Gilead, his eagerness and exultation mingled with some vague alarm. The
vow he has made cannot but weigh upon his mind now that the performance
of it comes so near. He has had time to think what it implies. When he
uttered the words that involved a life the issue of war appeared
doubtful. Perhaps the campaign would be long and indecisive. He might
have returned not altogether discredited, yet not triumphant. But he has
succeeded beyond his expectation. There can be no doubt that the
offering is due to Jehovah. Who then shall appear? The secret of his vow
is hid in his own breast. To no man has he revealed his solemn promise;
nor has he dared in any way to interfere with the course of events. As
he passes up the valley with his attendants there is a stir in his rude
castle. The tidings of his coming have preceded him and she, that dear
girl who is the very apple of his eye, his daughter, his only child,
having already rehearsed her part, goes forth eagerly to welcome him.
She is clad in her gayest dress. Her eyes are bright with the keenest
excitement. The timbrel her father once gave her, on which she has often
played to delight him, is tuned to a chant of triumph. She dances as she
passes from the gate. Her father, her father, chief and victor!
And he? A sudden horror checks his heart. He stands arrested, cold as
stone, with eyes of strange dark trouble fixed upon the gay young figure
that welcomes him to home and rest and fame. She flies to his arms, but
they do not open to her. She looks at him, for he has never repulsed
her--and why now? He puts forth his hands as if to thrust away a
dreadful sight, and what does she hear? Amid the sobs of a strong man's
agony, "Alas, my daughter, thou hast brought me very low ... and thou
art one of them that trouble me." To startled ears the truth is slowly
told. She is vowed to the Lord in sacrifice. He cannot go back. Jehovah
who gave the victory now claims the fulfilment of the oath.
We are dealing with the facts of life. For a time let us put aside the
reflections that are so easy to make about rash vows and the iniquity of
keeping them. Before this anguish of the loving heart, this awful issue
of a sincere but superstitious devotion we stand in reverence. It is one
of the supreme hours of humanity. Will the father not seek relief from
his obligation? Will the daughter not rebel? Surely a sacrifice so awful
will not be completed. Yet we remember Abraham and Isaac journeying
together to Moriah, and how with the father's resignation of his great
hope there must have gone the willingness of the son to face death if
that last proof of piety and faith is required. We look at the father
and daughter of a later date and find the same spirit of submission to
what is regarded as the will of God. Is the thing horrible--too horrible
to be dwelt upon? Are we inclined to say,
"... 'Heaven heads the count of crimes
With that wild oath?' She renders answer high,
'Not so; nor once alone, a thousand times
I would be born and die.'"
It has been affirmed that "Jephthah's rash act, springing from a
culpable ignorance of the character of God, directed by heathen
superstition and cruelty poured an ingredient of extreme bitterness into
his cup of joy and poisoned his whole life." Suffering indeed there must
have been for both the actors in that pitiful tragedy of devotion and
ignorance, who knew not the God to Whom they offered the sacrifice. But
it is one of the marks of rude erring man that he does take upon himself
such burdens of pain in the service of the invisible Lord. A shallow
scepticism entirely misreads the strange dark deeds often done for
religion; yet one who has uttered many a foolish thing in the way of
"explaining" piety can at last confess that the renouncing mortifying
spirit is, with all its errors, one of man's noble and distinguishing
qualities. To Jephthah, as to his heroic daughter, religion was another
thing than it is to many, just because of their extraordinary
renunciation. Very ignorant they were surely, but they were not so
ignorant as those who make no great offering to God, who would not
resign a single pleasure, nor deprive a son or daughter of a single
comfort or delight, for the sake of religion and the higher life. To
what purpose is this waste? said the disciples, when the pound of
ointment of spikenard very costly was poured on the head of Jesus and
the house was filled with the odour. To many now it seems waste to
expend thought, time or money upon a sacred cause, much more to hazard
or to give life itself. We see the evils of enthusiastic self-devotion
to the work of God very clearly; its power we do not feel. We are saving
life so diligently, many of us, that we may well fear to lose it
irremediably. There is no strain and therefore no strength, no joy. A
weary pessimism dogs our unfaith.
