Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke - Volume 2.pdf

<strong>Commentary</strong> on Matthew, Mark, Luke - Volume 2
391 though it is possible that they were sent to spy. However that may be, as they had brought their
haughty disdain along with them, they are easily provoked by the slightest offense to bite or snarl
at Christ. Hence we see with what difficulty those who are influenced by ambition and the lust of
power are brought to submit to sound doctrine. Those especially whose attachment to ceremonies
has been strengthened by long practice cannot endure any novelty, but loudly condemn every thing
to which they have not been accustomed. In short, any thing more haughty or more disdainful than
this class of men cannot be imagined.
Both Evangelists mention that they were scribes and Pharisees; but Matthew puts the scribes
first, and Mark puts them second. They convey the same meaning, that the scribes belonged to
various sects, but that the Pharisees were the leaders, because they occupied an honorable station,
and at that time held the government. That the Pharisees should be the first to take offense at
disregard of the laws of which they were authors ought not to excite surprise; for, as we have said,
though they boasted that they were expounders of the law, and though their name was derived from
that circumstance, 392 they had corrupted by their inventions the purity of the word of God. All the
traditions that then existed among the Jews had come out of their workshop; 393 and this was the
reason why they displayed more than ordinary zeal and bitterness in defending them.
2. Why do thy disciples transgress? When we speak of human traditions, this question has no
reference to political laws, the use and object of which are widely different from enjoining the
manner in which we ought to worship God. But as there are various kinds of human traditions, we
must make some distinction among them. Some are manifestly wicked, for they inculcate acts of
worship which are wicked and diametrically opposed to the word of God. Others of them mingle
profane trifles with the worship of God, and corrupt its purity. Others, which are more plausible,
and are not chargeable with any remarkable fault, are condemned on this ground., that they are
imagined to be necessary to the worship of God; and thus there is a departure from sincere obedience
to God alone, and a snare is laid for the conscience.
To this last description the present passage unquestionably relates; for the washing of hands,
on which the Pharisees insisted, could not in itself be charged with wicked superstition; otherwise
Christ would not have permitted the water-pots to be used at the marriage, (John 2:6,) if it had not
been an allowable ceremony; but the fault lay in this, that they did not think that God could be
properly worshipped in any other way. It was not without a specious pretext that the practice of
washings was first introduced. We know how rigidly the Law of God demands outward cleanness;
not that the Lord intended that this should occupy the whole attention of his servants, but that they
might be more careful to guard against every spiritual defilement. But in washings the Law preserved
some moderation. Next came teachers, who thought that they would not be reckoned sufficiently
391 “En cas qu’ils l’eussent trouve bon maistre a leur gre;” — “provided that they should find him to be a good master to their
liking.”
392 See Harmony, vol. 1, p. 281.
393 “Elles avoyent este forgees en leur boutique;” — “they had been manufactured in their workshop.”
172
John Calvin