as soon as he could arrange his business affairs he attached himself to Jesus.

The next we see of him,-although some time may have intervened-he is giving a great feast in his house. We are not told just why he did this, but the reason would seem to have been to confess and honor Jesus before his old companions. These men-publicans and sinners-appear to have made up the body of his guests. He was now leaving them to go with Jesus. While he had abandoned his old life and was a new man-indeed, all the more for this very reason—he was interested in his friends of former days, and wished them to know Jesus too.

The only other recorded event is the calling of Matthew to be an apostle. This seems a strange choice. It was not because he had been a publican, but because the Master saw in him the qualities which fitted Matthew for a great and useful work in the establishment of his kingdom among men.

Thus we have but a small basis of facts and events from which to determine Matthew's character, and yet there is much self-revelation in even these scant records. Evidently Matthew was a man of decision. He formed his opinions quickly, and acted promptly. We see this in the way he responded to the call which he heard that day is his toll-booth. What he had known of Jesus before this time we are not told. If the supposition that he and Jesus were kinsmen is correct, he may have been well acquainted with Him. At least, since Jesus spent so much of His time by the Sea of Galilee, it is quite probable that Matthew had heard Him speak. However, when the words, "Follow me," fell upon his ears, they went to his deepest heart. There was something in them which appealed to all that was best in the publican. So he arose at once, put his business into other hands, and joined Jesus.

It was not easy to do this. It involved sacrifice. No doubt Matthew's business was profitable and he must give it up with its emoluments, honest or dishonest. If he had wronged any man, collecting more than was just and right, he must make restitution. Matthew was not the man to keep ill-gotten gains after he had become a follower of Christ. He must turn his back on his old life and leave it altogether and for ever. He must break with his old friends and companions, and sever the as

sociations of his life. Then he must go with One who had nothing of any earthly kind to offer as compensation, and who himself had not where to lay his head.

It is evidence, first, of depth and thoroughness of conviction, and, then, of masterful decision of purpose, that Matthew's answer to the call of Jesus was so prompt and unquestioning. Many men would have hesitated, considering the matter for a time, weighing the question, counting the cost; but Matthew decided on the instant, and without question or assurance of any kind, committed his life into the hands of the new Master who stood at the door, waiting for him.

The giving of the feast in honor of Jesus also showed great strength of conviction and force of character. His was no half-conversion. He was not ashamed to confess his new faith. It was not easy to do it among the companions of his old life. But he faltered not. He made the feast in honor of Jesus and invited his fellow publicans and sinners of former days. It must have been a motley company that sat down at the tables in his house. Some respectable Pharisees who looked in and saw the guests, expressed astonishment that Jesus should accept an invitation to eat with such disreputable people. Yet Matthew's new faith was equal to this confession.

As we study these fragments of story, we find other revealings of character in Matthew. One is, his rare and beautiful humility. It is only in his own Gospel that, in the list of the apostles, the designation, "the publican" is added to Matthew's name. Both Mark and Luke give the name without hint of the old odious calling. Matthew, however, would not conceal anything, but wanted the world to know from what Jesus had rescued him. There really was no necessity for keeping up this memory of a blotted past, for Matthew was his new apostolic name, symbol of the new man whom Jesus had chosen for sacred service. It was under the old name, Levi, that he was a publican, and both the name and the character of which it was the symbol had been left for ever behind that day when the voice of the Master reached his heart. Yet so sensitive was Matthew to the honor of Christ and to the honesty of his own character that when he wrote the list of the twelve, he added "the publican" after his own name, that he

might do full credit to the grace of Jesus Christ.

It has been noted, too, that in Matthew's list he puts himself after Thomas, probably his twin, while both in Mark and Luke the name of Thomas follows Matthew's. Small as this fact is, it reveals the man's humility. Then the entire suppression of his own personality in his Gospel, is another illustration of his modesty and humility. He tells of his call to follow Jesus, and also of his choice as an apostle, but mentions not a single incident of his life, records not a word that he spoke nor a question that he asked, and gives not the slightest intimation of anything he did. He refers to a feast at which Jesus sat down among publicans and sinners as a guest, but he does not say that the feast was given by him. We have to go to one of the other gospels to learn this. All this tells of the lowliness of Matthew. He learned well his Master's spirit of humility and self-obliteration.