To Jephthah and his daughter the vow was sacred, irrevocable. The
deliverance of Israel by so signal and complete a victory left no
alternative. It would have been well if they had known God differently;
yet better this darkly impressive issue which went to the making of
Hebrew faith and strength than easy unfruitful evasion of duty. We are
shocked by the expenditure of fine feeling and heroism in upholding a
false idea of God and obligation to Him; but are we outraged and
distressed by the constant effort to escape from God which characterizes
our age? And have we for our own part come yet to the right idea of self
and its relations? Our century, beclouded on many points, is nowhere
less informed than in matters of self-sacrifice; Christ's doctrine is
still uncomprehended. Jephthah was wrong, for God did not need to be
bribed to support a man who was bent on doing his duty. And many fail
now to perceive that personal development and service of God are in the
same line. Life is made for generosity not mortification, for giving in
glad ministry not for giving up in hideous sacrifice. It is to be
devoted to God by the free and holy use of body, mind and soul in the
daily tasks which Providence appoints.
The wailing of Jephthah's daughter rings in our ears bearing with it the
anguish of many a soul tormented in the name of that which is most
sacred, tormented by mistakes concerning God, the awful theory that He
is pleased with human suffering. The relics of that hideous
Moloch-worship which polluted Jephthah's faith, not even yet purged away
by the Spirit of Christ, continue and make religion an anxiety and life
a kind of torture. I do not speak of that devotion of thought and time,
eloquence and talent to some worthless cause which here and there amazes
the student of history and human life,--the passionate ardour, for
example, with which Flora Macdonald gave herself up to the service of a
Stuart. But religion is made to demand sacrifices compared to which the
offering of Jephthah's daughter was easy. The imagination of women
especially, fired by false representations of the death of Christ in
which there was a clear divine assertion of self, while it is made to
appear as complete suppression of self, bears many on in a hopeless and
essentially immoral endeavour. Has God given us minds, feelings, right
ambitions that we may crush them? Does He purify our desires and
aspirations by the fire of His own Spirit and still require us to crush
them? Are we to find our end in being nothing, absolutely nothing,
devoid of will, of purpose, of personality? Is this what Christianity
demands? Then our religion is but refined suicide, and the God who
desires us to annihilate ourselves is but the Supreme Being of the
Buddhists, if those may be said to have a god who regard the suppression
of individuality as salvation.
Christ was made a sacrifice for us. Yes: He sacrificed everything
except His own eternal life and power; He sacrificed ease and favour
and immediate success for the manifestation of God. So He achieved
the fulness of personal might and royalty. And every sacrifice His
religion calls us to make is designed to secure that enlargement and
fulness of spiritual individuality in the exercise of which we shall
truly serve God and our fellows. Does God require sacrifice? Yes,
unquestionably--the sacrifice which every reasonable being must make in
order that the mind, the soul may be strong and free, sacrifice of the
lower for the higher, sacrifice of pleasure for truth, of comfort for
duty, of the life that is earthly and temporal for the life that is
heavenly and eternal. And the distinction of Christianity is that it
makes this sacrifice supremely reasonable because it reveals the higher
life, the heavenly hope, the eternal rewards for which the sacrifice is
to be made, that it enables us in making it to feel ourselves united to
Christ in a divine work which is to issue in the redemption of mankind.
