St William of York Christopher Norton pdf

download

https://ebookname.com/product/st-william-of-york-christopher-
norton/

Get Instant Ebook Downloads – Browse at https://ebookname.com

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Zebrafish Protocols for Neurobehavioral Research 1st

Edition William H. J. Norton (Auth.)

https://ebookname.com/product/zebrafish-protocols-for-
neurobehavioral-research-1st-edition-william-h-j-norton-auth/

Crash of the Titans The Early Years of the New York

Jets and the AFL William J. Ryczek

https://ebookname.com/product/crash-of-the-titans-the-early-
years-of-the-new-york-jets-and-the-afl-william-j-ryczek/

A Treatise of Human Nature David Fate Norton

https://ebookname.com/product/a-treatise-of-human-nature-david-
fate-norton/

The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky 1st Edition George

B. Dantzig

https://ebookname.com/product/the-cambridge-companion-to-
vygotsky-1st-edition-george-b-dantzig/
The ocean of the rivers of story 1 pages 1 118 1. ed.
Edition Somadeva

https://ebookname.com/product/the-ocean-of-the-rivers-of-
story-1-pages-1-118-1-ed-edition-somadeva/

A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning

Theory and Practice 1st Edition Jennifer A. Moon

https://ebookname.com/product/a-handbook-of-reflective-and-
experiential-learning-theory-and-practice-1st-edition-jennifer-a-
moon/

Big Data in Ecology 1st Edition Mehrdad Hajibabaei

https://ebookname.com/product/big-data-in-ecology-1st-edition-
mehrdad-hajibabaei/

God s Politics Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left
Doesn t Get It First Edition Printing Jim Wallis

https://ebookname.com/product/god-s-politics-why-the-right-gets-
it-wrong-and-the-left-doesn-t-get-it-first-edition-printing-jim-
wallis/

Green Criminology An Introduction to the Study of

Environmental Harm 1st Edition Rob White

https://ebookname.com/product/green-criminology-an-introduction-
to-the-study-of-environmental-harm-1st-edition-rob-white/
Bodies of Nature 1st Edition Phil Macnaghten (Ed.)

https://ebookname.com/product/bodies-of-nature-1st-edition-phil-
macnaghten-ed/
St William of York
 YORK MEDIEVAL PRESS

York Medieval Press is published by the University of York’s Centre for

Medieval Studies in association with Boydell & Brewer Limited. Our objective is
the promotion of innovative scholarship and fresh criticism on medieval culture.
We have a special commitment to interdisciplinary study, in line with the
Centre’s belief that the future of Medieval Studies lies in those areas in which its
major constituent disciplines at once inform and challenge each other.

Editorial Board (2005–2008):

Professor J. G. Wogan-Browne (Dept of English and Related Literature)

Dr T. Ayers (Dept of History of Art)
Professor P. P. A. Biller (Dept of History)
Dr J. W. Binns (Emeritus, Dept of English and Related Literature)
Dr Gabriella Corona (Dept of English and Related Literature)
Professor W. M. Ormrod (Chair, Dept of History)
Professor J. D. Richards (Dept of Archaeology).

All enquiries of an editorial kind, including suggestions for monographs and

essay collections, should be addressed to: The Director, University of York,
Centre for Medieval Studies, The King’s Manor, York, YO1 7EP (E-mail:
[email protected]).

Publications of York Medieval Press are listed at the back of this volume.
St William of York

Christopher Norton

YORK MEDIEVAL PRESS

 © Christopher Norton 2006

All rights reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation

no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system,
published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast,
transmitted, recorded or reproduced in any form or by any means,
without the prior permission of the copyright owner

The right of Christopher Norton to be identified as

the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with
sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

First published 2006

A York Medieval Press publication

in association with The Boydell Press
an imprint of Boydell & Brewer Ltd
PO Box 9 Woodbridge Suffolk IP12 3DF UK
and of Boydell & Brewer Inc.
668 Mt Hope Avenue Rochester NY 14620 USA
website: www.boydellandbrewer.com
and with the
Centre for Medieval Studies, University of York

ISBN 1 903153 17 4

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available

from the British Library

Typeset by Word and Page, Chester

Disclaimer:
Printed in Great Britain by
Some images in the printed version
CromwellofPress,
this book are notWiltshire
Trowbridge, available for inclusion in the eBook.
To view these images please refer to the printed version of this book.
 CONTENTS

List of Illustrations vi
List of Tables viii
List of Genealogical Tables viii
Preface ix
Abbreviations xi

Introduction 1

1 William fitzHerbert 5

2 William the Treasurer 27

3 Archbishop William: The First Archiepiscopate 76

4 Archbishop William: The Second Archiepiscopate 124

5 Saint William 149

Epilogue 202

Appendix A. The Family and Estates of Herbert the Chamberlain 203

Appendix B. Paulinus of Leeds and the Family of Ralph Nowell 229

Appendix C. An Itinerary of William fitzHerbert 239

Bibliography 243
Index 257
 Disclaimer:
Some images in the printed version of this book are not available for inclusion in the eBook.
To view these images please refer to the printed version of this book.

ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1. Map showing Herbert the Chamberlain’s estates in Southern

England. 10
Drawing: Pat Gibbs

Fig. 2. Map showing the Archdeaconry of the East Riding and the
Yorkshire estates of Herbert the Chamberlain. 13
Drawing: Pat Gibbs

Fig. 3. Map of Winchester c. 1110. 18

Drawing: Pat Gibbs, based on Winchester in the Early Middle Ages, ed. M.
Biddle (Oxford, 1976), fig. 26.

Fig. 4. Map of York in the early twelfth century. 21

Drawing: Pat Gibbs, based on C. Norton, ‘The York Fire of 1137:
Conflagration or Consecration?’, Northern History 34 (1998), 194–204, map 1.

Fig. 5. Map of the Minster area in York in the early twelfth century. 22
Drawing: Pat Gibbs, based on C. Norton, ‘The Anglo-Saxon Cathedral at
York and the Topography of the Anglian City’, Journal of the British
Archaeological Association 151 (1998), 1–42, fig. 2.

Fig. 6. Anglo-Saxon wall-paintings on the chancel arch of the church

of Nether Wallop, Hants. 52
Photograph: © Crown copyright. NMR.

Fig. 7. Drawing of the inscribed sun-dial at Weaverthorpe Church. 53

Drawing: W. G. Collingwood, reproduced from J. Bilson, ‘Weaverthorpe
Church and Its Builder’, Archaeologia 72 (1922), 51–70, fig. 3.

Fig. 8. Plan of Weaverthorpe Church. 55

Drawing: John Bilson, reproduced from J. Bilson, ‘Weaverthorpe Church
and Its Builder’, Archaeologia 72 (1922), 51–70, fig. 1.

Fig. 9. Weaverthorpe Church from the south-west. 56

Photograph: reproduced by permission of English Heritage. NMR.

Fig. 10. Weaverthorpe Church, interior looking east. 56

Photograph: reproduced by permission of English Heritage. NMR.

Fig. 11. Map of Weaverthorpe village. 59

Drawing: Pat Gibbs, based on T. C. H. Brewster, ‘An Excavation at
Weaverthorpe Manor, East Riding, 1960’, YAJ 44 (1972), 114–33, fig. 2.
Fig. 12. Map of Yorkshire in the mid-twelfth century. 101
Drawing: Pat Gibbs.

Fig. 13. The tomb of Archbishop Godfrey de Ludham. 108

Photograph: © Crown copyright. NMR. Reproduced by kind permission of
the Dean and Chapter of York.

Fig. 14. Seal of Archbishop William fitzHerbert (Durham Cathedral

Muniments 4.1 Archiep. 7). 110
Photograph: reproduced by kind permission of the Dean and Chapter of
Durham.

Fig. 15. Siculo-Arabic casket at York Minster. 119

Photograph: reproduced by kind permission of the Dean and Chapter of
York.

Fig. 16. Map of Winchester c. 1148. 126

Drawing: Pat Gibbs, based on Winchester in the Early Middle Ages,
ed. M. Biddle (Oxford, 1976), fig. 27.

Fig. 17. The St Cuthbert or Stonyhurst Gospel Book. 141

Photograph: British Library, reproduced by kind permission of The Society
of Jesus (British Province).

Fig. 18. Plan of York Minster in William fitzHerbert’s time. 145

Drawing: Stuart Harrison.

Fig. 19. Map showing the origins of individuals cured at the tomb of
St William in 1177. 157
Drawing: Pat Gibbs.

Fig. 20. Engraving by Henry Cave of the west wall of St William’s

Chapel on Ouse bridge during demolition. 167
Photograph: Gordon Smith, from H. Cave, Antiquities of York (London, 1813),
pl. 27.

Fig. 21. The opening page of the Vita Sancti Willelmi, from Thornton
Abbey (British Library, MS Harley 2, f. 76r). 182
Photograph: by permission of the British Library.

Fig. 22. Engraving by Joseph Halfpenny of St William’s Chapel on

Ouse bridge. 196
Photograph: Gordon Smith from J. Halfpenny, Fragmenta Vetusta, or the
Remains of Ancient Buildings in York (York, 1807), pl. 22.
 TABLES

1 The 1177 miracles 154

2 Posthumous miracles in the Vita 189

3 Herbert the Chamberlain’s estates 228

GENEALOGICAL TABLES

1 The family connections of Herbert the Chamberlain and his wife

Emma xiii

2 The FitzHerbert family in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries xiv

3 The FitzHerbert family in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries xv

4 The family of Ralph Nowell and Paulinus of Leeds xvi

 PREFACE

This book was researched and written during my tenure of a British Academy
Research Readership between October 2002 and September 2004. My first and
greatest debt is to the British Academy for making it possible to immerse
myself in the complexities of the twelfth century free from the routine dis-
tractions of university life. I am equally indebted to my colleagues in the
History of Art Department of the University of York for making it possible for
me to take leave of absence from the usual obligations of teaching and
administration during this period.
Special thanks are due to the staff of York Minster Library, particularly
Mrs Deirdre Mortimer and Mr John Powell, who, together with the Minster
Archivist, Mr Peter Young, provided a service of unfailing courtesy and
efficiency, even during circumstances of the greatest difficulty. The excellent
resources of the Minster Library and Archives provided convenient access to
most of the materials required for the research. Additional resources were
provided by the University of York Library, to whose staff I am equally
indebted.
I have benefited enormously over the years from discussions with and
help from many colleagues at the Centre for Medieval Studies at the
University of York. In particular, Dr Sarah Rees Jones, Professor David Smith,
Dr James Binns and Chris Daniell have assisted on a number of points of
detail, and Mrs Louise Harrison has provided unfailing and ever-cheerful
service on the word-processor. Professor David Palliser has also advised on a
number of issues. My scholarly debt to previous labourers in the field of
twelfth-century ecclesiastical history will be apparent on every page that
follows. Any tares that remain are my own responsibility.
This project was originally undertaken as essential background research
for a study of the early fifteenth-century stained glass window in York
Minster illustrating the life and miracles of St William of York. It rapidly
became apparent, however, that much of the historical spadework on
William fitzHerbert and such key sources as the Vita of St William had yet to
be done, and that it required far more extensive treatment than could
possibly be fitted into a preliminary chapter in a book on the St William
Window. The result will, I hope, stand on its own merits. I also hope that time
will permit a detailed examination of the St William Window on another
occasion. In the meantime, the opportunity to study the stained-glass panels
as they pass through the workshop during the current programme of
conservation and restoration has been a constant inspiration, and I am most
grateful to the staff of the York Glaziers Trust for providing access to the glass

ix
and for many stimulating discussions. By a happy coincidence, this book is
due to appear about the time that the completed window is unveiled.
Last but not least, this book would never have been completed without the
constant support of my wife, Sue.

