"As snow in summer, and as rain in harvest; so honour is not seemly for a fool. As the bird by wandering, as the swallow by flying; so the curse causeless shall not come. A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass, and a rod for the fool's back. Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. He that sendeth a message by the hand of a fool cutteth off the feet, and drinketh damage. The legs of the lame are not equal; so is a parable in the mouth of fools. As he that bindeth a stone in a sling; so is he that giveth honour to a fool. As a thorn goeth up into the hand of a drunkard; so is a parable in the mouth of fools. The great God, that formed all things, both rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors. As a dog returneth to his vomit; so a fool returneth to his folly."
The two leading ideas in the comparison in the first of these verses are incongruity and mischief. "Snow" and "rain," in the times of the year mentioned, were very unseasonable, and apt to prove very injurious to the prospects of the husbandman and of the country. Such cold in summer, when warmth was specially necessary for filling and ripening the fruits of the ground; and such wet weather in autumn, when drought was so desirable for in-gathering in proper condition, were alike unsuitable to their respective seasons, and at once ominous and effective of evil.-"So honour is not seemly for a fool." The incongruity and the mischief are alike predicable, whether the fool be regarded as meaning the weak man or the wicked man. "Honour"-that is any situation of power, authority, and influence-is out of place when in his hands. The weak man will abuse such a position from incapacity; and he may thus oven, without any evil intention, be the instrument of very serious and extensive harm. The harm may arise either from his own obstinacy in the refusal of suitable counsel,-for such obstinacy, alas! is no infrequent associate of imbecility;-or from his being made the dupe and tool of the artful and ambitious, the selfish and the cruel.
But the elevation of wicked men to such a position, is still more unseemly, and still more prejudicial, as all history might be cited to prove. When wickedness is set in high places, and endowed with resources at its own disposal for weal or for woe,-well may a nation tremble!
In the land of Israel, "snow in summer and rain in harvest" would have been regarded as indications of the displeasure of Jehovah.* Such appearances were fitted to fill them with the fear that God was about to visit them with famine and "cleanness of teeth in their borders."-So the advancement to honour and authority of wicked men--men devoid of principle-would have been with them, and is indeed with all, a presage of impending calamities.
* See 1Sa_12:17-18.
Verse Pro_26:2. "As the bird by wandering, as the swallow by flying; so the curse causeless shall not come." There is difficulty here in settling the precise point in the comparison. The ordinary interpretation explains it with reference to curses pronounced by men without cause-imprecations, anathemas, that are unmerited:-and the meaning is understood to be-as the bird or sparrow, by wandering, and as the swallow, or wood-pigeon, by flying, shall not come,-that is, shall not reach us or come upon us in the way of injury; so is it with the causeless curse. It will "do no more harm than the bird that flies over head, than Goliath's curses did to David."* And it might be added, that, as these birds return to their own place,-to the nests whence they came, so will such gratuitous maledictions come back upon the persons by whom they are uttered. Thus God turned the curses into a blessing which Balak the son of Zippor lured Balaam to pronounce against Israel. Thus the malicious and hard-hearted curses of Shimei against David came not upon him, but fell upon the head of their unprincipled author.
* Henry.
I am not sure, though this interpretation has its difficulties, that a better can be given of the words. They may, however, refer, not to curses uttered by men, but to curses or judgments sent by God. The meaning then will be that as the bird in flying has an object, and by flying gains that object, so the curse, or judgment of God, never comes without a cause. For every visitation of His there is a reason; and an end to be answered by it. It comes, in every case, in testimony of the divine displeasure, and for punitive warning and correction. Thus it was when "snow" came "in summer," or "rain in harvest:" and thus it was when "the basest of men" were, in God's providence, raised to power:-it was that they might be the scourges of His people, for their sins, and for their good.
