John Coates
Acting Director, Division of Corporation Finance
April 8, 2021
Over the past six months, the U.S. securities markets have seen an unprecedented surge in the use and popularity of Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (or SPACs).[1],[2] Shareholder advocates – as well as business journalists and legal and banking practitioners, and even SPAC enthusiasts themselves[3] – are sounding alarms about the surge. Concerns include risks from fees, conflicts, and sponsor compensation, from celebrity sponsorship and the potential for retail participation drawn by baseless hype, and the sheer amount of capital pouring into the SPACs, each of which is designed to hunt for a private target to take public.[4] With the unprecedented surge has come unprecedented scrutiny, and new issues with both standard and innovative SPAC structures keep surfacing.
The staff at the Securities and Exchange Commission are continuing to look carefully at filings and disclosures by SPACs and their private targets. As customary, and in keeping with the Division of Corporation Finance's ordinary practices, staff are reviewing these filings, seeking clearer disclosure, and providing guidance to registrants and the public. They will continue to be vigilant about SPAC and private target disclosure so that the public can make informed investment and voting decisions about these transactions.
The basics of a typical SPAC are complex, but can be simplified as follows. A SPAC is a shell company with no operations. It proceeds in two stages. In the first stage, it registers the offer and sale of redeemable securities for cash through a conventional underwriting, sells them primarily to hedge funds and other institutions, and places the proceeds in a trust for a future acquisition of a private operating company.[5] Initial investors also commonly obtain warrants to buy additional stock as at a fixed price, and sponsors of the SPAC obtain a 'promote' – greater equity than their cash contribution or commitment would otherwise imply – and their promote is at risk. If the SPAC fails to find and acquire a target within a period of two years, the promote is forfeited and the SPAC liquidates. About ten percent of SPACs have liquidated between 2009 and now.[6]
Read Commentary & Updates of Sussex vs Derbyshire County Championship 2021, Division 3 Cricket Match only on ESPN.com. Check full commentary of Sussex vs Derbyshire Division 3. NSW opposition leader Chris Minns has ripped into Gladys Berejiklian, accusing her of 'running away from scrutiny' after she announced she would scrap her daily COVID-19 press conference.
But most SPACs since 2009 have gone on to identify acquisition candidates. In their second stage, SPACs complete a business combination transaction, in which the SPAC, the target (i.e., the private company to be acquired), or a new shell 'holdco' issues equity to target owners, and sometimes to other investors. SPAC shareholders typically have a vote on the so-called 'de-SPAC' transaction, and many investors who purchased securities in the first stage SPAC either sell on the secondary market or have their shares redeemed before or shortly after the de-SPAC. After the de-SPAC, the entity carries on its operations as a public company. In this way, SPACs offer private companies an alternative pathway to 'go public' and obtain a stock exchange listing, a broader shareholder base, status as a public company with Exchange Act registered securities, and a liquid market for its shares.
With that overview, I would like to focus on legal liability that attaches to disclosures in the de-SPAC transaction. Some – but far from all – practitioners and commentators have claimed that an advantage of SPACs over traditional IPOs is lesser securities law liability exposure for targets and the public company itself. They sometimes specifically point to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) safe harbor for forward-looking statements, and suggest or assert that the safe harbor applies in the context of de-SPAC transactions but not in conventional IPOs.[7] This, such observers assert, is the reason that sponsors, targets, and others involved in a de-SPAC feel comfortable presenting projections and other valuation material of a kind that is not commonly found in conventional IPO prospectuses.
These claims raise significant investor protection questions. Are current liability protections for investors voting on or buying shares at the time of a de-SPAC sufficient if some SPAC sponsors or advisors are touting SPACs with vague assurances of lessened liability for disclosures? Do current liability provisions give those involved – such as sponsors, private investors, and target managers – sufficient incentives to do appropriate due diligence on the target and its disclosures to public investors, especially since SPACs are designed not to include a conventional underwriter at the de-SPAC stage? Moreover, is it appropriate that the choice of how to go public may determine or be determined by liability rules?
To be sure, projections are woven into the fabric of business combinations. They of course help 'sell' the deal, but they can also be a key component for boards and other participants in negotiating and understanding the economics – indeed, the fairness – of the transaction. Moreover, state law, such as in Delaware, may require disclosure of projections used by the boards or their advisors in these transactions.[8] Participants and their advisors are used – and expect – to prepare and disclose projections in acquisitions, including de-SPACs. I fear, though, that participants may not have thought through all the legal implications of these statements under the circumstances of these transactions.