x
 ABBREVIATIONS

AY The Archaeology of York

BAACT British Archaeological Association Conference
Transactions
Chronica Pontificum Chronica Pontificum Ecclesiae Eboracensis in HCY II,
312–445
CRR Curia Regis Rolls, I–VIII (London, 1922–38)
CS Councils and Synods with Other Documents Relating
to the English Church, I, AD 871–1204, Part II,
1066–1204, ed. D. Whitelock, M. Brett and
C. N. L. Brooke (Oxford, 1981)
DB Domesday Book
EEA English Episcopal Acta
EEA V English Episcopal Acta, V, York 1070–1154,
ed. J. Burton (Oxford, 1988)
EEA XX English Episcopal Acta, XX, York 1154–1181,
ed. M. Lovatt (Oxford, 2000)
EEA XXVII English Episcopal Acta, XXVII, York 1189–1212,
ed. M. Lovatt (Oxford, 2004)
EHD II English Historical Documents II, 1042–1189,
ed. D. C. Douglas and G. W. Greenaway,
2nd edn (London, 1981)
EHR English Historical Review
EYC I–III Early Yorkshire Charters, vols 1–3, ed. W. Farrer
(Edinburgh, 1914–16), with Consolidated Index,
ed. C. T. Clay and E. M. Clay, YASRS Extra Series
4 (1942)
EYC IV–XII Early Yorkshire Charters, vols 4–12, ed. C. T. Clay,
YASRS Extra Series 1–3 and 5–10 (1935–65)
Gervase Gervase of Canterbury, Chronica, in The Historical
Works of Gervase of Canterbury, I, ed. W. Stubbs,
RS 73 (London, 1879)
HCY I–III The Historians of the Church of York and Its
Archbishops, 3 vols, ed. J. Raine, RS 71
(London, 1879–94)
Historia Abbendonensis Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis: The History of the
Church of Abingdon, II, ed. J. Hudson, OMT
(Oxford, 2002)

xi
 Abbreviations
Hugh the Chanter Hugh the Chanter, The History of the Church of York
1066–1127, ed. C. Johnson, M. Brett, C. N. L. Brooke
and M. Winterbottom, revised edn, OMT (Oxford,
1990)
John of Hexham John of Hexham, Historia in Symeonis Monachi
Opera Omnia, ed. T. Arnold, II, RS 75 (London,
1885)
Miracula Miracula Quaedam Sancti Willelmi, in HCY III,
531–43
OMT Oxford Medieval Texts
PR 1130 Magnum Rotulum Scaccarii, vel Magnum Rotulum
Pipae de Anno Tricesimo-Primo Regni Henrici Primi,
ed. J. Hunter (London, 1833)
PR 1159– The Great Roll of the Pipe AD 1158–1159,
Publications of the Pipe Roll Society, I (1884),
and subsequent volumes for subsequent years
PUE II–III Papsturkunden in England, II–III, ed. W. Holtzmann
(Berlin, 1935 and Göttingen, 1952)
RCHM Royal Commission on Historical Monuments,
England
Red Book Red Book of the Exchequer, 3 vols, ed. H. Hall, RS 99
(London, 1896)
Roger of Howden Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Houedene, 4 vols,
ed. W. Stubbs, RS 51 (London, 1868–71)
RRAN I–III Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum 1066–1154,
Volume I, ed. H. W. C. Davis (Oxford, 1913);
Volume II, Regesta Henrici Primi 1100–1135,
ed. C. Johnson and H. A. Cronne (Oxford, 1956);
Volume III, Regesta Regis Stephani ac Mathildis
Imperatricis ac Gaufridi et Henrici Ducum
Normannorum, 1135–54, ed. H. A. Cronne and
R. H. C. Davis (Oxford, 1968)
RS Rolls Series
SS Surtees Society
TRHS Transactions of the Royal Historical Society
VCH Victoria County History
Vita Vita Sancti Willelmi Auctore Anonymo, in HCY II,
270–91
William of Newburgh William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum
in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and
Richard I, I, ed. R. Howlett, RS 82 (London, 1884)
YAJ Yorkshire Archaeological Journal
YASRS Yorkshire Archaeological Society Record Series

xii
 Genealogical Table 1. The family connections of Herbert the Chamberlain and his wife Emma

Herbert Wake-Dog
count of Maine Tancred of
d. 1036 Hauteville

Hugh II Theobald III = Gersendis = Azzo Robert daughter Roger I

count of Maine count of Blois marquess of Guiscard count of
d. 1051 d. 1089/90 Liguria d. 1085 Sicily
d. 1101

Herbert II Margaret Hugh = Heria Geoffrey of

count of Maine (betrothed to Conversano
d. c. 1062 Robert of William the
Normandy) Conqueror
d. c. 1062 d. 1087

Roger II
king of Sicily
d. 1154
Herbert the = Emma Stephen = Adela Robert = Sibyl
Chamberlain alive 1130 count of Blois duke of
d. c. 1120 d. 1102 Normandy
d. 1134

Roger
Herbert = Adela/ William other children Theobald IV Stephen William Henry duke of
fitzHerbert Sibyl fitzHerbert count of Blois king of of Blois Apulia
d. 1148 (mistress archbishop d. 1152 England bishop of d. 1149
x 1155 of Henry I) of York d. 1154 Winchester
alive 1157 d. 1154 d. 1171

Henry de Sully
Elizabeth abbot of
Fécamp
=
 Genealogical Table 2. The FitzHerbert family in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries

Herbert the Chamberlain = Emma

d. c. 1120 alive 1130
Robert Corbet Hunger son of Odin
of Alcester of Broad Windsor

Henry I Sibyl Corbet = Herbert William daughter = William Croc daughter = Robert de Gilbert Geoffrey Arnulf = ? daughter Osbert
d. 1135 alive 1157 fitzHerbert I fitzHerbert Venuiz fitzHerbert fitzHerbert d.s.p.?
d. 1148 x 55 archbishop alive alive 1111
of York 1109 x 1114 Gervase
Reginald, earl of d. 1154
Cornwall d.1175 Herbert
William alive 1187 fitzGeoffrey
Gundred alive 1148
Rohese
Alexander I = Sibyl d.1122
of Scotland
d.s.p. 1124

Robert Herbert fitzHerbert II = Lucy Henry fitzHerbert

fitzHerbert d. winter 1203-4 daughter and co-heir of occurs 1158-65
d.s.p. 1165 Milo, earl of Hereford
d. 1219 x 1220 William de = Mabel Patric
Mandeville

1 2
Reginald fitzHerbert Alice = Peter fitzHerbert = Isabel de Ferrers Matthew fitzHerbert = Joan
d.s.p. 1192 daughter d. 1235 widow of Roger d. 1231
of Robert Mortimer I
fitzRoger d. 1252

Herbert fitzMatthew Peter fitzMatthew John fitzMatthew

d.s.p. 1245 d.s.p. 1255 alive 1282

Cont’d
Matthew fitzJohn = Eleanor
d.s.p. 1309 alive 1316
 Genealogical Table 3. The FitzHerbert family in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries

Cont’d
1 2
Sibyl = William = Margaret
daughter of de Ferrers daughter and
William earl of Derby coheiress of
Marshall earl d. 1254 Roger de
of Pembroke Quincy earl of
1 2 Winchester
Alice = Peter fitzHerbert = Isabel de Ferrers William = Maud
daughter of d. 1235 widow of Roger Mortimer I de Vivonne de Ferrers
Robert d. 1252 d. 1259 d. 1299
fitzRoger

William = Lucy Herbert fitzPeter Isabel = Reginald fitzPeter = Joan de Vivonne Robert William Ferrers
de Ros alive 1266 d.s.p. 1248 daughter of d. 1286 d. 1314 earl of Derby of Groby
d. 1264 William de deprived 1266 d. 1287
Braose heiress
of Blenlevny

John fitzReginald Walter fitzReginald Peter fitzReginald Herbert fitzReginald William Ferrers
of Blenlevny portioner of of Chewton d. 1325
alive 1308 Pontesbury d. 1322
alive 1277-8

Herbert fitzJohn Roger fitzPeter Reginald fitzHerbert Henry, lord

d. 1321 d. 1347 Ferrers of Groby
d. 1343

Margaret = Matthew fitzHerbert Reginald fitzHerbert Edmund fitzReginald William, lord

d. 1356 d.s.p. 1356 Ferrers of Groby
d. 1371
daughter daughter
 Genealogical Table 4. The family of Ralph Nowell and Paulinus of Leeds

Thurwif

Lefwin = Juliana le Gras

Ralph Nowell de Marisco
bishop of the Orkneys
alive 1154

Gilbert Peter Adam Thomas Paulinus = daughter Hugh Gerard Walter

canon of priest of the priest of Leeds parson of chaplain
Ripon Wakefield d. c. 1202 Stokesley de Marisco

1 2 1
? = Ralph Nowell = Helen = Robert John (Nowell)
alive 1227 Wilstrop of Wilstrop chaplain
de Marisco
?

Peter Richard

Agnes
daughter
and heiress
alive 1278
 Introduction

St William of York is one of the more obscure saints of medieval England.

Even in the city whose name he bears he is less well known than his younger
contemporaries Aelred of Rievaulx and Thomas Becket. If he is remembered
at all, it is as likely as not for the miracle of Ouse bridge – surely one of the
least remarkable miracles in the annals of hagiography – or for the unedifying
mystery surrounding his death. Outside York, few people have ever heard of
St William – unless they be twelfth-century ecclesiastical historians, among
whom he has achieved a certain notoriety as the man at the centre of one of
the most protracted and convoluted election disputes ever to have afflicted
the English church. For cognoscenti of ecclesiastical rows, the ‘case of
St William of York’, as it has come to be known from the title of a famous
article by Dom David Knowles,1 has assumed the status of a classic. And not
without reason. The election of a new archbishop of York developed from
being a little local difficulty into an international cause célèbre involving kings,
cardinals, popes and several men who were subsequently to be reckoned as
saints, all divided between the different factions.
Yet the intense spot-light which has been shone on the election dispute has
tended to leave in the shadows other aspects of William fitzHerbert’s career.
For thirty-five years prior to his consecration as archbishop of York, William
held the twin offices of treasurer of York Minster and archdeacon of the East
Riding. These decades have generally been passed over more or less in
silence, on the grounds that the details of his early career are few;2 yet his
family connections and lengthy ecclesiastical apprenticeship are by no means
as poorly documented as has been supposed, and are essential for under-
standing the troubled, final years of his life. The procedural twists and turns
surrounding William’s election and consecration, his deposition, and his
eventual return as archbishop inevitably constitute a dominant theme in the
last decade and a half of his life, but there are other aspects of this period
which equally merit attention. As for William’s canonisation and the early

1
D. Knowles, ‘The Case of St William of York’, Cambridge Historical Journal, 5.2 (1936),
162–77 and 212–14, reprinted with additional notes in his collected essays,
The Historian and Character and Other Essays (Cambridge, 1963), pp. 76–97.
2
D. Baker, ‘Viri Religiosi and the York Election Dispute’, in Councils and Assemblies,
ed. G. J. Cuming and D. Baker, Studies in Church History 7 (Cambridge, 1971),
pp. 82–100, at p. 98.

