John Calvin Commentary Ezekiel 11:14-16

"And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and all the house of Israel, all of them, [are they] unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get you far from Jehovah; unto us is this land given for a possession. Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Whereas I have removed them far off among the nations, and whereas I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them a sanctuary for a little while in the countries where they are come." — Ezekiel 11:14-16 (ASV)

Here God seems to rebuke the thoughtlessness of His servant, or rather the error of the people, because we said that the Prophet announced not what he privately thought, but what was commonly received. Whatever it is, God answers his complaint as we saw, and shows that even if He takes away from their midst the eminent and conspicuous, and those who seem to be the supports of a city and kingdom, yet the Church does not perish for that reason, because He has hidden reasons why He preserves it, not in splendid and magnificent pomp, as men call it, but so that its safety may eventually excite admiration.

The sum of the matter is, therefore, although not only Pelatiah, but all the counselors of the king, and all the leaders of the people should perish, yet God can work in weakness, so that the Church shall nevertheless remain safe. And so He teaches that the remnant must not be sought in that rank which was then conspicuous, but rather among ordinary and despised people. Now we understand the intention of God in this answer.

He says therefore, thy brethren, thy brethren, and the men of thy relationship. He here recalls His servant to the exiles and the captives, of whom he himself was one, as if He would say that they were not cast out of the Church, as they were still held in some esteem.

For God seemed to cast them off when He banished them from the promised land; but He now shows that they were reckoned among His sons although disinherited from the land of Canaan. Therefore He twice repeats the name of brethren, and adds, men of thy relationship, that the Prophet might also count himself among their number.

Those who refer this to the three exiles weaken the intensity of the passage, while they impose an inappropriate comment, and turn away the reader from the genuine sense of the Prophet. But rather, as I recently hinted, God here corrects the Prophet because he perversely restricts the body of the Church to the citizens at Jerusalem; as if He said, although the Israelites are captives, do they still seem to you to be foreigners? And so will you deny them a place in the Church?

They are, therefore, thy brethren, thy brethren, he says, and the men of thy relationship. Hence the repetition is emphatic, and serves this purpose: that the Prophet may cease to measure God’s grace by the safety of the city alone, as he had done.

Because one man had suddenly died, he thought that all must perish. Meanwhile he did not perceive how he wronged the miserable exiles, whom God had so expelled from the land of Canaan, that yet some hope of pity remained, as all the Prophets show, and as we shall soon see.

This passage then is noteworthy, that we may learn not to estimate the state of the Church by the common opinion of mankind. This also applies to the splendor which too often blinds the eyes of the simple. For it will happen that we think we have found the Church where there is none, and we despair if it does not appear before our eyes; as we see today that many are amazed by those magnificent displays which are conspicuous in the Papacy.

There the name of “The Church” is boldly flaunted before all; there also its distinguishing marks are presented. The simple are attracted to the empty spectacle, so under the name of the Church they are drawn to destruction, because they conclude the Church exists wherever that deceptive splendor is visible.

On the other hand, many who cannot discern the Church with their eyes and point it out, accuse God of deceiving them, as if all the faithful in the world were extinct. We must therefore hold that the Church is often wonderfully preserved in its hiding places: for its members are not men living in luxury, or such as win the veneration of the foolish by vain ostentation, but rather ordinary men, of no account in the world.

We have a memorable example of this, when God recalls His own Prophet from the chief leaders at Jerusalem, not to other leaders who would draw people to admire them, but to miserable exiles, whose dispersion made them contemptible. He shows therefore that some remnants were left even in Chaldea.

Now it follows, to whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem said, depart, ye far from the sanctuary of Jehovah, the land is given to us. Here God denounces the arrogance of the people, who remained at home quiet and careless. For He here relates the words of the citizens of Jerusalem, because, indeed, they preferred themselves to the exiles, even boasting that the exiles were alienated from the holy people because they had been dragged into exile, or had left the city of their own accord.

As to their saying, depart afar off, it ought not to be taken strictly in the imperative mood; but the statement should be understood to mean that while they depart far from the sanctuary, the land will remain as an inheritance for us. We see, therefore, that the citizens of Jerusalem were self-satisfied, and content with their own ease, since they still enjoyed their country, worshipped God in the temple, and the semblance of a kingdom still remained.

Since therefore they were so self-content, God shows that on the contrary they were blinded with pride, since He had not entirely cast away His captives, although He afflicted them with temporal punishment. But this their boasting was very foolish, for congratulating themselves that they had escaped exile. For meanwhile what was their state?

In truth their king was treated with ignominy, and we know what happened to them afterwards; for they were reduced to such desperate circumstances that mothers devoured their children, and those nourished in great luxury consumed their dung. Indeed, even before the city was besieged, what reason did they have to boast about themselves!

But we here perceive how great was their obstinacy with which they hardened themselves against the scourge of God. Hence they stupidly supposed that God could not subdue them. Now consider their ferocity in insulting the miserable exiles as if they were cast away far from God, since Ezekiel and Daniel and their companions were among these exiles.

We know that Daniel’s piety was so celebrated at Jerusalem, that they all acknowledged him as a special gift and ornament of his age. When, therefore, Daniel was so highly esteemed for his superior piety, how could they act so arrogantly toward him—since they were aware of their many crimes, profane, full of all defilements, addicted to cruelty, fraud, and perjury, being foul in their abominations, and infamous in their intemperance?