There are not a few popularly accepted guides in religion who fatally
misconceive the doctrine of sacrifice. They take man-made conditions for
Divine opportunities and calls. Their arguments come home not to the
selfish and overbearing, but to the unselfish and long-suffering members
of society, and too often they are more anxious to praise
renunciation--any kind of it, for any purpose, so it involve acute
feeling--than to magnify truth and insist on righteousness. It is women
chiefly these arguments affect, and the neglect of pure truth and
justice with which women are charged is in no small degree the result of
false moral and religious teaching. They are told that it is good to
renounce and suffer even when at every step advantage is taken of their
submission and untruth triumphs over generosity. They are urged to
school themselves to humiliation and loss not because God appoints these
but because human selfishness imposes them. The one clear and damning
objection to the false doctrine of self-suppression is here: it makes
sin. Those who yield where they should protest, who submit where they
should argue and reprove, make a path for selfishness and injustice and
increase evil instead of lessening it. They persuade themselves that
they are bearing the cross after Christ; but what in effect are they
doing? The missionary amongst ignorant heathen has to bear to the
uttermost as Christ bore. But to give so-called Christians a power of
oppression and exaction is to turn the principles of religion upside
down and hasten the doom of those for whom the sacrifice is made. When
we meddle with truth and righteousness even in the name of piety we
simply commit sacrilege, we range ourselves with the wrong and unreal;
there is no foundation under our faith and no moral result of our
endurance and self-denial. We are selling Christ not following Him.
XVIII.
_SHIBBOLETHS._
JUDGES xii. 1-7.
While Jephthah and his Gileadites were engaged in the struggle with
Ammon jealous watch was kept over all their movements by the men of
Ephraim. As the head tribe of the house of Joseph occupying the centre
of Palestine Ephraim was suspicious of all attempts and still more of
every success that threatened its pride and pre-eminence. We have seen
Gideon in the hour of his victory challenged by this watchful tribe, and
now a quarrel is made with Jephthah who has dared to win a battle
without its help. What were the Gileadites that they should presume to
elect a chief and form an army? Fugitives from Ephraim who had gathered
in the shaggy forests of Bashan and among the cliffs of the Argob, mere
adventurers in fact, what right had they to set up as the protectors of
Israel? The Ephraimites found the position intolerable. The vigour and
confidence of Gilead were insulting. If a check were not put on the
energy of the new leader might he not cross the Jordan and establish a
tyranny over the whole land? There was a call to arms, and a large force
was soon marching against Jephthah's camp to demand satisfaction and
submission.
The pretext that Jephthah had fought against Ammon without asking the
Ephraimites to join him was shallow enough. The invitation appears to
have been given; and even without an invitation Ephraim might well have
taken the field. But the savage threat, "We will burn thine house upon
thee with fire," showed the temper of the leaders in this expedition.
The menace was so violent that the Gileadites were roused at once and,
fresh from their victory over Ammon, they were not long in humbling the
pride of the great western clan.
One may well ask, Where is Ephraim's fear of God? Why has there been no
consultation of the priests at Shiloh by the tribe under whose care the
sanctuary is placed? The great Jewish commentary affirms that the
priests were to blame, and we cannot but agree. If religious influences
and arguments were not used to prevent the expedition against Gilead
they should have been used. The servants of the oracle might have
understood the duty of the tribes to each other and of the whole nation
to God and done their utmost to avert civil war. Unhappily, however,
professed interpreters of the divine will are too often forward in
urging the claims of a tribe or favouring the arrogance of a class by
which their own position is upheld. As on the former occasion when
Ephraim interfered, so in this we scarcely go beyond what is probable in
supposing that the priests declared it to be the duty of faithful
Israelites to check the career of the eastern chief and so prevent his
rude and ignorant religion from gaining dangerous popularity. Bishop
Wordsworth has seen a fanciful resemblance between Jephthah's campaign
against Ammon and the revival under the Wesleys and Whitefield which as
a movement against ungodliness put to shame the sloth of the Church of
England. He has remarked on the scorn and disdain--and he might have
used stronger terms--with which the established clergy assailed those
who apart from them were successfully doing the work of God. This was an
example of far more flagrant tribal jealousy than that of Ephraim and
her priests; and have there not been cases of religious leaders urging
retaliation upon enemies or calling for war in order to punish what was
absurdly deemed an outrage on national honour? With facts of this kind
in view we can easily believe that from Shiloh no word of peace, but on
the other hand words of encouragement were heard when the chiefs of
Ephraim began to hold councils of war and to gather their men for the
expedition that was to make an end of Jephthah.