According to the former view, the great lesson taught is that when exposed to the malice of men and their unmerited imprecations we should put our trust in God. According to the latter, that if we would shun "the curse," or-judicial infliction of the Lord, we must beware of everything that would provoke His displeasure: and that when His heavy dispensations do come, it behoves us to inquire what is their cause, and for what end they are sent; to ask, each one of us-"Why am I thus?"-"What meaneth the heat of this great anger?"-and to "humble ourselves under His mighty hand," and sigh and pray for the attainment of the end He has in view. This second sense of the proverb appears to derive some countenance from the verse which follows:-
Verse Pro_26:3. "A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass, and a rod for the fool's back." The obvious import is-that correction suits "the fool," even as the whip does the horse, and the bridle the ass. He requires the rod. Nothing else will do for him; nothing else bring him to his senses, or drive his folly from his heart; if even that proves effectual-"for a reproof entereth more into a wise man, than a hundred stripes into a fool." I give the following, as the pointed application of the proverb to various characters by a judicious expositor:-"Are you," then, "the unhappy fathers of foolish children! You must make use of the rod and reproof to give them wisdom. Are you authorized to bear rule in the church? the rod of church discipline must be applied to offenders, that they may be reclaimed, and others warned. Are you magistrates? the rod which God has put into your hands may be a means of preserving young malefactors from the gibbet at a more advanced period of life. Are you wise? beware of turning aside unto folly, that you may never need the rod. Are you fools? learn wisdom, or do not blame those whom duty and charity will oblige to use the rod for your correction. Is it not better, that you should be treated by your superiors with love and in the spirit of meekness, than to be beaten with the rod? Are you obliged, for your faults, to bear the pains of church censure, or criminal law? Kiss the rod, and "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto you." Have you formerly endured the rod? Let the impressions and effects of it abide with you for life, lest the sword of divine vengeance be unsheathed against you, because you refused to hear the voice of the rod and Him that hath appointed it."*
* Dr. Lawson.
Verses Pro_26:4-5. "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit." In these two verses, there is the appearance of contradiction. But it is the appearance only. The principle of harmony seems to lie in the different senses of which the words "according to his folly" are susceptible.
The case is obvious. There may be folly both in the matter and the manner of the fool's talk. In neither must he be imitated. We must not bring ourselves down to his level. We must not debate with him in his own style-allowing him to get the better of our temper and self-possession. The evil of answering the fool according to his folly in this sense, is stated in the end of the verse-"Lest thou also be like unto him:"-lest, that is, thou pass for a fool like him, sharing in the contempt that attaches to his character;-which is especially apt to be the case, when, in presence of those who do not know him, a man enters into the foolish, frothy, absurd, contemptible talk of the silly, the vain, the worthless,-chiming in with, encouraging and countenancing their folly, and seeming to relish and enjoy it:-or lest thou, in point of fact, really contract resemblance to him;-for by thus descending beneath the proper level, and conforming to such folly, there is a risk of contracting a littleness and silliness of mind; and, along with it, a trifling, talkative, contentious, wrangling spirit, and a manner destitute of all becoming dignity and respectability; producing the scorn of all who do, and the regret and pity of all who do not, know us.
Then, on the other hand, "Answer a fool according to his folly," means answer him as his folly deserves. And this may be in various ways.-There may be occasions not a few on which entire silence is the most suitable of all replies. The fool's cavils and questions may really not be at all deserving of notice. As the danger mentioned, however, is "lest he be wise in his own conceit"-the silence in such cases requires to be accompanied with marked and manifest indications of its intention; otherwise, the very evil deprecated will be incurred. The fool will impute it to inability, and take credit to himself accordingly. This will give him a triumph, and settle him in his self-conceit. The same remark applies to irony, which may frequently be a sufficiently suitable kind of answer to the folly of the fool. It is a species of reply which has the appearance of conformity to the folly; but in reality is the reverse. Great care must be taken that the irony be such as to be perceived. If the fool himself does not see it, but takes the irony for earnest, it will then have all the effect of rendering him the more "wise in his own conceit:"-and if others do not see it it will have the effect stated in the former, of making us appear, in their eyes, "like unto him." Again, a petulant, captious caviller is not entitled to the respectful treatment due to a sincere and modest inquirer or objector. It is well to be able, in such cases, so to point an answer, as at once to expose the ignorance or the malice of the caviller, and to put a reply out of his power;-thus setting him fast-making him feel his folly, and bringing down his self-estimation. This, however, we should be sure, is not done in any such way as would cherish in ourselves the very principle which we seek to repress in him-of petulance and self-conceit. That were to answer him "according to his folly" in the sense of the fourth verse, and "to be like him." All our answers should be in meekness as well as firmness; and more in the spirit of pity than of scorn.
