John Calvin Commentary Matthew 8

And when he had come down from the mountain, Matthew now returns to the course of the history. He had previously said that Christ went up into a mountain, (Matthew 5:1), then he heaped together, as it were, many leading points of the doctrine of Christ; and now he adds that, about the time when he preached on the mountain, he healed a certain leper.

The same event is related by Mark and Luke, though they do not mention the time. It was a striking display of the divine power of Christ that, by his word alone and a touch of his hand, he suddenly cleansed the man’s leprosy.

Now, though leprosy was a different kind of disease from elephantiasis,⁴⁸⁸ (ἐλεφαντίασις,) it is quite clear that it was difficult to cure. When it had continued for a long time and become deeply seated, it rarely happened that any person recovered. Granting that physicians might, by their professional skill, have given some relief, it is evident that there was nothing human about this miracle.

Approaching, worshipped What is the meaning of the verb προσκυνεῖν, which is rendered in the Latin version, adorare, to adore or worship, may be easily learned from this passage. For its exposition, we may rely on the other two Evangelists, of whom Mark says that he fell on his knees, and Luke that he fell down on his face. The outward gesture of kneeling was exhibited by the leper as a token of reverence. Now we know that such marks of respect were in general use among the Jews, as the people of the East are more given to that kind of ceremonies. Many people accordingly think that the leper did not intend to render to Christ divine worship,⁴⁸⁹ but gave him a respectful salutation as a distinguished prophet of God.

I enter into no dispute as to the feelings which moved the leper to pay reverence to Christ. But I look at what he attributed to him: that he was able to cleanse him, if he were willing. By these words he declared that he acknowledged a divine power in Christ; and when Christ replies, I am willing, he shows that he claimed more for himself than belongs to man. He who, by the mere expression of his will, restores health to people, must possess supreme authority.

Whether the leper believed that Christ was the Son of God, or that he had received this power in the same manner as Moses and the other prophets, he entertains no doubt that he held in his hand, and in his power, the gift of healing.

True, he speaks conditionally, if thou art willing, thou art able. But this is not inconsistent with that certainty of faith which God demands in our prayers, for people ought not to expect more than God promises. The leper had not learned by any inspired communication, or any promise of God, what Christ would do. It would therefore have been improper for him to go beyond these limits. For although we sometimes read that certain people prayed without any condition, we ought to believe that they were guided by special movements of the Spirit,⁴⁹⁰ which must not be taken as a general rule.

I am not even certain if we are at liberty to say, strictly speaking, that the leper offered a prayer. He only declares that he is so fully convinced of the power of Christ as to entertain no doubt that it is in his power to cure leprosy; and then presents himself to be healed, but uncertain as to the result, because he did not yet know the will of Christ.⁴⁹¹

And Jesus says to him, See that you tell it not to anyone. Some people, by way of excusing the leper, think that Christ did not seriously forbid him to publish the miracle, but rather gave him an additional encouragement to do so. Others more justly consider the reason for the prohibition to have been that the full time was not yet come (John 7:6). I acknowledge that to have suppressed this miracle would have been improper. However, our Lord had a particular reason for wishing that the report of it should not be immediately spread, or, at least, not by the leper. The leper was so far from deserving praise for the disorderly display of his regard that he ought, in my opinion, to be condemned for not obeying Christ’s command. If he wished to express his gratitude to Him to whom he was indebted for his cure, no better method could have been found than obedience, which God prefers to all sacrifices (1 Samuel 15:22), and which is the origin and foundation of lawful worship. This example shows us that those who allow themselves to be guided by reckless zeal act improperly, because the more eager they are to please God, the greater progress they make in rebellion to His commands.

Show yourself to the priest. Since the ceremonies of the law had not yet been repealed, Christ did not wish that they should be despised or neglected. Now, God had commanded in the law that if anyone had been cleansed from leprosy, he should present himself to the priest with a sacrifice of thanksgiving (Leviticus 14:2). The design⁴⁹² was that the priest, by his decision, might testify to the benefit received from God, and that the person who had been healed might give an expression of his gratitude. Christ, therefore, by sending the leper to the priest, proves that He had no other object in view than to display the glory of God. The showing to the priest was for the purpose of examination, and the offering was the expression of thanksgiving. He wishes that the priests should examine the man, to make the divine favor manifest and undoubted, and that the leper, on the other hand, should acknowledge that God had healed him. Meanwhile, as I have just mentioned, He commands them to observe the ceremonies prescribed by the law, until it was repealed.

The attempt of the Papists to use this passage as an authority for their own confession⁴⁹³ is highly foolish. Leprosy, they allege, is put allegorically for sin; and the priests, who are consecrated by the Pope, are the judges of spiritual leprosy.⁴⁹⁴ Even granting that this authority was conferred on the priests under the law for the purpose of informing the people that all their cleanness, and the decision respecting it, depended on the priesthood, still this is impiously claimed for themselves by the Popish priests.

All the honor that belonged to the ancient priests is now claimed by Christ alone as His own. He alone is appointed to be the judge of spiritual leprosy and entitled to receive from those who have been cured the offering for their cleansing. Under the law, a sacrifice was employed as the seal of cleanness, because satisfaction made by the shedding of blood is the only way in which people are cleansed. To transfer to another that right, which God has declared to be the prerogative of His own Son, is a detestable sacrilege. When the ministers of the Gospel, by the command of Christ, declare to sinners that they are cleansed from their sins, this must not be tortured into the pretended jurisdiction, which the priests imagine, of pronouncing a decision about leprosy.⁴⁹⁵

And when Jesus had entered—Those who think that Matthew and Luke give different narratives are led into a mistake by a mere trifle. The only difference in the words is that Matthew says that the centurion came to him, while Luke says that he sent some of the Jews to plead in his name. But there is no impropriety in Matthew saying that the centurion did what was done in his name and at his request. There is such a perfect agreement between the two Evangelists in all the circumstances that it is absurd to make two miracles instead of one.

The band of soldiers, which the centurion had under his command, was stationed, I have no doubt, in the town of Capernaum, in the same manner as garrisons were usually appointed for the protection of the towns. Though he perceived the morals of the people to be very vicious and depraved (for we know that Capernaum, being on the seacoast, must have been more dissolute⁴⁹⁹ than other towns), yet this did not prevent him from condemning the superstitions of his country and acquiring a taste for true and sincere piety. He had not built a synagogue for the Jews without exposing himself to some hatred and to some risk: and the only reason why he loved that nation was that he had embraced the worship of one God. Before Christ healed his servant, he had been healed by the Lord.

This was itself a miracle. One who belonged to the military profession, and who had crossed the sea with a band of soldiers for the purpose of accustoming the Jews to endure the yoke of Roman tyranny, submits willingly and yields obedience to the God of Israel. Luke says that this servant was very dear to him; and thus anticipates a doubt which might have arisen in the mind of the reader, for we know that slaves⁵⁰⁰ were not held in such estimation as to make their masters so solicitous about their life, unless by extraordinary industry, fidelity, or some other virtue, they had secured their favor. By this statement Luke means that this was not a low or ordinary slave, but a faithful servant, distinguished by many excellencies, and very highly esteemed by his master; and that this was the reason why he was so anxious about his life, and recommended him so earnestly.

From both Evangelists it is evident that it was a sudden palsy, which, from the first attack, took away all hope of life: for slow palsies are not attended by severe pain. Matthew says that he was grievously tormented, and Luke that he was near death—both descriptions—pain or agony, and extreme danger—serve to enhance the glory of the miracle: and for this reason I am the more unwilling to hazard any absolute assertion as to the nature of the disease.