1
 St William of York
development of his cult as a saint, the considerable body of evidence which
survives has never received the critical attention which it deserves.
Modern assessments of William’s personal qualities have generally been at
best disparaging, if not overtly negative. Wealthy, indolent and immoral is
the not untypical view of one modern scholar.3 Derek Baker has been in a
minority in suggesting that it was precisely William’s experience and com-
petence which aroused the opposition at the start of the election dispute of
ambitious clergy less well qualified than himself.4 The final years of William’s
life were blighted by the opposition of the Cistercians and their allies, and his
modern reputation has also suffered from what might be called a Cistercian
tendency. William left no letters or other writings to counter-balance the
contemporary effusions of his enemy, St Bernard. Even Bernard’s modern
admirers have conceded that some of his letters on the subject of the York
election dispute, and some of the aspersions cast on William fitzHerbert, are
among the most forceful and extreme ever to have come from his pen. Yet
such has been the power of Bernard’s rhetoric and the force of his reputation
that William’s character has been blackened,5 in spite of the fact that his
opponents failed repeatedly to prove any of the charges proferred against
him in the ecclesiastical courts appointed to determine the case, until
eventually the day arrived when the final arbiter (the pope) happened to be a
Cistercian pupil of St Bernard. The general feeling that William was
something of a worthless or unsavoury character is summed up by the
opinion, attributed recently to a canon of York Minster, that he was ‘not the
kind of saint we would wish to commemorate’. His name is surrounded by a
faint but unmistakable aura of embarrassment and disapprobation.
Certainly, William fitzHerbert divided his contemporaries, and he con-
tinues to divide opinion to this day. It has been no part of my purpose to
rehabilitate him. If, however, the picture of him which emerges from these
pages seems unexpectedly sympathetic, it is because I have been led to the
conclusion that the judgements which have been passed on him have been
very partial. Partial, firstly, in the sense that the extant sources relating to the
election dispute are heavily biased in favour of his opponents’ point of view;
and partial also in the sense that the election dispute, however significant in
its own right, occupied only a small part of his life. William’s career spanned
nearly five decades, during which he moved in the highest circles of politics
and administration, both ecclesiastical and secular. The election dispute was
the last but not necessarily the most difficult or harrowing of the intrigues
and dramas through which he lived.
William was not someone, like Bernard or Thomas Becket, who forced

3
G. V. Scammell, Hugh du Puiset, Bishop of Durham (Cambridge, 1956), p. 10.
4
Baker, ‘Viri Religiosi’.
5
See for example the comments in The Letters of St Bernard of Clairvaux, ed. B. S. James,
2nd edn (Stroud, 1998), p. 271.

2
 Introduction
himself upon the attention of his contemporaries by the strength of his
character and his convictions. On the contrary, he seems, from the few hints
that we have about his personality, at least towards the end of his life, to have
been a mild-mannered and probably cautious man. Yet he had the knack of
being at the right place at the right time and of meeting the people who
mattered. William was a cleric of unexceptional abilities but privileged
background and fortune. To what extent he actively affected the course of
events in his lifetime is debatable; but, to borrow a metaphor beloved of
medieval authors, he can be seen as a mirror of his world, in life and in death.
His career and his canonisation both reflect and illuminate the aspirations,
the struggles, the disappointments and the surprises of life in the upper
echelons of the church in the twelfth century.

Almost all of the sources cited in this study are available in printed editions.
The majority of the narrative and chronicle sources were published in the
nineteenth century, often in the volumes of the Rolls Series or the Surtees
Society. In some cases these have now been superseded by modern editions.
Even when recent editions do not exist, there are generally modern critical
studies in print. It has therefore seldom been necessary to discuss the sources
per se. As regards the specifically York or Yorkshire sources, however, the
situation is less satisfactory. The majority of the relevant texts were printed by
James Raine in the three volumes of The Historians of the Church of York in the
Rolls Series between 1879 and 1894.6 His text of Hugh the Chanter’s History of
the Church of York has now been superseded by the valuable critical edition
and translation in the Oxford Medieval Texts series,7 but for other sources we
are still dependent on Raine. The York Chronica Pontificum, for instance,
would benefit from a critical edition and might be better known if it had been
translated. I suspect that it would emerge as a more interesting source than it
is usually thought to be. As for the early thirteenth-century Vita of St William
and the collection of early miracles which pass under the name of the
Miracula, they have never received any critical examination in print, and I
have therefore devoted some space in Chapter Five to an analysis of these
two key texts. For Alured of Beverley’s Annales we are still dependent on the
1716 edition by Thomas Hearne.8
For the years of the election dispute, the narrative sources are comple-
mented by an important dossier of letters preserved among the corres-
pondence of St Bernard, and by a handful of papal letters. This is the only
phase of William’s life for which there exists a coherent historiography. The
fundamental chronology of the years 1140 to 1147 was established by David

6
HCY.
7
Hugh the Chanter.
8
Aluredi Beverlacensis, Annales sive Historia de Gestis Regum, ed. T. Hearne (Oxford,
1716).

3
 St William of York
Knowles,9 and the relevant sources were discussed at length by Derek
Baker.10 My analysis of the dispute in Chapter Three is deeply indebted to
their fundamental studies, though my conclusions differ from theirs in
important respects.
Historians of twelfth-century Yorkshire are fortunate in the availability of
charter evidence. As well as a significant number of published monastic
cartularies, the magnificent series of volumes of Early Yorkshire Charters
edited by Farrer and Clay is unsurpassed.11 However, the essential process of
identifying individuals and refining dates still continues. For twelfth-century
royal charters, the more recent volumes of the Regesta Regum Anglo-
Normannorum are essential,12 and the on-going series of English Episcopal Acta
has enormously facilitated analysis of episcopal charters. In particular, the
York volume for the years 1070–1154 edited by Janet Burton, which covers the
whole of William’s career and not just his archiepiscopate, has been
invaluable for the present study.13 Whenever I have been able to suggest new
identifications of grantees or witnesses, or to propose revised dates for the
charters, I have presented the evidence in the footnotes. Likewise for revised
identifications or dates for early Minster clergy and archdeacons, for which
the published volumes of Fasti by Clay and by Diana Greenway remain
fundamental.14 All of these works have been constantly by my side.
One particularly laborious task has been the unravelling of the FitzHerbert
family tree and the identification of the family estates. This has shed much
new light on William’s family connections throughout his life; his links with
the Nowell family, both in his lifetime and subsequently, have also proved
illuminating. Those who wish to know the detailed evidence relating to the
two families will find it set out in the Appendices.

9
Knowles, ‘St William’.
10
D. Baker, ‘San Bernardo e l’elezione di York’, in Studi su S. Bernardo di Chiaravalle,
Convegno Internazionale, Firenze 1974 (Rome, 1975), pp. 115–80.
11
EYC I–III and EYC IV–XII.
12
RRAN II–III.
13
EEA V.
14
C. T. Clay, comp., York Minster Fasti, 2 vols, YASRS 123–4 (1958–9), and
D. E. Greenway, comp., Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae 1066–1300, VI, York (London, 1999).

4
 CHAPTER ONE

William fitzHerbert

William’s life revolved around the ancient cathedral cities of Winchester and
York. He was brought up at Winchester, he was consecrated archbishop
there, and it was to Winchester that he retreated for a number of years
towards the end of his life. As a young man he moved to York, where he held
the post of treasurer of the Minster for many years until he became arch-
bishop, and it was to York that he ultimately returned to vindication and to
death. Buried within the walls of the Minster, he was raised in due course to
the ranks of the saints, and came to bear the name of his adopted city as
St William of York. The move from Winchester to York was engineered by his
father, who secured for him his initial appointment, and his family connec-
tions continued to affect the progress of his career almost until the end. It is
therefore appropriate to begin in the traditional manner with some account of
his family and background.

Family background

William was the son of Herbert the Chamberlain and his wife, Emma. There
has been no scholarly unanimity about their antecedents, but both Herbert
and Emma, it appears, were illegitimate offspring of leading French comital
families (Genealogical Table 1).1 Herbert’s father was probably Count Herbert
II of Maine, the last of the ruling counts of Maine. The son of Count Hugh II
(†1051) and grandson of Herbert Wake-Dog (†1036), Herbert II succeeded to
the title as a boy. In 1061, following his mother’s advice, he came to an
arrangement with Duke William of Normandy whereby, in the event of his
dying without an heir, the county of Maine would pass to the Norman dukes.
Shortly afterwards, Count Herbert conveniently died without having mar-
ried. Herbert the Chamberlain is believed to have been a young illegitimate
son of his, who would have fallen into the hands of Duke William along with
the county of Maine. Brought up apparently under William’s tutelage, he
made a career for himself in the royal administration in England, rising to
become a senior treasury official and intimate advisor of Henry I. William
fitzHerbert owed his appointment to York to his father’s influence at court.

1
The evidence for what follows is set out in Appendix A.

5
 St William of York
Herbert the Chamberlain’s wife, Emma, was seemingly an illegitimate
daughter of Count Theobald III of Blois, who died in 1089 x 1090. She was
therefore a half-sister of Stephen, count of Blois (†1102), who married William
the Conqueror’s daughter, Adela; their son was the future King Stephen.
William fitzHerbert was consequently a cousin of King Stephen and of his
brother, Henry of Blois, the bishop of Winchester and sometime papal legate.
The rise to power of the family of Blois in the 1130s was to have a decisive
impact on the final phase of William fitzHerbert’s career: without it, his
election to the archbishopric of York is unthinkable.
But this is to anticipate. At the time of their marriage, probably in the early
1080s, Herbert and Emma, for all their family associations, would have had
no prospect of inheriting either titles or lands. However, Herbert’s upbring-
ing under the guardianship of William the Conqueror would have familiar-
ised him with the workings of one of the most powerful régimes in eleventh-
century Europe. His appointment as royal chamberlain in the final years of
the Conqueror’s reign provided him with the opportunity to make both his
name and his fortune.2 The title ‘chamberlain’ implied a connection with the
king’s camera or chamber, but in practice it could signify a variety of things.3
Some chamberlains held the title by right of inheritance, and probably had no
more than occasional or symbolic duties consonant with a particular status at
court. Other chamberlains held substantive offices in the royal administra-
tion. Furthermore, some men of the former category might for a while hold an
office of the second type, and then revert to an honorific position on
relinquishing that office. Herbert the Chamberlain held an administrative
office of chamberlain attached to the royal treasury, and the title was
subsequently passed to his descendants, without in their case implying any
official administrative position.
The association of the treasury with the chamber went back to the days

2
In two of the four mentions of Herbert in Domesday Book, the word ‘chamberlain’ is
an addition, which may suggest that he was appointed to the post around the time the
survey was being compiled (R. L. Poole, ‘The Appointment and Deprivation of
St William, Archbishop of York’, EHR 45 (1930), 273–81). Herbert witnessed a charter
in favour of Westminster Abbey dated 1095–6 x ante 1098 as Herbertus camerarius regis
de Winton, according to J. A. Robinson, Gilbert Crispin, Abbot of Westminster (Cam-
bridge, 1911), p. 146 no. 27. However, Westminster Abbey Charters 1066–c. 1214,
ed. E. Mason, London Record Society 25 (1988), p. 318 no. 488, reads this as Herbertus
camerarius. Reg[inaldus] de Winton. See Chapter Two for the inscription at Weaver-
thorpe where Herbert is described as Herebertus Wintonie.
3
On what follows, see G. H. White, ‘Financial Administration under Henry I’,
TRHS 4th s., 8 (1925), 56–78; H. G. Richardson and G. O. Sayles, The Governance of
Medieval England from the Conquest to Magna Carta (Edinburgh, 1963), pp. 216–28;
C. W. Hollister, ‘The Origins of the English Treasury’, EHR 93 (1978), 262–75,
reprinted in his Monarchy, Magnates and Institutions in the Anglo-Norman World
(London, 1986), pp. 209–22; J. A. Green, The Government of England under Henry I
(Cambridge, 1986), pp. 30–5.