It is not clear that claims about the application of securities law liability provisions to de-SPACs provide targets or anyone else with a reason to prefer SPACs over traditional IPOs. Any simple claim about reduced liability exposure for SPAC participants is overstated at best, and potentially seriously misleading at worst.[9] Indeed, in some ways, liability risks for those involved are higher, not lower, than in conventional IPOs, due in particular to the potential conflicts of interest in the SPAC structure.[10]
Tickets 2 5 – create fogbugz tickets. More specifically, any material misstatement in or omission from an effective Securities Act registration statement as part of a de-SPAC business combination is subject to Securities Act Section 11. Equally clear is that any material misstatement or omission in connection with a proxy solicitation is subject to liability under Exchange Act Section 14(a) and Rule 14a-9, under which courts and the Commission have generally applied a 'negligence' standard.[11] Any material misstatement or omission in connection with a tender offer is subject to liability under Exchange Act Section 14(e). De-SPAC transactions also may give rise to liability under state law. Delaware corporate law, in particular, conventionally applies both a duty of candor and fiduciary duties more strictly in conflict of interest settings, absent special procedural steps, which themselves may be a source of liability risk.[12] Given this legal landscape, SPAC sponsors and targets should already be hearing from their legal, accounting, and financial advisors that a de-SPAC transaction gives no one a free pass for material misstatements or omissions.
What about the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act? Does that provide de-SPAC participants with protections in private litigation that are not available in a conventional IPO? Any answer to that question should note the limits of the safe harbor in the PSLRA. The safe harbor only applies in private litigation, and does not prevent the Commission from taking appropriate action to enforce the federal securities laws. Even if the safe harbor clearly applies, its procedural and substantive provisions do not protect against false or misleading statements made with actual knowledge that the statement was false or misleading. A company in possession of multiple sets of projections that are based on reasonable assumptions, reflecting different scenarios of how the company's future may unfold, would be on shaky ground if it only disclosed favorable projections and omitted disclosure of equally reliable but unfavorable projections, regardless of the liability framework later used by courts to assess the disclosures. The safe harbor is also not available if the statements in question are not forward-looking. Statements about current valuation or operations have been viewed as outside the safe harbor by some courts, even if they are derived from or linked to forward-looking projections or statements.[13] Nor is the safe harbor available unless forward-looking statements are accompanied by 'meaningful cautionary statements' identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Parallels desktop 10 for mac 10 2 0.
Despite all of this, it may still be thought that the PSLRA offers something for SPACs not available to conventional IPOs. But that, too, is uncertain at best. The PSLRA was passed by Congress in 1995 to stem what was considered to be a rising tide of frivolous or unwarranted securities lawsuits aimed at operating companies filing routine annual and quarterly reports under the Exchange Act. At the time, companies were thought by some to be reluctant to provide forward-looking information at least in part due to the prevalence of so-called strike suits which, irrespective of the merits of the claim, were usually less costly to settle than to fight in court. Congress provided a safe harbor for forward-looking statements made by established, publicly traded, reporting companies. The safe harbor was intended to provide a defense against such suits and provide grounds for summary dismissal. Congress designed the safe harbor generally to permit and even encourage reporting companies to disclose information about future plans and prospects.[14]
But, lest the safe harbor swallow the entire securities disclosure regime, the PSLRA specifically excludes from the safe harbor statements made in connection with specified types of securities offerings. Three of those exclusions are of note: those made in connection with an offering of securities by a blank check company, those made by a penny stock issuer, and those made in connection with an initial public offering. The statute refers to the Commission's rules defining 'blank check company' and to the Exchange Act's definition of 'penny stock.'[15]
By contrast, however, the PSLRA's exclusion for 'initial public offering' does not refer to any definition of 'initial public offering.' No definition can be found in the PSLRA, nor (for purposes of the PSLRA) in any SEC rule. I am unaware of any relevant case law on the application of the 'IPO' exclusion. The legislative history includes statements that the safe harbor was meant for 'seasoned issuers' with an 'established track-record.'[16]
What is the upshot of this? In simple terms, the PSLRA excludes from its safe harbor 'initial public offerings,' and that phrase may include de-SPAC transactions. That possibility further calls into question any sweeping claims about liability risk being more favorable for SPACs than for conventional IPOs. To be sure, an 'IPO' is generally understood to be the initial offering of a company's securities to the public, and the SPAC shell company initially offers redeemable equity securities to the public when it first registers to raise funds in order to look for and later acquire a target. However, it is also commonly understood that it is the de-SPAC – and not the initial offering by the SPAC – that is the transaction in which a private operating company itself 'goes public,' i.e., engages in its initial public offering. Economically, and practically, the private target of a SPAC is a different organization than the SPAC itself. The information, including financial statements, relevant to evaluating the investment changes dramatically in the de-SPAC because the private target has operations unlike the SPAC; and initial SPAC investors commonly have the right to and do sell or have their shares redeemed.
When Congress passed the PSLRA, the path to becoming a public company was fairly simple and standardized. In the last 25 years, companies have been able to raise increasingly large sums privately, and even provide some liquidity to shareholders while remaining private. Multiple paths to dispersed ownership now exist, including not only SPACs, but also direct listings and dual-track IPO/M&A processes. With the large pool of private capital available and the increase in Exchange Act Section 12(g) registration thresholds, a company can remain private and grow significantly without going through a traditional IPO. With all these changes, the appeal of understanding and developing law around economic substance over form may be greater than ever.