Since therefore we see that they so boldly insulted their brothers, can we wonder that today the Papists also are aggressive, because they retain the traditional succession and the title of the Church, and that they say that we are rejected and cut off from the Church, and so are unworthy of having either a name or a place among Christians?

If, therefore, today the Papists are so hostile towards us, there is no reason why their haughtiness should disturb us; but this example shows us that it has always been this way. But there was another reason why the citizens of Jerusalem said that their captives were cast far away.

For it was clear that their exile was the just penalty for their crimes; but meanwhile how did they dare set themselves apart from others, when their own lives were more wicked? Lastly, since God had already passed sentence upon them, their condition could not truly be different from that of those on whom the judge had already pronounced his sentence, but they were deaf to all the Prophets’ threats, so that they despised God, and hence their boasting, by which they treated everyone who did not remain in the land of Canaan as foreigners.

This passage also teaches us that if God ever disciplines those who share our faith, yet there is no reason why we should entirely condemn them, as if they were beyond hope; for allowance must be made for the mercy of God. And we must carefully note what follows.

For after the Prophet has related that the citizens of Jerusalem boasted when they thought themselves the sole survivors, God answers on the contrary, because they were cast away far among the nations, and dispersed among the lands, or through the lands, therefore I shall be to them as a small sanctuary.

We see that God even here claims some place for sinners in the Church, against whom He had exercised the severity of His judgment. He says, by way of concession, that they were cast away and dispersed, but He adds, that He was still with them for a sanctuary; indeed, because they bore their exile calmly and with composure, this is stated as a reason why He should pity them.

For their sentence is not so general that God overlooked His own elect. This promise then ought not to be extended to all the captives indiscriminately, because we shall see that God included only a few. Without doubt then, this was a special promise which God wished to be a consolation to His elect.

He says, because they bore exile and dispersion with calmness and composure, therefore God would be a sanctuary to them. But this was a gracious approval of their modesty and subjection, because they not only suffered exile but also dispersion, which was more severe. For if they had all been taken to a distant region this would have been a severe trial, but still they might have united more easily, had they not been dispersed. This second punishment was more grievous to them, because they perceived in it cause for despair, as if they could never be gathered together again as one people.

Thus, their wrestling with these temptations was a sign of considerable piety; and as some of the faithful did not demonstrate their obedience immediately, yet because God knows His own (2 Timothy 2:19), and watches for their safety, therefore, He here contrasts all their miseries with the protection on which their safety was founded. Therefore, because they were dispersed through the lands, hence, He says, I will be to them a small sanctuary.

The third person is here used. Interpreters take מעט (megnet) to mean the noun to'ar, and understand it as “a small sanctuary,” although it may be taken for a small number of men, and we may, therefore, accurately translate it “a sanctuary of security.” Although the other sense suits the passage best, that God would be a small sanctuary to the captives, so there will be an antithesis between the splendor of the visible temple and the hidden grace of God, which so escaped the notice of the Chaldeans that they rather trod it underfoot, and even the Jews who still remained at Jerusalem despised it.

The sanctuary, therefore, which God had chosen for Himself on Mount Zion, because it deservedly attracted all eyes towards it, and the Israelites were always gazing at it, since it revealed the majesty of God, might be called the magnificent sanctuary of God. Nothing of the sort was seen in the Babylonian exile, but God says, that He was to the captives as a small or contracted sanctuary. This passage corresponds to Psalm 90, where Moses says, Thou, O God, hast always been a tabernacle to us (Psalms 90:1), and yet God had not always either a temple or a tabernacle through which He made a covenant with their ancestors.

But Moses there teaches what God afterwards represented by a visible symbol: that the fathers really thought that they truly lay hidden under the shadow of God’s wings, and were not safe and sheltered in any other way unless God protected them. Moses, therefore, on behalf of the fathers, celebrates the grace of God which was continual even before the sanctuary was built.

So also in this place God says metaphorically, that He was their sanctuary, not that He had erected an altar there, but because the Israelites were lacking any external sign and symbol, He reminds them that the reality itself was not entirely taken away, since God had His wings outstretched to cherish and defend them.

This passage is also noteworthy, so that the faithful do not lose heart where God has no visible standard raised. Although He does not openly go before them with royal banners to preserve them, yet they need not conclude they are altogether deserted; but they should remember what is here said of a small sanctuary. God, therefore, although He does not openly show His influence, yet He does not cease to preserve them by a secret power, of which in our own age we have a very remarkable proof.

The world indeed thinks us lost as often as the Church suffers tangible harm, and most people become very anxious, as if God had deserted them. Then this promise should be remembered as a remedy: God is to the dispersed and cast away a small sanctuary; so that although His hand is hidden, yet our safety proves that He has worked powerfully in our weakness. We see then that this sense is most suitable, and contains very useful doctrine. Yet the other interpretation is also fitting: that God is “the sanctuary of a few,” because in that great multitude but few remain who are really the people of God, for the greater part was ignorant of Him. Since then God does not regard that multitude of the ungodly which was already within the Church, but only here directs His words to His own elect, it is not surprising that He states that they are few in number.