We find in this chapter striking evidence of the great change which was now fast coming in through the rejection of Jesus by Israel. For, first, we have certain religious guides, “scribes and Pharisees which were of Jerusalem,” who had the best spiritual opportunities of their nation, and who came clothed with all that savored of antiquity and outward sanctity. These men put the question to our Lord, “Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.” The Lord at once deals with conscience. He does not enter into an abstract discussion about tradition; nor does He dispute with them as to the authority of the elders; but He at once jays hold of this great fact, that, in their zeal for the tradition of the elders, they were setting themselves point-blank against the plain, positive commandment of God. This I believe to be the invariable effect of tradition, no matter with whom it may be found. If we take up the history of Christendom, and consider any rule that ever was invented, it will be found to carry those who follow it in opposition to the mind of God. It may seem to be the most natural thing possible, and growing out of the new circumstances of the Church; but we are never safe in departure from God's word for any other standard. I am not now contending for the mere literal interpretation of Scripture. A certain course that the word of God binds upon His saints in dealing with one evil may not be their duty at some other crisis. New circumstances modify the path the Church ought to pursue. Were you to apply the directions given for judging immorality to fatal error touching our Lord's person, you would have a very insufficient measure of discipline. False doctrine does not touch the natural conscience as gross conduct. Nay, you may too often find a believer drawn away by his affections to make excuses for those who are fundamentally heterodox. All sorts of difficulties fill the mind where the eye is not really single. Many might thus be involved who did not themselves hold the false doctrine. If I hold the principle of dealing with none but him who brings not the doctrine of Christ, it will not do: for there may be others entangled with it. What is any individual, what is the Church even, in comparison with the Savior, the Son of the Father? Accordingly, the rule laid down by the Spirit for vindicating Christ's person from blasphemous assailants or their partisans, is infinitely more stringent than where it is a question of moral corruption, be it ever so bad. Again, there is a strong tendency to stereotype our own previous practice, and when some fresh evil comes in to insist on what was done then, or generally, without inquiring afresh of God, and searching into His word in view of the actual case before us and our own responsibility. The spirit of dependence is needed in order to walk rightly with God. There is in the written word of God that which will meet every claim; but each case should be a renewed occasion for consulting that word in His presence who gave it. People like to be consistent with themselves, and to hold fast former opinions and practices.
Our Lord, in this place, asserts that deference to mere human tradition leads into direct disobedience to God's will. Washing the hands might have seemed to be a most proper act. Nobody could pretend that Scripture forbade it; and no doubt the Jewish doctors could press its great significance. They might very well argue how calculated it was to keep before their minds the purity God insists on, and especially that we ought never to receive anything from His hand without putting away all defilement from ours. They might reason thus to a people who loved all outward routine. At all events they might say, What was the harm of such a tradition? What mischief could it do for persons to wash their hands, while it might do so much good? But our Lord simply comes to this issue, “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” It was not in spite of, but by, their tradition that God was disobeyed. This is illustrated by a very important relationship in Israel. The Apostle Paul, in writing to the Ephesians, shows us that the command to honor the father and mother was the first commandment with promise. Other commandments had the threat of death annexed to them; but this commandment was one that God singled out to crown with long life on the earth. The apostle's reasoning is, that if a Jewish child was not only bound, but encouraged, by such promise to venerate his parents, how much more is a Christian child now. He was to obey them in the Lord; not merely in the law, but in the Lord. This is the instance here also taken up: “God commanded, saying, Honor thy father and mother; and he that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” That is, on the one hand, the honor was valued by God; on the other, disrespect was deadly in His sight. “But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me, and shall not honor his father or his mother.” The Jews had brought in a cheat for their consciences, by which they might free themselves from the obligation to meet filial duties. They had only to pronounce the word, “It is a gift” (Corbin), and a parent might be forgotten! Doubtless, it was one of their authorized traditions, and for the priest's profit, but it was as undoubtedly an unhallowed act in God's sight, and a direct infringement of His command. “Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.” This is a solemn thing to be remembered; for it is not merely applicable to this class of natural relationships, but if any will take the trouble of examining every kind of religious rule introduced, not only in popery, but in protestantism, they will find the same thing invariably true. To add to Scripture is ruinous; it does not matter by whom it may be done, nor for the holiest motive men may allege; for God is jealous about it, and will not have His word enlarged or amended. Revelation is complete, and our simple business is to be obedient to the word of God.
