the prophets. It was speedily followed by another in Judah, under the leadership of the priesthood,

which resulted in the dethronement of Athaliah and the accession of Joash. From the popular point

of view, each of these movements represented a reaction against what was foreign and non-

Israelitish in politics and in religion, and in favor of the ancient institutions in Church and State.

And, surely, we cannot fail to perceive, from the higher point of view, the fitness that in the

northern kingdom, where since the time of Jeroboam there was not any authorized priesthood (2

Chronicles 11:14), the prophets should, in a sense,* have taken the lead in such a movement, nor

that in Judah the Divinely-instituted priesthood should have sustained a similar part.

* We have said "in a sense," for the attentive readers of this history will not fail to distinguish the

peculiar part taken by the prophets and that of the secular leaders in the moveme nt.

In truth, this was one of the higher purposes of the priestly office (Leviticus 10:10; Deuteronomy

33:10; Malachi 2:7). But what we are careful to mark is the light which this throws upon the

Divinely -appointed institutions in Israel, especially in re ference to the mutual relations of Church

and State, and the influence for good of religion upon national life and civil liberty.

There is yet another aspect of these movements, alike as regards their short -lived success and their

ultimate failure. They were a last Divine interposition in that downward course which led to the

final judgments upon Israel and Judah. The people had fallen away from the Divine purpose of

their national calling, and become untrue to the meaning of their national history. From this point

of view the temporary success of these movements may be regarded as a Divine protest against the

past. But they ultimately failed because all deeper spiritual elements had passed away from rulers

and people. Nor is it otherwise than as those who, as it were, uttered this Divine protest that the

prophets in the north and the priests in the south took so prominent a part in these movements. But

with the vital aspect which would have given permanency to these movements, neither the military

party in the north nor the majority in the south were in any real sympathy.

And still deeper lessons come to us. There is not a more common, nor can there be a more fatal

mistake in religion or in religious movements than to put confidence in mere negations, or to

expect from them lasting results for good. A negation without a corresponding affirmation -

indeed, if it is not the outcome of it - is of no avail for spiritual purposes. We must speak, because

we believe; we deny that which is false only because we affirm and cherish the opposite truth.

Otherwise we may resist, and enlist unspiritual men, but we shall not work any deliverance in the

land. "Jehu destroyed Baal out of Israel" (2 Kings 10:28), but "he departed not from the sins of

Jeroboam, which made Israel to sin."

"And Joash did that which was right in the sight of Jehovah all the days of Jehoiada the priest" (2

Chronicles 24:2).

But "after the death of Jehoiada," "he and his people left the house of Jehovah, God of their

fathers, and served groves and idols: and wrath came upon Judah and Jerusalem for this their

trespass" (vers. 17, 18). And as if to mark this lesson the more clearly, the judgments alike upon

Israel and upon Judah came to them through one and the same instrumentality - that of Hazael,

king of Syria (2 Kings 10:32; 12:17, 18).

As regards the movement in the southern kingdom of Judah, Old Testament history does not

present a nobler figure than that of Jehoiada, whether viewed as priest or patriot. Faithful to his

religion, despite his connection with the house of Jehoram and the temptations which it would

involve, he dared to rescue the infant prince and to conceal him for six years at the risk of his life.

At that time he must have been upwards of a hundred years of age.*

* Accord ing to 2 Chronicles 24:15, Jehoiada died at the age of 130. And as, according to 2 Kings

12:6, the restoration of the Temple under Jehoiada took place in the twenty-third year of Joash, the

high-priest must have been about 107 years old at the accession of Joash.