The Preacher's Homiletical Commentary
Luke 5:12-16
CRITICAL NOTES
Luke 5:12.—St. Matthew gives a distinct note of time and place when and where this miracle was wrought: it was after the Sermon on the Mount, and as Jesus came down from the mount, that the leper met him. Full of leprosy.—A term of medical accuracy describing the severity of the disease. The leprosy had spread over his whole body, but not in the manner described in Leviticus 13:13, for he was still unclean (Luke 5:14). It is to be specially noticed that when the disease had attained a certain stage the man was pronounced ceremonially clean, and was allowed to mingle with others. Thou canst make me clean.—His faith was wonderfully strong, as there was only one case of a leper being cleansed by miracle—that of Naaman.
Luke 5:13. Touched him.—A violation of the letter of the Mosaic law, but an action prompted by the higher law of compassion (Mark 1:41).
Luke 5:14. He charged him to tell no man.—The reason of the prohibition probably was our Lord’s unwillingness to allow the attention of the people to be diverted from His teaching to His miracles, and an excitement to be aroused which would interfere with His work. The mischievous effect of disobedience to His commands on this occasion is noted in Mark 1:45. Shew thyself to the priest, etc.—See Leviticus 14:1. For a testimony unto them.—I.e. to the priests that a miracle had taken place.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.— Luke 5:12
“Be clean: be silent.”—The Mosaic law, which banished the leper from camp and city, which compelled him to go with bare head and rent garment, as one who mourned his own death, and to cry, “Unclean, unclean!” so often as he approached the haunts of men, was not a sanitary precaution, but a dramatic religious parable setting forth God’s hatred for the various forms of disease and death which spring from sin. Those afflicted by this disease were doubly burdened—they were the prey of the most loathsome of all physical maladies, and were living emblems of the disastrous effects of sin and of God’s anger against it. Hence we can understand the intense longing with which this leper entreated to be cured, and the compassion of the Saviour for one in his pitiable condition. Note:—
I. The astonishing and sublime faith of the leper.—“Full of leprosy,” he draws near to Jesus with the cry, “Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.” Jesus had not long begun His public ministry. He had only just delivered the Sermon on the Mount. He had not fully showed Himself unto Israel. The leper could not possibly have heard many of His words, or have seen many of His works. He may have sat on the mountain, apart from the the groups which gathered immediately round Jesus, and may have heard the divinest words which ever fell from human lips. But a great multitude had also heard them. Yet none but the leper seems to have felt that He who spake as never man spake must be more than man—the Lord from heaven. He does not hesitate to address Christ as “Lord”; nay, he worships this “Lord” as God. He kneels down, and falls on his face before Him, as though seeing in Him a divine and ineffable majesty. He has no doubt of Christ’s power to heal a disease which was yet beyond the scope of human power. But he is humble; he refers himself solely to the pure and kindly will of Christ, leaves the decision to Him, and is prepared to accept it, whatever it may be.
II. The compassion of Christ.—“Moved with compassion” (Mark 1:41), “He put forth His hand and touched him.” To touch a leper was to become a leper in the eye of the law and of the priests. So that to heal a leper Christ became a leper, just as to save sinners He who knew no sin became sin for us. What comfort was in that touch, and what promise! For how should Christ take him by the hand and not heal him? how bid him rise, and lift him from the dust, without also raising him from death to life? The touch of Christ was His response to the leper’s worship: the words He speaks respond to the leper’s prayer. “Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.” “I will: be thou clean.” Word answers to word: the response of Christ is a mere echo of the leper’s prayer. And so when we cry, “Make us clean,” God always answers, “Be thou clean.” But that is not always the answer we hear or seem to hear. We often ask God to create a clean heart within us when He can only cleanse our hearts with a torrent of affliction or with bitter tears of repentance.
III. Our Lord’s command.—“To tell no man, and to show himself to the priests.” We should have thought that the man’s first duty was not to hold his peace, but to tell every man he met what a great Saviour he had found, and to urge them to repair to the Healer, in order that they too might be made whole. Perhaps after all, in spite of the opinion of many good men in the present day, it is not every convert’s first and great duty to bear verbal witness to the Saviour who has redeemed him. One of the reasons for this command was, doubtless, that our Lord did not as yet wish to draw on Himself the public attention. It was perilous to the higher objects of His mission that the people of Galilee, ignorant and sensual in their thoughts, should crowd round Him, and try to make Him by force the sort of king He would not be. And, therefore, for a time He set Himself to repress the eager zeal of his converts and disciples. Another and more special reason was, that He wished the leper to discharge a special duty, viz. to bear “a testimony to the priests.” He cared for the absent priests in distant Jerusalem, no less than for the leper’s immediate neighbours in Galilee. As yet the priests were prejudiced against Him. They thought of Him as a zealot, a fanatic, who in cleansing the Temple had swept away corruptions at which they connived, by which they had profited. The testimony He wished to send them could hardly have failed to make a deep and auspicious impression on their minds. Jesus would fain have brought them all to a knowledge of the truth and a better mind. And then, too, His deference to their priestly authority could hardly have failed to propitiate them, and to convince them that He was bent on establishing the law, not on making it void.