Thus, it matters not what example any may propose. Take one of the commonest possible—the choice of a minister. People, Christians, say, We must send for ministers, and choose between them who is to be ours. I am willing to conceive care and conscience in exercising their judgment without partiality or prejudice. But where is the warrant for choosing any one whatever to preach the gospel, or to teach the church? Is there one precept, one instance in all the New Testament? Did God, then, not foresee the difficulties and the wants of congregations? Surely He did. Why, then, is there absence of all such directions for them Because it was a sin to do it, not only not His mind, but contrary to it. There is not a single case, nor anything like it, from the time the Holy Ghost was sent down at Pentecost till the canon of Scripture was closed. And yet you have multitudes of churches spoken of in the Scripture. What, then, is a congregation to do where they want a minister Why not search and see the Scripture way of meeting such a dilemma.? The difficulty arises from their being in a false position already. The central truth of the church is the presence of the Holy Ghost. I am speaking now of the Christian assembly, wherein the Spirit is personally present to act according to His own will in the midst of disciples there gathered for the purpose of glorifying God, and exalting Christ. Where the meeting is thus carried on, the question of choosing a minister could not arise. Where there are but three meeting upon God's principles (that is, church-ground), it is, if I might so say, church, if not the church. If there were three thousand real saints met, but not on God's principles, that would not be the church nor church either, though all members in Christ. So that, if you take this common Protestant tradition of choosing a minister, it is decisive. It puts the persons who use it in distinct opposition to the word of God. It might be good for a Christian assembly to feel their weakness. There might be none with any special gift among them; some might be able to help in worship and prayer, though not in preaching or teaching. But the blessed comfort is that, even if there were not some one specially gifted in the word, the Holy Ghost is able to edify the saints without him. If the assembly could have any amount of gift, and have it in a wrong way, the blessing would be impaired, and the will and glory of God so far set aside. But if there were not one with a special gift, there might be real blessing, provided the eye were towards the Lord. The object of the Holy Ghost is to put the souls of the saints in direct connection with the Lord. God in His wisdom may be pleased to raise up none in a particular assembly, or He may send there two, three, or more to minister. I do not believe that any one man has sufficient gifts for the church. The notion of having a single person to be the exclusive organ of the communications of God to His people, is a wrong to them, and above all, to the Lord. In every respect it opposes and destroys the will of God about His church. There might seem to be a great many good reasons why people should choose a minister, but never listen to any apology for that which you do not find in the word of God. We are bad judges of what would be best for us. Men may make great mistakes; but faith goes upon the ground that God can make none. He provides for everything in His word. God is pressing that upon us at this very moment. At the Reformation the point was to get the Bible at all, so that there might be the possibility of poor souls learning Christ for their salvation. But there nearly all that was known of the truth ended. The Reformation never touched the true question of the church. The Reformers had to deal with a very rough enemy. They had to blow up the masses of rock in the quarry; and we must not find fault if they could not fashion the stones nor build them with equal skill. But we ought not to stop at their hewings.
Tradition ought never to be held in any shape whatever. Here it was not mere following one another, but using tradition to indulge hypocritical selfishness. “Ye hypocrites,” says our Lord, “well did Esaias prophesy of you saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.” Those who pretended such zeal for the law were destroying its very foundations all the while. The father and mother stand at the head of the relative precepts which have to do with men. Thus, by their tradition, which allowed their dishonor, God's own authority, was made mill and void—and that, too, in the very highest earthly relationships in Israel. Isaiah shows that, as they had got rid of the law by their tradition, so the prophets condemned them. “In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
Having dispatched this matter, He calls the multitude, and says to them, “Hear and understand: not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man, but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.” It is the religious leaders chiefly that occupy themselves with tradition. The great general snare is denying the evil of men. The constant weapon which Satan uses now is the idea that man is not so bad but moral culture may improve him. The progress of the world is astonishing, they say. There are societies for promoting every philanthropic object, even down to preventing cruelty to animals. Here is a word that pronounces on these efforts of men in the gross. “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man, but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.” The real secret of man's deplorable condition is his heart. This affects all that comes out.
