xvii. 10), such unworthy, such defiled work should be so honoured
with an infinite overwhelming acceptance.--_Bridges._
To be out of the hands of evil is not to be free from it; for it still pursueth sinners, and it ceaseth not until it be gotten to the place where they are. . . . For, as St. Augustine saith, that God doth not forthwith avenge sinners is His patience, not His negligence. Wherefore it is to be feared lest by how much He stays the longer that we may repent, by so much He will punish us the more, if that we will not amend.--_Jermin._
Caius--Agrippa having suffered imprisonment for wishing him emperor--when he came afterwards to the empire, the first thing he did was to prefer Agrippa, and give him a chain of gold as heavy as the chain of iron that was on him in prison. Those that lose anything for God He seals them a bill of exchange of a double return.--_Trapp._
_MAIN HOMILETICS OF VERSE_ 22.
AN INHERITANCE INCORRUPTIBLE.
+I. A good man has always spiritual inheritance to leave his children.+ He has always his own holy character and example. And this is often of great service to them in a material point of view. Men who have obtained fame in the world leave their children the inheritance of a famous name, which is often a fortune in itself. The son or daughter of a famous man can command positions of worldly advantage which are closed against the children of obscure parents. But while a famous father can leave his fame as an inheritance to his children he cannot ensure to them the possession of the genius by which he gained it. Talent is not hereditary, and it often happens that a very gifted father has very common-place children. But moral worth--a godly character--is an inheritance that not only makes a son respected in the world for his father's sake, but is very likely to make him also a partaker of the same godliness. A good man's character is not hereditary, but it is very apt to propagate other characters of the same kind. This inheritance of a good man is an incorruptible inheritance. No inheritance of lands or money are entirely out of reach of the changes and chances of human life, but the example, and the memory, and the blessings which have come from a godly parentage, make an inheritance which, like the heavenly one, "fadeth not away." It is the best possible safeguard that a father can leave his children against the temptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil. The remembrance of what belief in the Gospel did for a holy father has saved many a son for drifting on the quicksands of infidelity. There have been times in the history of many a child of godly parents, when such an anchor has been the only one which has held them from "making shipwreck of faith" (1 Tim. i. 19). The character of a good man is such an indisputable fact, and is so entirely unexplainable on any other ground than that of the existence of a supernatural and Divine power, that it constitutes an unanswerable argument for the truth of revelation. And so with every other form of evil that assails men. The inheritance which Christ has left to his disciples--to His spiritual children--is His _character._ This has produced and reproduced its own kind through all the ages since His sojourn upon earth. This has held them to the faith in the dark days of persecution. And when the infidel himself has come face to face with it, even he has been compelled to acknowledge the intrinsic worth of the children's portion. This holy life, lived among sinful men, has been the "unsearchable riches" (Ephes. iii. 8) of one Christian generation after another, for more than eighteen centuries, and it is by virtue of this inheritance that good men have been enabled to transmit to their posterity their own godly lives and examples.
+II. A good man may have a material as well as a moral inheritance to bequeath.+ He may possess both character and substance. But the fact that a man is good is no guarantee that he will have any worldly wealth to leave behind him. If Lord Bacon's assertion be correct, that "Prosperity is the blessing of the Old Testament, and adversity the blessing of the New," he is quite as likely to die poor as rich. Still there is often a blessing of some amount of material riches given to honest labour, and probably there are far more godly men in proportion to their number, who acquire _some_ inheritance to leave behind them, than there are godless men. (See on verse 11, etc.)
+III. Good men sometimes inherit wealth which has been gathered by bad men.+ It is not a universal rule, but it may be oftener fulfilled than we are aware of. It may be inherited by generations of wicked men and at last come into the hands of a just one. That it should be so is seen to be a wise and good law of providence. 1. _Because a good man will make a far better use of "the mammon of unrighteousness."_ He will use it to minister to both the bodily and spiritual needs of his fellow-creatures as well as his own. 2. _Because the laid-up wealth of the wicked has often been obtained by defrauding the good._ God does not always cause it to be repaid to the identical _persons_ who were thus defrauded, but He may often cause it to be restored to identical _characters._ This proverb must be taken to assert the straightforward motion of the wheels of providence, although by reason of their "great height" (Ezek. i. 18),--their vast circumference--they take a long time to go round.
_OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS._
The usurer lightly begets blind children that cannot see to keep what their father left them. But when the father is gone to hell for gathering, the son often follows for scattering. But God is just.--_T. Adams._
That the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just appears to have been a prominent feature of the Old Dispensation (chap. xxviii. 8; Job xxvii. 16, 17), and it will be openly renewed in the latter-day glory of the Church (Isa. lxi. 6).--_Bridges._
This is the direct promise of heaven (Psa. ciii. 17; Prov. xxii. 6). That it ever fails, must be by palpable neglect. A man may be saved himself, and lose his children; but the Bible speaks of this as the parent's fault (1 Sam. iii. 13; Prov. xiii. 24), and brands it as the great curse upon the earth (Mal. iv. 6). While the sinner not only cannot send down his wealth, but cannot himself possess it. It is a curse to him. It will be used for the saints (Matt. xxv. 28).--_Miller._
It is quite clear that in this and other passages an inheritance is regarded _as a good,_ and that no blame is attached to "the good man" who leaves it to his children. The principle expressed in the latter clause is the same as that laid down by the apostle, _"All things are yours,"_ and, among other things, "the world." That may most truly be called mine, from which I derive the greatest possible benefit it can be made to yield. It would be strange, indeed, were I to wish anything else, or anything more. . . . The wicked man calls his wealth _his own._ But it is _God's._ God is the friend of His children, and holds that property, like everything else, for their good; so that it is _theirs_ by being _His._--_Wardlaw._
Personal goodness profiteth for posterity. God gives not to His servants some small annuity for life only, as great men used to do, but "keepeth mercy for thousands" of generations "of them that fear Him." The opposite is not perpetually and universally true of every wicked person, . . . but, together with their lands, they bequeath their children their sins and punishments, which is far worse than that legacy of leprosy that Joab left his issue (2 Sam. iii. 29).--_Trapp._
An expression of trust like that in Eccles. ii. 26, that in the long run the anomalies of the world are rendered even.--_Plumptre._
_MAIN HOMILETICS OF VERSE_ 23.
LAND AND ITS TILLERS.
+I. That untilled land+ (see Critical Notes) +possesses a latent power to produce food.+ There are many things in nature in which there exists a latent power to minister to man's needs; but his hand must be put forth to arouse the sleeping power. There is heat in coal to warm him, but he must kindle the coal before it will put it forth. So in the earth, there are stores of life-giving power wrapped up in its bosom, but the hand of man must till it before it will yield him food. And it will yield food to the poor man as well as to the rich; his hard toil will be rewarded by receiving bread for his labour.
+II. That though much food is to be got out of the land by the poor man, yet more is to be got out of it by the rich.+ This is implied in the contrast, though it is not directly expressed.--(See Fausset's Note in the Comments.) The poor man cannot spend so much upon his land as the rich man can. He can give little beside hard labour, while the man who possesses wealth can call in every appliance to increase the fruitfulness of the land. It is well known that the more liberally a land is farmed the more abundant will be the crop.
+III. Yet want of judgment--_i.e.,_ a sense of justice, often leads a rich man to neglect to cultivate his land so as to increase its power of yielding food.+ All landowners are responsible to God for a right use of His earth. Holding in their hands, as they do, the power of making food abundant or scarce, they have much for which to give an account to Him whose stewards they are. When they turn into hunting-grounds and parks for their own exclusive use acres of land which, if cultivated, would yield much food, and thus lighten the burdens of their poorer fellow-creatures, they "destroy it for want of judgment," or "justice."
_OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS._
By the rule of interpretation by the contrast of opposites, and by supplying the wanting member in one clause from its opposite expressed in the other clause, the sense is, "But there is food (wealth) possessed by rich men that is destroyed for want of honesty in its acquisition and its employment." The poor man's (honest) labour forms the contrast to the rich man's "want of justice" in his acquisitions. The _newly_ tilled land of the poor forms the contrast to the rich man's possessions held for some time.--_Fausset._
What is the practical or extended application? If talents lie inactive, or if their activity is not wisely directed, a rich harvest is _destroyed for want of judgment._ The same ruin flows from a neglect of religious advantages. The harvest of grace withers into a famine. Slothful professor! rouse thyself to _till_ the ground; else thou wilt starve for want of _food._ Then let thy roused energy be directed by a _sound judgment;_ for want of which, the fruits of industry, temporal, intellectual, and spiritual, will run to waste.--_Bridges._
There seems an interesting connection between the former verse and this. Talk of _inheritances!_ says the poor man, with his scanty means and daily hard toil; _we_ have no inheritance, either _from_ our fathers, or _for_ our children: all is homely with us, and likely to remain so. Well, says Solomon, the poor man is not without his consolations, even of a temporal nature, _"much food is in the tillage of the poor."_ The maxim is not to be confined to the one kind of labour specified, but extends equally to all the different modes in which the poor make their daily bread. The poor peasant, who cultivates his plot industriously and by "the sweat of his brow," will, through the Divine blessing, procure thereby an ample supply of _food_ for himself and his family, and industry and tidy economy will make the cottage fireside and table snug and comfortable, and its lowly tenants will enjoy plenty, though in a plain and homely form. On the other hand, how often in the case of those who obtain _inheritances_ may the poor see the saying verified, "There is that is destroyed for want of _judgment._" By prodigality, by bad management, they waste their fortunes. Their lands are extensive, but unproductive; or if productive, the product is mis-spent and squandered; it goes, no one can tell how. To such persons the homely comfort of the poor is a just object of envy; far more, in many cases, than the wealth of the rich is to the poor.--_Wardlaw._
The proverbial sense is, that a little is made much by God's blessing and pains, and that much is made little by wickedness and carelessness.--_Jermin._
_MAIN HOMILETICS OF VERSE_ 24.