IV. The leper’s blended obedience and disobedience to the command.—By lingering on the way and prating to every man he met, it is likely that confused and misleading rumours concerning the miracle would travel before him, and his message would lose much of its value. Till the priests have pronounced him clean, he was a leper in the eye of the law, and had no right to enter the cities and talk with men. If he assumed that he was clean before they pronounced him clean, they would infer that both he and Christ were wanting in respect both to them and to the law. All the grace, all the courtesy and deference, of our Lord’s act would be cast away, and the special value and force of the testimony to the priests would be impaired, if not lost. Obviously, he thought to honour Christ by “much publishing” what He had done. Yet to what good end did he honour Christ with his tongue, while he dishonoured by disobeying Him in his life. Let us take the warning, and be “swift to hear, slow to speak.” Much talk about religion—and especially about the externals of religion, about miracles and proofs, about ceremonies or the affairs of the Church—so far from strengthening the spirit of devotion, is perilously apt to weaken it. There are few who are strong enough to talk as well as to act. A great faith such as this leper’s is not always a patient, submissive faith. No doubt he would have found it much easier to lay down his life for Christ’s sake than to hold his tongue for Christ’s sake, just as Naaman would have found it easier to “do some great thing” than simply to bathe in the Jordan. Yet we need not think too hardly of him because he could not refrain his tongue. The man who can rule that member is a perfect man, for his faith covers his whole life down to its lightest action.—Cox.
The Leper and the Lord.
I. The leper’s cry.—There is a keen sense of misery. This impels him to passionate desire for healing. How this contrasts with the indifference of men as to soul-cleansing!
1. Note his confidence. He was sure of Christ’s power to heal.
2. Note his doubt. He is uncertain as to Christ’s willingness. He has no right to presume on it. Therefore he comes with a modest prayer, breathing entreaty quite as much as doubt. The leper’s doubt is our certainty. We know the principle on which Christ’s mercy flows.
II. The Lord’s answer.—Show Him misery, and He answers with pity. Christ’s touch accompanies His compassion. Those who would heal “lepers” must “touch” them. Christ’s word accompanies His touch. A word of dignity and conscious power, curt, authoritative, imperative.
III. The immediate cure.—“Straightway.” The healing of the leprosy of sin may be equally immediate. Forgiveness may be the act of a moment, though the conquering of sin be gradual and life-long. Do not suspect, but expect, immediate conversions.—Maclaren.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Luke 5:12
Luke 5:12. Leprosy is Typical of Sin.
I. In virtue of its repulsiveness.
II. As suggesting impurity or defilement.
III. As leading to isolation or separation.—Laidlaw.
Leprosy a Symbol of Divine Anger.—Leprosy was the most frightful of all diseases, and was regarded by the Jews with special horror, as a symbol of God’s wrath against sin. In Jewish history we read of it as having been directly inflicted by God in punishment of
(1) rebellion (Miriam— Numbers 12),
(2) lying (Gehazi— 2 Kings 5:27), and
(3) presumption (Uzziah— 2 Chronicles 26:19). The sufferings of the leper arose
(1) from the physical malady, which gradually and slowly consumed the body, and could neither be cured nor alleviated by human skill, and
(2) from the ceremonial defilement which it involved, and which both excluded him from the Temple and imposed upon him separation from human society. We read of these unhappy outcasts as gathering together into companies outside towns (2 Kings 7:3; Luke 17:12). Leprosy is taken as a symbol of the depth of spiritual defilement and death in Psalms 51:7 and Isaiah 1:6. “Leprosy was nothing short of a living death, a corrupting of all the humours, a poisoning of the very springs of life, a dissolution little by little of the whole body, so that one limb after another actually decayed and fell away (Trench).
Leprosy and Death.—The leper was the type of one dead in sin: the same emblems are used in his misery as those of mourning for the dead; the same means of cleansing as for uncleanness in connection with death, and which were never used except on these two occasions.—Alford.