Of this silent, lowly, obscure apostle, even tradition, usually so ready to supply interesting facts about the apostles, records only one saying which is attributed to Matthew, and one fact about him. The one saying which is reported to be from him is, "When the neighbor of an elect man sins, he himself has sinned, for if he had lived as the Word commands, his neighbors would have so reverenced him as to refrain from sin." Whether Matthew's or not, this word is well worth our remembering.

The fact about Matthew which tradition preserves is that he was an ascetic and lived on herbs and water. This seems scarcely probable when we remember the feast which Matthew himself gave to his new Master and his old companions at the beginning of his discipleship, and the defence of gladness of life which Jesus made when His disciples were blamed for feasting rather than fasting.

We have no knowledge whatever concerning Matthew's labors as an apostle either during our Lord's ministry or after His ascension. His name appears in the list of the eleven apostles given in the first chapter of The Acts -his name only-and that is the last glimpse we have of him. One tradition relates that he went out from Jerusalem as a missionary to Ethiopia, where he was murdered while at prayer. An earlier tradition, however, relates that he died a natural death.

Yet out of this life so discredited in its beginnings, so silent and obscure in its apostleship, came most noble and worthy fruit-the irst gospel. It is a well-known fact that for a number of years after the day of Pentecost, there was no written gospel. The apostles were sent out to preach, not to write. At length, however, the necessity began to be apparent for a written record of the story of the life of Christ from the pen of an apostle, and Matthew was one of the first to whom the Church looked for such a document. Singularly enough his profession as a publican had helped to prepare him for such a task. He had been trained to be observant, methodical and accurate. He was familiar, too, with the art of writing--this was necessary in his work as a collector of customs. Then he had been an apostle and had lived in the family of Jesus for many months, and knew well His life, character and teaching. Tradition relates that Matthew wrote his gospel to leave with his own people, when in answer to a divine cali he was about to go away to preach elsewhere"to fill up the void about to be made by his absence."

One internal evidence of authenticity of Matthew's gospel is the way the writer treats himself. If the book were a forgery, it would not likely speak of its author as a despised publican, nor would it leave him so without personal mention.

Matthew's gospel is the one consummate blossom of his life and apostleship. There is nothing else-not a word, nor a deed, nor a memory. Jesus seems to have called him simply and exclusively for this one work. It has been said that the mission of Stephen-that for which he was born and trained, was to make one half-hour speech, dying even before it was finished. We know that John Baptist's mission-that for which such sublime preparation was made-was only to preach a few months, and then introduce the Messiah to a few holy men. Matthew's mission was to write the first gospel. Surely that was enough for any man to do. It is a wonderful book. Even Renan describes it as the "most wonderful book of Christendom-the most important book that ever has been written." It enshrines a marvelous story of the Christ. What this book has done for the world never can be known. Almost certainly it was the earliest of

the gospels. For nearly nineteen centuries it has been carrying over the world the story of Jesus, His life, His ministry, His words, His love and sorrow, His death and resurrection. What matters it that nothing else is recorded of Matthew-no preaching, no miracle-work

ing, no heroic suffering? Surely it was enough for one apostle to be called and trained just to write such a matchless book which has lived through the ages, and will live until the consummation of all things. Philadelphia, Pa.

I.

INTRODUCTORY.

In order that we may approach the study of this book intelligently it is necessary that certain principles of interpretation should be recognized and accepted. To the statement and consideration of these principles this introductory chapter is devoted.

I.

Read first in Paul's Letter to the Romans IV. 4. "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, might have hope." If we consider that verse in its setting, we shall find that Paul, having made a quotation from the Old Testament Scriptures, interpolates upon the general scheme of his argument, a declaration that the inspired writing of Scripture does not exhaust itself in that particular age to which it is addressed. That is one of the peculiar notes of inspiration. Inspired writings differ from all others in this, they are not produced for one age exclusively, but have perpetually a varying application to varying ages.

