HE next finds fome refemblance in him, to Pifo, the Roman high-priest under Tiberius; of whom the fame Tacitus fays, That he was not author of any fervile fentence; and could upon occafion moderate with wisdom. But it must be owned, that the negative part of this laft character is very far from doing juftice to the genius of Nathan; who fufficiently appears, in the facred writings, to be rather an infpirer of noble purposes, than a mere non-adviser of fuch as were base and servile -Witness his ftrong encouragement to David, to put his noble design of building the temple of Go D, into immediate execution. And it were but justice to add, That he could do more, than moderate wifely; for it is evident, that he knew alfo how to reprove princes with authority, and yet without offence; which must be allowed to require very uncommon talents, with a dexterity of address perhaps yet rarer. And this Nathan did, without being impaired in any degree, either of favour or affection, with David: quite otherwife; he seems to have increased in both, his whole life long. But it must be owned, that his known character of being inspired

by GOD, bore him out in this conduct beyond the lot of other mortals, and so justly endeared him to David, that tradition tells us, he named one fon after him, and committed another to his tuition. And it must be owned, that Solomon, in all probability, could not have been placed under a better preceptor, nor one whose instructions would better intitle him to that bleffed appellation of Jedidjah, or the beloved of Go D.

WHOEVER Confiders the predictions of divine vengeance now denounced against David, on the fcore of his guilt, in the matter of Uriah, muft furely find them to be in their nature very extraordinary family to continue beyond any other regal race in the known world; and yet the fword to continue as long never to depart from it!

His

A KING the greatest of his time! his dominion throughly established, and his enemies under his feet; highly honoured and beloved at home, and as highly awful to all the neighbouring nations! Such a king threatened to have his wives publicly prostituted before the face of all his people! And what is yet much stranger, more shock

ing, and more incredible, by one of his own race! and, as a fure proof of this, the darling offspring of his guilt to perish quickly, before his eyes! He alone, who fills futurity, could foresee this; he only who sways the world, and knows what evil appetites and difpofitions, unrestrained, will attempt and perpetrate, could pronounce it: and to put it beyond all doubt, that he did foresee it, he immediately fmote the child which Bathsheba bare to David, with a mortal disease.

but

DAVID had, upon his humiliation and repentance, juft experienced one fignal mercy from GOD; he could not tell how far the continuance of thofe holy offices might prevail yet further, upon a Being of infinite benignity. It is true, the denunciation of vengeance was positive; many fuch denunciations in fcripture, feemingly positive, are yet really conditional. Or, fuppofing it pofitive, like the fentence of death upon Adam, yet might it not be immediate; but respited, as his was. At worst, he could neither err, nor offend in that extreme. And for these reasons it was, as he himself gives us to understand, that David (as the text tells us) befought God for the child; and David

D 4

David fafted, and went in, and lay all night upon the earth.

And the elders of his houfe arofe, and went to him, to raise him up from the earth: but he would not, neither did he eat bread with them.

THUS he continued fafting, mourning, and imploring GOD, for feven days fucceffively. And it came to pass (fays the facred historian, 2 Sam. xii. 18.) on the feventh day, that the child died: and the fervants of David feared to tell him, that the child was dead: for they faid, Behold, while the child was yet alive, we spake unto him, and he would not hearken unto our voice: How will he then vex himself, if we tell him, that the child is dead! But when David faw, that his servants whispered, David perceived that the child was dead: therefore David faid unto his fervants, Is the child dead? And they faid, He is dead. Then David (with a refignation, and a refolution, never to be enough admired and imitated) arose from the earth, and washed and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the Lord, and worshipped: then he came unto his own house, and when he required, they fet bread before him, and he did eat.

Then

Then faid bis fervants unto him, What thing is this that thou haft done? Thou didst faft and weep for the child, while it was alive; but when the child was dead, thou didft rife, and eat bread.

To this question David made the most truly heroic, philofophic, and religious anfwer, recorded in history: And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fafted, and wept: for I faid, Who can tell, whether God will be gracious to me, that the child may live? But now he is dead, wherefore Should I faft? Can I bring him back again? I fhall go to him, but he shall not return to me. This, I will venture to say, is the nobleft leffon upon all that is reasonable and religious in grief, that ever was penned. I CANNOT but obferve upon this occafion, that the thinking reader must find it very furprising, to fee fo wife a man as David, fafting and mourning in fo extraordinary a manner, for a child, who, being yet an infant, could not poffibly have been endeared to him, by any of those blandishments which so ftrongly engage the parental affections to their offspring; and who, as he was a dreadful monument of guilt, one

would