Let it be allowed that Ephraim, a strong tribe, the guardian of the ark
of Jehovah, much better instructed than the Gileadites in the divine
law, had a right to maintain its place. But the security of high
position lies in high purpose and noble service; and an Ephraim
ambitious of leading should have been forward on every occasion when the
other tribes were in confusion and trouble. When a political party or a
church claims to be first in regard for righteousness and national
well-being it should not think of its own credit or continuance in power
but of its duty in the war against injustice and ungodliness. The favour
of the great, the admiration of the multitude should be nothing to
either church or party. To rail at those who are more generous, more
patriotic, more eager in the service of truth, to profess a fear of some
ulterior design against the constitution or the faith, to turn all the
force of influence and eloquence and even of slander and menace against
the disliked neighbour instead of the real enemy, this is the nadir of
baseness. There are Ephraims still, strong tribes in the land, that are
too much exercised in putting down claims, too little in finding
principles of unity and forms of practical brotherhood. We see in this
bit of history an example of the humiliation that sooner or later falls
on the jealous and the arrogant; and every age is adding instances of a
like kind.
Civil war, at all times lamentable, appears peculiarly so when the cause
of it lies in haughtiness and distrust. We have found however that,
beneath the surface, there may have been elements of division and
ill-will serious enough to require this painful remedy. The campaign may
have prevented a lasting rupture between the eastern and western tribes,
a separation of the stream of Israel's religion and nationality into
rival currents. It may also have arrested a tendency to ecclesiastical
narrowness, which at this early stage would have done immense harm. It
is quite true that Gilead was rude and uninstructed, as Galilee had the
reputation of being in the time of our Lord. But the leading tribes or
classes of a nation are not entitled to overbear the less enlightened,
nor by attempts at tyranny to drive them into separation. Jephthah's
victory had the effect of making Ephraim and the other western tribes
understand that Gilead had to be reckoned with, whether for weal or woe,
as an integral and important part of the body politic. In Scottish
history, the despotic attempt to thrust Episcopacy on the nation was the
cause of a distressing civil war; a people who would not fall in with
the forms of religion that were in favour at head-quarters had to fight
for liberty. Despised or esteemed they resolved to keep and use their
rights, and the religion of the world owes a debt to the Covenanters.
Then in our own times, lament as we may the varied forms of antagonism
to settled faith and government, that enmity of which communism and
anarchism are the delirium, it would be simply disastrous to suppress it
by sheer force even if the thing were possible. Surely those who are
certain they have right on their side need not be arrogant. The
overbearing temper is always a sign of hollow principle as well as of
moral infirmity. Was any Gilead ever put down by a mere assertion of
superiority, even on the field of battle? Let the truth be acknowledged
that only in freedom lies the hope of progress in intelligence, in
constitutional order and purity of faith. The great problems of national
life and development can never be settled as Ephraim tried to settle the
movement beyond Jordan. The idea of life expands and room must be left
for its enlargement. The many lines of thought, of personal activity, of
religious and social experiment leading to better ways or else proving
by-and-by that the old are best--all these must have place in a free
state. The threats of revolution that trouble nations would die away if
this were clearly understood; and we read history in vain if we think
that the old autocracies or aristocracies will ever approve themselves
again, unless indeed they take far wiser and more Christian forms than
they had in past ages. The thought of individual liberty once firmly
rooted in the minds of men, there is no going back to the restraints
that were possible before it was familiar. Government finds another
basis and other duties. A new kind of order arises which attempts no
suppression of any idea or sincere belief and allows all possible room
for experiments in living. Unquestionably this altered condition of
things increases the weight of moral responsibility. In ordering our own
lives as well as in regulating custom and law we need to exercise the
most serious care, the most earnest thought. Life is not easier because
it has greater breadth and freedom. Each is thrown back more upon
conscience, has more to do for his fellow-men and for God.
* * * * *
We pass now to the end of the campaign and the scene at the fords of
Jordan, when the Gileadites, avenging themselves on Ephraim, used the
notable expedient of asking a certain word to be pronounced in order to
distinguish friend from foe. To begin with, the slaughter was quite
unnecessary. If bloodshed there had to be, that on the field of battle
was certainly enough. The wholesale murder of the "fugitives of
Ephraim," so called with reference to their own taunt, was a passionate
and barbarous deed. Those who began the strife could not complain; but
it was the leaders of the tribe who rushed on war, and now the rank and
file must suffer. Had Ephraim triumphed the defeated Gileadites would
have found no quarter; victorious they gave none. We may trust, however,
that the number forty-two thousand represents the total strength of the
army that was dispersed and not those left dead on the field.
