- Parent Category: FAQs
- Category: Bible Questions and answers about the Church
- Published on Monday, 14 February 2011 10:14
Please explain the New Testament teaching of Leviticus 21:21-22
The physical defects, enumerated in Leviticus 21 ,as preventing the Sons of Aaron from exercising their public priestly functions, would correspond to-day rather to moral defects.
Clearly there are physical defects, which, while not hindering a brother breaking bread, would disqualify him from leading the assembly in worship to the Father, e.g., dumbness, excessive stammering, defective organs of speech. I remember a good brother thus afflicted, to whose presence none thought of objecting, but to whose audible exercises, which were frequent, some did take exception. Probably he would have been more in the love of the Spirit, had he but rarely taken audible part in the worship. But the physical defects, enumerated in Leviticus 21 ,as preventing the Sons of Aaron from exercising their public priestly functions, would correspond to-day rather to moral defects, which though not bringing the person in question under discipline, would render him unfit to lead the assembly in its priestly worship.
How could a brother for instance, who was known to lose his temper in public, or be a quarrelsome person, or had a bad financial record, be indicated as a leader of the saints? How could a bankrupt, who had not paid his creditors, or a man who owed money to the saints or the world, pretend “to offer the bread of God” in the public assembly? The lack of conscience evidenced by attempting to do so, would in itself be but poor proof of the reality of his Christian profession, though he might still be allowed to break the bread, pending possible developments. It might be hoped that his own sense of propriety would keep him silent, but if not, the elder brethren would doubtless feel their responsibility to act.