6
 William fitzHerbert
when the royal treasure was physically located in proximity to the king’s
chamber. In time, however, it became no longer possible for the treasury to
follow the royal person on his constant travels from one place to another, and
throughout this period the royal treasury was based at Winchester. The
association with the royal chamber or household was gradually broken, but
the title of chamberlain continued to be used for the senior officials attached
to the treasury. Herbert the Chamberlain was such a one, and spent much of
his official life at Winchester, rather than following the monarchs on their
incessant itinerations. By the end of Henry I’s reign, it appears that the
treasury was administered by an official with the title of treasurer, supported
by two chamberlains of the treasury. Whether this formal arrangement was
an innovation of Henry I’s, or whether it was the continuation of a system
which went back to the time of William the Conqueror or even earlier, has
been a matter of intense debate. It is also partly one of terminology, and there
has been much discussion as to whether Herbert the Chamberlain held the
title of treasurer or not.4 What is certain is that he was a long-serving treasury
official, who was in charge of the royal treasury at Winchester for much of
Henry I’s reign, until he fell from grace in 1118. He died a year or two later.5
We catch glimpses of some of Herbert’s activities in the later years of
William Rufus and under Henry I.6 He witnessed various royal and other
charters and from his position in the witness-lists among the clergy we learn
that he was in clerical orders.7 He was the recipient of a number of royal
charters and writs, one of which dates from the start of Henry I’s reign
(perhaps issued at the time of his coronation). Addressed to Eudes the
steward and Herbert the Chamberlain, it orders them to ensure that the
convents of Westminster, Winchester and Gloucester be issued with full
livery from the king on those festivals (i.e. Christmas, Easter and Pentecost)
when the king wore his crown in their churches. Their precentors were also to

4
White, ‘Financial Administration’, Richardson and Sayle, Governance of Medieval
England, pp. 216–28, and Hollister, ‘Origins of the English Treasury’, take different
views on Herbert the Chamberlain’s title. John of Hexham, p. 317, says that William
was filius Herberti Wintoniensis, thesaurarii Henrici Regis, but it is not clear if the title as
such was applied to Herbert the Chamberlain in his lifetime.
5
See below, Chapter Two and Appendix A.
6
J. Bilson, ‘Weaverthorpe Church and Its Builder’, Archaeologia 72 (1922), 51–70, and
references cited in n. 3.
7
Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. W. Dugdale, revised edn ed. J. Caley, H. Ellis and
B. Bandinel, 6 vols in 8 (London, 1817–30), IV, 16a, no. III = EEA VI, Norwich 1070–
1214, ed. C. Harper-Bill (Oxford, 1990), no. 12, dated 3 September 1101, and 17a, no. V
= RRAN II, no. 547 given on the same day; see also Winchester in the Early Middle Ages:
An Edition and Discussion of the Winton Domesday, ed. M. Biddle, Winchester Studies 1
(Oxford, 1976), p. 33. Other charters witnessed by Herbert the Chamberlain are RRAN
II, nos 544, 548 and 1291. Also RRAN II, no. 550 = Historia Abbendonensis, pp. 76–9
(only the latter version including Herbert among the witnesses). See also the reference
in n. 2.

7
 St William of York
have an ounce of gold.8 The crown-wearing ceremonies were major events in
the political calendar, and Herbert’s role in organising them is one indication
of his importance in the royal administrative hierarchy. He was one of the
commissioners appointed by the king to carry out a survey of royal pro-
perties in Winchester c. 1110, the resulting document being the so-called
Winton Domesday.9 Also in 1110 he was the recipient of a writ from the king
relating to the establishment of the New Minster community at their new site
to the north of the city at Hyde Abbey.10 On a famous occasion in 1111,
Herbert was a member of a court held in the treasury at Winchester in the
presence of the queen (the king being absent), which voted in favour of Abbot
Faricius of Abingdon in a dispute about the lands of the abbey. It is the first
recorded occasion on which, it appears, Domesday Book was cited in
evidence. Geoffrey fitzHerbert, who was also present at this session, was
probably one of his sons.11
Herbert’s position provided him with opportunities for personal profit and
family advancement. For example, following the death of the previous abbot
of Abingdon in 1097, the estates of the abbey were held by the king until the
election of Faricius in 1100. Faricius discovered that Herbert the Chamberlain
had taken the opportunity to stake a claim to some lands which the mona-
stery held at Leckhampstead in Berkshire and elsewhere. Herbert eventually
relinquished the other lands, but managed to retain possession of 10 hides at
Leckhampstead for the consideration of the paltry sum of one mark of silver.
The Abingdon chronicler made a point of emphasising the difficulties that
Faricius had in dealing with Herbert.12
Herbert seems to have developed the art of extracting properties from
ecclesiastical institutions and offices whose estates passed temporarily into
the king’s hands, or who suffered from temporary financial difficulties.13 In
London, the canons of St Paul’s alleged that he had acquired one of their

8
RRAN II, no. 490. Other royal charters addressed to Herbert the Chamberlain are
RRAN II, nos 946–8, 959 (= Historia Abbendonensis, pp. 166–7), 1379 and 1380.
9
Winchester in the Early Middle Ages, pp. 10 and 33.
10
RRAN II, no. 947; Property and Piety in Early Medieval Winchester. Documents relating to
the Topography of the Anglo-Saxon and Norman City and Its Minsters, ed. A. R. Rumble,
Winchester Studies 4.iii (Oxford, 2002), pp. 163–5.
11
RRAN II, no. 1000, and Historia Abbendonensis, pp. 170–1. It may have been also at this
time that Herbert the Chamberlain was one of a panel, including most of the same
people, which advised the bishop of Winchester in adjudicating a claim relating to
land at Alton and at Patney (Wiltshire) (EEA VIII, Winchester 1070–1204, ed.
M. J. Franklin (Oxford, 1993), no. 18). On Geoffrey fitzHerbert, see also Appendix A.
12
Historia Abbendonensis, pp. 62–3, 126–7 = RRAN II, no. 521, 196–9. K. L. Shirley,
‘Faricius of Abingdon and the King’s Court’, Haskins Society Journal 9 (1997)
(published 2001), 175–84, emphasises Faricius’s frequent recourse to the king’s court
to achieve his ends, but overlooks the fact that, in this case, he was outmanoeuvred by
Herbert the Chamberlain.
13
A full analysis of Herbert the Chamberlain’s estates is given in Appendix A.

