LECTURE XII.

ZEDEKIAH; OR, THE GUILT OF MORAL WEAKNESS.

JEREMIAH XXXviii. 4—6. (1)

Therefore the princes said unto the king, We beseech thee let this man be put to death: for thus he weakeneth the hands of the men of war that remain in the city, and the hands of all the people, in speaking such words unto them : for this man seeketh not the welfare of this people, but the hurt.

Then Zedekiah the king said, Behold, he is in your hand: for the king is not he that can do anything against you.

Then took they Jeremiah, and cast him into the dungeon of Malchiah.

THERE is a scene in the New Testament of which we are forcibly reminded by this passage in the life of Zedekiah. It is that in which the "chief priests and rulers of the people stood and vehemently ac

1 With this Lecture the following chapters should be read : 2 Kings xxiv. 17-20; xxv. I—7; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 10, 13; Jeremiah xxi. xxiv. xxvii. xxviii. xxix. xxxii. xxxiv. xxxvii. xxxviii, xxxix. 1—7; lii. 1—1I.

cused" the Saviour at the tribunal of the Roman

governor. "We found this fellow (said they) perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Cæsar." "He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry." "Away with this man-crucify Him, crucify Him." Then Pilate, willing to release Him, spoke once and again in His favour. He went on to expostulate a third time even-"Why, what evil hath He done? I have found no cause of death in Him: I will therefore chastise Him, and let Him go. And they were instant with loud voices requiring that He should be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed." "And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they desired." It was as if he had said, like the irresolute king in the text,Behold, He is in your hand : for the Roman governor is not he that can do anything against you." And the sequel presented a parallel to Jeremiah's wrongful treatment. "Then took they Jesus, and led Him

66

away to be crucified."

Now I have brought these two cases of moral weakness in juxtaposition, in order that we may be assisted in forming an estimate both of what moral weakness is in the sight of God, and of what it ought to be in the sight of man. I mean, of course, that we may be assisted in determining whether it is simply a pitiable, and therefore venial error, or whether it is actually sinful. The subject of to-day's biographical sketch, Zedekiah, appears to open up this question; but

:

I am the more inclined to enter upon it, because in a recent number of a popular serial I have found the following defence of Pilate, which I conceive to be founded upon a false principle of morality. The writer is alluding to the Crucifixion, and his words are these "During the most awful and melancholy scene that the world ever witnessed-when the earth trembled with horror, and the kindly sun veiled his face before the cruelty of man-after the Divine Victim, and those women whose perfect love cast out their fear, the character who most deserves our pity is the timid, feminine, compassionate ruler, who pleaded hard for that sacred life against the murderous and turbulent mob of Jerusalem; who yielded at last in an agony of remorse and shame." And then he proceeds to contrast Pilate's conduct with that of the Apostles, much to the disadvantage of the latter"His cowardice seems much more venial than the dastardly desertion of those men, who after living in daily intercourse with our Saviour for the space of three years, hanging on His words, eating at the same table, sleeping at His side, sharing His every toil and privation, (made light indeed by so blessed a presence and so deep an affection,) at the first sight of sword or staff, 'forsook Him and fled.”

Now not to mention the unkind and indeed ungenerous manner in which the Apostles are spoken of, and the scanty allowance which is made for their momentary terror and defection, there is something

inexpressibly painful in this studied apology for Pilate, whose weakness, humanly speaking, brought about the crucifixion of the Saviour. His conduct, however, though fraught in that particular case with consequences which have exposed him to lasting infamy, is merely a sample of a temper which as it is found in many of us, and leads many of us into much evil, at least deserves analysis, and exposure of its real nature. If this is not done, we shall be in danger either of apologizing for ourselves under similar failures in duty, or of condemning Pilate on feeling rather than on principle. We will endeavour to obtain our object by examining the life of Zedekiah, the whole of which is before us, and which, consistent in its inconsistencies, will serve to explain both what Pilate was, and what too many of us, it is to be feared, are in danger of becoming.

Zedekiah, the uncle of Jehoiachin, and the brother of Jehoiakim, whose career we considered last Sunday, was the last of the four phantom kings, the creatures of Egypt or of Babylon, who appeared and disappeared after Josiah, and preceded the destruction of Jerusalem. Their years were few and evil. Jehoahaz was deposed after a reign of three months, and ended his days in Egypt. Jehoiakim passed a miserable eleven years in alternate vassalage and rebellion, and at length met a violent death, and was denied even the rites of sepulture. Jehoiachin had been scarcely seated three months on his tottering throne when Jerusalem

66

was taken by Nebuchadnezzar, and he himself was consigned to an imprisonment which lasted for thirtyseven years. Last of all came his father's brother Zedekiah1 the nominee of the Babylonian monarch, whose character is thus summed up by the sacred annalist: He did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, according to all that Jehoiakim had done. For through the anger of the Lord it came to pass in Jerusalem and Judah, until He had cast them out from His presence, that Zedekiah rebelled against the King of Babylon." Here we have it declared distinctly that though Zedekiah may have been weak, he was also wicked-that his wickedness displeased God-that for it he was given over to the folly of rebelling against Nebuchadnezzar-and that the final issue of his rebellion was a judicial requital for what he had done, and for what he had been.

Irresolution, a fatal irresolution, was the bane of Zedekiah's whole career. When appointed to the kingdom by Nebuchadnezzar, he had taken an oath to him by Elohim that he would bear him true allegiance. Nebuchadnezzar was no sooner occupied in other matters, than he seems to have wavered in his purpose, and to have trafficked with envoys from Tyre,

1 Zedekiah is called, 2 Chron. xxxvi. II, the brother of Jehoiachin whom he succeeded, but he was really his uncle, 2 Kings xxiv. 17. The word brother is used, in the passage alluded to, with some latitude.