a bitterness and disgust of all the occupations nnd pleasures of life, which we cannot, with our experience, fairly endorse. But, as a rule, his moralizing is not of the ascetic type. He recommends, on the whole, 11 cheerful and grateful enjoyment of all the innocent pleasures of life, with a constant remembrance that the judgment draws ever nearer and nearer. While he has no hesitation in declaring that no earthly employments or pleasures can completely satisfy the soul and give it a resting-place, he does not, like the ancient hermits, approve of dressing in sackcloth, of feeding on bread and water only, and of retiring altogether from the society of our fellows. His teaching, indeed, contains a great deal more of true Christianity than has often been found in the writings and sermons of professedly Christian moralists and preachers. All the more weight, therefore, is to be attached to his words from this very fact, that he does not pose as an ascetic. We could not listen to him if he did; and accordingly we must be all the more careful not to lessen the value and weight of the words he speaks to which we should attend, by depreciating bim as au authority. It is only of some of his judgments that we can say they are such as a healthy mind could scarcely endorse. '!'his, in the passage before us, is certainly not one of them. It certainly runs counter to our ordinary sentiments and practices, like many of the sayings of Christ, but is not on that account to be hastily rejected; we are not justified either in seeking to diminish its weight or explain it away. It is not, indeed, a matter of surprise that the thoughts and feelings of beings under the influence of sinful habits, which enslave both mind and- heart, should require to undergo a change before their teaching coincides with the mind of the Holy Spirit. In this section of the book we have teaching very much in the spirit of the New Testament. Compare with the second verse the sentences spoken by Christ: "Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger; woe unto you that laugh now ! for ye shall mourn and weep" (Luke vi. 25). And notice that the visits paid to the afflicted to console them, from which the Preacher declares he had gained moral and spiritual benefits, are recommended to us by the apostle as Christian duties (Jas. i. 27). From even the saddest experiences, therefore, a thoughtful mind will derive some gain; some compensations there are to the deepest miseries. The house of mourning is that in which there is sorrow on account of death. According to Jewish customs, the expres- sion of grief for the dead was very much more demonstrative and elaborate than with us. The time of mourning was for seven days (Ecclus. xxii. 10), sometimes in special cases for thirty days (NU.ID b. xx. 29; Deut. xxiv. 8). The presence of sympathizing friends (John xi. 19), of hired mourners and minstrels (Matt. ix. 23; Mark v. 38), the solemn meals of the bread and wine of affiiction (Jer. xvi. 7; Hos. ix. 4), made the scene very impressive. Over against the picture he suggests of lamentation and woe, he sets that of a house of feasting, filled with joyous guests, and he asserts that it is better to go to the former than to the latter. He contratlicts the more natural and obvious inclination which we all have to joy rather than to sorrow. But a moment's consider- ation will convince us that he is in the right, whether we choose the better part or not. Joy at the best is harmless-it relieves an overstrain on the mind or spirit; but when it has passed away it leaves no positive gain behind. Sorrow rightly borne is able to draw the thoughts upward, to purify and transform the soul. Its office is like that attributed to tragedy by Aristotl<'- : "to cleanse the mind from evil paosions by pity and terror-pity at the sight of another's misfortune, and terror at the resemblance between the sufferer and ourselves" ('Poetics'). Contradictory of ordinl.\ry feelings and opinions though this teaching of Solomon's is, there are three ways in which a visit to the house of mourning is better than to the house of feasting. !. IT AFFOBl)S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SHOWING SYMPATHY WITH THE AFFLICTED, Among our best-spent hours are those in which we have sought to lighten and share the burden of the bereaved and distressed. We may not have been able to open sources of consolation which otherwise would have remained hidden and sealed; but the mere expression of our commiseration may be h~lpful and s~othing. S~metimes we may be able to suggest consolatory thoughts, to impart serviceable advice, or to give needful relief. But in all cases we feel that we have received more than we have given-that in 6eekina to comfort the sorrowful we come into closer communion with that Saviour who ca~e from heaven to earth to bear tl:,Q burden of sin and suffering, OR. VII, 1-29.] ECCLESIASTES ; OR, THE PREACHER. 191