8
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
Before turning from the subject of evidence, we may just remark
that inspired history supplies us with more than one instance in
which a righteous man has been condemned with an appearance of
attention to Deuteronomy xvii. 6, 7. Witness the case of Naboth, in 1
Kings xxi; and the case of Stephen, in Acts vi. and vii; and above all,
the case of the only perfect Man that ever trod this earth. Alas! men
can, at times, put on the appearance of wonderful attention to the
letter of Scripture when it suits their own ungodly ends; they can
quote its sacred words in defense of the most flagrant
unrighteousness and shocking immorality. Two witnesses accused
Naboth of blaspheming God and the king, and that faithful Israelite
was deprived of his inheritance and of his life on the testimony of
two liars, hired by the direction of a godless, cruel woman. Stephen,
a man full of the Holy Ghost, was stoned to death for blasphemy, on
the testimony of false witnesses received and acted upon by the
great religious leaders of the day, who could doubtless quote
Deuteronomy xvii. as their authority.
But all this, while it so sadly and forcibly illustrates what man is, and
what mere human religiousness without conscience is, leaves wholly
untouched the fine moral rule laid down for our guidance in the
opening lines of our chapter. Religion without conscience or the fear
of God is the most degrading, demoralizing, hardening thing beneath
the canopy of heaven; and one of its most terrible features is seen in
this, that men under its influence are not ashamed or afraid to make
use of the letter of holy Scripture as a cloak wherewith to cover the
most horrible wickedness.
But thanks and praise to our God, His Word stands forth before the
vision of our souls in all its heavenly purity, divine virtue, and holy
morality, and flings back in the face of the enemy his every attempt
to draw from its sacred pages a plea for aught that is not true,
venerable, just, pure, lovely, and of good report.
We shall now proceed to quote for the reader the second paragraph
of our chapter, in which we shall find instruction of great moral
value, and much needed in this day of self-will and independence.
"If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between
blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and
stroke, being matters of controversy within thy gates; then shalt
thou arise and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God
shall choose; and thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and
unto the judges that shall be in those days, and inquire; and they
shall show thee the sentence of judgment: and thou shalt do
according to the sentence which they of that place which the Lord
shall choose shall show thee; and thou shalt observe to do according
to all that they inform thee; according to the sentence of the law
which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which
they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the
sentence which they shall show thee, to the right hand, nor to the
left, and the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken
unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy
God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die; and thou shalt put
away the evil from Israel. And all the people shall hear and fear and
do no more presumptuously." (Ver. 8-13.)
Here we have divine provision made for the perfect settlement of all
questions which might arise throughout the congregation of Israel.
They were to be settled in the divine presence, at the divinely
appointed centre, by the divinely appointed authority. Thus self-will
and presumption were effectually guarded against. All matters of
controversy were to be definitively settled by the judgment of God
as expressed by the priest or the judge appointed by God for the
purpose.
In a word, it was absolutely and entirely a matter of divine authority.
It was not for one man to set himself up in self-will and presumption
against another. This would never do in the assembly of God. Each
one had to submit his cause to a divine tribunal, and bow implicitly
to its decision. There was to be no appeal, inasmuch as there was
no higher court. The divinely appointed priest or judge spoke as the
oracle of God, and both plaintiff and defendant had to bow, without
a demur, to the decision.
Now, it must be very evident to the reader that no member of the
congregation of Israel would ever have thought of bringing his case
before a Gentile tribunal for judgment. This, we may feel assured,
would have been utterly foreign to the thoughts and feelings of
every true Israelite. It would have involved a positive insult to
Jehovah Himself, who was in their midst to give judgment in every
case which might arise. Surely He was sufficient. He knew the ins
and outs, the pros and cons, the roots and issues, of every
controversy, however involved or difficult. All were to look to Him,
and to bring their causes to the place which He had chosen, and no
where else. The idea of two members of the assembly of God
appearing before a tribunal of the uncircumcised for judgment would
not have been tolerated for a moment. It would be as much as to
say that there was a defect in the divine arrangement for the
congregation.
Has this any voice for us? How are Christians to have their questions
and their controversies settled? Are they to betake themselves to the
world for judgment? Is there no provision in the assembly of God for
the proper settlement of cases which may arise? Hear what the
inspired apostle says on the point to the assembly at Corinth, and
"to all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
both theirs and ours," and therefore to all true Christians now.
"Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before
the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the
saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you,
are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we
shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life! If
then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to
judge who are least esteemed in the Church. I speak to your shame.
Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that
shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to
law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore
there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with
another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather be
defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of
God? Be not deceived." (1 Cor. vi. 1-9.)
Here, then, we have divine instruction for the Church of God in all
ages. We must never, for a moment, lose sight of the fact that the
Bible is the book for every stage of the Church's earthly career. True
it is, alas! the Church is not as it was when the above lines were
penned by the inspired apostle; a vast change has taken place in the
Church's practical condition. There was no difficulty in early days in
distinguishing between the Church and the world—between "the
saints" and "unbelievers"—between "those within" and "those
without." The line of demarkation was broad, distinct, and
unmistakable in those days. Any one who looked at the face of
society in a religious point of view would see three things, namely,
Paganism, Judaism, and Christianity—the Gentile, the Jew, and the
Church of God—the heathen temple, the synagogue, and the
assembly of God. There was no confounding these things. The
Christian assembly stood out in vivid contrast with all beside.
Christianity was strongly and clearly pronounced in those primitive
times. It was neither a national, provincial, nor parochial affair, but a
personal, practical, living reality. It was not a mere nominal, national,
professional creed, but a divinely wrought faith, a living power in the
heart flowing out in the life.
But now, things are totally changed. The Church and the world are
so mixed up, that the vast majority of professors could hardly
understand the real force and proper application of the passage
which we have just quoted. Were we to speak to them about "the
saints" going to law "before the unbelievers," it would seem like a
foreign tongue. Indeed, the term "saint" is hardly heard in the
professing church, save when used with a sneer, or as applied to
such as have been canonized by a superstitious reverence.
But has any change come over the Word of God, or over the grand
truths which that Word unfolds to our souls? Has any change come
over the thoughts of God in reference to what His Church is, or what
the world is, or as to the proper relation of the one to the other?
Does He not know who are "saints" and who are "unbelievers"? Has
it ceased to be "a fault" for "brother to go to law with brother, and
that before the unbelievers"? In a word, has holy Scripture lost its
power, its point, its divine application? Is it no longer our guide, our
authority, our one perfect rule and unerring standard? Has the
marked change that has come over the Church's moral condition
deprived the Word of God of all power of application to us—"to all
that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"? Has
our Father's most precious revelation become, in any one particular,
a dead letter—a piece of obsolete writing—a document pertaining to
days long gone by? Has our altered condition robbed the Word of
God of a single one of its moral glories?
Reader, what answer does your heart return to these questions? Let
us most earnestly entreat of you to weigh them honestly, humbly,
and prayerfully in the presence of your Lord. We believe your answer
will be a wonderfully correct index of your real position and moral
state. Do you not clearly see and fully admit that Scripture can never
lose its power? Can the principles of 1 Corinthians vi. ever cease to
be binding on the Church of God? It is fully admitted—for who can
deny that things are sadly changed?—but "Scripture cannot be
broken," and therefore what was "a fault" in the first century cannot
be right in the nineteenth; there may be more difficulty in carrying
out divine principles, but we must never consent to surrender them,
or to act on any lower ground. If once we admit the idea that
because the whole professing church has gone wrong it is impossible
for us to do right, the whole principle of Christian obedience is
surrendered. It is as wrong for "brother to go to law with brother
before the unbelievers" to-day as when the apostle wrote his epistle
to the assembly at Corinth.[17] True, the Church's visible unity is
gone; she is shorn of many gifts, she has departed from her normal
condition; but the principles of the Word of God can no more lose
their power than the blood of Christ can lose its virtue or His
priesthood lose its efficacy.
And further, we must bear in mind that there are resources of
wisdom, grace, power, and spiritual gift treasured up for the Church
in Christ her Head, ever available for those who have faith to use
them. We are not straitened in our blessed and adorable Head. We
need never expect to see the body restored to its normal condition
on the earth, but for all that, it is our privilege to see what the true
ground of the body is, and it is our duty to occupy that ground and
no other.
Now, it is perfectly wonderful the change that takes place in our
whole condition—in our view of things, in our thoughts of ourselves
and our surroundings—the moment we plant our foot on the true
ground of the Church of God. Every thing seems changed; the Bible
seems a new book; we see every thing in a new light; portions of
Scripture which we have been reading for years without interest or
profit now sparkle with divine light, and fill us with wonder, love, and
praise. We see everything from a new stand-point; our whole range
of vision is changed; we have made our escape from the murky
atmosphere which inwraps the whole professing church, and can
now look around and see things clearly in the heavenly light of
Scripture. In fact, it seems like a new conversion; and we find we
can now read Scripture intelligently, because we have the divine key.
We see Christ to be the centre and object of all the thoughts,
purposes, and counsels of God from everlasting to everlasting, and
hence we are conducted into that marvelous sphere of grace and
glory which the Holy Ghost delights to unfold in the precious Word of
God.
May the reader be led into the thorough understanding of all this, by
the direct and powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit. May he be
enabled to give himself to the study of Scripture, and to surrender
himself, unreservedly, to its teaching and authority. Let him not
confer with flesh and blood, but cast himself, like a little child, on the
Lord, and seek to be led on in spiritual intelligence and practical
conformity to the mind of Christ.
We must now look for a moment at the closing verses of our
chapter, in which we have a remarkable onlook into Israel's future,
anticipating the moment in which they should seek to set a king over
them.
"When thou art come unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth
thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I
will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;
thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee whom the Lord thy
God shall choose; one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king
over thee; thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not
thy brother. But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the
people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses;
forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto you, 'Ye shall henceforth
return no more that way.' Neither shall he multiply wives to himself,
that his heart turn not away; neither shall he greatly multiply to
himself silver and gold."
How very remarkable that the three things which the king was not to
do were just the very things which were done—and extensively done
by the greatest and wisest of Israel's monarchs. "King Solomon
made a navy of ships in Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth, on the
shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent in the
navy his servants, shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the
servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir, and fetched from
thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents [over two millions],
and brought it to king Solomon." "And Hiram sent to the king
sixscore talents of gold." "And the weight of gold that came to
Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents of
gold [nearly three and a half millions], beside that he had of the
merchantmen, and of the traffic of the spice merchants, and of all
the kings of Arabia, and of the governors of the country." Again, we
read, "And the king made silver to be in Jerusalem as stones.... And
Solomon had horses brought out of Egypt.... But king Solomon loved
many strange women.... And he had seven hundred wives,
princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned
away his heart." (1 Kings ix, x, xi.)
What a tale this tells! what a commentary it furnishes upon man in
his very best and highest estate! Here was a man endowed with
wisdom beyond all others, surrounded by unexampled blessings,
dignities, honors, and privileges; his earthly cup was full to the brim;
there was nothing lacking which this world could supply to minister
to human happiness. And not only so, but his remarkable prayer at
the dedication of the temple might well lead us to cherish the
brightest hopes respecting him, both personally and officially.
But sad to say, he broke down most deplorably in every one of the
particulars as to which the law of his God had spoken so definitely
and so clearly. He was told not to multiply silver and gold, and yet
he multiplied them; he was told not to return to Egypt to multiply
horses, and yet to Egypt he went for horses; he was told not to
multiply wives, and yet he had a thousand of them, and they turned
away his heart. Such is man! Oh, how little is he to be counted
upon! "All flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of
grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away."
"Cease ye from man whose breath is in his nostrils, for wherein is he
to be accounted of?"
But we may ask, How are we to account for Solomon's signal,
sorrowful, and humiliating failure? what was the real secret of it? To
answer this, we must quote for the reader the closing verses of our
chapter.
"And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom,
that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which
is before the priests the Levites; and it shall be with him, and he
shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may learn to fear
the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these
statutes, to do them; that his heart be not lifted up above his
brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the
right hand or to the left; to the end that he may prolong his days in
his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel." (Ver. 18-
20.)
Had Solomon attended to these most precious and weighty words,
his historian would have had a very different task to perform; but he
did not. We hear nothing of his having made a copy of the law; and
most assuredly, if he did make a copy of it, he did not attend to it—
