THE LEPER

THE LEPER

Mat 9:9-13

Mark 2:14-17

Luke 5:27-32

        It is quite impossible to over-estimate the value and importance of this account of the cleansing of the leper. Taken as a separate account, it is full of light, and indeed presents the evangel in a picture. If, however, it be taken in connection with the ethical Manifesto of Jesus, it is even more suggestive, and more wonderful.

        Necessarily there is some slight difference between this account, and some others which have occupied our attention, because here we see our Lord dealing with physical disability; but here as indeed in all cases, the physical disability was the result of human failure, or as we may accurately say, of human sin. When we were dealing with the account of our Lord's healing of the man in the Bethesda porches, we emphasized the fact, which now we may once more refer to, because of its importance. All disease is ultimately the result of the breaking of law; but this does not mean that every person suffering from physical disease is so suffering on account of his or her own personal sin. There are multitudes of people in the world today suffering from physical disability through no sin of their own; but such disability is always the result of the breaking of the law of God somehow, or somewhere. In the healing of the sick our Lord was never violating the true order of life, but rather restoring life to its true order, which is always that of health. Therefore in dealing with this account we are not for a moment to look upon the leper as a sinner above all others, but we do remember that leprosy was always the outcome of broken law somewhere.

        Now, as we have said, if this account be taken in very close connection with the ethical Manifesto, it is found to be the more arresting. In that Manifesto our Lord had uttered the ultimate and final and perfect Ethic of human life. It has often been pointed out, and it remains an arresting fact, that all students of human life, and the laws which condition it, are agreed as to the high idealism of what we speak of as the Sermon on the Mount. It is said that it is not practicable, that men cannot live up to the standard revealed in it; and there is no doubt that such statements are perfectly accurate, while man is under the mastery of sin. It is not possible for any man to live according to the ideal of the Sermon on the Mount until he is born again. To think that America, England, Japan, Russia, Asia or any other land might be governed on the lines of the Sermon on the Mount would bring war and anarchy. For humanity cannot be governed on the basis of the Sermon on the Mount until it is regenerated. And one day this world will be governed on those lines. For we shall be perfect as our heavenly Father.

        In spite of this recognition of the high idealism of the Ethic, it is found to be at once searching, severe, and inspiring. As we listen to the enunciation, our attention is fastened upon the Lord from Whose lips these great words fell, and as we watch Him not merely as He delivers this utterance, but through all the account of His life as we find it in this four-fold Gospel, we find that in His own character, in His own Person, He realized and revealed the meaning of His Ethic. In Him we have a revelation of the ideals He presented, realized in the midst of ordinary human conditions. At the end of Mat 7:28, 29, we find a declaration concerning the effect produced by the ethical Manifesto upon the listening crowds. A reference to the opening of this Manifesto (Matthew 5:1) shows that it was not spoken to the crowds, but to His own disciples.

        "And seeing the multitudes He went up into the mountain; and when He had sat down, His disciples came unto Him; and He opened His mouth and taught them."

        Nevertheless, it is equally evident that the crowds gathered round and listened, for Matthew declares that at the close of the Manifesto, "the multitudes were astonished at His teaching." Moreover, continuing, he reveals the nature of their astonishment, "He taught them as having authority." That is a sufficient declaration, but Matthew goes further, and employs these significant words, "and not as their scribes." Now the remarkable fact is that in those days the scribes, the order of which had arisen under Ezra, and had been highly developed in the Maccabean period, were the authoritative teachers. Our Lord ratified their authority when upon one occasion He said: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat. All things, therefore, whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe."

        The "therefore" refers to the position, "Moses' seat." In so far as they were interpreters according to that authority, they were in authority. Continuing, He said: "But do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not."

        Now the authority of Jesus was put by the people into contrast with that of these scribes. Matthew gives us no further explanation, but it is self-evident that His authority was such as commanded the consent of the human soul, however depraved that soul might be. The question of obedience does not arise at the moment, but the consciousness that what He had said could not be opposed.

        This is a somewhat lengthy introduction, but it is important in our present article. It was as our Lord was descending from the Mount, surrounded by His disciples and the pressing crowds that this most arresting thing took place. We speak of it as arresting in view of the Eastern atmosphere. A leper is seen approaching Jesus, a leper who is separated by law from all contact with his fellow-men. The question at once arises: What then happened? We have just been listening to the law from His lips, a law infinitely beyond, and infinitely severer than the law of Moses. In His enunciation of it He has carried conviction. What will be His attitude towards this leper?