The economic essence of an initial public offering is the introduction of a new company to the public. It is the first time that public investors see the business and financial information about a company. As a result, Congress, markets, analysts, and the SEC staff typically treat these introductions differently from other kinds of capital raising transactions. This heightened scrutiny for a company's first introduction to the public market applies in other contexts as well – such as a company's first registration of a class of securities under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or an A/B exchange offer. An IPO is where the protections of the federal securities laws are typically most needed to overcome the information asymmetries between a new investment opportunity and investors in the newly public company. To be sure, some elements of the SEC's regulatory regime reflect a recognition that small or new public companies may not be as able to shoulder the costs of all disclosure requirements as older, larger companies. But it remains true that IPOs are understood as a distinct and challenging moment for disclosure.
If these facts about economic and information substance drive our understanding of what an 'IPO' is, they point toward a conclusion that the PSLRA safe harbor should not be available for any unknown private company introducing itself to the public markets. Such a conclusion should hold regardless of what structure or method it used to do so. The reason is simple: the public knows nothing about this private company. Appropriate liability should attach to whatever claims it is making, or others are making on its behalf.
To be clear, in the initial offering by a SPAC, when the shell company is first raising funds to finance all (or more commonly a portion) of its hoped-for acquisition of the yet-to-be-named target, disclosures clearly have a role to play under the federal securities laws. Investors need to know about sponsors and their financial arrangements, the procedural protections of the SPAC structure, and what kinds of returns the SPAC is likely to generate for investors absent a de-SPAC transaction or for those who choose to exit before the de-SPAC is completed.[17] But it also is clear that investors at the time of the initial SPAC filing cannot understand all aspects of the long-term value proposition of the offering, precisely because a SPAC does not have operations or a business plan beyond a search for a target.
Where do we go from here? First, and most directly, all involved in promoting, advising, processing, and investing in SPACs should understand the limits on any alleged liability difference between SPACs and conventional IPOs. Simply put, any such asserted difference seems uncertain at best. SPAC sponsors and targets and their affiliates and advisors should already be providing the public with the information material to the investment opportunities a de-SPAC represents, regardless of how the liability analyses ultimately play out. Liability risk is an important feature of the conventional IPO process. If that risk drives choices about what information to present and how, it should not in my view be different in the de-SPAC process without clear and compelling reasons for and limits and conditions on any such difference.
Second, there may be advantages to providing greater clarity on the scope of the safe harbor in the PSLRA. Congress could not have predicted the wave of SPACs in which we find ourselves. It may be time to revisit these issues. For example, the Commission could use the rulemaking process to reconsider and recalibrate the applicable definitions, or the staff could provide guidance explaining its views on how or if at all the PSLRA safe harbor should apply to de-SPACs. If the Commission or staff pursue that route, however, it would be important to keep the practicalities of SPACs in mind, in addition to other aspects of SPAC structures, relative to conventional IPOs as well as to other forms of achieving dispersed ownership, such as direct listings. Should the SEC reconsider the concept of 'underwriter' in these new transactional paths? Is guidance needed about how projections and related valuations are presented and used in the documents for any of these paths?
In closing, I want to make three final points. First, I am not pro- or anti-SPAC. Under federal securities law, the touchstones for all securities offerings remain what they have long been. What disclosures do investors need to make informed investment and voting decisions? How should the SEC, its staff, and private actors weigh the capital-formation costs and benefits of disclosures, procedures, and liability rules? Do particular disclosures, procedures, and liability rules reduce the all-in costs of capital? Information should be cost-effective and reliable, and not materially misleading, in every securities transaction. Investors should have access to that information – and then be allowed to make their own decisions about how to invest or vote.
Second, forward-looking information can of course be valuable. Modern finance and valuation techniques focus on risk and expected future cash flows. Investors and owners commonly view forward-looking information as decision-useful and relevant. That is true for companies being acquired, as well as for companies going public. But forward-looking information can also be untested, speculative, misleading or even fraudulent, as reflected in the limitations on the PSLRA's liability protections, even when the safe harbor applies. Reflected in the PSLRA's clear exclusion of 'initial public offerings' from its safe harbor is a sensible difference in how liability rules created by Congress differentiate between offering contexts. Private companies that combine with SPACs to enter the public markets have no more of a track record of publicly-disclosed historical information than private companies that are going through a conventional IPO. If there are risks to the use of cost-effective, complete, and reliable forward-looking information in any setting, those risks should be carefully evaluated in light of the goals of the federal securities laws. At the same time, the risk of misuse of such information should also be carefully evaluated in light of the economic realities of the capital formation process.
Third and finally, one of the more interesting and challenging aspects of recent SPAC transactions is that the investors in the SPAC's first public capital raise often redeem or sell their shares around the time of the business combination. New investors buy these shares in the aftermarket or participate in a new offering by the combined entity. Said plainly, many investors in the SPAC's own initial offering are not the investors in the ultimate public company's ongoing business operations. If a major shift in owners is in fact occurring in most or all SPACs as they progress through a de-SPAC, it is the de-SPAC as much as any other element of the process on which we should focus the full panoply of federal securities law protections – including those that apply to traditional IPOs. If we do not treat the de-SPAC transaction as the 'real IPO,' our attention may be focused on the wrong place, and potentially problematic forward-looking information may be disseminated without appropriate safeguards.