yea, he turned his back upon it, and did the very things which he
was told not to do. In a word, the cause of all the wreck and ruin
that so rapidly followed the splendor of Solomon's reign, was the
neglect of the plain Word of God.
It is this which makes it all so solemn for us, in this our own day,
and which leads us to call the earnest attention of the reader to it.
We deeply feel the need of seeking to rouse the attention of the
whole Church of God to this great subject. Neglect of the Word of
God is the source of all the failure, all the sin, all the error, all the
mischief and confusion, the heresies, sects, and schisms that have
ever been or are now in this world. And we may add, with equal
confidence, that the only real, sovereign remedy for our present
lamentable condition will be found in returning, every one for himself
and herself, to the simple but sadly neglected authority of the Word
of God. Let each one see his own departure, and that of the whole
professing body, from the plain and positive teaching of the New
Testament—the commandments of our blessed Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ. Let us humble ourselves under the mighty hand of our
God, because of our common sin, and let us turn to Him in true self-
judgment, and He will graciously restore and heal and bless us, and
lead us in that most blessed path of obedience which lies open
before every truly humble soul.
May God the Holy Ghost, in His own resistless power, bring home to
the heart and conscience of every member of the body of Christ on
the face of the earth, the urgent need of an immediate and
unreserved surrender to the authority of the Word of God.
 CHAPTER XVIII.
The opening paragraph of this chapter suggests a deeply interesting
and practical line of truth.
"The priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part
nor inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the Lord
made by fire, and His inheritance. Therefore shall they have no
inheritance among their brethren: the Lord is their inheritance, as He
hath said unto them. And this shall be the priest's due from the
people, from them that offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep;
and they shall give unto the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks,
and the maw. The first-fruits also of thy corn, of thy wine, and of
thine oil, and the first of the fleece of thy sheep shalt thou give him.
For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy tribes, to stand
to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons forever. And if
a Levite come from any of thy gates out of all Israel, where he
sojourned, and come with all the desire of his mind unto the place
which the Lord shall choose; then he shall minister in the name of
the Lord his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, which stand
there before the Lord. They shall have like portions to eat, beside
that which cometh out of the sale of his patrimony." (Ver. 1-8.)
Here, as in every part of the book of Deuteronomy, the priests are
classed with the Levites in a very marked way. We have called the
reader's attention to this as a special characteristic feature of our
book, and shall not dwell upon it now, but merely, in passing, remind
the reader of it, as something claiming his attention. Let him weigh
the opening words of our chapter, "The priests the Levites," and
compare them with the way in which the priests the sons of Aaron
are spoken of in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers; and if he should
be disposed to ask the reason of this distinction, we believe it to be
this, that in Deuteronomy the divine object is, to bring the whole
assembly of Israel more into prominence, and hence it is that the
priests in their official capacity come rarely before us. The grand
Deuteronomic idea is, Israel in immediate relationship with Jehovah.
Now, in the passage just quoted, we have the priests and the Levites
linked together, and presented as the Lord's servants, wholly
dependent upon Him, and intimately identified with His altar and His
service. This is full of interest, and opens up a very important field of
practical truth, to which the Church of God would do well to attend.
In looking through the history of Israel, we observe that when things
were in any thing like a healthful condition, the altar of God was well
attended to, and, as a consequence, the priests and the Levites
were well supplied. If Jehovah had His portion, His servants were
sure to have theirs; if He was neglected, so were they. They were
bound up together. The people were to bring their offerings to God,
and He shared them with His servants. The priests the Levites were
not to exact or demand of the people, but the people were
privileged to bring their gifts to the altar of God, and He permitted
His servants to feed upon the fruit of His people's devotedness to
Him.
Such was the true—the divine idea as to the Lord's servants of old.
They were to live upon the voluntary offerings presented to God by
the whole congregation. True it is that in the dark and evil days of
the sons of Eli we find something sadly different from this lovely
moral order. Then, "the priest's custom with the people was, that
when any one offered sacrifice, the priest's servant came, while the
flesh was in seething, with a flesh-hook of three teeth in his hand;
and he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; all that
the flesh-hook brought up, the priest took for himself. So they did in
Shiloh unto all the Israelites that came thither. Also before they
burnt the fat [God's special portion], the priest's servant came, and
said to the man that sacrificed, 'Give flesh to roast for the priest; for
he will not have sodden flesh of thee, but raw.' And if any man said
unto him, Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, and then take
as much as thy soul desireth; then he would answer him, 'Nay; but
thou shalt give it me now; and if not, I will take it by force.'
Wherefore the sin of the young men was very great before the Lord;
for men abhorred the offering of the Lord." (1 Sam. ii. 13-17.)
All this was truly deplorable, and ended in the solemn judgment of
God upon the house of Eli. It could not be otherwise. If those who
ministered at the altar could be guilty of such terrible iniquity and
impiety, judgment must take its course.
But the normal condition of things, as presented in our chapter, was
in vivid contrast with all this frightful iniquity. Jehovah would
surround Himself with the willing offerings of His people, and from
these offerings He would feed His servants who ministered at His
altar. Hence, therefore, when the altar of God was diligently,
fervently, and devotedly attended to, the priests the Levites had a
rich portion—an abundant supply; and on the other hand, when
Jehovah and His altar were treated with cold neglect, or merely
waited upon in a barren routine or heartless formalism, the Lord's
servants were correspondingly neglected. In a word, they stood
intimately identified with the worship and service of the God of
Israel.
Thus, for example, in the bright days of the good king Hezekiah,
when things were fresh and hearts happy and true, we read, "And
Hezekiah appointed the courses of the priests and the Levites after
their courses, every man according to his service, the priests and
Levites for burnt-offerings and for peace-offerings, to minister, and
to give thanks, and to praise in the gates of the tents of the Lord. He
appointed also the king's portion of his substance for the burnt-
offerings, to wit, for the morning and evening burnt-offerings, and
the burnt-offerings for the Sabbaths, and for the new moons, and
for the set feasts, as it is written in the law of the Lord. Moreover, he
commanded the people that dwelt in Jerusalem to give the portion
of the priests and the Levites, that they might be encouraged in the
law of the Lord. And as soon as the commandment came abroad,
the children of Israel brought in abundancethe first-fruits of corn,
wine, and oil, and honey, and of all the increase of the field; and the
tithe of all things brought they in abundantly. And concerning the
children of Israel and Judah, that dwelt in the cities of Judah, they
also brought in the tithe of oxen and sheep, and the tithe of holy
things which were consecrated unto the Lord their God, and laid
them by heaps. In the third month they began to lay the foundation
of the heaps, and finished them in the seventh month. And when
Hezekiah and the princes came and saw the heaps, they blessed the
Lord and His people Israel. Then Hezekiah questioned with the
priests and the Levites concerning the heaps. And Azariah the chief
priest of the house of Zadok answered him, and said, 'Since the
people began to bring the offerings into the house of the Lord, we
have had enough to eat, and have left plenty; for the Lord hath
blessed His people; and that which is left is this great store." (2
Chron. xxxi. 2-10.)
How truly refreshing is all this! and how encouraging! The deep, full,
silvery tide of devotedness flowed around the altar of God, bearing
upon its bosom an ample supply to meet all the need of the Lord's
servants, and "heaps" beside. This, we may feel assured, was
grateful to the heart of the God of Israel, as it was to the hearts of
those who had given themselves, at His call and by His appointment,
to the service of His altar and His sanctuary.
And let the reader specially note those precious words, "As it is
written in the law of the Lord." Here was Hezekiah's authority, the
solid basis of his whole line of conduct from first to last. True, the
nation's visible unity was gone; the condition of things when he
began his blessed work was most discouraging; but the word of the
Lord was as true, as real, and as direct in its application in
Hezekiah's day as it was in the days of David or Joshua. Hezekiah
rightly felt that Deuteronomy xviii. 1-8 applied to his day and to his
conscience, and that he and the people were responsible to act upon
it, according to their ability. Were the priests and the Levites to
starve because Israel's national unity was gone? Surely not. They
were to stand or fall with the Word, the worship, and the work of
God. Circumstances might vary, and the Israelite might find himself
in a position in which it would be impossible to carry out in detail all
the ordinances of the Levitical ceremonial, but he never could find
himself in circumstances in which it was not his high privilege to give
full expression to his heart's devotedness to the service, the altar,
and the law of Jehovah.
Thus, then, we see, throughout the entire history of Israel, that
when things were at all bright and healthy, the Lord's worship, His
work, and His workmen were blessedly attended to; but on the other
hand, when things were low, when hearts were cold, when self and
its interests had the uppermost place, then all these great objects
were treated with heartless neglect. Look, for example, at Nehemiah
xiii. When that beloved and faithful servant returned to Jerusalem,
after an absence of certain days, he found, to his deep sorrow, that,
even in that short time, various things had gone sadly astray;
amongst the rest, the poor Levites had been left without any thing
to eat. "And I perceived that the portions of the Levites had not
been given them; for the Levites and the singers that did the work
were fled every one to his field." There were no "heaps" of first-
fruits in those dismal days, and surely it was hard for men to work
and sing when they had nothing to eat. This was not according to
the law of Jehovah, nor according to His loving heart. It was a sad
reproach upon the people that the Lord's servants were obliged,
through their gross neglect, to abandon His worship and His work in
order to keep themselves from starving.
This, truly, was a deplorable condition of things. Nehemiah felt it
keenly, as we read, "Then contended I with the rulers, and said,
'Why is the house of God forsaken?' And I gathered them together,
and set them in their place. Then brought all Judah the tithe of the
corn, and the new wine, and the oil, unto the treasuries. And I made
treasurers over the treasuries, ... for they were counted faithful;"—
they were entitled to the confidence of their brethren—"and their
office was to distribute unto their brethren." It needed a number of
tried and faithful men to occupy the high position of distributing to
their brethren the precious fruit of the people's devotedness; they
could take counsel together, and see that the Lord's treasury was
faithfully managed, according to His Word, and the need of His true
and bona-fide workmen fully met, without prejudice or partiality.
Such was the lovely order of the God of Israel—an order to which
every true Israelite such as Nehemiah and Hezekiah would delight to
attend. The rich tide of blessing flowed forth from Jehovah to His
people, and back from His people to Him, and from that flowing tide
His servants were to draw a full supply for all their need. It was a
dishonor to Him to have the Levites obliged to return to their fields;
it proved that His house was forsaken, and that there was no
sustenance for His servants.
Now, the question may here be asked, What has all this to say to
us? what has the Church of God to learn from Deuteronomy xviii. 1-
8? In order to answer this question, we must turn to 1 Corinthians
ix, where the inspired apostle deals with the very important subject
of the support of the Christian ministry—a subject so little
understood by the great mass of professing Christians. As to the law
of the case, it is as distinct as possible. "Who goeth a warfare at any
time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of
the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk
of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the
same also? For it is written in the law of Moses, 'Thou shalt not
muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God
take care for oxen? or saith He it altogether for our sakes? For our
sakes, no doubt, this is written; that he that ploweth should plow in
hope, and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his
hope. If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if
we shall reap your carnal things? If others be partakers of this
power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless"—here grace
shines out, in all its heavenly lustre—"we have not used this power;
but suffer all things lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. Do ye
not know that they which minister about holy things live of the
things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers
with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which
preach the gospel should live of the gospel. But"—here again grace
asserts its holy dignity—"I have used none of these things; neither
have I written these things that it should be so done unto me; for it
were better for me to die than that any man should make my
glorying void. For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to
glory of; for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me if I
preach not the gospel! For if I do this thing willingly, I have a
reward; but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is
committed unto me. What is my reward, then? Verily that when I
preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge,
that I abuse not my power in the gospel." (Ver. 7-18.)
Here we have this interesting and weighty subject presented in all its
bearings. The inspired apostle lays down, with all possible decision
and clearness, the divine law on the point. There is no mistaking it.
"The Lord hath ordained that they that preach the gospel should live
of the gospel;" that just as the priests and the Levites of old lived on
the offerings presented by the people, so now, those who are really
called of God, gifted by Christ, and fitted by the Holy Ghost to
preach the gospel, and who are giving themselves constantly and
diligently to that glorious work, are morally entitled to temporal
support. It is not that they should look to those to whom they
preach for a certain stipulated sum. There is no such idea as this in
the New Testament. The workman must look to his Master, and to
Him alone, for support. Woe be to him if he looks to the church, or
to men in any way. The priests and Levites had their portion in and
from Jehovah. He was the lot of their inheritance. True, He expected
the people to minister to Him in the persons of His servants. He told
them what to give, and blessed them in giving: it was their high
privilege, as well as their bounden duty, to give; had they refused or
neglected, it would have brought drought and barrenness upon their
fields and vineyards. (Hag. i. 5-11.)
But the priests the Levites had to look only to Jehovah. If the people
failed in their offerings, the Levites had to fly to their fields and work
for their living. They could not go to law with any one for tithes and
offerings; their only appeal was to the God of Israel, who had
ordained them to the work and given them the work to do.
So also with the Lord's workmen now—they must look only to Him.
They must be well assured that He has fitted them for the work, and
called them to it, ere they attempt to push out (if we may so express
it) from the shore of circumstances, and give themselves wholly to
the work of preaching. They must take their eyes completely off