Human Nature typified by this Leper.—Leprosy was to the body what sin is to the soul. Christ heals the leper by His touch. Human nature was typified by this leper. Christ healed us all by His touch. He touched us by taking our nature (Hebrews 2:16), and thus cleansed us.—Wordsworth.
“Fell on his face.”—By this act of reverence we should not necessarily be led to suppose that this sufferer knew Jesus as a Divine being; but taken in connection with his belief in our Saviour’s omnipotence, and his use of the title “Lord,” it indicates that genuine worship was now offered to Christ and accepted by Him.
“If Thou wilt, Thou canst.”—He was convinced of Christ’s power, but not sure whether He would cleanse this sickness, as evidently this was the first case of leprosy which our Lord had been asked to cure.
“Make me clean.”
I. The prayer of faith.—No doubt of Christ’s ability to heal him. The only question is—Is Christ willing to help him? The prayer shows acquiescence as well as humility.
II. A prayer for physical blessing.—In such things we never can know what is really best for us. Threatened death, or loss of property. Are we to pray to have these averted? We are never sure. We must in such temporal emergencies ever say, “If Thou wilt, Thou canst.”—Miller.
An Exemplary Prayer.—Whether the leper consciously meant it or not, his words, “If Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean,” are quite in the spirit of prayer as Christ has taught it to us and exemplified it Himself. It was a prayer for a temporal blessing—the restoration of his health, and is made conditional upon the will of the Lord. So is it with all temporal blessings. We may desire them earnestly and ask for them from God, but leave the bestowal or withholding of them to His gracious will. We accept this as the condition of prayer, because we feel that God in His wisdom knows better than we do what would be best for us. But no such condition attaches to prayers we offer for spiritual blessings, for we can be perfectly sure that all such are good for us. And we see that Christ Himself, in offering the prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane to be saved from death (Hebrews 5:7), left the granting of His request to be determined by the will of God (chap. Luke 22:42). The same recognition of the Divine power to fulfil the prayers of the afflicted, together with an equally calm resignation to the will of God, whatever it may be, are to be found in Daniel 3:17, and 2 Samuel 15:25.
Christ’s Omnipotence.—Christ’s omnipotence is the first attribute that impresses a spectator of His life and work: His calm bearing and air of authority produce a deep impression; His infinite goodness and compassion can only be fully realised as He becomes better known by us. Both anxiety and faith are manifest in this leper’s words.
Luke 5:13. “Jesus touched him.”
I. None of the Jews would have done this.—He was a leper. They kept lepers afar off, for fear of defilement. Jesus was not afraid of defilement. He could have healed him without a touch. But the man needed the touch of a warm hand to assure him of sympathy. Many wish to do Christian work from a distance—through agents and committees. It is much better to come close to those we wish to benefit. There is a wondrous power in a human touch. You put something of yourself into your gift.
II. The touch left no taint of defilement on Christ.—It left the leprous body clean without making the Healer leprous. There is no danger in touching the lowest outcasts, if you go to them with God’s love in your heart, and yearning to do good. Do not slip your tract under the door and hurry away as if you were afraid or ashamed. Go inside these homes. It will not soil your hand to clasp the hands of the poor. You will both bless and be blessed in the deed.—Miller.
Christ’s Union with our Nature.—When He took upon Him our flesh, He did not only deign to touch us with His hand, but was united to one and the same body with ourselves, that we might be flesh of His flesh.—Calvin.
“Be thou clean.”—“Such an imperative as the tongue of man had never hitherto uttered. Thus has hitherto no prophet healed. Thus He speaks in the might of God who speaks and it is done” (Stier). Contrast with Christ’s words those used by St. Peter in Acts 3:6; Acts 3:12.
Answers to Prayer.—The leper had known that Christ was able to heal him; now he knew that Christ was willing to do so. In his case there was no delay between the offering of the prayer and the gift of the blessing asked. But in our experience there may be delay in our receiving the blessing we crave. There may lie between the majestic and merciful words “I will” and the visible result sometimes weeks and years. The prayer of faith our Lord hears at once, and He gives the soul assurance of having been heard through the Holy Spirit; but the fulfilment of the prayer He often accomplishes only after a long time, and by the delay He would prepare us for a greater benefit than that for which we asked. In the holy sacraments which appeal to our senses we have Christ stretching forth His hands to touch and cleanse the soul.