[1] This statement represents the views of the Acting Director of the Division of Corporation Finance of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC or Commission). It is not a rule, regulation, or statement of the SEC. The Commission has neither approved nor disapproved its content. This statement does not alter or amend applicable law and has no legal force or effect. This statement creates no new or additional obligations for any person.
[2]See Ben Scent, Wall Street's $100 Billion SPAC Boom Upends the League Table, Bloomberg Law (Apr. 1, 2021, 4:10 PM).
[3]E.g., Andrew Ross Sorkin et al., What a SPAC Believer Thinks of SPAC Mania, N.Y. Times (Mar. 30, 2021).
[4]SPACs – What You Need To Know, Investor.gov (Dec. 10, 2020).
[5] For studies of SPACs, see, e.g., Michael Klausner, Michael Ohlrogge and Emily Ruan, A Sober Look at SPACs, Yale J. Reg. (forthcoming 2021); Minmo Gahng, Jay R. Ritter and Donghang Zhang, SPACs, Working Paper (Mar. 2, 2021).
[6]SPAC Status by Year of IPO, SPACInsider (last visited Apr. 6, 2021) (showing that there have been 26 total liquidations as of Apr. 6, 2021).
[7]See, e.g., Chris Bryant, Why Chamath Palihapitiya Loves SPACs So Much, Bloomberg Opinion (January 28, 2021) (citing Haystack, Alignment Summit Chats: SPACS (w/ Chamath Palihapitiya), YouTube (Dec. 2, 2020) (statement of Chamath Palihapitiya) ('Because the SPAC is a merger of companies, you're all of a sudden allowed to talk about the future. When you do that you have a better chance of being more fully valued.')); cf. John Jenkins, SPACs: Is the PSLRA Safe Harbor Driving the Boom?, Deal Lawyers.com (Feb. 3, 2021); Bruce A. Ericson, Ari M. Berman and Stephen B. Amdur, The SPAC Explosion: Beware the Litigation and Enforcement Risk, Harv. L. Sch. Forum on Corp. Gov. (Jan. 14, 2021).
[8]In re Netsmart Technologies, Inc., Shareholder Litig., 924 A.2d 171 (Del. Ch. 2007) (enjoining a merger because the proxy statement omitted the projections used to render the fairness opinion).
[9] I am far from alone in noting the litigation risk attached to SPACs. E.g., Jeff Montgomery, SPAC Investor Sues in Chancery Over MultiPlan's Stock Drop, Law360 (Mar. 25, 2021); Jennifer Bennett, Canoo Faces Investor Suits Over Post-SPAC Deal Focus Changes, Bloomberg Law (Apr. 5, 2021); Priya Cherian Huskins, Why More SPACs Could Lead to More Litigation (and How to Prepare), A.B.A. Business Law Today (June 25, 2020); Ellison Ward Merkel et al., Litigation Risk in the SPAC World, Quinn Emanuel Trial Laws. (Sept. 30, 2020).
[10]See infra note 12. In Delaware, as under SEC Rule 405, control can be found to exist – raising the corporate law standard in state court review of conflict of interest transactions – where a shareholder owns less than 50% of the stock, but exercises control over the business affairs of the corporation. E.g.,In re Tesla Motors, Inc. Shareholder Litig. No. 12711-VCS, 2018 WL 1560293 (Del.Ch. Mar. 28, 2018) (refusing to dismiss claim that Musk controlled Tesla despite owning only 22% of the voting power due to 'actual domination and control').
[11]See, e.g., Beck v. Dobrowski, 559 F.3d 680, 682 (7th Cir. 2009) ('There is no requiredstate of mind for a violation of section 14(a); a proxy solicitation that contains a misleading misrepresentation or omission violates the section even if the issuer believed in perfect good faith that there was nothing misleading in the proxy materials'); Report of Investigation Pursuant to Section 21(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Commission Statement on Potential Exchange Act Section 10(b) and Section 14(a) Liability, Exchange Act Release No. 51283 (Mar. 1, 2005) ('Where the failure to make such disclosure is negligent, an issuer would violate Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 14a-9 thereunder…').
[12] Cede & Co. v. Technicolor Inc., 634 A.2d 345, 361 (Del. 1993) ('To rebut the [business judgment] rule [presumption], a shareholder plaintiff assumes the burden of providing evidence that directors, in reaching their challenged decision, breached any one of the triads of their fiduciary duty––good faith, loyalty or due care.'); In re Transkaryotic Therapies, Inc., 954 A.2d 346, 357-63 (Del.Ch. 2008) (identifying a breach of fiduciary duties for failure to disclose material facts to stockholders before stockholder vote on merger); City of Fort Myers Gen. Emp.'s Pension Fund v. Haley, 235 A.3d 702 (Del. 2020) (breach of duty of candor due to failure to disclose conflict of interest in merger); Chester County Emp.'s Ret. Fund v. KCG Holdings, Inc., No. 2017-0421-KSJM, 2019 WL 2564093 (Del.Ch. June 21, 2019) (refusing to dismiss case challenging merger approved by shareholders on ground that disclosure prior to vote was inadequate); Kahn v. M&F Worldwide Corp., 88 A.3d 635 (Del. Mar. 14, 2014) (setting forth special procedures required in mergers involving control shareholders, without which heightened entire fairness must be shown by interested fiduciaries); Olenik v. Lodzinski, 208 A.3d 704 (Del. Apr. 11, 2019) (refusing to apply deferential review where special conflict of interest procedures were not applied ab initio); FrontFour Capital Group LLC v. Taube, No. 2019-0100-KSJM, 2019 WL 1313408 (Del.Ch. Mar. 22, 2019) (enjoining two cross-conditioned mergers due to disclosure inadequacies concerning special procedures used to mitigate conflict of interest).