from men—from all creature-streams and human props, and lean
exclusively upon the living God. We have seen the most disastrous
consequences resulting from acting under a mistaken impulse in this
most solemn matter; men not called of God, or fitted for the work,
giving up their occupations, and coming forth, as they said, to live
by faith and give themselves to the work. Deplorable shipwreck was
the result in every instance. Some, when they began to look the
stern realities of the path straight in the face, became so alarmed
that they actually lost their mental balance, lost their reason for a
time; some lost their peace, and some went right back into the
world again.
In short, it is our deep and thorough conviction, after forty years'
observation, that the cases are few and far between in which it is
morally safe and good for one to abandon his bread-winning calling
in order to preach the gospel. It must be so distinct and
unquestionable to the man himself, that he has only to say, with
Luther, at the Diet of Worms, "Here I am; I can do no otherwise:
God help me! Amen." Then he may be perfectly sure that God will
sustain him in the work to which He has called him, and meet all his
need "according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus." And as to
men and their thoughts respecting him and his course, he has simply
to refer them to his Master. He is not responsible to them, nor has
he ever asked them for any thing. If they were compelled to support
him, reason would that they might complain or raise questions; but
as they are not, they must just leave him, remembering that to his
own Master he standeth or falleth.
But when we look at the splendid passage just quoted from 1
Corinthians ix, we find that the blessed apostle, after having
established, beyond all question, his right to be supported,
relinquishes it completely.—"Nevertheless, I have used none of these
things." He worked with his hands; he wrought with labor and travail
night and day, in order not to be chargeable or burdensome to any.
"These hands," he says, "have ministered to my necessities, and
those that were with me." He coveted no man's silver or gold or
apparel. He traveled, he preached, he visited from house to house,
he was the laborious apostle, the earnest evangelist, the diligent
pastor, he had the care of all the churches. Was not he entitled to
support? Assuredly he was. It ought to have been the joy of the
Church of God to minister to his every need. But he never enforced
his claim—nay, he surrendered it. He supported himself and his
companions by the labor of his hands; and all this as an example, as
he says to the elders of Ephesus, "I have showed you all things, how
that so laboring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the
words of the Lord Jesus, how He said, 'It is more blessed to give
than to receive.'"
Now, it is perfectly wonderful to think of this beloved and revered
servant of Christ, with his extensive travels from Jerusalem and
round about to Illyricum, his gigantic labors as an evangelist, a
pastor, and a teacher, and yet finding time to support himself and
others by the work of his hands. Truly he occupied high moral
ground. His case is a standing testimony against hirelingism, in every
shape and form. The infidel's sneering references to well-paid
ministers could have no application whatever to him. He certainly did
not preach for hire.
And yet he thankfully received help from those who knew how to
give it. Again and again the beloved assembly at Philippi ministered
to the necessities of their revered and beloved father in Christ. How
well for them that they did so! It will never be forgotten. Millions
have read the sweet record of their devotedness, and been
refreshed by the odor of their sacrifice; it is recorded in heaven,
where nothing of the kind is ever forgotten—yea, it is engraved on
the very tablets of the heart of Christ. Hear how the blessed apostle
pours out his grateful heart to his much-loved children.—"I rejoiced
in the Lord greatly, that now at the last your care of me hath
flourished again; wherein ye were also careful, but ye lacked
opportunity. Not that I speak in respect of want;"—blessed, self-
denying servant!—"for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, to
be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to
abound; every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full
and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. I can do all
things through Christ, which strengtheneth me. Notwithstanding, ye
have well done that ye did communicate with my affliction. Now ye
Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I
departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as
concerning giving and receiving, but ye only. For even in
Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my necessity. Not because
I desire a gift; but I desire fruit that may abound to your account.
But I have all, and abound; I am full, having received from
Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odor of a
sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God. But my
God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory by
Christ Jesus." (Phil. iv. 10-19.)
What a rare privilege to be allowed to comfort the heart of such an
honored servant of Christ, at the close of his career, and in the
solitude of his prison at Rome! How seasonable, how right, how
lovely, was their ministry! What joy to receive the apostle's grateful
acknowledgments! and then how precious the assurance that their
service had gone up, as an odor of sweet smell, to the very throne
and heart of God! Who would not rather be a Philippian ministering
to the apostle's need, than a Corinthian calling his ministry in
question, or a Galatian breaking his heart? How vast the difference!
The apostle could not take any thing from the assembly at Corinth;
their state did not admit of it. Individuals in that assembly did
minister to him, and their service is recorded on the page of
inspiration, remembered above, and it will be abundantly rewarded
in the kingdom by and by. "I am glad of the coming of Stephanas
and Fortunatus and Achaicus; for that which was lacking on your
part they have supplied. For they have refreshed my spirit and
yours, therefore acknowledge ye them that are such." (1 Cor. xvi. 17,
18.)
Thus, then, from all that has passed before us, we learn most
distinctly that both under the law and under the gospel it is
according to the revealed will, and according to the heart of God,
that those who are really called of Him to the work, and who devote
themselves earnestly, diligently, and faithfully to it, should have the
hearty sympathy and practical help of His people. All who love Christ
will count it their deepest joy to minister to Him in the persons of His
servants. When He Himself was here upon earth, He graciously
accepted help from the hands of those who loved Him, and had
reaped the fruit of His most precious ministry—"certain women,
which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary, called
Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, and Joanna the wife of
Chuza, Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which
ministered unto Him of their substance." (Luke viii. 2, 3.)
Happy, highly privileged women! What joy to be allowed to minister
to the Lord of glory, in the days of His human need and humiliation!
There stand their honored names, on the divine page, written down
by God the Holy Ghost, to be read by untold millions, to be borne
along the stream of time right onward into eternity. How well it was
for those women that they did not waste their substance in self-
indulgence, or hoard it up to be rust on their souls, or a positive
curse, as money must ever be if not used for God!
But on the other hand, we learn the urgent need, on the part of all
who take the place of workers, whether in or out of the assembly, of
keeping themselves perfectly free from all human influence, all
looking to men, in any shape or form. They must have to do with
God in the secret of their own souls, or they will assuredly break
down, sooner or later. They must look to Him alone for the supply of
their need. If the church neglect them, the church will be the serious
loser here and hereafter. If they can support themselves by the labor
of their hands, without curtailing their direct service to Christ, so
much the better; it is unquestionably the more excellent way. We are
as persuaded of this as of the truth of any proposition that could be
submitted to us. There is nothing more spiritually and morally noble
than a truly gifted servant of Christ supporting himself and his family
by the sweat of his brow or the sweat of his brain, and, at the same
time, giving himself diligently to the Lord's work, whether as an
evangelist, a pastor, or a teacher. The moral antipodes of this is
presented to our view in the person of a man who, without gift or
grace or spiritual life, enters what is called the ministry, as a mere
profession or means of living. The position of such a man is morally
dangerous and miserable in the extreme. We shall not dwell upon it,
inasmuch as it does not come within the range of the subject which
has been engaging our attention, and we are only too thankful to
leave it and proceed with our chapter.
"When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth
thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those
nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh
his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth
divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a
charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a
necromancer; for all that do these things are an abomination unto
the Lord, and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth
drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord
thy God. For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened
unto observers of times, and unto diviners; but as for thee, the Lord
thy God hath not suffered thee so to do." (Ver. 9-14.)
Now, it may be that, on reading the foregoing quotation, the reader
feels disposed to ask what possible application it can have to
professing Christians. We ask, in reply, Are there any professing
Christians who are in the habit of going to witness the performances
of wizards, magicians, and necromancers? are there any who take
part in table-turning, spirit-rapping, mesmerism, or clairvoyance?[18]
If so, the passage which we have just quoted bears very pointedly
and solemnly upon all such. We most surely believe that all these
things which we have named are of the devil. This may sound harsh
and severe, but we cannot help that. We are thoroughly persuaded
that when people lend themselves to the awful business of bringing
up, in any way, the spirits of the departed, they are simply putting
themselves into the hands of the devil, to be deceived and deluded
by his lies. What, we may ask, do those who hold in their hands a
perfect revelation from God want of table-turning and spirit-rapping?
Surely nothing. And if, not content with that precious Word, they
turn to the spirits of departed friends or others, what can they
expect but that God will judicially give them over to be blinded and
deceived by wicked spirits, who come up and personate the
departed, and tell all manner of lies?
We cannot attempt to go fully into this subject here; we have no
time, nor space, nor inclination, for any thing of the sort. We merely
feel it to be our solemn duty to warn the reader against having any
thing whatever to do with consulting departed spirits. We believe it
to be most dangerous work. We do not enter upon the question as
to whether souls can come back to this world; no doubt God could
permit them to come if He saw fit, but this we leave. The great point
for us to keep ever before our hearts is, the perfect sufficiency of
divine revelation. What do we want of departed spirits? The rich
man imagined that if Lazarus were to go back to earth and speak to
his five brethren, it would have a great effect.—"'I pray thee
therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house;
for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they
also come into this place of torment.' Abraham saith unto him, 'They
have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' And he said,
'Nay, father Abraham; but if one went unto them from the dead,
they will repent.' And he said unto him, 'If they hear not Moses and
the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from
the dead.'" (Luke xvi. 27-31.)
Here we have a thorough settlement of this question. If people will
not hear the Word of God, if they will not believe its clear and
solemn statements as to themselves, their present condition, and
their future destiny, neither will they be persuaded though a
thousand departed souls were to come back and tell them what they
saw and heard and felt in heaven above or in hell beneath; it would
produce no saving or permanent effect upon them, It might cause
great excitement—great sensation, furnish great material for talk,
and fill the newspapers far and wide; but there it would end. People
would go on all the same with their traffic and gain, their folly and
vanity, their pleasure-hunting and self-indulgence. "If they hear not
Moses and the prophets, [and, we may add, Christ and His holy
apostles,] neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the
dead." The heart that will not bow to Scripture will not be convinced
by any thing; and as to the true believer, he has in Scripture all he
can possibly want, and therefore he has no need to have recourse to
table-turning, spirit-rapping, or magic. "And when they shall say
unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto
wizards that peep, and that mutter; should not a people seek unto
their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the
testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because
there is no light in them." (Is. viii. 19, 20.)
Here is the divine resource of the Lord's people, at all times and in
all places; and to this it is that Moses refers the congregation in the
splendid paragraph which closes our chapter. He shows them very
distinctly that they had no need to apply to familiar spirits,
enchanters, wizards, or witches, which were all an abomination to
the Lord. "The Lord thy God," he says, "will raise up unto thee a
Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto
him ye shall hearken; according to all that thou desiredst of the Lord
thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, 'Let me not
hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this
great fire any more, that I die not.' And the Lord said unto me, 'They
have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a
Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put My
words into his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall
command him. And it shall come to pass that whosoever will not
hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will
require it of him. But the prophet which shall presume to speak a
word in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or
that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall
die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word
which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the
name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is
the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath
spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." (Ver. 15-
22.)
We can be at no loss to know who this Prophet is, namely, our
adorable Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. In the third chapter of Acts,
Peter so applies the words of Moses.—"He shall send Jesus Christ,
which before was preached unto you; whom the heaven must
receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath
spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.
For Moses truly said unto the fathers, 'A Prophet shall the Lord your
God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye
hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall
come to pass that every soul which will not hear that Prophet shall
be destroyed from among the people.'" (Ver. 20-23.)
How precious the privilege of hearing the voice of such a Prophet! It
is the voice of God speaking through the lips of the Man Christ Jesus
—speaking, not in thunder, not with flaming fire, nor the lightning's
flash, but in that still small voice of love and mercy which falls in
soothing power on the broken heart and contrite spirit, which distills
like the gentle dew of heaven upon the thirsty ground. This voice we
have in the holy Scriptures—that precious revelation which comes so
constantly and so powerfully before us in our studies on this blessed
book of Deuteronomy. We must never forget this. The voice of
Scripture is the voice of Christ, and the voice of Christ is the voice of
God.
We want no more. If any one presumes to come with a fresh
revelation, with some new truth not contained in the divine Volume,
we must judge him and his communication by the standard of
Scripture and reject them utterly. "Thou shalt not be afraid of him."
False prophets come with great pretensions, high-sounding words,
and sanctimonious bearing. Moreover, they seek to surround
themselves with a sort of dignity, weight, and impressiveness which
are apt to impose on the ignorant. But they cannot stand the
