ordinary sense that the prophet here refers. The abolition of the Old Testament form of worship had been expressly announced even by the earlier prophets (compare Jer. iii. 16 and Dan. ix. 27). It is the more apparent that there can be no reference here to the "bloodless sacrifice of the New Testament," since the resemblance on which Reinke lays stress, namely, "that they are both composed of fine and pure wheaten flour with a mixture of wine," is a purely material one, and there is no essential connexion between the two. The meat-offering, the food to be offered to the Lord by his people, was a symbolical representation of good works (see the Dissertation on the Pentateuch, vol. ii. p. 530; and "The Lord's Day," p. 24 translation). But according to the doctrine of the Catholics, the "holy sacrifice of the mass" has a very different meaning.

At first sight

The third section embraces chap. ii. 10—16. it appears as if the prophet is reproving one particular crime, which has an immediate connexion with the corrupt state of mind to which all the rest is directed, namely, severity and unfaithfulness towards women. But the appearance vanishes on closer examination. The prophet traces this crime to its original cause, to the darkening of the religious consciousness, which must always take place, where the punishment of sin is inflicted, whilst the confession of sin is wanting; he who does not murmur against this sin will necessarily murmur against God (Lam. iii. 39). This is evident from ver. 10, which determines the genus to which the particular crime belongs. "Have we not all one father? Hath not one God created us? Why then is brother faithless towards brother, to profane the covenant of our fathers ?" The Israelites are children of God, spiritual brethren. Hence every violation of the duties arising out of their fraternal relationship, such as the unfaithfulness of which the men have been guilty towards their Israelitish wives, is at the same time a sin against God, and a profanation of his covenant. "He who loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how shall he love God whom he hath not seen." Whoever abolishes the distinction between an Israelitish and a heathen woman, shows by that very fact, that he must, first of all, have ceased to recognise the distinction between the God of Israel and the idols of the heathen. This is expressly declared

in the opening clause of the following verse, “Judah hath dealt treacherously." Unfaithfulness in connexion with their earthly marriage is represented here, as the symptom and consequence of unfaithfulness in connexion with their heavenly marriage. And the latter, viz., the profanation of the sanctuary of the Lord which he loveth, that is of his kingdom in Israel, is mentioned as the chief cause; injustice to their neighbour is described in ver. 13 as merely the second.

In the fourth section, chap. ii. 17-iii. 6, the fundamental disposition, against which the prophet is contending, is very conspicuous. They say, "Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment ?" From their own stand-point they are quite right in their conclusions respecting God. But the prophet tells them in his reply that their stand-point is a false one. God is and will continue to be the righteous One, and will show himself to be so; not, however, on those whom they regard as the sole objects of his righteous judgments, but on those who are so more than any others, namely on themselves, who in their infatuation and blindness are longing for the coming of God to judgment. He, first of all, sends his messenger, to warn them and lead them to repentance. And then, the divine angel of the covenant, whom they are eagerly looking for as the supposed destroyer of the heathen, suddenly appears to punish the transgressors of the covenant. His appearance is destructive to the wicked members of the Church of God, but to the Church itself it is a most salutary event, a fulfilment of the promises it has

received from God.

from God.

In the fifth section (chap. iii. 7-12), the prophet charges the people with neglecting to bring the tithes and heave-offerings, a neglect which bears witness to their inward apostasy He points out the folly of such conduct. Imagining that they are deceiving God, they are really deceiving themselves. The curse is already resting upon them; and yet they persist in the sin, of which it is the consequence. If they will only do their duty, the curse will soon be turned into a

blessing.

This section is closely connected with the one which precedes it. What could be more adapted to put to shame those who

murmured impatiently against God, and maintained that the continued afflictions of the covenant-nation were a practical proof of the want of righteousness on His part, than the declaration, which forms the theme of this section, "Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the Lord of Hosts." The very thing which appears to them to be at variance with divine righteousness, affords a striking proof of its existence. We have here the second part of the reply to the question which provoked it, "where is the God of righteousness?" The first reply we find in the previous section, “he will quickly appear, but to your destruction;" the second we have here, "he is appearing already in your present circumstances." You are already acquainted with one side, namely, the judicial side of his righteousness; it depends entirely upon yourselves whether you shall also become acquainted with the other side.