[13]See, e.g., In re Quality Systems, Inc. Securities Litigation, 865 F.3d 1130, 1142, (9th Cir. 2017) ('[W]here defendants make mixed statements containing non-forward-looking statements as well as forward-looking statements, the non-forward-looking statements are not protected by the safe harbor of the PSLRA.'). See also Rodriguez v. Gigamon Inc., 325 F. Supp. 3d 1041, 1049-50 (N.D. Cal. 2018) (CFO's statement about corporation's large deferred service, healthy product backlog, and consistent quarterly linearity, which was a statement made with another statement as to expected earnings for an upcoming quarter, were non-forward-looking statements and were not protected by the PSLRA's safe-harbor; statement included facts regarding the present state of the corporation, not assumptions); NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund v. Pitney Bowes Inc., No. 3:09-CV-01740 VLB, 2013 WL 1188050 (D. Conn. Mar. 23, 2013) (citing Sawant v. Ramsey, 3:07-CV-980 VLB, 2010 WL 3937403 (D. Conn. Sept. 28, 2010) (holding that otherwise forward-looking statements that contain misrepresentations of current facts 'are not protected by the safe harbor provision of the PSLRA or the bespeaks caution doctrine'); In re Nortel Networks Corp. Sec. Litig., 238 F. Supp. 2d 613, 629 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (holding that statements encompassing forward-looking and present or historical components were not entitled to safe harbor protection where the '[c]omplaint alleges that the Defendants had no basis for their optimistic statements and already knew (allegedly) that certain risks had become reality' and notably where plaintiffs adequately pled scienter).
Scrutiny 8 3 9 Commentary David Guzik
[14]See generally, H.R. Rep. No. 104-369, 43 (November 28, 1995) (Congress created the safe harbor provision to 'enhance market efficiency by encouraging companies to disclose forward-looking information.').
[15] The PSLRA's exclusion for blank check companies overlaps the exclusion for penny stock issuers. Securities Act Rule 419 (which predated passage of the PSLRA) limits its definition of 'blank check company' to one that issues 'penny stock.' Most SPACs, however, avoid meeting the definition of penny stock issuer and are therefore neither a 'blank check company' nor a 'penny stock issuer' as those terms are defined. The Commission has not substantively amended the definition of 'blank check company' since the passage of the PSLRA, but of course, it could consider doing so in the future.
[16] Debate in Senate to Override President's Veto, 141 Cong. Rec. S190602 (daily ed. Dec. 21, 1995) (statement of Sen. Diane Feinstein, 'The provisions [of the PSLRA] are only available to companies with an established track record.' and 'I understand the safe harbor does not apply to a new company, but only applies to seasoned issuers.').
Scrutiny 8 3 9 Commentary Full
[17]See Division of Corporation Finance, Disclosure Guidance: Topic No. 11, Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (December 22, 2020).
Scrutiny 8 3 9 Commentary Pdf
Most of this chapter is a repetition of divers passages ofChrist's preaching and miracles which we had before in Matthew and Mark; theyare all of such weight, that they are worth repeating, and therefore they arerepeated, that out of the mouth not only of two, but of three, witnesses everyword may be established. Here is, I. A general account of Christ's preaching,and how he had subsistence for himself and his numerous family by the charitablecontributions of good people (v. 1-3). II. The parable of the sower, and thefour sorts of ground, with the exposition of it, and some inferences from it (v.4-18). III. The preference which Christ gave to his obedient disciples beforehis nearest relations according to the flesh (v. 19-21). IV. His stilling astorm at sea, with a word's speaking (v. 22-25). V. His casting a legion ofdevils out of a man that was possessed by them (v. 26-40). VI. His healing thewoman that had the bloody issue, and raising Jairus's daughter to life (v. 41-56).
