CRITICAL NOTES.—
Proverbs 19:10 Delight. Most commentators translate this word “luxury.” Miller, however, as will be seen from his comment, retains the reading of the English version.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF Proverbs 19:10
I. Where there is wealth or exalted station there ought to be correspondent qualifications. (For the real signification of the word translated delight see Critical Notes.) If a man is rich he ought to be wise, and if he is powerful he ought to have been instructed how to use his power well. A fool is useless in any condition of life, but a fool who is the possessor of a fortune is a power for evil. We must understand the word servant here to mean an ignorant and incapable man—one who, though able to serve, has no ability to rule. A man may be very well fitted to perform the duties of a common seaman, but if he is ignorant of the laws of navigation it would be a great misfortune for both himself and the rest of the crew if he were to be appointed to the captain’s post. If he had remained before the mast he might have done good service, but when he is promoted to a higher rank he is only an instrument of mischief. Of the two incongruities dealt with in the proverb this last is the most fruitful of evil. It is a lamentable thing when great riches come into the possession of a fool who does not know how to use his wealth either for his own or his neighbour’s good, and it may be productive of positive harm both to himself and others. Instances are not at all uncommon, and most men have met with them, in which a man in a very humble station, and destitute of true and spiritual wisdom, inherits suddenly a large fortune. In the majority of such cases the inheritance is a curse rather than a blessing, for the inheritor has no idea how to use it so as to promote his own real welfare. His higher nature has never been developed, consequently he has no spiritual or intellectual desires to gratify, and all he can do with his wealth is to minister to his appetites and gratify his passions, which he often does in a most unseemly way, and to an extent which makes him a worse man when he is rich than he was when he was poor. But this misuse of wealth is not so great a misfortune as the misuse of power. The evil effects of the first will be confined within comparatively narrow limits, but those of the latter are widespread. When a man is neither a prince by birth or by nature, and yet is in a position which gives him power over men who are either or both, there is a great disproportion in the moral fitness of things which generally brings much social and national trouble. For if a man’s only title to rule is that of birth, it is better for those whom he rules than if he had none at all. If he is an incapable man himself he may be the descendant of greater men, and those under him may be able to submit to him for what he represents, although they cannot reverence him for what he is. But when he has not even this small claim on their obedience, the unseemliness is so great that national anarchy, and consequently much individual suffering, is the almost certain result.
II. Either of these incongruities present a deep mystery in the Divine government. When we consider what a great power for good as well as for evil is wrapped up in wealth, the providence appears to us dark which often gives it to the moral fool and leaves the wise man destitute. But when we find a weak man apparently holding in his hands the destinies of many stronger and nobler men—a “servant” ruling over “princes”—the providence seems darker still. But there are two sources whence we can draw comfort. We can look forward to that “time of restitution of all things” (Acts 3:21) when all these manifest inconsistencies shall be done away with, and we can assure ourselves that “things are not what they seem”—that the wisdom of the wise man is a greater power for good than the wealth of the rich, and that, after all, the choice of the ruler is in the hand of those whom he rules, and that if the latter are “princes” they will not long suffer themselves to be ruled by one who is “a servant.”
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
1. In its secular form this truth is obvious.
2. In its higher but intermediate form, it means that an ungodly sinner, here called “a stupid man,” on his way to death and judgment, is so shockingly off in all interests of his being, that “delight” is a mockery; it is anything but suited to his state. And to have him stand, as he often does, superior to Christians, overawing Christian life, and repressing Christian eminence of character, is indeed a servant ruling a prince; and it is as good an instance as could be met, of something that does not suit, or as the original has it, does not sit well.
3. But Solomon would carry it a story higher. He means to continue his pursuit of the impenitent. He means to tell them that their delight, in itself considered, would not sit well; that to reward a fool would bring dishonour upon government; and to release the outlaw from his bonds would really be to elect the slave to a post higher than the “princes.”—Miller.
With all the preference here expressed for virtuous poverty, the seemliness of rank, and the violence done by the upstart rule of the lower over the higher, are not overlooked.—Chalmers.
Abundance of wealth, dainty fare, and pastime or recreation, is not meet for a vain and wicked person. For, first of all, He rather deserveth correction than recreation; secondly, He abuseth all his delights and possessions to his own hurt, being drunken with his vanities; last of all, He is so puffed up and corrupted by prosperity, that he oppresseth his neighbours.… But if a light vanity beseem not a vain person, then authority, which carrieth with it a weight of glory, less beseemeth a vile person, who is of a servile disposition and condition, especially that rule which is exercised over noble personages.—Muffet.
Judge, then, how horrible it is that men should set the devil or his two angels, the world and the flesh, on the throne, while they place God on the footstool; or that in this commonwealth of man, reason, which is the queen or princess over the better powers and graces of the soul, should stoop to so base a slave as sensual lust.—T. Adams.
The reason is, because a wise man is master of his delight, a fool is servant unto it. And delight never doth well but where it is commanded, never doth so ill as where it is commander.… The command of delight is like the ruling of a servant over princes; and as he is foolish in ruling, so it is the quality of a fool to give the ruling of his heart unto delight.—Jermin.