        Matthew describes the leper as approaching in an attitude of reverence, "worshipping Him." It is not necessary at the moment to read into that statement all that we now properly associate with worship. It does, however, signify that he approached Him as One to Whom he rendered homage, One Who was evidently superior to him. Then we hear him speak: "Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean."

        There was not a moment's delay. The answer in words and in an act synchronized. Jesus said: "I will; be thou made clean," and His hand was stretched out and put upon the leper. Immediately the leprosy was gone.

        It is evident that this carries us at once far beyond the presentation of an ideal. The presentation of an ideal is one thing, and the taking hold of a derelict human being outside the pale of religion and civilization, and restoring him, is quite another matter. Here our Lord is revealed in an entirely new aspect. We heard Him enunciate the final ethic. Descending from the mountain we see Incarnate Purity and incarnate pollution brought face to face, and there we have an illustration of the whole Christian Enterprise. Now while the account is simple, there are two ways of looking at it. The first is that of considering the Lord and leprosy, emphasizing the contrast. The second is that of looking at the Lord and the leper, the contact made, and the result issuing.

        As we look at the Lord Himself, to repeat the phrase already used, we know we are looking at Incarnate Purity. He had told His disciples that unless their righteousness exceeded the righteousness of scribes and Pharisees, there was no value in it. The righteousness seen in the Lord Himself did exceed the righteousness of scribes and Pharisees; and indeed, that of moral teachers of all kinds. His righteousness consisted first in His perfect knowledge of God, and second, in His perfect conformity to the will and the character of God. We remember how, later on in His ministry, He declared: "The prince of the world cometh; and he hath nothing in Me." (John 14:30)

        He is seen, therefore, the One realizing perfection of human only One in Whom there is the realization of Absolute Purity.

        With that in mind we turn to consider leprosy. If we want to understand what leprosy meant in that Eastern country, and in the Hebrew economy, it is good to read and study technically the law of the leper as found in Leviticus 13 & 14. For the purposes of the present article we may summarize that law. First, it demanded that if leprosy were manifested, there must be an investigation on the part of the priests. There was an actual leprosy, and there was that which often appeared to be such, but was not actually so. The first investigation of the priest was concerned with that fact. If that investigation proved that the appearance was false, that it was not the real thing, and then the person was segregated for eight days, certain religious sacrifices were made, and the appearances vanished. But if the leprosy were found to be actual, there followed the segregation of the leper. He or she must be put outside the camp, away from the possibility of coming into contact in any way with any other member of the nation. This means evidently that leprosy was then considered quite hopeless. Nothing could be done for the leper. The only action possible in its presence was that of segregation and that in order to the well-being of the community.

        Moreover, a careful study of the chapters referred to will reveal that to the Hebrew people leprosy was the ultimate symbol of moral malady. The whole ceremonial law emphasized this fact. Because of its nature, of its insidious beginnings, of its slow processes, of its destructive power, and the ultimate ruin wrought by it, it became a powerful symbol of moral depravity. It was a disease that baffled human skill. It is very arresting in passing to note that those dealing with the disease today are beginning to find that if taken in its early stages it may be cured. In the past 20 years, 15 million people worldwide have been cured of leprosy. It nevertheless was in the ancient economy, a type of the uttermost moral depravity. All this makes the contrast the most arresting. The Lord Himself, having delivered His ethic, stands confronting a man suffering from the disease which in itself is the utmost symbol of moral depravity. Holiness in the flesh is standing face to face with sin in the flesh in its most terrible manifestation. That brings us face to face with our consideration.

        We pause once more to look at the man himself. In the presence of the Lord his sense of need was quickened. He knew that need, and he knew that so far as all ordinary skill was concerned, his case was hopeless. Nevertheless he desired cleansing. As he approached Jesus with that sense of need, and that consciousness of helplessness, his anguish became the more emotional. For some reason he came convinced that Christ could deal with him. This is evident in his saying, "Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst." One cannot help wondering as the account is pondered, whether this man had been on the edge of the crowd listening to the Manifesto. If so he, in common with others, must have been filled with a sense of its finality in authority. It may be that he had heard of Jesus. It may even be that he had seen Him before. Evidently he was familiar with His power, and came confessing it. In this his faith is seen in excess of some other cases. As for instance, a man came to Him once saying: "If Thou canst do anything, have compassion on us." (Mark 9:22)

        This man did not come questioning the ability of the Lord, but wistfully wondering whether He would be willing to help. He came steeped in his leprosy. Luke, the physician, in his account, describes him as "full of leprosy," which means to say that he was in the worst and most terrible state.