This ought especially to be attended to on serious subjects. There is a way which some have, when a person starts any objection on points of a religious nature,-bearing for instance on the truth of Christianity or the principles of the gospel,-of half angrily and half sneeringly, with a stern or a taunting rebuff, putting him down, by roundly telling him that what he says is nonsense, and unworthy of an answer. This, in general, is fitted to have one or other or all of three effects:-the excitement to resentful passions; the gratification of self-sufficiency and self-conceit instead of their repression; (for this kind of knock-down way of treating an argument or objection will of course be interpreted as indicating the consciousness of inability to meet it calmly and fairly;)-and the confirmation of scepticism and infidelity. Serious subjects should be treated seriously in all cases,-even with the fool. The best way to reply, is, not by a disdainful, jeering exclamation of "absurd nonsense!"-nor, by anything of the nature of buffoonery, trying to turn the laugh against the caviller: but to endeavour, in our reply, to unite such gravity and seriousness, as to show our deep impression of the importance of the subject, as one never to be trifled with or treated with lightness;-such force of argument as shall settle the question:-such determined firmness, as to rebuke and repress the spirit of self-conceit:-and such gentleness and kindliness, as shall conciliate attention and candid consideration, and contribute to win the heart. This last great object Christians are at times too prone to forget. Never should we imagine it sufficient merely to gain a victory on a disputed point. Our aim should above all things be, to gain the foolish, and even the conceited and impertinent, caviller himself-to draw him to a conviction of God's truth and a choice of God's ways. We should seek to make him sensible, by our whole manner, that we are in earnest,-that we are concerned for him, and anxious to convince him, for his own good, of his error and his danger.* O! what is it, in the comparison-to have the credit of silencing an adversary, or to have the satisfaction of winning and saving a soul-saving a soul from death, and covering the multitude of sins!
* This is beautifully exemplified on many occasions, in our Lord's interviews with his enemies:-See Mat_12:24, &c; Mat_15:1, &c.; Luk_13:14-17; Joh_8:7, &c.
Verse Pro_26:6. "He that sendeth a message by the hand of a fool cutteth off the feet, and drinketh damage." The general meaning of this proverb is too obvious to be mistaken by any one. Here again "a fool" may signify either a weak and incompetent man,-who has not capacity for the discharge of the trust committed to him, or one who is unprincipled,-on whose integrity and honour little reliance can be placed;-either the senseless man, or the worthless man, or a combination of both. He who commits any "message" to such a one "cutteth off the feet;"-is guilty of the same anomalous absurdity as if he were purposely to lame himself with a view to expedite his journey! The consequence which might be anticipated is expressed by Solomon in the words-"and drinketh damage:" he reaps, that is, as the reward of his absurdity and recklessness, disappointment, vexation, shame, injury, just in proportion to the magnitude and importance of the business.
Mark the general lesson. It evidently is-that we be careful, in all cases, to select suitable agents for the undertaking on which they are to be commissioned. It is an important lesson for governments, in the selection of ambassadors, diplomatists, and provincial and colonial magistrates;-to see that they be, in all respects, men competent for the trusts committed to them,-likely to execute them successfully, and in a manner that shall secure the honour and the interests of their country. It is a lesson to ourselves as the inhabitants of a free country,-to look well to it that we use conscientiously, considerately, and wisely, our elective franchise, and beware of committing the representative administration of our national affairs to men without principle or without capacity,-or holding such maxims of public policy as are, in our apprehension, at variance with the civil and religious liberties of the realm, or any of its other interests. It is a lesson to churches, in the choice of those to whom they commit the instruction and rule of the house of God;-to see to it, that they be men, in knowledge, in character, in temper, in prudence, and in energy, competent, as far as attainable, for "rightly dividing the word of truth,"-watching for souls,"-"taking care of the church of God." It is a lesson to both pastors and churches, in cases of discipline, or in any matters of general interest requiring the agency of individuals;-to see to it that persons be appointed, suitable in both disposition, and freedom from partiality and prejudice, and possessing the description of knowledge, whether sacred or secular, which fits them for the charge of the particular case. It is a lesson to all, in the ordinary affairs of domestic life, of secular business, of benevolent exertion;-to see to it, that according to the nature of what is to be done, they engage right heads, right hearts, and right hands.