Verses 1-3
We are here told,
I. What Christ made the constant businessof his life—it was preaching; in that work he was indefatigable,and went about doing good (v. 1), afterward—entoµ kathexeµs—ordine, in the proper time or method.Christ took his work before him and went about it regularly. He observed a seriesor order of business, so that the end of one good work was the beginning ofanother. Now observe here, 1. Where he preached: He went about—dioµdeue—peragrabat.He was an itinerant preacher, did not confine himself to one place, butdiffused the beams of his light. Circumibat—He went his circuit, as ajudge, having found his preaching perhaps most acceptable where it was new.He went about through every city, that none might plead ignorance. Herebyhe set an example to his disciples; they must traverse the nations of the earth,as he did the cities of Israel. Nor did he confine himself to the cities,but went into the villages, among the plain country-people, to preach tothe inhabitants of the villages, Jdg. 5:11. 2. What he preached: Heshowed the glad tidings of the kingdom of God, that it was now to be set upamong them. Tidings of the kingdom of God are glad tidings, andthose Jesus Christ came to bring; to tell the children of men that God waswilling to take all those under his protection that were willing toreturn to their allegiance. It was glad tidings to the world thatthere was hope of its being reformed and reconciled. 3. Who werehis attendants: The twelve were with him, not to preach if he werepresent, but to learn from him what and how to preach hereafter, and, ifoccasion were, to be sent to places where he could not go. Happy were these hisservants that heard his wisdom.
II. Whence he had the necessary supports oflife: He lived upon the kindness of his friends. There were certain women,who frequently attended his ministry, that ministered to him of theirsubstance, v. 2, 3. Some of them are named; but there were many others,who were zealously affected to the doctrine of Christ, and thought themselvesbound in justice to encourage it, having themselves found benefit,and in charity, hoping that many others might find benefit by it too.
1. They were such, for the most part, as had been Christ'spatients, and were the monuments of his power and mercy; they had been healedby him of evil spirits and infirmities. Some of them had been troubled inmind, had been melancholy, others of them afflicted in body, and he had been tothem a powerful healer. He is the physician both of body and soul, and those whohave been healed by him ought to study what they shall render to him.We are bound in interest to attend him, that we may be ready to applyourselves to him for help in case of a relapse; and we are bound in gratitudeto serve him and his gospel, who hath saved us, and saved us by it.
2. One of them was Mary Magdalene, out of whom had been castseven devils; a certain number for an uncertain. Some think that she was onethat had been very wicked, and then we may suppose her to be the womanthat was a sinner mentioned just before, ch. 7:37. Dr. Lightfoot, findingin some of the Talmudists' writings that Mary Magdalene signified Mary theplaiter of hair, thinks it applicable to her, she having been noted, in thedays of her iniquity and infamy, for that plaiting of hair which isopposed to modest apparel, 1 Tim. 2:9. But, though she had been animmodest woman, upon her repentance and reformation she found mercy, and becamea zealous disciple of Christ. Note, The greatest of sinners must not despair ofpardon; and the worse any have been before their conversion the more they shouldstudy to do for Christ after. Or, rather, she was one that had been verymelancholy, and then, probably, it was Mary the sister of Lazarus, who was awoman of a sorrowful spirit, who might have been originally of Magdala,but removed to Bethany. This Mary Magdalene was attending on Christ's crossand his sepulchre, and, if she was not Mary the sister of Lazarus, either thatparticular friend and favourite of Christ's did not attend then, or theevangelists did not take notice of her, neither of which we can suppose; thusDr. Lightfoot argues. Yet there is this to be objected against it that MaryMagdalene is reckoned among the women that followed Jesus from Galilee(Mt. 27:55, 56); whereas Mary the sister of Lazarus had her residence inBethany.
3. Another of them was Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod'ssteward. She had been his wife (so some), but was now a widow, and left ingood circumstances. If she was now his wife, we have reason to think that her husband,though preferred in Herod's court, had received the gospel, and was verywilling that his wife should be both a hearer of Christ and a contributor tohim.
4. There were many of them that ministered to Christ of theirsubstance. It was an instance of the meanness of that condition to which ourSaviour humbled himself that he needed it, and of his great humility andcondescension that he accepted it. Though he was rich, yet for our sakes hebecame poor, and lived upon alms. Let none say that they scorn to bebeholden to the charity of their neighbours, when Providence has brought theminto straits; but let them ask and be thankful for it as a favour. Christ wouldrather be beholden to his known friends for a maintenance for himself and hisdisciples than be burdensome to strangers in the cities and villages whither hecame to preach. Note, It is the duty of those who are taught in the word to communicateto them who teach them in all good things; and those who are herein liberaland cheerful honour the Lord with their substance, and bring a blessing upon it.
Verses 4-21
The former paragraph began with an account of Christ'sindustry in preaching (v. 1); this begins with an account of the people'sindustry in hearing, v. 4. He went into every city, to preach; so they,one would think, should have contented themselves to hear him when he came totheir own city (we know those that would); but there were those here that came tohim out of every city, would not stay till he came to them, nor thinkthat they had enough when he left them, but met him when he wascoming towards them, and followed him when he was going from them. Nordid he excuse himself from going to the cities with this, that there weresome from the cities that came to him; for, though there were, yetthe most had not zeal enough to bring them to him, and therefore such is hiswonderful condescension that he will go to them; for he is found of thosethat sought him not, Isa. 65:1.