It is not in any wise what God made. Man now is merely a corrupt creature, whose corruption is imparted to what he takes in. Therefore mere restraining of the flesh is entirely useless in God's sight and essentially false. The Lord says to the multitude, “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man, but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.” Observe, He has done with the question of Jerusalem and of tradition. He speaks of what touches human nature. Man is lost. But no one thoroughly believes this about himself, till he has found Christ. He may believe he is a sinner, but does he believe he is so bad that no good can be got out of him? Is not the prevalent theory and effort to better man's condition? But our Lord declares here that it is not by what you put in, or what you keep from man, that he is made better. The heart is bad; and till the heart is reached, all else is vain. “But the word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth and in thy heart.” God's way of dealing with the heart ought to be the nearest thing to a Christian. What so simple, so blessed, so mighty as the gospel? Who says that the gospel wants a handmaid? The handmaid has lost her mission and is discharged. As Hagar was sent out of the house, so all that you get by Hagar is merely Ishmael—the son born after the flesh, that mocks the child of promise. Man is not now in a state of probation. The trial has been made. God has pronounced upon men that the flesh is utterly worthless; and yet man is trying the question again, instead of believing God.
The disciples came to speak to our Lord about it. They did not altogether relish what He had been saying. They came and said unto Him, “Knowest thou not that the Pharisees were offended after they heard this saying?” They might not be offended themselves, but were disposed to sympathize with the people who were. We might have thought the multitude would be most offended. But no; the Pharisees, standing upon tradition, have no more notion of the true ruin of man's nature in the sight of God than even the poor multitude in all their ignorance. Nothing so blinds the mind as tradition. The Pharisees, then, were offended, and the disciples were trying to act as mediators between them and our Lord. But our Lord answers still more sternly, “Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up.” There needs be a new life from God, not an improving of the old one. A plant must be planted, then, and the heavenly Father must do it. Every other plant must be rooted up. “Let them alone; they be blind leaders of the blind.” We are not to spend our time reasoning with these Pharisees: it is altogether vain. They require first principles, and the work of God in their souls; and therefore all discussion is premature and thrown away. “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind.” He did not apply this to the multitude, but to the leaders that were stumbled by the doctrine of man's total corruption. Such are best left to their own devices. “Let them alone.” And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
But the Lord does not leave the disciples where they were. Peter answers and says unto Him, Declare unto us this parable. This is evidently instructive. What did He mean by calling it a parable? He did not understand it himself. Here was one, the very chief of the twelve apostles, and he cannot understand what our Lord means when He tells them that man is altogether wrong—his heart most of all; that what comes out of him is what is so bad, not that which goes in. And this is a parable! The difficulty of Scripture arises less from difficult language than from unpalatable truth. Truth is contrary to people's wishes; and they cannot see it, because they do not like to receive it. A man may not be always conscious of this himself; but it is the real secret that God sees. The obstacle consists in man's dislike of the truth. Peter says, “Declare unto us this parable. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?” Think where a disciple was when he could find a dark saying in our Lord's sentence upon man as utterly bad and worthless! “Do ye not yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth, goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draft? But those things that proceed out of the heart, they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.” The source of man's evil is from within. And, therefore, until there is a new life brought in—till man is born again of water and of the Spirit, all is useless. “These are the things which defile a man; but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.” There closes our Lord's most blessed and weighty instruction; showing that the day of outward forms was past, and that it was now a question of the reality of man's state in the sight of God. And this he brings out with the greatest possible clearness for the disciples who could not understand: all very suggestive indeed to us.