Mark 7:1-16

Then came together unto Him the Pharisees, and certain of the Scribes.

Scribes and Pharisees coming to Christ

I. When they came. When Gennesaret turned its heart toward Him. When diseased bodies had felt the virtue of His touch, and imprisoned souls had been set free by His word. Then. As soon as ever the Church’s Child was born, the devil sought to drown Him (Revelation 12:1).

II. Who they were that came. Pharisees and scribes. The learned and the religious. These two classes have always been the greatest opponents of Christ’s kingdom.

III. Whence they came. From Jerusalem. Machiavel observed that there was nowhere less piety than in those that dwelt nearest to Rome. “The nearer the Church, the farther from God.” “It cannot be that a prophet shall perish out of Jerusalem.”

IV. Where they came. To Jesus. As the moth flies at the lamp, and bats fly at the sun, What a contrast between such a coming and those named in Mark 6:56. “I will draw all men unto Me.” (L. Palmer.)

The tradition of men

It is the folly of men that, in discharge of me duties of religion, they are satisfied to put ceremonies and confessions that cost but little, in the place of righteousness of heart and life which cost a great deal.

I. There is today an ecclesiastical ritualism, which is disastrous to piety. It starts with the assumption that its methods of worship are the best possible; and, after a little, declares they are the only ones acceptable to God. The Church usurps the place of Christ. Of any church that estimates ritual above character, that endeavours to build up form rather than shape life, Christ says, “Full well do ye reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your tradition.”

II. There is today a social ritualism, which is disastrous to true piety. Public opinion is a power; it has its theory of religion. Certain things done, and certain others left undone, are the credentials of piety. Men’s actions are the only things taken into account, not the men themselves. Society has agreed that a little honesty, a little charity, and church going, shall be accepted as religion. Such reject the commandment of God that they may keep their tradition.

III. There is a ritualism of personal opinion, which is disastrous to true piety. Every man has his own idea of the conditions on which he personally may be right with God. They forget that it is for God to decide what is satisfactory to Him. It is sometimes argued that, since there are so many opposite theories and conflicting creeds, our acceptance or rejection of what is called religion cannot be of much importance. But religion is a simple matter. Piety is the being and doing what God has commanded; just that; nothing more and nothing less. Those commandments are few, brief, intelligible. Whatever vagueness and confusion there may be in our ideas of religion, it is of our own making. Let God speak for Himself, and listen only to Him, and all is plain. (Monday Club Sermons.)

Tradition accumulates rubbish

Accepting the traditions of men as our rule, we get to be heirs of a vast deal of rubbish. Just as around the anchored rock in the ever-swinging tide, there gathers all sorts of debris, floating fragments of wrecks, drifting grass and weeds, with perhaps now and then some bright sea blossom, or shell of beauty cast up by the heave of the surge-so a church that takes as pattern of its creed and ceremonial the belief and methods of men of other times, is sure to be cumbered with a mass of outworn mistakes, the refuse and driftwood of centuries, with here and there a suggestion of world long value, but as a whole, out of date and useless. (Monday Club Sermons.)

Tradition conceals truth

Each generation encumbered the divinely ordained ritual with its own comments; so after awhile men’s notions overgrew and hid from sight God’s thought, as some wild vine in the forest wreathes its fetters of verdure around the hearty tree, interlacing and interknotting its sprays, looping mesh on mesh of pliant growth, till the tree is smothered and hidden, and the all-encompassing vine alone is seen and seems to bare life. (Monday Club Sermons.)

