Charles Ellicott Commentary Malachi 1:11

"For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles, saith Jehovah of hosts." — Malachi 1:11 (ASV)

This verse contains no verb, and, as far as the rules of grammar are concerned, its participles can be rendered with either present or future tenses. If we take the words as referring to the present, we are met by the insurmountable difficulty that in no sense, at the time of Malachi, could the Lord’s Name be said to be great over all the earth, or pure sacrifices to be offered to Him in every place. Nor can we, with many commentators, suppose that heathen rites are here referred to as being offered ignorantly, through idols, to the one true God (Compare to Pope’s universal prayer:

“Father of all, in every age,
In every clime adored,
By saint, by savage, and by sage,
Jehovah, Jove, or Lord!”).

For there is no hint that any such meaning is intended. Moreover, such a sentiment would be quite foreign to the Old Testament, which always represents heathen rites as an utter abomination and always speaks of the adherence of the Gentiles to the worship of the true God as a thing of the future. We are compelled, therefore, to take the words as a prophetic announcement of the future rejection of Israel and the calling of the Gentiles.

In every place. —In contrast to the one place (Deuteronomy 12:5–7). (Compare to our Lord’s words to the woman of Samaria: John 4:21–24.)

Incense shall be offered ...—This is a possible translation of the words; but this Hebrew word is not elsewhere used for “incense,” and can more naturally be translated shall be burnt, as the passive participle of the verb used in Leviticus 1:9. Dr. Pusey’s footnote on this passage is well worth reading, as, indeed, his footnotes usually are.

We prefer, therefore, to take the words thus: “An oblation shall be burnt to my name, even a pure offering.” In any case, unless we expect some future establishment of a universal offering of material sacrifices, we must understand both expressions in a spiritual sense. This is, in truth, the only reasonable way of interpreting such passages (see Notes on Zechariah 2:6-13; Zechariah 3:8–10; Zechariah 6:9–15, and especially Zechariah 14:16-21).

If, therefore, any Christians would claim this verse as support for their custom of offering incense in churches, they must also conform with Zechariah 14:16-21 and go up every year to Jerusalem to keep the Feast of Tabernacles.

The word “offering,” as in the preceding verse (compare to 1 Samuel 2:17; Isaiah 1:13), denotes sacrificial gifts in general, not the flour offerings as distinguished from the flesh offerings. The word “pure” is emphatic, not signifying the bloodless sacrifice of the Mass (Council of Trent), as distinguished from the bloody sacrifices, but as the converse of “polluted” (Malachi 1:7).

We have made the above remarks in no controversial spirit, but simply in the interests of truth. Lest anyone should suppose we imply that this interpretation was originated by the Council of Trent, we refer the reader to Dr. Pusey’s Commentary. In it, he shows by quotations from Justin, Irenæus, Hippolytus, Cyprian, Cyril of Jerusalem, Chrysostom, and Augustine, as well as from Tertullian, Eusebius, and Theodoret, that it is quod semper, quod ab omnibus, quod ubique.

Those, therefore, who prefer so-called authority to the results of calm criticism are bound to disagree with us.