MAKEMIE, md'k6-mf, FRANCIS: American Presbyterian; b. at Rathmelton (32 m. n.e. of Donegal), Ireland, 1658; d. in Accomac Co., Va., in the summer of 1708. He was educated at Glasgow University and was ordained as a missionary to America by the presbytery of Laggan, Ireland, in 1682. He itinerated in Maryland, Virginia, and

136

Barbados, and is said to have founded the church at Snow Hill, Md. In 1704 he went to England to secure aid for the Presbyterian Church in America, and on his return in 1706 he helped to organize at Philadelphia the first presbytery in America. In 1707 he was arrested at Newtown, L. L, for preaching without a license and had to pay heavy costs besides being confined in jail for several weeks. He wrote a catechism which was attacked by G. Keith, when he wrote a spirited reply praised by I. Mather. He has been regarded as the founder, of Presbyterianism in America, but there are rec ords of at least two other ministers before him.

Bibliography: C. A. Briggs, American Presbyterianism, New York, 1885; W. B. Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, iii. 1-4, ib. 1858; G. P. Hays, Presbyterians, pp. 83, 74-78, ib. 1892; R. E. Thompson, American Church History Series, vol. vi., ib. 1895; J. H. Patton, Popular Hist. of the Presbyterian Church, U. 3. A., ib. 1900; C. L. Thompson, The Presbyterians, ib. 1903; DNB, xxxv. 390-391.

MALACHI, mal'a-cal, BOOK OF: The book which, in the English Version, closes the Old Tes tament. It is debated whether Malachi is a per sonal name, or merely official (" my messenger "), or used symbolically. Against the supposition that it is a personal name Hengstenberg uses the following arguments: (1) the super The scription gives no information respect Title. ing his antecedents; (2) the oldest Jewish tradition appears to know nothing about him; (3) it is derived from iii. 1, and is impossible as a personal name since to a prophet it could not be given by men, but by God alone. Hengstenberg, therefore, considers the name as either ideal, or an official title. The first of these arguments was by Hengstenberg himself regarded as not cogent in view of the meager knowledge pos sessed concerning other prophets. The second can not be accepted, since the translators of the Sep tuagint rendered the word "my messenger" in iii. 1, but put Malachias (as a personal name) in the title. As to the third, the.name may be abbrevi ated from a form Malachiah, "Messenger of Yah weh," which would satisfy the form in the Greek, and meet the objection of Hengstenberg. The date of the prophecy is disputed. Recently Stade, Cornill and Kautzsch have argued for a date prior to the time of Ezra, although the entire point of view of the book, resting upon the institution of the law, implies that Ezra had already come. Stade's argument, based upon the fact that Malachi makes no reference to Ezra's measures against The mixed marriages, to a publication of Date. the law, while it regards the priests as Levitea, loses force inasmuch as the same features are found in Neh. xiii., which deals with events later than Ezra's measures. The book can belong neither before Ezra nor under his leader ship, since in that case mention of it would have been made in the book of Ezra, se is seen by the ref erence to Haggai and Zechariah in Ezra v. 1, vi. 14; and the absence of mention in Nehemiah is against the activity of the prophet during Nehemiah's gov ernorship. Nagelsbach, KtThler, Orelli, and Reuss rightly place the book in the period between the two visits of Nehemiah, the ground being the reference to the "governor" in Mal. i. 8, who, however, can not be Nehemiah (of. Neh. v. 8, 10, 14-18) and suits best the governor of the time between Nehemiah's visits. The content of the book agrees with this period, since reference is made to three points, marriage with foreign women, observance of the Sabbath, and maintenance of the temple services through stated offerings (cf. Neh. x. 28 sqq.). Neh, sill, has Neh. x. in view, and Malachi agrees in standpoint with Neh. xiii. At the coming of Ezra the temple service was a charge on the state treasury; Later under Nehemiah the Jews undertook to support the temple by their own contributions as a fulfilment of the law (Neh. x. 33), but became lax in performance after Nehemiah's departure. Out of this arose the reproaches which appear both in Malachi and in the book of Nehemiah, which therefore fix the date.

The prophet takes in at a glance past, present, and future. Starting with the past, he sets plainly before his hearers the love which led Yahweh to choose Jacob while he rejected Esau.

The Con- In contrast to this love of long standtents. ing, the prophet sets the present conduct of the people. People and priest sin in that they bring diseased offerings, reduce the temple revenues, and disgrace the divine name by mixed marriages. For these things comes the judgment, which is to be ushered in by a great messenger, whom Yahweh calls emphatically "my messenger," but who, in turn, is only the forerunner of a still greater, the angel of the covenant, with whom Yahweh himself will appear, and this messenger, as the counterpart of Moses, will reveal the new law to God's people. The prophet determines yet more closely the time of the coming of the forerunner, when he says that he is the prophet Elijah, who will come to convert young and old. Then the Lord will return to his temple, and the great and terrible day of judgment will begin. But the judgment has two sides, the destruction of the ungodly, and the refining and purification of the righteous. While Malachi's minatory sermon seems to lay stress upon mere externals, upon the outward observance of the law, in reality he cites the cases of disobedience merely se examples in order to exhort the people to such conduct as befits those in the presence of the day of final reckoning. Israel's duty-this is his exhortation-is in general and in particular conscientiously to obey the law. Malachi has, upon the basis of passages like i. 11, iii. 3, been charged with laying undue emphasis upon sacrifice and thus with being in sharp contrast with the earlier prophets. But alongside of these passages should be placed i. 10, which (like Isa. i. 10 sqq.) shows that not sacrifice in itself but as an evidence of righteous intention is what the prophet has in mind.

(W. Volck†.)

Bibliography: The earlier commentaries are obsolete. Modern commentaries are by G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve, London, 1898: L. Reinke, Giessen, 1858; A. K&hler, Erlangen, 1885: C. F. Keil, Eng. transl., Edin burgh, 1888; W. Drake, in Bible Commentary, London, 1878; T. T. Perowne, in Cambridge Bible, Cambridge, 1890; C. von Orelli, Twelve Minor Prophets, New York, 1893; W. Nowack, Göttingen, 1903; E. B. Pussy, Minor Prophets, latest ed., London, 1907: O. leopescul, Cserno wita, 1908. Consult also: E. W. Hengetenberg, Beiträge

137

tur Einteilung in das AZte Testament, 3 vols., Berlin 1831-1839: W. Böhme, in ZATW, vii (1887), 210 sqq.; F. W. Farrar, The Minor Prophets, London, 1890; J. Wellhausen, Kleine Propheten, Berlin, 1898; C. C. Torrey, in JBL, avii. 1. 1898 (important); works cited under Biblical Introduction; Messiah; also DB, iii. 218-222; EB, iii. 2907-2910; JE, viii. 27b-278.