The fact is, however, that, through the per versity of the people, this settlement of the gen eral government on theocratical principles was not carried out in its proper form and extent ; and it is in this neglect we are to seek the necessity for those officers called Judges, who were from time to time raised up to correct some of the evils which resulted from it.
It is very evident, from the whole history of the judges, that after the death of Joshua the Israelites threw themselves back upon the seg regative principles of their government by tribes, and all but utterly neglected, and for long periods did utterly neglect, the rules and usages on which the general government was established. There was, in fact, no human power adequate to enforce them. They were good in themselves, they were gracious, they conferred high privi leges; but they were enforced by no sufficient authority. No one was amenable to any tribunal for neglecting the annual feasts, or for not refer ring the direction of public affairs to the Divine King. Omissions on these points involved the absence of the Divine protection and blessing, and were left to be punished by their consequences.
The people could not grasp the idea of a Divine and Invisible King; they could not bring them selves to recur to him in all those cases in which the judgment of a human king would have de termined the course of action, or in which his arm would have worked for their deliverance.
(13) Reason for Judges. Therefore it was that God allowed them judges in the persons of faithful men, who acted for the most part as agents of the divine will, regents for the Invisible King; and who, holding their commission directly from him, or with his sanction, would be more inclined to act as dependent vassals of Jehovah than kings, who, as members of royal dynasties, would come to reign with notions of independent rights and royal privileges, which would draw away their attention from their true placr; in the theocracy. In this greater dependence of the
judges upon the Divine King we see the secret of their institutions.
The Israelites were disposed to rest upon their separate interests as tribes; and having thus al lowed the standing general government to re main inoperative through disuse, they would in cases of emergency have been disposed 'to make themselves a king like the nations,' had their at tention not been directed to the appointment of officers whose authority could rest on no tangible right apart from character and services. This, with the temporary nature of their powers, ren dered their functions more accordant with the principles of the theocracy than those of any other public officers could be. And it is prob ably in this adaptation to the peculiar circum stances of the Hebrew theocracy that We shall discover the reason of our inability to find any similar office among other nations. In being thus peculiar it resembled the Dictatorship among the Romans; to which office indeed that of the judges has been compared ; and perhaps this parallel is the nearest that can be found. E. W. H.