Luke 5:14. “To tell no man.”—The soul that has received blessing from God, and is conscious of it, is apt to lose the freshness and beauty of its spiritual life by talking too freely to others of its secret experiences, just as a rose sprinkled with dew loses something of its freshness when it is plucked and passed from hand to hand. We are instinctively slow to speak of the things that touch us deeply, and a certain hardness and coarseness are observable in the character of those who are ready to speak of their deepest spiritual experiences to those who are willing to listen to them. No one can, indeed, receive great spiritual benefits from God without revealing the fact to others, but the unconscious testimony of a humble, devout life is often far more eloquent than words that come too readily from the lips.
“To tell no man.”—Besides the reason suggested above in the Critical Notes, Christ may have intended that the man who had been cleansed should lose no time in proceeding to the Temple—should go on this errand “without saluting any by the way” or pausing to tell about his cure. The reasons for the journey:
1. Obedience to the Mosaic regulations concerning leprosy.
2. The expression of gratitude to God for the benefit received.
3. That the priests might learn, and by their examination of the person cleansed attest, that a mighty work had been wrought by the power of God.
“Testimony.”—The priests and people of Jerusalem were inclined to be hostile towards Christ: the effect of this miracle notified to them should have been to produce faith in Jesus. It was now a testimony to them; it might, in case of persistent unbelief, become a testimony against them.
The King’s Touch.—This King’s touch cures all sorts of diseases. It did so while He walked in a low, despised condition on earth; and it does so still by that virtual Divine power now that He is in heaven. And although His glory there is greater, His compassion is not less than when He was here; and His compassion always was, and is, directed much more to souls diseased than to bodies, as they are better and more valuable.—Leighton.
Superstitious Inferences from the Narrative.—The use made of this passage by Roman Catholic theologians in support of confession to priests and the observance of penance seems farfetched. It is not the priests who heal, but Christ: they merely attest the fact, and their doing so is simply because of their administration of laws partly ceremonial and partly sanitary, which are now abolished. There is no record of powers corresponding to theirs being instituted in connection with the ministers of the Christian religion.
Luke 5:15. Grateful, but disobedient.—St. Mark informs us that the man who had been cleansed disobeyed the strict injunction of Christ and “blazed abroad the matter.” His disobedience was culpable, though natural. His joy at recovering health must have been very intense, and his instinctive feelings must have led him to say, like the psalmist, “Come ye and hear, all ye who fear God, and I will declare what He hath done for my soul” (Psalms 66:16). As a result, however, of his impulsive conduct, Christ was incommoded in His work by the multitudes that thronged to Him to be healed of their infirmities.
What the Miracles of Healing were.—Our Lord’s miracles of healing may be regarded—
I. As proofs of His Divine mission, His Messiahship, and His divinity.
II. As a means of disarming prejudice, and thereby securing a favourable reception for His teachings.
III. As encouragements to believing prayer under the ordinary trials of life.
IV. As emblems of the spiritual blessings which He bestows.
V. As examples to be copied by His disciples in all time.—Johnston.
Luke 5:15. “Great multitudes came together … and He withdrew Himself.”
I. The first cleansing of a leper was a trumpet-call to all sufferers to flock to the Emmanuel presence.
II. But He, whose praise was on all lips, and who was Himself the holy centre of all these activities and all these mercies, “withdrew … and prayed.” It was not one withdrawal, one wilderness, one prayer (all is plural in the original): the withdrawals were repeated, the wildernesses were more than one, the prayers were habitual. Solitary prayer was His custom. Is it ours? Does not the question humble us? Prayer divided His life with teaching and healing. We too need the desert. It is not safe to have the world always with us.—Vaughan.
The Prayers of Christ.
I. How different from ours!—No confession of sin. That topic was a blank to Him. No need of forgiveness.
II. How real His prayers!—For strength. How often is it said, “He looked up to heaven”! “Father, I thank Thee!” There was no acting, no feigning, in His devotions. He really prayed, and was really answered. Prayer was no luxury, no self-indulgence.
III. How continual His prayers!—He was ever withdrawing Himself from human sight and contact. Do we not need like withdrawings, and more of them?—Ibid.
Luke 5:16. “Withdrew Himself into the wilderness.”—By solitary communion with God and by holy meditation even Jesus was strengthened. It is a proof of the completeness of His assimilation to us that He sought and found help by those means of grace which are at our service. Could any argument for the duty of prayer to God be stronger than this which is afforded by the example of Christ? If He found prayer a necessity of His life, how much more should we!
A Testimony to the Truthfulness of the Gospels.—The insertion of this reference to Christ’s prayers is a testimony to the truthfulness of the Gospels. Had the writers invented the stories of His miraculous powers, and aimed at representing Him as altogether a supernatural being, the ideas of humility and dependence upon God, which prayer implies, would have seemed to them foreign and contradictory to their purpose.