Perverted tradition the bane of the Church

It is a subtle artifice of the Great Enemy of mankind, to make the real Word of God of none effect by means of a pretended Word. When he cannot prevail with men to go contrary to what they know to be the Word which came from God, then he deals with them as he taught his lying prophet to deal at Bethel with the prophet of God who came from Judah. When Jeroboam “said to the Man of God, Come home with me, and refresh thyself, and I will give thee a reward,” the prophet resolutely repelled the invitation: “If thou wilt give me half thy house, I will not go in with thee, neither will I eat bread nor drink water in this place; for so was it charged me by the Word of the Lord, saying, Eat no bread, nor drink water.” An old prophet, however, followed the man of God, and gave him a like invitation, and received a like refusal. But, when the great deceiver put a falsehood into the mouth of the wicked old man: “I am a prophet also, as thou art, and an angel spake unto me by the Word of the Lord, saying, ‘Bring him back with thee into thy house, that he may eat bread and drink water,’ but he lied unto him”-the lie proved fatal! “He went back with him, and did eat bread in his house, and drank water” (1 Kings 13:1). The Man of God was greatly to be pitied, yet he was greatly to be blamed. He had received it explicitly from God that he should neither eat nor drink in idolatrous Bethel; and it was his plain duty to adhere to that command, unless God repealed it in the same way in which he gave it, or with equal evidence that such was His will; whereas he believes an old man of whom he knows nothing, on his own word, under suspicious circumstances, and in opposition to what had been the Word of God to himself. While a direct and palpable temptation to go contrary to God’s command was offered, he resisted and repelled the temptation; but when a temptation was offered, which came as a repeal of the command and in relief of his necessities, though on no sufficient authority, then his weakness prevailed. Why, think you, were lying prophets permitted? Why are lying teachers still suffered? Why, even lying wonders? To try the state of men’s hearts. Is your heart, by the grace of God, made humble and teachable? then will you be taught of the Spirit “to discern the things which differ”-to detect the fallacies and delusions practised upon it-and “to approve the things which are more excellent.” Is your heart self-sufficient, careless, carnal? then will it be deceived and led astray by plausible and flattering pretences. In contending that the Scriptures are the sole rule of faith, we give them exclusive authority over the judgment and the conscience. This authority lies in the real sense, and the just application of that sense, not in any sense or application contrary to that which is just and true, and which man may seek to impose. This sense is to be ascertained, and the right application of it is to be learnt by humble, teachable, diligent, and devout study, with the use of all needful helps thereto. The influence of the Scriptures on the heart is the special work of Him who dictated them. The blessing of God is needful to our success in endeavouring to ascertain the sense and right application of them; but so great are the obstacles to our “receiving with meekness the engrafted Word,” that “God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, must shine into our hearts” by the special grace of the Holy Spirit, in order to our feeling the transforming influence of the light of the knowledge of His glory, as seen in the face of Jesus Christ. No consent of man in any interpretation or application of Scripture is of binding authority on others. Consent is often contagious-not enlightened. The influence of leaders, the supposed interests of party, early associations, and prejudices, often bias the judgment. But the unerring standard remains. And the deviations of churches, and councils, and nations, from this standard, and the continuance of those deviations for ages, cannot deflect this standard one jot or tittle from its rectitude. But while no consent of men can bind of authority to any interpretation or application of Scripture, yet those views of truth which are commended to us by the consent in them of varied bodies of enlightened and devout men, come to us under a just and commanding influence. (J. Pratt, B. D.)

Ceremonialism and spirituality

I. Ceremonialism substitutes washing with water for purity of heart.

II. Ceremonialism substitutes the traditions of the elders for the commands of God.

III. Ceremonialism substitutes the worship of the lips for the worship of the heart.

IV. Ceremonialism substitutes a subtle evasion for filial duty.

V. Ceremonialism substitutes avoidance of unclean food for avoidance of impure and malicious thoughts. Application: It is possible to be, in a sense, religious, and yet, in a deeper sense, sinful, and out of harmony with the mind and will of God. None is wholly free from the temptation to substitute the external, formal, apparent, for the faith, love, and loyalty of heart required by God. Hence the need of a good heart, which must be a new heart-the gift and creation of God by His Spirit. (J. R. Thomson, M. A.)

The tradition of men versus the commandments of God

In the conflict between the Church and the sacred relationships of common life, to the latter must be assigned the preeminence. The necessities of the temple, of its services or its servants, must not be met at the expense of filial faithfulness. The sin of the Pharisees and scribes was-

I. A gross perversion of the relative claims of the parent and the Church.

II. A wicked interference with the first commandment with promise.

III. A cruel undermining of filial affection and fidelity and as cruel an exposure of the aged and enfeebled parents to a falsely justified neglect.

IV. An unwarranted usurpation of authority to weaken the obligation of a Divine law. (R. Green.)

The religion of the Jews

The interference of the Pharisees and scribes served to bring out their religion. Consider some of its features. The religion here depicted and condemned-

I. Consisted mainly of external observances (Mark 6:2).

1. By this feature the same system of religion may be detected in the present day.

2. Religion in this sense is upheld by many strong principles in the nature of man-awakened conscience, self-righteousness, vanity.