Here was, it seems, a vast concourse, much people weregathered together, abundance of fish to cast their net among; and he was asready and willing to teach as they were to be taught. Now in theseverses we have,
I. Necessary and excellent rules and cautions for hearing theword, in the parable of the sower and the explanation and application ofit, all which we had twice before more largely. When Christ had put forth thisparable, 1. The disciples were inquisitive concerning the meaning of it,v. 9. They asked him, What might this parable be? Note, We should covetearnestly to know the true intent, and full extent, of the word wehear, that we may be neither mistaken nor defective in our knowledge. 2. Christmade them sensible of what great advantage it was to them that they hadopportunity of acquainting themselves with the mystery and meaning of his word,which others had not: Unto you it is given, v. 10. Note, Those who wouldreceive instruction from Christ must know and consider what a privilege it is tobe instructed by him, what a distinguishing privilege to be led into the light,such a light, when others are left in darkness, such a darkness. Happy are we,and for ever indebted to free grace, if the same thing that is a parableto others, with which they are only amused, is a plain truth tous, by which we are enlightened and governed, and into the mouldof which we are delivered.
Now from the parable itself, and the explication of it, observe,
(1.) The heart of man is as soil to the seed ofGod's word; it is capable of receiving it, and bringing forth the fruitsof it; but, unless that seed be sown in it, it will bring forth nothingvaluable. Or care therefore must be to bring the seed and the soiltogether. To what purpose have we the seed in the scripture, if it be notsown? And to what purpose have we the soil in our own hearts, if it benot sown with that seed?
(2.) The success of the seeding is very muchaccording to the nature and temper of the soil, and as that is, or isnot, disposed to receive the seed. The word of God is to us, as weare, a savour of life unto life, or of death unto death.
(3.) The devil is a subtle and spiteful enemy, that makes it hisbusiness to hinder our profiting by the word of God. He takes the word out ofthe hearts of careless hearers, lest they should believe and be saved,v. 12. This is added here to teach us, [1.] That we cannot be savedunless we believe. The word of the gospel will not be a saving word tous, unless it be mixed with faith. [2.] That therefore the devil does all he canto keep us from believing, to make us not believe the word when we readand hear it; or, if we heed it for the present, to make us forget it again, andlet it slip (Heb. 2:1); or, if we remember it, to create prejudices in our mindsagainst it, or divert our minds from it to something else; and all is lestwe should believe and be saved, lest we should believe and rejoice,while he believes and trembles.
(4.) Where the word of God is heard carelessly there iscommonly a contempt put upon it too. It is added here in the parable thatthe seed which fell by the way-side was trodden down, v. 5. They thatwilfully shut their ears against the word do in effect trample it under theirfeet; they despise the commandment of the Lord.
(5.) Those on whom the word makes some impressions, butthey are not deep and durable ones, will show their hypocrisy in atime of trial; as the seed sown upon the rock, where it gains no root, v. 13.These for awhile believe a little while; their profession promisessomething, but in time of temptation they fall away from their goodbeginnings. Whether the temptation arises from the smiles or the frowns, of theworld, they are easily overcome by it.
(6.) The pleasures of this life are as dangerous andmischievous thorns to choke the good seed of the word as any other. This isadded here (v. 14), which was not in the other evangelists. Those that are notentangled in the cares of this life, nor inveigled with the deceitfulnessof riches, but boast that they are dead to them, may yet be kept from heavenby an affected indolence, and the love of ease and pleasure. The delights ofsense may ruin the soul, even lawful delights, indulged, and too much delightedin.
(7.) It is not enough that the fruit be brought forth, but itmust be brought to perfection, it must be fully ripened. If it be not, itis as if there was no fruit at all brought forth; for that which in Matthew andMark is said to be unfruitful is the same that here is said to bringforth none to perfection. For factum non dicitur quod non perseverat—perseveranceis necessary to the perfection of a work.
(8.) The good ground, which brings forth good fruit, isan honest and good heart, well disposed to receive instruction andcommandment (v. 15); a heart free from sinful pollutions, and firmly fixed forGod and duty, an upright heart, a tender heart, and a heart that trembles atthe word, is an honest and good heart, which, having heard the word, understandsit (so it is in Matthew), receives it (so it is in Mark), and keepsit (so it is here), as the soil not only receives, but keeps, the seed;and the stomach not only receives, but keeps, the food or physic.
(9.) Where the word is well kept there is fruit brought forth withpatience. This also is added here. There must be both bearingpatience and waiting patience; patience to suffer the tribulationand persecution which may arise because of the word; patience tocontinue to the end in well-doing.
(10.) In consideration of all this, we ought to take heed howwe hear (v. 18); take heed of those things that will hinder our profiting bythe word we hear, watch over our hearts in hearing, and take heed lest theybetray us; take heed lest we hear carelessly and slightly, lest, upon anyaccount, we entertain prejudice against the word we hear; and take heed to theframe of our spirits after we have heard the word, lest we lose what we havegained.
