Already by the time of the prophets the condition of un-
be taken more generally. I am a sinner. Particularly I have offended in word.
And who is there that does not? (Jas. iii. 2). We have all reason to bewail it before God. Our lips are not consecrated to God. He has not had the firstfruits of our lips (Heb. xiii. 15). Therefore they are counted common and unclean, uncircumcised lips (Exod. vi. 30). They have been polluted with sin. We have spoken the language of an unclean heart in that evil communication which corrupts good manners, whereby many have been defiled. We are unworthy to take God's name into our lips. With what pure lips did the angels praise God? But, says the prophet, I cannot praise Him so, "'for I am a man of unclean lips"'.
5. CuHrRist's TEACHING ON UNCLEANNESS Already by the time of the prophets the condition of uncleanness was becoming more and more to be recognised as the result of the inward rather than the outward conduct. And our blessed Lord Jesus Christ in this, as in all else, filled out the prophets. One great design of Christ's coming was to set aside the ceremonial law which God made (Mark vit. 1-23), and to put an end to it. To make way for this He begins with the ceremonial law which men had made, and added to the law of God's making. He discharges His disciples from the obligations of this law. Then Pharisees and scribes, with whom Jesus had this argument about the disciples eating with unwashed hands, are said to have come from Jerusalem down to Galilee, eighty to a hundred miles, to pick quarrels with our Saviour there, where they supposed He had the greatest interest and reputation.
We observe in this incident : (a) What the tradition of the elders was. By it all were enjoined to "'wash their hands'' before meat, a clean custom with no harm in it. But to be over nice in it shows too great a care about the body, which is of the earth. They placed religion in it, and would not allow it to be a matter of indifference, as it was in its own nature. People are at liberty to do it or not to do it, but these self-appointed authorities commanded that it should be done upon pain of excommunication. The Papists pretend a zeal for the authority and antiquity of the Church and its canons, and talk much of councils and fathers, when really it is nothing but a zeal for their own wealth, interests,
Uncleanness
and dominions that govern them. And so it was with the Pharisees.
We have here an account of the practice of the Pharisees and all the Jews. They washed their hands often. The critics find a great deal of interest in the Greek word for '"'washed"'. Some say it means frequency in washing. Others think it signifies the pains they took in washing their hands—they washed with great care. Others say it means, they washed their hands to their waists. Others that they lifted up their hands when wet so that the water ran down to their elbows. They particularly washed before they ate bread. That is, before they sat down to a solemn meal. For that was the rule. They must be sure to wash before they ate the bread on which they had begged a blessing. "Whosoever eats the bread, over which they recite the benediction, 'Blessed be He that produceth bread,' must wash his hands before and after", or else he was thought to be defiled.
They took special care when they came in from the markets to wash their hands; from the judgment halls, so some translate it. It signifies any place of concourse, where there were people of all sorts, and it might be supposed some heathen, or Jews under ceremonial pollution. They say the rule of the rabbis was, that if they washed their hands well in the morning the first thing they did, that would serve for all day, provided they kept alone. But if they went into company, they must not at their return either eat or pray till they had washed their hands.
They added to this the washing of cups and pots and brazen vessels which they suspected had been made use of by heathens, or persons polluted—nay, and the very tables on which they ate their meat. There were many cases in which, by the law of Moses, washings were appointed, but they added to them, and enforced the observation of their own impositions as much as of God's institutions.
(b) What the practice of Christ's disciples was. They knew what the law was, and the common usage; but they understood themselves so well that they would not be bound up by it. They '"'ate bread with defiled, that is, with unwashen hands"'. Eating with unwashen hands, they called eating with defiled hands. Thus men keep up their superstitious vanities, by putting every thing into an ill name that contradicts them. The disciples knew (it is probable) that the Pharisees had their eye isaws Great Themes of the Bible upon them. Yet they would not humour them by a compliance with their traditions, but took their liberty, as at other times, and ate bread with unwashen hands. Herein their righteousness, however it might seem to come short, did really exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. v. 20).
(c) The offence which the Pharisees took at this. "They found fault." They censured them as profane and men of a loose conversation. Or rather they condemned them as men that would not submit to the power of the Church to decree rites and ceremonies, and were therefore rebellious, factious, and schismatical. They brought a complaint against them to their Master, expecting that he should check them and order them to conform. For they that are fond of their own inventions and impositions are commonly ready to appeal to Christ, as if He should countenance them, and as if His authority must interpose for the enforcing of them and the rebuking of those that do not comply with them. They do not ask, ""Why do not thy disciples do as we do?"' though that was what they meant, coveting to make themselves the standard. But, '"Why do not they walk according to the tradition of the elders?"? To which it was easy to answer, that by receiving the doctrine of Christ they had "more understanding than all their teachers, yea, more than the ancients" (Ps. cxix. 99, 102).
(d) Christ's vindication of them; in which: (1) He argues with the Pharisees concerning the authority by which this ceremony was imposed. They were the fittest to be discoursed with concerning that, who were the great sticklers for it. But this he did not speak of publicly to the multitude (as appears by His calling the people to Him, verse 14), lest he should have seemed to stir them up to faction and discontent at their governors; but addressed it as a reproof to the persons concerned, for the rule is, "'Let every one have his own."
(11) He reproves them for their hypocrisy in pretending to honour God when really they had no such design in their religious observances (verses 6, 7). "'They honour me with their lips", they pretend it is for the glory of God that they impose things, to distinguish themselves from the heathen, but really their heart is far from God, and is governed by nothing but ambition and covetousness. They would be thought hereby to appropriate themselves as a holy people to the Lord their God, when really it is the furthest thing in their thought. They rested in the outside of all their religious exercises, and their hearts were not right with God in them; and this was worshipping God in vain, for neither was He pleased with such sham devotions nor were they profited by them.
(iii) He reproves them for placing religion in the inventions and injunctions of their elders and rulers. They taught "for doctrines the traditions of men''. When they should have been pressing upon people the great principles of religion they were enforcing the canons of their church, and judged of people's being Jews, or not, according as they did or did not conform to them. This they did without any consideration as to whether they lived in obedience to God's laws or not. It was true there were divers washings imposed by the law of Moses (Heb. ix. 10). These were intended to signify that inward purification of the heart from worldly, fleshly lusts, which God requires as absolutely necessary to our communion with Him.
Instead of providing the substance, they presumptuously added to the ceremony, and were very nice in "washing pots and cups''; and observe that He adds, "'Many other such like things ye do"' (verse 8). Superstition is an endless thing. If one human invention and institution be admitted, though seemingly never so innocent, as this of washing hands, '"' Behold, a troop comes."' A door is opened for ''many other such like things''.
(iv) He reproves them for "laying aside the commandment of God"', and overlooking that, not urging that in their preaching, and in their discipline conniving at the violation of that, as if that were no longer of force. It is the mischief of impositions that too often they who are zealous for them have little zeal for the essential duties of religion, but can contentedly see them laid aside. Nay, they rejected "the commandment of God"'. You disannul and abolish the commandment of God; and even by your traditions make "the word of God of none effect"'. God's statutes shall not only lie forgotten, as antiquated, obsolete laws, but they shall in effect stand repealed, that their traditions may take place. They were intrusted to expound the. law, and to enforce it; and, under pretence of using that power, they violated the law, and dissolved the bonds of it— destroying the text with the comment.