John Calvin Commentary Luke 1:23

"And it came to pass, when the days of his ministration were fulfilled, he departed unto his house." — Luke 1:23 (ASV)

When the days were fulfilled—Λειτουργία is used by Luke to denote a charge or office, which passed, as we have said, to each of them in regular order (1 Chronicles 24:3). We are told that when the time of his office had expired, Zacharias returned home. From this, we conclude that as long as the priests were attending in their turns, they did not enter their own houses, so that they might be entirely devoted and attached to the worship of God.

For this purpose, galleries were constructed around the walls of the temple, in which they had chambers (1 Kings 6:5). The law did not, indeed, forbid a priest to enter his house. However, since it did not permit those who ate the showbread to come near their wives (1 Samuel 21:4), and as many people were disposed to treat sacred things irreverently, this was probably found to be a remedy: that, being removed from all temptations, they might keep themselves pure and clear from every defilement.

They were not only to abstain from intercourse with their wives but also from the use of wine and every kind of intoxicating drink (Leviticus 10:9). While they were commanded to change their mode of living, it was advantageous for them not to depart from the temple, so that the very sight of the place might remind them to cultivate such purity as the Lord had enjoined. It was also proper to remove every means of gratification, so that they might devote themselves more unreservedly to their office.

The Papists of the present day use this as a pretext for defending the tyrannical law of celibacy. They argue thus: The priests were formerly enjoined to separate from their wives while they were engaged in religious services. Therefore, perpetual continence is most properly demanded now from the priests, who offer sacrifices not in their turn, but every day—especially since the importance of religious services is far higher than it was under the law.

But I should like to know why they do not also abstain from wine and strong drink. For we are not at liberty to separate commandments which God has joined, so as to keep one half and disregard the other. Intercourse with wives is not as expressly forbidden as the drinking of wine (Ezekiel 44:21). If, under the pretext of the law, the Pope enjoins celibacy on his priests, why does he allow them wine? Indeed, on this principle, all priests ought to be thrown into some secluded apartments of the churches, to pass their whole life immured in prisons and excluded from the society of women and of the people.

It is now abundantly clear that they wickedly shelter themselves under the law of God, to which they do not adhere. But the full solution to the difficulty depends on the distinction between the law and the gospel.

A priest under the law stood in the presence of God to expiate the sins of the people, to be, as it were, a mediator between God and men. He who sustained that character should have had something distinctive about him, so that he might be distinguished from ordinary people and recognized as a figure of the true Mediator. Such, too, was the purpose of the holy garments and the anointing.

In our day, the public ministers and pastors of the church have nothing of this description. I speak of the ministers whom Christ has appointed to feed His flock, not of those whom the Pope commissions—as executioners rather than priests—to murder Christ. Let us therefore rest in the decision of the Spirit, which declares that marriage is honorable in all (Hebrews 13:4).