The finest literature the world has produced, apart from the literature of the Bible, while it will remain interesting for long years, -even though the conditions of the age to which it appealed may have changed,-will not have a living and practical application to any age save that in which it was penned. The writings of Chaucer are of absorbing interest to Englishmen today, because they reveal to us the age in which they were produced, but they have no vital message to the men of today.

In that particular, this whole Book of God

*A series of six articles on Malachi, of which this is the introductory chapter, are to be contributed by Rev. G. Campbell Morgan in the succeeding aumbers of THE RECORD OF CHRISTIAN WORK. -EDITOR.

is in entire contrast to all other writings. All Scripture "written aforetime" had a local application, and a distinctive message to the times in which it was written, but it was written also "for our learning."

The apostle, in this verse, makes use of the word "Scriptures"—"that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, might have hope." This word occurs in the New Testament no less than fifty-one times; and with only one exception, is used in reference to the recognized Scriptures of the people of Israel, known to us as the Old Testament. It may be well for us to turn to that one exception because it will enable us to keep that fact in mind. 2 Peter iii. 16: "As also in all his epistles speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction."

It is probable that when Peter, there referring to certain writings of Paul, makes use of the phrase "other Scriptures," he may be referring principally to New Testament writings which are beginning to be scattered. That is a probability. It is not an established fact. He may have referred in this case, as in every other, to the Old Testament, but there is a probability that he is making reference to New Testament writings-to those letters that are being distributed to the Church of Jesus Christ. That is the only case in the New Testament where it is at all possible to read into that expression "scriptures" that interpretation. In every other case the term refers to the recognized Scriptures of the Jewish people; and in that fact we discover that the New Testament has put its decided seal upon the Old. You cannot say, "I take the New and not the Old." If you accept the New, the Old is interwoven into every book that the New contains.

In this connection I would suggest to you, a profoundly interesting experiment to Bible students, which, while it is an experiment, is nevertheless profitable. Take your New Testament, and for once read it through from a literary standpoint with the object of finding out how many chapters there are in which there is no quotation from the Old, and no allusion to the Old, and see how much you have left.

Here then is a principle that we must keep in memory-what was "written aforetime," was written, not only with a direct bearing upon the time, but "for our learning." In other words, when the Holy Spirit of God moved men of old to write, He not only moved them to write with a view to the interests of the times in which they lived, but with a view to all who should come after them.

II.

Let us now turn to one of the most important of the Old Testament Scriptures. Deut. vi. 1-4: Now these are the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments which the Lord your God commanded to teach you, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go to possess it, that thou mightest fear the Lord thy God, to keep all His statutes, and His commandments which I command thee, thou and thy son, and thy son's son, all the days of thy life; and that thy days may be prolonged. Hear, therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it, that it may be well with thee, and that ye may increase mightily, as the Lord God of thy fathers hath promised thee, in the land that floweth with milk and honey. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God." among the things "written aforetime," is to be found this statement of a great principle underlying all life and revealing the method of Divine Government. The whole economy of Divine Government gathers round that verse: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God." That was the special truth that was committed to the nation of Israel to preserve as a sacred thing, amid the nations of the earth. It is the central truth of all Divine Government and of all human life: "God is

one."

Here,

Mathematics is spoken of as being an exact science. Is it exact? I think not. Nothing is absolutely proved. That two and two make four, no one can prove. It never has been

proved, and it is quite impossible to prove itthat is, you cannot demonstrate the truth of it. Euclid is exact surely, it is built up step by step; you cannot do Book 2 until you have done Book 1. Come down to the early days of school life, and every boy knows he cannot do his "Pons Asinorum" without knowing the first proposition. It must then be exact. Let us examine it. How is it built up? Unless you learn your definitions, and believe in them, you cannot do Euclid. What are your definitions? Listen, "a point"-you see Euclid is explicit is position without magnitude." Absolutely absurd! You cannot have position without magnitude. The instant you admit position you admit magnitude. "A line is length without breath." Equally absurd! You cannot have one without the other.

So our exact things are built up on impossibilities, and absurd positions. All mathematical science may be reduced to a common fact. What is that one common fact? ONE! When you have said "one" you have said "two," and when you have said a "million" you have said "one." You cannot get beyond "'one." One is essential, two is accidental.