searching power of the Word of God. Some simple clause of holy
Scripture will strip them of all their imposing surroundings, and cut
up by the roots their wonderful revelations. Those who know the
voice of the true Prophet will not listen to any other: those who have
heard the voice of the good Shepherd will not listen to the voice of a
stranger.
Reader, see that you listen only to the voice of Jesus.
 CHAPTER XIX.
"When the Lord thy God hath cut off the nations whose land the
Lord thy God giveth thee, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in
their cities, and in their houses; thou shalt separate three cities for
thee in the midst of thy land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee to
possess it. Thou shalt prepare thee a way, and divide the coasts of
thy land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee to inherit, into three
parts, that every slayer may flee thither." (Ver. 1-3.)
What a very striking combination of "goodness and severity" we
observe in these few lines! We have the "cutting off" of the nations
of Canaan because of their consummated wickedness, which had
become positively unbearable; and on the other hand, we have a
most touching display of divine goodness in the provision made for
the poor man-slayer in the day of his deep distress, when flying for
his life from the avenger of blood. The government and the
goodness of God are, we need hardly say, both divinely perfect.
There are cases in which goodness would be nothing but a toleration
of sheer wickedness and open rebellion, which is utterly impossible
under the government of God. If men imagine that because God is
good they may go on and sin with a high hand, they will sooner or
later find out their woeful mistake.
"Behold," says the inspired apostle, "the goodness and severity of
God!"[19] God will most assuredly cut off evil-doers who despise His
goodness and long-suffering mercy. He is slow to anger, blessed be
His holy name! and of great kindness. For hundreds of years He bore
with the seven nations of Canaan, until their wickedness rose up to
the very heavens, and the land itself could bear them no longer. He
bore with the enormous wickedness of the guilty cities of the plain;
and if He had found even ten righteous people in Sodom, He would
have spared it for their sakes. But the day of terrible vengeance
came, and they were "cut off."
And so will it be ere long with guilty christendom. "Thou also shalt
be cut off." The reckoning-time will come, and oh, what a reckoning-
time it will be! The heart trembles at the thought of it, while the eye
scans and the pen traces the soul-subduing words.
But mark how divine "goodness" shines out in the opening lines of
our chapter. See the gracious painstaking of our God to make the
city of refuge as available as possible for the slayer. The three cities
were to be "in the midst of thy land." It would not do to have them
in remote corners, or in places difficult of access. And not only so,
but "thou shalt prepare thee a way;" and again, "Thou shalt divide
the coasts of thy land ... into three parts." Everything was to be
done to facilitate the slayer's escape. The gracious Lord thought of
the feelings of the distressed one "flying for refuge to lay hold on the
hope set before him." The city of refuge was to be "brought near,"
just as "the righteousness of God" is brought near to the poor
broken-hearted helpless sinner—so near, that it is "to him that
worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly."
There is peculiar sweetness in the expression, "Thou shalt prepare
thee a way." How like our own ever-gracious God—"the God and
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"! and yet it was the same God that
cut off the nations of Canaan in righteous judgment who thus made
such gracious provision for the man-slayer. "Behold, the goodness
and severity of God."
"And this is the case of the slayer, which shall flee thither, that he
may live: Whoso killeth his neighbor ignorantly, whom he hated not
in time past; as when a man goeth into the wood with his neighbor
to hew wood, and his hand fetcheth a stroke with the axe to cut
down the tree, and the head slippeth from the helve, and lighteth
upon his neighbor, that he die; he shall flee unto one of those cities
and live; lest the avenger of the blood pursue the slayer, while his
heart is hot, and overtake him, because the way is long,"—most
touching and exquisite grace!—"and slay him; whereas he was not
worthy of death, inasmuch as he hated him not in time past.
Wherefore I command thee, saying, 'Thou shalt separate three cities
for thee.'" (Ver. 4-7.)
Here we have a most minute description of the man for whom the
city of refuge was provided. If he did not answer to this, the city was
not for him; but if he did, he might feel the most perfect assurance
that a gracious God had thought of him, and found a refuge for him,
where he might be as safe as the hand of God could make him.
Once the slayer found himself within the precincts of the city of
refuge, he might breathe freely, and enjoy calm and sweet repose.
No avenging sword could reach him there, not a hair of his head
could be touched there.
He was safe—yes, perfectly safe; and not only perfectly safe, but
perfectly certain. He was not hoping to be saved, he was sure of it.
He was in the city, and that was enough. Before he got in, he might
have many a struggle deep down in his poor terrified heart, many
doubts and fears and painful exercises. He was flying for his life, and
this was a serious and an all-absorbing matter for him—a matter
that would make all beside seem light and trifling. We could not
imagine the flying slayer stopping to gather flowers by the roadside.
Flowers! he would say, What have I to do with flowers just now? My
life is at stake. I am flying for my life. What if the avenger should
come and find me gathering flowers? No; the city is my one grand
and all-engrossing object: nothing else has the smallest interest or
charm for me. I want to be saved; that is my exclusive business
now.
But the moment he found himself within the blessed gates, he was
safe, and he knew it. How did he know it? By his feelings? by his
evidences? by experience? Nay; but simply by the Word of God. No
doubt he had the feeling, the evidence, and the experience, and
most precious they would be to him after his tremendous struggle
and conflict to get in; but these things were by no means the ground
of his certainty or the basis of his peace. He knew he was safe
because God told him so. The grace of God had made him safe, and
the Word of God made him sure.
We cannot conceive a man-slayer within the walls of the city of
refuge expressing himself as many of the Lord's dear people do in
reference to the question of safety and certainty. He would not deem
it presumption to be sure he was safe. If any one had asked him,
Are you sure you are safe? Sure! he would say, How can I be
otherwise than sure? Was I not a slayer? have I not fled to this city
of refuge? has not Jehovah, our covenant-God, pledged His Word for
it? has He not said that "fleeing thither he may live"? Yes, thank
God, I am perfectly sure. I had a terrible run for it—a fearful
struggle. At times, I almost felt as if the avenger had me in his
dreaded grasp. I gave myself up for lost; but then, God, in His
infinite mercy, made the way so plain, and made the city so easy of
access to me, that, spite of all my doubts and fears, here I am, safe
and certain. The struggle is all over, the conflict past and gone. I can
breathe freely now, and walk up and down in the perfect security of
this blessed place, praising our gracious covenant-God for His great
goodness in having provided such a sweet retreat for a poor slayer
like me.
Can the reader speak thus as to his safety in Christ? Is he saved,
and does he know it? If not, may the Spirit of God apply to his heart
the simple illustration of the man-slayer within the walls of the city
of refuge. May he know that "strong consolation" which is the sure,
because divinely appointed, portion of all those who have "fled for
refuge to lay hold on the hope set before them." (Heb. vi. 18.)
We must now proceed with our chapter; and in so doing, we shall
find that there was more to be thought of in the cities of refuge than
the question of the slayer's safety. That was provided for perfectly,
as we have seen; but the glory of God, the purity of His land, and
the integrity of His government had to be duly maintained. If these
things were touched, there could be no safety for any one. This
great principle shines on every page of the history of God's ways
with man. Man's true blessing and God's glory are indissolubly bound
together, and both the one and the other rest on the same
imperishable foundation, namely, Christ and His precious work.
"And if the Lord thy God enlarge thy coasts, as He hath sworn unto
thy fathers, and give thee all the land which He promised to give
unto thy fathers; if thou shalt keep all these commandments to do
them, which I command thee this day, to love the Lord thy God, and
to walk ever in His ways; then shalt thou add three cities more for
thee, beside these three; that innocent blood be not shed in thy
land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and so
blood be upon thee. But if any man hate his neighbor, and lie in wait
for him, and rise up against him, and smite him mortally that he die,
and fleeth into one of these cities; then the elders of his city shall
send and fetch him thence, and deliver him into the hand of the
avenger of blood, that he may die. Thine eye shall not pity him, but
thou shalt put away the guilt of innocent blood from Israel, that it
may go well with thee." (Ver. 8-13.)
Thus, whether it was grace for the slayer, or judgment for the
murderer, the glory of God and the claims of His government had to
be duly maintained. The unwitting man-slayer was met by the
provision of mercy; the guilty murderer fell beneath the stern
sentence of inflexible justice. We must never forget the solemn
reality of divine government. It meets us every where; and if it were
more fully recognized, it would effectually deliver us from one-sided
views of the divine character. Take such words as these—"Thine eye
shall not pity him." Who uttered them? Jehovah. Who penned them?
God the Holy Ghost. What do they mean? Solemn judgment upon
wickedness. Let men beware how they trifle with these weighty
matters. Let the Lord's people beware how they give place to foolish
reasonings in reference to things wholly beyond their range. Let
them remember that a false sentimentality may constantly be found
in league with an audacious infidelity in calling in question the
solemn enactments of divine government. This is a very serious
consideration. Evil-doers must look out for the sure judgment of a
sin-hating God. If a willful murderer presumed to avail himself of
God's provision for the ignorant man-slayer, the hand of justice laid
hold of him and put him to death, without mercy. Such was the
government of God in Israel of old, and such will it be in a day that
is rapidly approaching. Just now, God is dealing in long-suffering
mercy with the world; this is the day of salvation—the acceptable
time. The day of vengeance is at hand. Oh that man, instead of
reasoning about the justice of God's dealings with evil-doers, would
flee for refuge to that precious Saviour who died on the cross to
save us from the flames of an everlasting hell![20]
Before quoting for the reader the closing paragraph of our chapter,
we would just call his attention to verse 14, in which we have a very
beautiful proof of God's tender care for His people, and His most
gracious interest in every thing which directly or indirectly concerned
them. "Thou shalt not remove thy neighbor's landmark, which they
of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in
the land that the Lord thy God giveth thee to possess it."
This passage, taken in its plain import and primary application, is full
of sweetness, as presenting the loving heart of our God, and
showing us how marvelously He entered into all the circumstances
of His beloved people. The landmarks were not to be meddled with.
Each one's portion was to be left intact, according to the boundary-
lines set up by those of old time. Jehovah had given the land to
Israel, and not only so, but He had assigned to each tribe and to
each family their proper portion, marked off with perfect precision,
and indicated by landmarks so plain that there could be no
confusion, no clashing of interests, no interference one with another,
no ground for lawsuit or controversy about property. There stood the
ancient landmarks, marking off each one's portion in such a manner
as to remove all possible ground of dispute. Each one held as a
tenant under the God of Israel, who knew all about his little holding,
as we say, and every tenant had the comfort of knowing that the
eye of the gracious and almighty Landlord was upon his bit of land,
and His hand over it to protect it from every intruder. Thus he could
abide in peace under his vine and under his fig-tree, enjoying the
portion assigned him by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Thus much as to the obvious sense of this beautiful clause of our
chapter; but surely it has a deep spiritual meaning also. Are there
not spiritual landmarks for the Church of God, and for each
individual member thereof, marking off, with divine accuracy, the
boundaries of our heavenly inheritance—those landmarks which they
of old time, even the apostles of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,
have set up. Assuredly there are, and God has His eye upon them,
and He will not permit them to be removed with impunity. Woe be to
the man that attempts to touch them; he will have to give account
to God for so doing. It is a serious thing for any one to interfere, in
any way, with the place, portion, and prospect of the Church of God;
and it is to be feared that many are doing it without being aware of
it.
We do not attempt to go into the question of what these landmarks
are; we have sought to do this in our first volume of "Notes on
Deuteronomy," as well as in the other four volumes of the series; but
we feel it to be our duty to warn, in the most solemn manner, all
whom it may concern against doing that which, in the Church of
God, answers to the removal of the landmarks in Israel. If any one
had come forward in the land of Israel to suggest some new
arrangement in the inheritance of the tribes, to adjust the property
of each upon some new principle, to set up some new boundary-
lines, what would have been the reply of the faithful Israelite? A very
simple one, we may be sure. He would have replied in the language
of Deuteronomy xix. 14. He would have said, We want no novelties
here; we are perfectly content with those sacred and time-honored
landmarks which they of old time have set in our inheritance. We are
determined, by the grace of God, to keep to them, and to resist,
with firm purpose, any modern innovation.
Such, we believe, would have been the prompt reply of every true
member of the congregation of Israel; and surely the Christian ought
not to be less prompt or less decided in his answer to all those who,
under the plea of progress and development, would remove the
landmarks of the Church of God and, instead of the precious
teaching of Christ and His apostles, offer us the so-called light of
science and the resources of philosophy. Thank God, we want them
not. We have Christ and His Word; what can be added to these?
What do we want of human progress or development, when we
have "that which was from the beginning"? What can science or
philosophy do for those who possess "all truth"? No doubt, we want
—yea, long to make progress in the knowledge of Christ; long for a
fuller, clearer development of the life of Christ in our daily history;
but science and philosophy cannot help us in these; nay, they could
only prove a most serious hindrance.
Christian reader, let us seek to keep close to Christ, close to His
Word. This is our only security in this dark and evil day. Apart from
Him, we are nothing, have nothing, can do nothing; in Him, we have
all. He is the portion of our cup and the lot of our inheritance. May
we know what it is not only to be safe in Him, but separated to Him,
and satisfied with Him, till that bright day when we shall see Him as
He is, and be like Him and with Him forever.
We shall now do little more than quote the few remaining verses of
our chapter. They need no exposition. They set forth wholesome
truth, to which professing Christians, with all their light and
knowledge, may well give attention.
"One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for
any sin, in any sin that he sinneth; at the mouth of two witnesses, or
at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established."
(Ver. 15.)
This subject has already come before us. It cannot be too strongly
insisted upon. We may judge of its importance from the fact that not
only does Moses again and again press it upon Israel's attention, but
our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and the Holy Ghost in the apostle
Paul, in two of his epistles, insists upon the principle of "two or three
witnesses," in every case. One witness, be he ever so trustworthy, is
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookname.com