        Yet observe that his approach was a venture, a venture of hope, a venture of wistful desire, a venture born of his consciousness of his own condition, and of his desire for cleansing. He came, making that venture, with the halting "If." As we have said, he was convinced of Christ's ability, but halted as to whether He would be willing. In the very form of address, however, we discover a submission to the authority of the will of Christ. It is certainly arresting that he did not ask to be cleansed. He did not prefer a petition, but flung himself out in all his misery and dereliction, knowing the ability of Christ. and recognizing the authority of His will.

        Now we turn to look at the Lord in the presence of the man, and to watch carefully His attitude toward him. We are first arrested by the fact that there was no manifestation of fear in the presence of leprosy. It is evident that He knew perfectly what power was resident within Himself, and therefore there was no fear. Moreover there was nothing of contempt in His attitude, and certainly there was no suspicion of despair.

        His answer to the cry of the leper was immediate. We referred a moment ago to the man who came and said: "If Thou canst do anything, have compassion on us, and help us."

        Jesus answered him: "If thou canst! All things are possible to him that believeth."

        This leper came with an "If," but it had an entirely different emphasis. The one man questioned His ability. This man submitted to His sovereignty. In answer to that, in a moment the "I will" was spoken, and the hand was stretched forth and laid upon him.

        Here we pause a moment to recognize that there have been, and perhaps still are, expositors who find difficulty with the account at this point. They recognize that the law of Moses forbad anyone to touch a leper, and they declare that if Jesus touched the leper He broke the law. An attempt is made to escape from the difficulty by saying that the law did not apply to Him. But this cannot be affirmed. He was "born under the law." He kept the law. He obeyed the law. Whereas He broke resolutely all the traditions that men had superimposed upon the law as to the law itself, He was obedient to its every jot and little. Then how are we to explain the narrative? Quite resolutely I do so by declaring that He never touched the leper that is to say that when His hand rested on him, he was already cleansed. Jesus said, "I will," and at once stretched forth His hand; but quicker than the movement of the human hand was the activity of the Divine power, and the leper was cleansed. The touch laid upon him was a sacramental symbol of the fact that he was now cleansed. He that a moment ago cried out as a leper: "Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean," was now a leper no longer; and in proof of it the hand of Jesus was laid upon him.

        It will at once be seen that this account is a most remarkable unveiling. When Christ comes face to face with a human being suffering from the leprosy of sin, He always quickens the sense of need, and makes it possible for that need to express itself in His presence. The approach to Him may be made haltingly. The one coming may even come as figuratively on crutches, with an "If." That, however, is enough as long as the appeal is made to Him, and the venture made upon Him. As there was cleansing virtue resident in Him for that physical disability of leprosy, so there is cleansing virtue in Him for the polluted moral nature. If that be not so, then we have no Gospel, and the world has no Gospel. The whole account thus reveals the peculiar and lonely glory of the Lord.

        A little later on John was in prison, and was strangely perplexed because he could not understand the methods of the Master. He sent two of his disciples to make an enquiry, which revealed his dawning sense of uncertainty. To that question our Lord replied by naming the things He was doing and among the rest "the lepers are cleansed." He thus gave as one sign of His Messiahship, His power to deal with that which was the utmost symbol of sin. Here, then, at the foot of the mount of the interpretation of morality, we see Him confronting a derelict, and cleansing him.

        All this has its immediate value and application. The world is full of lepers, lepers in the spiritual sense, lepers depraved through sensuality, through passion, through pride. Formal religion and external ceremony cannot deal with them. Social laws can only deal with them as the Hebrew law did, by segregating them. It is quite possible to take such men and women and incarcerate them in prison. We are doing that all the time. Moreover, it is necessary. Only let us never forget that when we have put men or women in prison on the basis of a righteous verdict of guilty, we have put them there for the sake of society, and not for their own sakes. Prison will not cleanse moral depravity, or cure it.

        What then shall be done with such leprosy, and with these lepers? There is one inclusive answer: "In none other name is there salvation; for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved."

        But we have that Name, and it is our business to proclaim it, and to affirm without any hesitation, that the leprosy of sin can be cleansed, and man can be purified by the infinite grace and power of the Christ of God.