"The Lord your God is one God." God is behind everything, the final certain ONE. You cannot analyse, or divide or explain Him, yet He is the one and only absolute certainty. He is ONE, all-comprehending, indivisible. When you have said that you have said all. When you have omitted that, you have left everything out, and babbled only in chaotic confusion.

From that truth I make a deduction. If God is ONE, then the principles and the purposes of His government never vary. Dispensations and methods change; the will of God never changes, never varies, never progresses, in that sense. What does progress mean? Failure! What does advancement mean? Past limitations. You cannot progress unless there has been failure somewhere. If I can be better in five minutes than I am now I am wrong now. Progress is a confession of failure. When this age boasts of its vaunted progress, it is telling the story of the failure of the past. God never makes progress, never advances. Consequently He is not always doing as we are, legislating for man-framing new laws because the old ones have failed. The will of right, love and tenderness, His will is eternal. I say dispensations come and go, dawn and

God

vanish; but God remains the same, underneath every one, and with every one, and in every one. Some people tell us God has changed His methods in dealing with men, and speak as though God had not only altered His methods, but His mind. I agree that He has changed His methods, but His mind, never! did not begin to love man when Jesus came. Jesus came to roll back the curtain and show man the heart that was eternal, the love that was always there. Christianity is not God's alteration of attitude towards man. It is not that in the old dispensation He was a policeman and in this a father. He has always been a father, He never changes.

Dispensations and methods mark the change of man, and the necessary change in the way the Divine Hand is placed upon human life, but behind everything-God.

God the same abiding,

His praise shall tune my voice, And while in Him confiding

I cannot but rejoice.

We must get our feet down upon this abiding rock. It is for this reason that the Old Testament Scriptures are of value. The accidents of human life perpetually change, the essentials of human life abide for ever.

III.

If we accept these great principles we can now move forward another step. The prophetic messages are pre-eminently suited, as it seems to me, to the age in which we live, and there is a sense in which they are of more value today that even the writings of the apostles. I do not undervalue these apostolic writings, but there are reasons why the prophetic utterances come with greater force to us today than these.

The apostolic writings are expositions of God's new application of eternal truth in a new dispensation. With Jesus, the new dispensation dawned, a fresh light broke upon the senses of man. New methods came into operation. The eternal God is the same, but fresh light from the essential light of Deity broke forth, and the apostles under inspiration -inspiration which grew out of local requirements-wrote their definition of that new light.

To us, their writings are the prisms which divide the essential light into its component parts and glories. And so I read the apostolic writings, and I have my theology.

They are most valuable, we can never do without them.

The prophetic writings are not expositions of truth in that sense at all. They are almost invariably addressed to people who know truth as enshrined in their own dispensation, and they are messages to call these people to be obedient thereto. In that sense the prophetical writings come to us with a force that the apostolic writings do not possess.

We know the truth of God as no other age has ever known it, and yet there never was a time when men, knowing, and living under its blessings, were less obedient to it than now. So then the "Scriptures written aforetime for our learning" demand our attention, and will always repay solemn searching, and prayerful inquiry as to their deep and inner meaning. Such are the principles upon which we base our study.

IV.

Now as to the times of the book and its author. It is almost universally admitted, indeed, one may say that it is so far admitted that there remains no doubt or question about it, that the book occupies its right place in the arrangement of the Old Testament Scriptures, that Malachi himself was the last of the Old Testament prophets.

There can be little doubt further, that the message is closely associated with the work of Nehemiah, and if Malachi is to be read intelligently, Nehemiah should be read at the same time. That is the history. Malachi is the divine messenger to the condition of things portrayed in the history of Nehemiah. The proofs of this are largely and mostly to be found in the books themselves. Let us turn to only three coincidences.

(1.) Nehemiah xiii. 29: "Remember them, O, my God, because they have defiled the priesthood and the covenant of the priesthood and of the Levites." Remembering the force of these words turn to the prophecy of Malachi ii. 8: "But ye are departed out of the way, ye have caused many to stumble at the law, ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of hosts." Nehemiah complains in the closing years of his history that the priesthood has corrupted the covenant; while Malachi, in this second chapter, addresses himself very largely to the priests, and the specific charge that he brings against them is that they have