THE CHILD AND THE ROD.
+I. Pain is a necessary instrument in human training.+ The rod is to be included in the means of education. Some natures need an experience of pain to quicken their _mental_ capabilities. Sometimes children are like untilled land (see ver. 23), they have large capabilities lying dormant, which will not awaken unless they are subjected to severe discipline and punished for their shortcomings. And what is necessary in intellectual training is also necessary in moral training. Children must be made to feel that pain is the outcome of transgression, and evil habits must if possible be crushed while in the bud. They can be overcome then at the expense of far less suffering than when they have taken firmer hold, and the pain is as nothing compared with that which the habits themselves will inflict if they are allowed to go on through life and enthrall the soul entirely. A thorn which has but just entered the skin can be extracted with a very small amount of suffering, even by an unskilful hand; if left for a few days it may produce a festering wound; if not extracted at all, it may end in mortification. The fear of suffering is also a great _preventive_ of sin. The Great Father of men uses it as an instrument to dissuade men from breaking His laws. He warns them, over and over again, of the suffering which they will bring upon themselves if they disobey His commands and their experience of the suffering that has followed sin in the past often leads them to avoid it in the future. And what is effectual in the training of men is effectual also with children. They will often avoid the repetition of an act which they know has brought them punishment before and will do so again. This fear of pain is not the highest motive for abstinence from wrong-doing, but in both the child and the man it may be the foundation of an upbuilding of character which shall by-and-by go on growing in goodness without this instrumentality.
+II. That infliction of pain is compatible with the highest love, and is often a token of it.+ The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews tells us that God scourges His children whenever He sees that they need it. And yet they have become His children only by the exercise of His own Infinite love. But we know that He chastens not for His pleasure, but for our profit (Heb. xii. 10); that He has love and wisdom enough to see the "far-off interest of tears." So it is the father or mother, who truly loves his or her child, who is willing to undergo the present suffering of inflicting pain in order to ensure a future blessing to their children. "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; _therefore_ I will punish you for your iniquities" (Amos iii. 2). What is true of the Divine parent is true also of the human. It follows--
+III. That the neglect of chastisement is a proof of the want of real love.+ "He that spareth his rod _hateth_ his son." What should we think of a father who would see his child bleed to death rather than bind up the wound, because in so doing he would inflict some present bodily pain upon the child, and some mental suffering upon himself? Or of the physician who would not use the knife to stop the progress of mortal disease because the patient shrinks from the incision, and he himself is averse to the sight of blood? We should say they were destroyers of life which had been entrusted to them to preserve. But what shall we say of a parent who is so fond of his child that he cannot inflict pain upon him now for deeds that, if repeated until they become habits, will ruin him for time and for eternity? Such sickly sentimentalism in a parent makes him unworthy of his name, and turns him who should have been his child's highest earthly blessing into his direst curse. Many inmates of our gaols are there because they have been the victims of this so-called love; and when God sums up their misdeeds a large portion of the guilt will fall elsewhere than on the child cursed by such a parent.
_OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS._
Fond parents think it love (that spares the rod), but Divine wisdom calls it hatred.--_John Howe._
The discipline of our children must commence with self-discipline. Nature teaches us to love them much. But we want a controlling principle to teach us to love them wisely. The indulgence of our children has its root in self-indulgence.--_Bridges._
The phrase "betimes," or "early in the morning," admonisheth parents to procure the means of their children's welfare before all other matters; and, as it were, as soon as they rise out of their beds. The Lord be merciful to us for the neglect of this duty; for if we have any worldly business to do we go first about that, and then teach and instruct our children at our leisure. O reckless carelessness about the chiefest matters! Oh that as we use to feed our children in the morning so we could once be brought to instruct them also betimes.--_Muffet._
Justice must be observed in the correction of children. 1. That there is a fault committed. 2. That the fault so committed deserveth punishment. 3. That the punishment do not exceed the quality of the fault, which will otherwise seem to rage and revenge rather than to chastise for amendment.--_Spencer._
_To spare the rod_ in the first clause being opposed to _chastening_ in the second, by the rod must be meant not only that particular instrument of punishment, but everything besides that may prove the means of our correction and amendment. And by chastisement is here intended every means of correction, every means of effecting what we intend by chastening, whether it be reproof, restraint of liberty, disappointment of our children's wills, or corporal punishment. By _loving_ and _hating_ is not here meant the exerting actually those passions in the heart, for then the text would be untrue, but the acting agreeably to the _reason,_ and not the _blindness_ of those passions; the producing such effects as are in God's account, and in wise men's too, and in our own when freed from partial prejudices; the consequences and fruits of love and hatred acting regularly, such as are commonly esteemed the effects of those two causes, whether they indeed proceed from them or no. For if we are to reckon of love or hatred by the effects, then it is easy to discern when parents hate their children, namely, when, through neglect or fondness, they permit them to enter on a course of ruin, and so let them fall into such miseries as the utmost hatred of their inveterate enemies could neither wish nor make them greater, whatever love there may be at the bottom. A mother is as much a murderess who stifles her child in a bed of roses as she that does it with a pillow-bear _(pillow-case)._ The end and mischief is as great, though the means and instrument be not the same.--_Bishop Fleetwood._
He that spareth the rod from his son maketh him to be _his rod,_ wherewith he whips himself, and wherewith God whips both of them. It is better thy son should feel thy rod than thou feel the sorrow of his wicked life. And do not _hate_ him in not correcting of him, lest he _hate thee_ by thy not correcting of him, and God shew His hatred against both by His wrath upon you.--_Jermin._
The Koh-i-noor diamond, when it came into the Queen's possession, was a mis-shapen lump. It was very desirable to get its corners cut off and all its sides reduced to symmetry; but no unskilful hand was permitted to touch it. Men of science were summoned to consider its nature and capabilities. They examined the form of its crystals and the consistency of its parts. They considered the direction of the grain, and the side on which it would bear a pressure. With their instructions, the jewel was placed in the hands of an experienced lapidary, and by long, patient, careful labour, its sides were ground down to the desired proportions. The gem was hard, and needed a heavy pressure; the gem was precious, and every precaution was taken which science and skill could suggest to get it polished into shape without cracking it in the process. The effort was successful. The hard diamond was rubbed down into forms of beauty, and yet sustained no damage by the greatness of the pressure to which it was subjected. "Jewels, bright jewels," in the form of little children, are the heritage which God gives to every parent. They are unshapely and need to be polished; they are brittle and so liable to be permanently injured by the pressure; but they are stones of peculiar preciousness, and if they were successfully polished they would shine as stars for ever and ever, giving off, from their undimming edge, more brilliantly than other creatures can, the glory which they get from the Sun of Righteousness. Those who possess these diamonds in the rough should neither strike them unskilfully nor let them be uncut. . . . Prayer and pains must go together in this difficult work. Lay the whole case before our Father in heaven; this will take the hardness out of the correction, without diminishing its strength.--_Arnot._
Correction is a kind of cure, saith the philosopher (Arist. _Ethic._ lib. ii.), the likeliest way to save the child's soul; where, yet, saith Bernard, it is the care of the child that is charged upon the parent, not the cure, that is God's work alone.--_Trapp._
In order to form the minds of children, the first thing to be done is _to conquer the will._ To inform the understanding is a work of time, and must, with children, proceed by slow degrees, as they are able to bear it; but the subjecting of the will must be done at once, _and the sooner the better;_ for, by neglecting timely correction, they will contract a stubbornness and obstinacy which are hardly ever conquered, and not without using such severity as would be as painful to me as to the child. I insist upon the conquering of the will betimes, because this is the only strong and rational foundation of a religious education, without which both precept and example will be ineffectual. But when this is thoroughly done, a child is capable of being governed by the wisdom and piety of its parents till its own understanding comes to maturity, and the principles of religion have taken root in the mind.--_Mrs. S. Wesley._
It is _his_ rod that must be used, the rod of a parent, not the rod of a servant.--_Henry._
_MAIN HOMILETICS OF VERSE_ 25.
WANT AND SATISFACTION.
+I. The limited truth of the assertion in relation both to the righteous and the wicked.+ Read in the light of personal experience, and in the light of history, it is found _true,_ and is found _not true_ in the case of the righteous. Elijah _ate to satisfaction_ beside the brook Cherith, while many of his idolatrous countrymen suffered _want._ But Paul was often in hunger (2 Cor. xi. 27), while Nero lived in luxury. Christians have died from hunger, and others have had all their bodily wants supplied all their lives, and sometimes by most remarkable providential interpositions. Godliness is often profitable in this sense for the "life that now is" (1 Tim.