This section is also closely connected with the sixth or last. The words of the murmurers against God, who are introduced as speaking in vers. 13-15, are so directly related, often verbally, to the prophet's own words in the foregoing section, that they can only be regarded as intended for a reply. "Prove me now herewith (namely, by a faithful performance of your duties towards me), saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out blessings in immeasurable abundance" (ver. 10). In ver. 15 the opponents reply, "they (the heathen) prove God, and are delivered." What need then is there of proving, in the manner to which thou invitest us? Even the proving of the heathen is sufficient. If he has not shown himself to be the God of righteousness, when this test is applied, what are we to expect from this fresh proof? In ver. 12 they are told, "all the heathen call you blessed, for ye will be a delightsome land, saith the Lord of hosts ;" and the murmurers reply in ver. 15, “and now we call the wicked happy." It is the heathen who congratulate us, the faithful servants of God; but we, on the contrary, who congratulate those who have forgotten God. In ver. 7 the prophet says to them, "ye have gone away from mine ordinances, and have not observed them." In ver. 14 the murmurers answer, we have observed him, and

have walked mournfully before the Lords of hosts." Thou promisest great gain, if we do this. We have done it, and what have we gained? The same question still retains its force, "where is the God of righteousness ?"

The prophet then proceeds, after quoting these replies, which testify of the deepest blindness, to notice first of all the conduct of those who truly fear God, and under the form of a historical statement to warn them against taking part in expressions, which are dictated by feelings entirely opposed to their own. The truly pious, hearing the words of those who have the form of godliness, but deny its power, express to one another their abhorrence of their conduct. The Lord will bless them abundantly, when his judgments, which are about to break forth, shall fall upon the ungodly. The prophecy closes with an exhortation to adhere steadfastly to the law of God; with a promise that God will send Elias the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes, to revive the spirit of the law in the midst of the nation; and with a threat that he will smite the land with if it does not hearken to the voice of the messenger of

the

God.

curse,

We will now proceed to an exposition of the two sections, chap. ii. 17-iii. 6 and chap. iii. 13-24.

CHAP. II. 17-III. 6.

PRELIMINARY EXPOSITION OF ISAIAH XL. 3—5.

Before proceeding to the interpretation of this section in Malachi, and especially of chap. iii. 1, we must enter into a fuller explanation of Is. xl. 3-5, which we merely touched upon in a very cursory manner before. The answer, which Malachi gives to those who have ventured to impugn the justice of God, rests upon this passage. And it is of the greater importance that we should examine it here, since the New Testament citations emphatically show that it is closely connected with the subject of the present section.

"A voice crying: in the desert: prepare ye the way of the Lord! level in the desert a road for our God. Let every valley exalt itself, and every mountain and hill sink down, and the steep become a plain and the rugged a valley. And the glory of the Lord is revealed, and all flesh seeth together, for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken.”

Vers. 3 and 4 form an introduction to the coming of the Lord; ver. 5 describes the coming itself.

Are we to connect (in the desert) with the preceding words, as the translators of the Septuagint and the Evangelists after them have done (φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ· ἑτοιμάσατε Tην ódòv kupiov), or with the next clause, as modern commentators for the most part suppose? The decision of this question is of no great importance so far as the subject itself is concerned. For even if we connect the word with the following clause, the voice must be understood as sounding in the place in which the command itself was to be carried out. There are difficulties connected with both explanations. The parallel term any favours the connection with the words which follow, whilst the situation of 7 at the commencement, before the verb, favours the connection with the previous clause. It is in any case a very unusual thing for a subordinate idea to be placed first, in such a way as this. But here there is the less room to suppose that it is merely accidental, since ya is placed after the verb. If corresponded exactly to y, the order of the words would evidently be faulty. The arguments adduced in support of both connections retain their force, if we place in a kind of independent position, between the two clauses, as Vitringa, Rückert, and Stier have done, so that it shall belong equally to both "a voice crying: in the desert: prepare," &c., equivalent to, "a voice crieth in the desert, prepare in the desert," &c. Again ipp is not an independent sentence, but must be explained as a fragmentary expression arising from strong emotion, as the translators of the Septuagint perceived. We must supply in thought some such expression as this, "hark! what do I hear ?"

To whom does the voice crying in the desert belong, and to whom is it directed? Modern commentators, for the most part,