3. This system is exceedingly dangerous. Misleads the awakened sinner; produces a deep and fatal slumber.

II. Rests on human authority as its warrant (Mark 6:3; Mark 6:5; Mark 6:7).

1. By this feature we may detect it in the present day. Among those who take away the right-duty and exercise of private judgment. Among those who derive their religious belief from man-in whatever way.

2. This form of false religion is exceedingly dangerous. It dishonours Christ as a prophet, etc. It gives despotic power to man, which he is not qualified to wield. It degrades the soul to be a servant of servants, etc.

3. Call no man mawr.

III. Puts dishonour upon the sacred Scriptures.

1. By this feature we detect its existence now. In the Church of Rome, etc., the Scriptures are wholly concealed-made to speak according to tradition and the Church. Amongst ourselves: opinions are not surrendered to them, and they are neglected.

2. This form of religion stands opposed to those Scriptures which it dishonours (John 5:39, and others).

3. Know the Scriptures and revere them.

IV. Made light of the moral law (Mark 6:8).

1. May be seen in our own day-in the Church of Rome. May be seen, amongst ourselves, in those who put religious ceremonies in the place of moral duties.

2. This form has its origin in the love of sin, and is accommodated to an unsanctified heart.

3. It has no tendency to purify, but the reverse.

4. Beware of Antinomianism.

V. Consisted in hypocrisy, putting on appearances.

VI. Was vigilant and jealous of Christ and censured His disciples (Mark 6:1). (Expository Discourses.)

Unwashen hands

It was laid down that the hands were first to be washed clean. The tips of the ten fingers were then joined and lifted up, so that the water ran down to the elbows, then turned down, so that it might run off to the ground. Fresh water was poured on them as they were lifted up and twice again as they hung down. The washing itself was to be done by rubbing the fist of one hand in the hollow of the other. When the hands were washed before eating, they must be held upwards, when after it downwards, but so that the water should not run beyond the knuckles. The vessel used must be held first in the right, then in the left hand; the water was to be poured first on the right, then on the left hand; and at every third time the words repeated, “Blessed art thou who bast given us the command to wash the hands.” It was keenly disputed whether the cup of blessing or the handwashing should come first; whether the towel used should be laid on the table or on the couch; and whether the table was to be cleared before the final washing or after it. (Geikie’s Life of Christ.)

The tradition of the elders

The excess to which these regulations were carried is well illustrated by what is told of one Rabbi Akaba, who, in his dungeon, being driven by a pittance of water to the alternative of neglecting ablution or dying with thirst, preferred death to failing in ceremonious observance.

Moses commanded washing very freely

But it was always in connection with some very definite cause; being required either

(1) because of physical pollution which had been gathered, or

(2) in connection with moral consecration which was purposed.

The priests at consecration were washed. So was the leper after his recovery, and so were all after defilement or contact with those defiled. But the tradition of the elders had come to require as many washings in a day as Moses would have required in a month. The secret of this development lay in the adoption of the principle of “The Hedge,” i.e., something which guarded the Law by prohibiting not only actions forbidden, but all actions which might by any possibility lead to them. Accordingly, because Moses said that he who was defiled by contact with a corpse should wash, they held it was well to wash always after being out of doors, as you might have touched someone who might have touched some one or something dead … Thus life became a very slavery. Of course “the common people,” as they were contemptuously styled, could not afford either time, or thought, or money, to practise such scruples. But a great number associated themselves together, calling themselves “Haberim,” or “Comrades,” to observe these scruples. The Pharisees belonged to this society, of course, to a man. (R. Glover.)

Pharisaic prejudice

These Pharisees found fault because Christ’s disciples did not obey man’s law, the quoted “tradition,” the authority of their Church. It was not until the great (seventh) Earl of Shaftesbury was twenty-five years of age that he supposed that anyone outside the Church of England was worth listening to, or ever wrote anything worth reading. “As to their having any views of their own worthy of consideration,” he says, “it never crossed my mind until one day I got hold of a copy of some Commentary, and, after reading for awhile with great interest, it suddenly struck me, ‘The writer must have been a rank Dissenter!’ and I instantly shut up the book, recoiling from it as I would from poison. One of the first things that opened my eyes was reading of Doddridge being condemned as a Dissenter, and I remember exclaiming, ‘Good heavens! how will he stand in the day of judgment at the bar of God, as compared with Pope Alexander VI?’ It was not till I was twenty-five years old, or thereabouts, that I got hold of Scott’s Commentary on the Bible, and, struck with the enormous difference between his views and those to which I had been accustomed, I began to think for myself.”