Verse Pro_26:7. "The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the mouth of fools." This verse has by different critics been differently interpreted. One has it, "Lift up the legs of the lame"-"make the legs of the lame to dance;"-"so is a parable in the mouth of a fool." "A wise saying doth as ill become a fool, as dancing doth a cripple;-for, as his lameness never so much appears as when he would seem nimble, so the other's folly is never so ridiculous as when he would seem wise." The force of the comparison is, on this interpretation, sufficiently striking.
Another, from a different application of the same etymology, has the meaning-"the legs of the lame are wasted-emaciated-so is a parable in the mouth of fools." But this view seems unnatural and tame. The legs of the lame are not always wasted and slender. The meaning he attaches to the proverb is, that as the legs of the lame are slender and have lost their natural strength, so a parable in the mouth of a fool is deprived of its force. The explanation seems to rob the saying of much of its force. The idea certainly that is most readily and naturally suggested by the legs of the lame is that of inequality, and consequent inaptitude for sprightly or graceful movement. And in this sense the comparison is a very apt and expressive one. As the lame man, whose legs are not equal,-a short and a long, a straight and a crooked,-when he attempts to be nimble, is at once ludicrously awkward, and always in danger of falling; so is a fool awkward in the use of wise sayings, and is constantly in danger of stumbling into what is either ridiculous or mischievous, by his misapplication and abuse of them. "As therefore," says Henry, "it is best for a lame man to keep his seat, so is it best for a silly or a bad man to hold his tongue." *
* Stuart renders-"Take away the legs of a lame man; and so," &c. He explains thus-"The legs of a lame man are useless and may as well be taken away as respects any good from them. So a proverb in the mouth of fools is useless. It is a lame proverb."
For the sake of the close resemblance of the sentiment, we shall take in here verse ninth,-"As a thorn goeth up into the hand of a drunkard; so is a parable in the mouth of fools." The meaning is precisely similar to that of the sixth verse. A fool handling the maxims of wisdom is like a drunken man handling thorns. The drunkard, not knowing what he is about, lays hold of them rashly and recklessly, and thus wounds himself:-so the fool wounds himself by his manner of using the sayings of the wise. He confirms his reputation for folly; he exposes himself to pity or scorn; or even, inadvertently, from not at all perceiving how the use he is making of some one of them recoils upon himself, he pronounces his own verdict of culpability and condemnation; or still further, when attempting to bring a proverbial or pithy saying to bear on the support of his own cause, he blunders, by the misapplication of it, into a conclusion the very opposite of what he intended. He lays down principles that, in the eyes of every one who hears him, go to condemn himself, without his being in the least degree sensible of it. The thorn, ere he is aware, has "gone up into his hand," and the pain and the blood discover to him his folly.
Verse Pro_26:8. "As he that bindeth a stone in a sling, so is he that giveth honour to a fool." This verse also has been variously rendered. In the margin-"As he that putteth a precious stone in a heap of stones, so is he that giveth honour to a fool." It seems to be generally agreed that the word translated a sling means more properly a heap of stones.* And the word rendered stone is one frequently used to denote a precious stone.
* Parkhurst, Sohultens, Stock.
It is not denied, that our English version gives a good sense. The man who "binds a stone in a sling" maybe considered as preparing mischief. And so, the honour,-the power and influence,-that are bestowed upon a fool, only fit their possessor for doing hurt, either to himself, or to the person who has conferred it, or to others.*1 But the proper meaning appears to be-"giving honour to a fool is like hiding a precious stone in the midst of a heap of stones;"-or like "fixing a precious stone in the midst of a heap."-One critic renders-"As a spark of precious stone in the midst of a heap of stones, so is giving honour to a fool." The ideas then conveyed are-that the honour does not accord well with the other parts of the character,-and that to all really useful purposes it is lost. To the expression of incongruity thus brought out some make an addition, by supposing the heap of stones to be such an heap as was usually reared or thrown over notorious offenders, who were stoned, or otherwise ignominiously put to death.*2 This does certainly impart additional point and poignancy to the comparison. Giving honour to a fool is like inserting a diamond in a monument of infamy. The honour is thus worse than thrown away and lost. It is, in every view, where it ought not to be.
