“He cried against the altar in the word of the Lord, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the Lord, Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah by name; and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men’s bones shall be burnt upon thee.” 1 Kings xiii. 2.

These words are parts of a narrative which we hear read once a year in the Sunday Service, but which can scarcely be understood without some attention to the history which precedes it. It is a prophecy against the form of worship set up in the kingdom of Israel; let us consider what this kingdom and this worship were, and how this woe came to be uttered by a prophet of God.

When Solomon fell into idolatry, he broke what may be called his coronation oath, and at once forfeited God’s favour. The essential duty of a king of the chosen people was to act as God’s representative, to govern for Him. David was called a man after God’s heart, because he was thus faithful; he fulfilled his trust. Solomon failed, failed in the very one duty which, as king of Israel, he was bound to perform.

In consequence, a message came from Almighty God, revealing what the punishment of his sin would be. He might be considered as having forfeited his kingdom, for himself and his posterity. For David’s sake, however, this extreme sentence was not pronounced upon him. First, since the promise had been made to David that his son should reign after him, though that son was the very transgressor, yet he was spared the impending evil on account of the promise. As an honour to David, Solomon’s reign closed without any open infliction of divine vengeance; only with the presage of it. “Forasmuch as this is done of thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant. Notwithstanding in thy days I will not do it, for David thy father’s sake: but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son.” [1 Kings xi. 11, 12.] A still further mitigation of punishment was granted, still for David’s sake. It had been promised David, “I will set up thy seed after thee, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever … If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men; but My mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.” [2 Sam. vii. 12-15.] Accordingly, when Solomon had sinned, and the kingdom was rent from him, still holy David’s seed was not utterly put away before a new king, as the family of Saul had fallen before David; part of the kingdom was still left to the descendants of the faithful king. “Howbeit, I will not rend away all the kingdom; but will give one tribe to thy son,” Solomon’s son, “for David My servant’s sake.” This one tribe was the tribe of Judah, David’s own tribe; to which part of Benjamin was added, as being in the neighbourhood. And this kingdom, over which David’s line reigned for four hundred years after him, is called the kingdom of Judah.—But with this kingdom of Judah we are not now concerned; but with that larger portion of the tribes, which was rent away from David’s house, and forms what is called the kingdom of Israel.

These were the circumstances under which the division of the kingdom was made. Solomon seems to have allowed himself in tyrannical conduct towards his subjects, as well as in idolatry. On his death the people came to his son Rehoboam, at Shechem, and said, “Thy father made our yoke grievous; now therefore make thou the grievous service of thy father and his heavy yoke which he put upon us lighter, and we will serve thee.” Rehoboam was rash enough to answer, after three days’ deliberation, “My father made your yoke heavy, and I will add to your yoke; my father also chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.” [1 Kings xii. 4, 14.] Now every one sees that Rehoboam here acted very wrongly, and Solomon too, as I have said, had sinned grievously before him. His oppression of the people was a sin; yet, you will observe, the people had no right to complain. They had brought this evil on themselves; they had obstinately courted and struggled after it. They would have “a king like the nations,” a despotic king; and now they had one, they were discontented. Samuel had not only earnestly and solemnly protested against this measure, as an offence against their Almighty Governor, but had actually forewarned them of the evils which despotic power would introduce among them. “He will take your sons and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; he will set them to ear [sic] his ground and to reap his harvest and to make his instruments of war. He will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, and give them to his servants.” The warning ends thus: “And ye shall cry out in that day, because of your king which ye shall have chosen you, and the Lord will not hear you in that day.” [1 Sam. viii. 11-18.] These were Samuel’s words beforehand. Now all this had come upon them: as they had sown, so had they reaped. And, as matters stood, their best course would have been contentment, resignation; it was their duty to bear the punishment of their national self-will. But one sin was not enough for them. They proceeded, as men commonly do, to mend (as they considered) their first sin, by a fresh one;—they rebelled against their king. “What portion have we in David?” they said, “neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse. To your tents, O Israel—now see to thine own house, David.” [1 Kings xi. 16.] Ten tribes out of twelve revolted from their king in that day. Here they were quite inexcusable. Even putting it out of the question that they had brought the evil on themselves, still, independently of this, their king’s tyranny did not justify their sudden, unhesitating, violent rebellion. He was acting against no engagement or stipulation. Because their king did not do his duty to them, this was no reason they should not do their duty to him. Say that he was cruel and rapacious, still they might have safely trusted the miraculous providence of God, to have restrained the king by His prophets, and to have brought them safely through. This would have been the way of faith; but they took the matter into their own hands, and got into further difficulty. And I wish you to observe, that all the evil arose from this original fault, worked out in its consequences through centuries, viz., their having a king at all.