A hypocrite

A hypocrite has been likened to one who should go into a shop to buy a pennyworth, and should steal a pound’s worth; or to one who is punctual in paying a small debt, that he may get deeper into our books and cheat us of a greater sum. (T. Manton.)

Hypocrites perform small duties and neglect great

Hypocrites make much ado about small things that they may be more easy in their consciences while living in great sins. They pay the tithe of mint to a fraction, but rob God of His glory by their self-righteousness. They give God the shells, and steal the kernels for their own pride and self-will. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Heart worship required

God requires soul worship, and men give Him body worship; He asks for the heart, and they present Him with their lips; He demands their thoughts and their minds, and they give him banners, and vestments, and candies. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Perverse penances

No matter how painful may be the mortification, how rigid the penance, how severe the abstinence; no matter how much may be taken from his purse, or from the wine vat, or from the store, he will be content to suffer anything sooner than bow before the Most High with a true confession of sin, and trust in the appointed Saviour with sincere, child-like faith. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Faith and works reversed, or the plant upside down

Some time ago a lady showed me a small seedling acacia, remarking, “I cannot make this plant out; it doesn’t do well at all; it doesn’t grow a bit, though I water it well, and attend to it carefully.” I looked at the plant, and soon discovered the cause. The little plant had a tap root, as all seedlings have, and this tap root should have been inserted in the soil, where it would soon have struck out its lateral rootlets; but, instead of this, the plant was upside down, the leading root being in the soil, and the tap root exposed to the sun and air. It was impossible that the plant could grow or even live. It is thus with some people’s religion. (Sword and Trowel.)

In what sense worship is voluntary

The duties of worship ought to be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed to constrained; but they must not be voluntary, as voluntary is opposed to instituted or appointed. God doth no more approve of that worship we give Him according to our will, than He doth approve of our neglect of that which is according to His own will. (Burkitt.)

Human tradition versus Divine command

The experience is a universal one, that God’s commandments suffer from the competition of human rules. The great precepts of God have only an unseen God behind them, but behind the human rules there is generally a class whose pride is gratified by their observance and incensed by their neglect. Accordingly, whenever small rules of outward conduct begin to flourish, the great principles of religion-faith, love, honour-fall into the background. It is so today. The Thug in India who confessed to having killed 320 people had no pangs of conscience for killing them, but was somewhat distressed on account of having killed a few of them after a hare had crossed his path or a bird whistled in a certain direction. Murder was no crime in his opinion, but the neglect of an omen from Bowany was a grave one. In Hinduism, which is ceremonial throughout, a man may be a most religious man, and yet very wicked. Many in our own country would unscrupulously commit great crimes, and yet be very careful to avoid eating flesh on Good Friday. It seems as if we only had a certain amount of power of attention in us, and, if it goes to little rules, there is none left for great principles. (R. Glover.)

Tradition and inspiration

As with the man who attempts to serve two masters, so with him who thinks to walk by two lights: if he would keep in the straight loath he must put out one of the two, and guide himself by the other. (Dr. Wylie.)

Laying aside the commandment of God

A philosopher at Florence could not be persuaded to look through one of Galileo’s telescopes, lest he should see something in the heavens that would disturb him in his belief of Aristotle’s philosophy. Thus it is with many who are afraid of examining God’s Word, lest they should find themselves condemned. (Buck.)

The inefficacy of God’s Word-how produced

We make it of none effect when we-

I. Fail to read and study it and to appropriate its blessings.

II. When we give precedence to any human authority or law.

III. When by our lives we misrepresent it before the world.

IV. When we fail to urge its truths upon the anxious inquirer or careless sinner. (J. Gordon.)

Ears to hear

This rule must needs be of very great importance to Christians. For our Great Master

(1) calls all the people unto Him on purpose to tell them only this.

(2) He requires of them a particular attention.

(3) He requires it of every one of them without exception.

(4) He exhorts them to endeavour thoroughly to understand it.

(5) He lets them know that in order, to do it they have need of a singular grace and a particular gift of understanding.

It was for want of understanding this rule that the Jews still remained Jews, adhering to a mere external way of worship. It is for the very same reason that numbers of Christians, even to this day, serve God more like Jews than Christians. (Quesnel.)