The expedient used at the fords turned on a defect or peculiarity of
speech. Shibboleth perhaps meant _stream_. Of each man who came to the
stream of Jordan wishing to pass to the other side it was required that
he should say _Shibboleth_. The Ephraimites tried but said _Sibboleth_
instead, and so betraying their west-country birth they pronounced their
own doom. The incident has become proverbial and the proverbial use of
it is widely suggestive. First, however, we may note a more direct
application.
Do we not at times observe how words used in common speech, phrases or
turns of expression betray a man's upbringing or character, his strain
of thought and desire? It is not necessary to lay traps for men, to put
it to them how they think on this point or that in order to discover
where they stand and what they are. Listen and you will hear sooner or
later the _Sibboleth_ that declares the son of Ephraim. In religious
circles, for example, men are found who appear to be quite enthusiastic
in the service of Christianity, eager for the success of the church, and
yet on some occasion a word, an inflexion or turn of the voice will
reveal to the attentive listener a constant worldliness of mind, a
worship of self mingling with all they think and do. You notice that and
you can prophesy what will come of it. In a few months or even weeks the
show of interest will pass. There is not enough praise or deference to
suit the egotist, he turns elsewhere to find the applause which he
values above everything.
Again, there are words somewhat rude, somewhat coarse, which in
carefully ordered speech a man may not use; but they fall from his lips
in moments of unguarded freedom or excitement. The man does not speak
"half in the language of Ashdod"; he particularly avoids it. Yet now and
again a lapse into the Philistine dialect, a something muttered rather
than spoken betrays the secret of his nature. It would be harsh to
condemn any one as inherently bad on such evidence. The early habits,
the sins of past years thus unveiled may be those against which he is
fighting and praying. Yet, on the other hand, the hypocrisy of a life
may terribly show itself in these little things; and every one will
allow that in choosing our companions and friends we ought to be keenly
alive to the slightest indications of character. There are fords of
Jordan to which we come unexpectedly, and without being censorious we
are bound to observe those with whom we purpose to travel further.
Here, however, one of the most interesting and, for our time, most
important points of application is to be found in the self-disclosure of
writers--those who produce our newspapers, magazines, novels, and the
like. Touching on religion and on morals certain of these writers
contrive to keep on good terms with the kind of belief that is popular
and pays. But now and again, despite efforts to the contrary, they come
on the _Shibboleth_ which they forget to pronounce aright. Some among
them who really care nothing for Christianity and have no belief
whatever in revealed religion, would yet pass for interpreters of
religion and guides of conduct. Christian morality and worship they
barely endure; but they cautiously adjust every phrase and reference so
as to drive away no reader and offend no devout critic; that is, they
aim at doing so; now and again they forget themselves. We catch a word,
a touch of flippancy, a suggestion of licence, a covert sneer which goes
too far by a hairsbreadth. The evil lies in this that they are teaching
multitudes to say _Sibboleth_ along with them. What they say is so
pleasant, so deftly said, with such an air of respect for moral
authority that suspicion is averted, the very elect are for a time
deceived. Indeed we are almost driven to think that Christians not a few
are quite ready to accept the unbelieving _Sibboleth_ from sufficiently
distinguished lips. A little more of this lubricity and there will have
to be a new and resolute sifting at the fords. The propaganda is
villainously active and without intelligent and vigorous opposition it
will proceed to further audacity. It is not a few but scores of this
sect who have the ear of the public and even in religious publications
are allowed to convey hints of earthliness and atheism. A covert worship
of Mammon and of Venus goes on in the temple professedly dedicated to
Christ, and one cannot be sure that a seemingly pious work will not vend
some doctrine of devils. It is time for a slaughter in God's name of
many a false reputation.
* * * * *