*1 Stuart retains the rendering of the English version, and explains, not inaptly, "It would be absurd to bind a stone in a sling and then expect it to do execution. Equally so is it to bestow honour on a fool, and expect any good consequences from it."
*2 S3e Jos_7:25-26; Jos_8:29: 2Sa_18:17, &c.
Verse Pro_26:10. "The great God that formed all things both rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors." This verse so rendered, it cannot be questioned, contains an all important and solemn truth. The fool and the transgressor shall come to punishment in the end,-shall "receive the due reward of their deeds,"-at the hand of God himself-"the great God who formed all things;" and who has power to punish as well as to save: "He can create, and he destroy." But God is a supplement; and in such circumstances the absence of the name of God, and the need of supplying it is very unusual. Here too you may look at the translation in the margin:-"A great man grieveth all; he both hireth the fool and hireth transgressors." The Septuagint is hardly intelligible. The French translation is substantially the same as our marginal:-"Great men cause offence, or grief, to all, and take into their service the foolish and the wicked." The Latin Vulgate gives a sense entirely different, which it is not easy to draw from the original-"Judgment settles causes; and he who imposes silence on the fool, allays contentions-or wraths." The meaning is probably that given in the margin. When a prince takes into his service ministers without capacity and without principle-"the fool and the transgressor,"-it is to his subjects matter of universal concern and trouble;-both because it is a sad indication of his own character; and because the administration of such men ensures to the country so many and so grievous evils. The sentiment, in this view of it, quite harmonizes with those in preceding and following verses.
And the lesson has application from the throne downwards through all the descriptions of subsidiary trusts. Extensive proprietors who employ overseers of their tenants, or of those engaged in their manufactories, or mines, or whatever else be the description of their property, should see to the character of these overseers. Their power may be abused, and multitudes of workmen suffer, when the owner-the master-knows nothing of what is going on. But he ought to know. Many complainings and strikes, well or ill-founded, have their origin here.*
* Stuart renders the verse, "An arrow which woundeth every one is he who hireth a fool and he who hireth vagrants:" and explains, "The man who employs fools and vagrants to do his work, and pays them wages, will injure himself."
Verse Pro_26:11. "As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly." The proverb is quoted by the Apostle Peter.* The emblem is a loathsome and sickening one. It is meant to be so. It would not have been appropriate, had it been anything else. There are two ideas conveyed by the comparison. The disposition or tendency, on the part of the fool or vicious man, to return to his folly; and the loathsomeness-the vileness-of the thing itself, when it does take place. There are persons of great pretensions to refinement, who affect great disgust at the comparison. They wonder how any body of ordinary delicacy can utter it. They would think their lips polluted by the very words. It were well for such persons to remember, that there is no comparison so odious as the thing itself which is represented by it. It were well if such persons would transfer their disgust and loathing at the figure to that which the figure represents:-if they would cherish a proper loathing of sin. That is what God holds in abhorrence:-that is what should be abhorred by us. Persons may affect to sicken at the comparison here used, and yet be themselves exemplifying the very conduct it so aptly represents. Folly and sin are incomparably more polluting and debasing to the nature of man, than the vilest and most disgusting practices in the physical nature of any of the inferior animals. O! to have the due impression of this!-such an impression as will produce a careful practical avoidance of those moral evils which are so offensive in the sight of God!
* 2Pe_2:22.
The proverb has a more especial reference to those sinners, who have been warned,-who have smarted for their folly,-who have, when thus made to feel its effects, professed their consciousness of its evil, and their sense of danger as well as guilt,-and who possibly, for a time, have refrained from it,-have vowed their favourite sins away from them, and seemed as if they were resolved not on confessing only but forsaking:-but who have shaken off their temporary convictions, and have returned, more eagerly than ever, to their former ways. Strongly are such characters depicted in some parts of Scripture; and terrible is the warning which the description of them involves.* Beware, O sinner, of this fearful and fatal tendency. And let the professed people of God keep themselves aloof from all temptations to sin,-the sin especially to which they may before their conversion have been addicted. Let not the cup again touch their lips, lest the liking to it return, and they exemplify, as too many, alas! have done, the proverb before us!
