The Pulpit Commentary — Ezekiel — Volume 2 — Section 376

babel to Jerusalem, and was by them traced allowed to do the office or • priest, i.e. ho.ck t.o pre-exilio times (see Keil, on Dent. approe.oh the altar to offer sacrifice, or to xviii. 1 ; Ourtiss's 'Levitioe.l Priests,' pp. enter into the holy place (ver. 13). Ia this 22, eto. ; Delitzsoh, in Lnthardt's 'Zeit- way they should bear their iniquity (vers. schrift fiir kirchliche Wiseensche.ft,' pp. 286, 10, 12)---Qfovourite expression in the middle eto., e.nd in Riehm's 'He.ndworterbuch des books of the Penta.tench (Exod. xx viii. 38, Biblischen Alterthums,' a.rt. "Levi ten;" 43; Lev. v.1; x.17; xx.19; Numb. v. 31; Oehler, in Herzog's 'Ree.1-Encyclopii.die,' a.rt. xviii. 1), but never occurring in Deutero- "Levi"). The question, therefore, of which nomy, and meaning "to be requited" on Levites Ezekiel speaks in this verso, whether account of, e.nd make expiation for, sin and of those whose duties were of e. menial order their shame e.nd their abominations, i.e. the or of those whose functions partook of a shame due to them for their abominations- priestly character, is not difficult to resolve. e. speciallyEzekelian phrase (comp. eh. xvi. It could hardly have been the former, since 52, 54; xxxii. 30; xxxvi. 7). in vers. 11-14 Ezekiel's Levites are repre- Vere. 15, 16.-The ordinance for the priests. sented as about to be degraded by being That Ezekiel derived the phrase, the priests relegated to inferior task~ than those they the Levites, from Deuteronomy (xvii. 9; had formerly performed; 1t must have been xviii. 1; xxiv. 8; xxvii. 9) me.y be granted the latter, because in the present verse they without admitting that the Levites were all are designated the Levites that are gone priests, or tho.t the phrase had other import away ( or, went) far from ma, when Israel than that the priests were, as the Deutero- went astray. Now, Ismel's apostasy from nomist says, "sons of Levi" (xxi. 5 ; mi. Jehovah e.nd declension towards idolatry 9). The priesthood, e.t its institution, began with Solomon's unfaithfulness (1 having been entrusted to Aaron and his Kings xi. 4-8), e.nd continued with greater sons (Exorl. xxvii. 20, 21; xxviii. 1-4; or less intensity in every subsequent reign xxix. 9, 44; Numb. iii. JO; xvi.40; xviii. till tho exile; it certainly cannot be re- 7; xxv. 13), on Aaron's death the high stricted, e.s Keil e.nd Currey propose, to priesthood pe.eaed,into the hands of Eleaznr, Jeroboam'e conduct in setting up rive.I his eldest (living) son (Namb. x.x. 2ti--28), sanctuaries in Dun e.nd Bethel, with altar3 a.ml after Eieazar's death into those of o.nd priests, for tho e.ccommode.tion of the Phinehas, his eldest son (Numb. xxv. 11- northern kingdom ( l Kings xii 26-33). 13). In the le.at do.ye of the judges, when Nor is there room for doubting, although the e.rk and tabernacle stood o.t Sliiloh, the bisto~ico.l notices of the fa.et a.re not abun- high priesthood belonged to Eli, of the line dant, that in this apostasy the prieethoo,I of Ithame.r(comp. l Sam. :xiv. 3 and :xxii. 20 largely led the way (Jer. xxvi. 7, 11; 2 with 1 Chron. xxiv. 3), in which line it Kings xvi. 11-16; Zeph. i. 4), becoming continued till the reign of David, when it priests of the high places, ministering for was held conjointly by Abiatho.r (calkd also the people e.t heathen altars, and so co.using Ahimeleoh) of the line of Ithamn.r, and them to fall into iniquity (ver. 12). Heng- Zadok of the line of Elenzar (2 So.m. viii. stenberg and Plumptre suggest that the 17; xx. 25; 1 Kings iv. 4). This arro.nge- reason why these o.poste.te priests are now ment, however, Solomon eventually over- culled Levites wo.s to intimate that they turned, by deposing tho former for espousing were no more worthy of the priesthood, and Adonije.h'e pretensions to the throne (l were a.bout to be reduced to the lower Kings i. 7; ii. 26), a.nu from that timo ministry of the Levites so co.lied. Conee- forward till the exile the high priesthood q uen tly, under tho new Torah, those among remained with Zadok nnd his sons (1 Kings the priests (who were o.Jso Levites) who bad ii. 35; 1 Chron. xxix. 22). Whon, tllorefore, been guilty of this fie.grant wickedness it is announced to Ezokiol that his vision- (i.e., says Delitzsch, e.11 the Ao.ronides who 1111,nctuary should have os priests the sons of were not Zadokites) would no more, either Zadok, that kept the ohe.rge of J eliovah's in themselves or their descendants, be sanctuary, when the ohildren of Israel went sufferecl to retain the priestly office, but astray from him, the first qnestinn thnt would be degraded to the status of ordin- a.rises is-To what does this allude? Klicfoth ary Levites, e.nd, like them, should be holds it cannot meo.n tho.t, while Israel as ll ministers in Jehove.h's se.notuary, having whole declined into idolatry, the Zaclukito cha.rge--or, oversight (Revised Version}-e.t priests remained faithful to tho worship of the gates of the house, and ministering to Jehovah, because the vision of Jmh1h's (or, in) the house, i.e. in its courts, serving idolatries grnnted to tho prophet, in eh. e.s keepers of the charge of the house (ver. viii. IG, revealed quite clcnrly th,1t the 14), ns wntchers o.t the gates of the house pri~sthood was as much caught in the (ver. 11), as eluughterere of the sl\erificial n11t1onal o.postusy as woro tho princes or victims (var. 11), but should not, like their the people. Nor is the hmguagll of the brethren who had remained faithful, be text perfectly satisfied by tile virnv of Hii.vcr-  390 THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL. [arr. :xtrv.1-31.