II. Needful instructions given to those that are appointed topreach the word, and to those also that have heard it. 1. Those that have receivedthe gift must minister the same. Ministers that have the dispensingof the gospel committed to them, people that have profited by the word and arethereby qualified to profit others, must look upon themselves as lightedcandles: ministers must in solemn authoritative preaching, and people inbrotherly familiar discourse, diffuse their light, for a candle must notbe covered with a vessel nor put under a bed, v. 16. Ministers andChristians are to be lights in the world, holding forth the word of life.Their light must shine before men; they must not only be good, but dogood. 2. We must expect that what is now done in secret, and fromunseen springs, will shortly be manifested and made known, v. 17.What is committed to you in secret should be made manifest by you;for your Master did not give you talents to be buried, but to be traded with.Let that which is now hid be made known; for, if it be not manifested byyou, it will be manifested against you, will be produced in evidenceof your treachery. 3. The gifts we have will either be continued to us, or takenfrom us, according as we do, or do not, make use of them for the glory of Godand the edification of our brethren: Whosoever hath, to him shall be given,v. 18. He that hath gifts, and does good with them, shall have more; he that burieshis talent shall lose it. From him that hath not shall be taken away even thatwhich he hath, so it is in Mark; that which he seemeth to have, so itis in Luke. Note, The grace that is lost was but seeming grace, was nevertrue. Men do but seem to have what they do not use, andshows of religion will be lost and forfeited. They went out from us, becausethey were not of us, 1 Jn. 2:19. Let us see to it that we have grace insincerity, the root of the matter found in us; that is a good part whichshall never be taken away from those that have it.
III. Great encouragement given to those that prove themselvesfaithful hearers of the word, by being doers of the work, in aparticular instance of Christ's respect to his disciples, in preferring themeven before his nearest relations (v. 19-21), which passage of story we hadtwice before. Observe, 1. What crowding there was after Christ. There was nocoming near for the throng of people that attended him, who, though they werecrowded very so much, would not be crowded out from his congregation. 2. Some ofhis nearest kindred were least solicitous to hear him preach. Instead of gettingwithin, as they might easily have done if they had come in time, desiringto hear him, they stood without, desiring to see him; and,probably, out of a foolish fear, lest he should spend himself with too muchspeaking, designing nothing but to interrupt him, and oblige him to break off.3. Jesus Christ would rather be busy at his work than conversing with hisfriends. He would not leave his preaching, to speak with his mother andhis brethren, for it was his meat and drink to be so employed. 4.Christ is pleased to own those as his nearest and dearest relations that hearthe word of God and do it; they are to him more than his mother and brethren.
Verses 22-39
We have here two illustrious proofs of the power of our LordJesus which we had before—his power over the winds, and his power overthe devils. See Mk. 4 and 5.
I. His power over the winds, those powers of the air thatare so much a terror to men, especially upon sea, and occasion the death of suchmultitudes. Observe,
1. Christ ordered his disciples to put to sea, that he mightshow his glory upon the water, in stilling the waves, and might do an act ofkindness to a poor possessed man on the other side the water: He went into aship with his disciples, v. 22. They that observe Christ's orders mayassure themselves of his presence. If Christ sends his disciples, he goes withthem. And those may safely and boldly venture any where that have Christaccompanying them. He said, Let us go over unto the other side; for hehad a piece of good work to do there. He might have gone by land, a little wayabout; but he chose to go by water, that he might show his wonders inthe deep.
2. Those that put to sea in a calm, yea, and at Christ's word,must yet prepare for a storm, and for the utmost peril in that storm;There came down a storm of wind on the lake (v. 23), as if it were there,and no where else; and presently their ship was so tossed that it was filledwith water, and they were in jeopardy of their lives. Perhaps the devil, who isthe prince of the power of the air, and who raiseth winds by thepermission of God, had some suspicion, from some words which Christ might letfall, that he was coming over the lake now on purpose to cast that legion ofdevils out of the poor man on the other side, and therefore poured this stormupon the ship he was in, designing, if possible, to have sunk him and preventedthat victory.
3. Christ was asleep in the storm, v. 23. Some bodilyrefreshment he must have, and he chose to take it when it would be least ahindrance to him in his work. The disciples of Christ may really have hisgracious presence with them at sea, and in a storm, and yet he may seem as if hewere asleep; he may not immediately appear for their relief, no, not whenthings seem to be brought even to the last extremity. Thus he will try theirfaith and patience, and quicken them by prayer to awake, and make theirdeliverance the more welcome when it comes at last.
4. A complaint to Christ of our danger, and the distress hischurch is in, is enough to engage him to awake, and appear for us, v. 24. Theycried, Master, master, we perish! The way to have our fears silenced isto bring them to Christ, and lay them before him. Those that in sincerity callChrist Master, and with faith and fervency call upon him as theirMaster, may be sure that he will not let them perish. There is norelief for poor souls that are under a sense of guilt, and a fear of wrath, likethis, to go to Christ, and call him Master, and say, 'I am undone,if thou do not help me.'
5. Christ's business is to lay storms, as it is Satan'sbusiness to raise them. He can do it; he has done it; he delights to doit: for he came to proclaim peace on earth. He rebuked the wind andthe raging of the water, and immediately they ceased (v. 24); not, asat other times, by degrees, but all of a sudden, there was a great calm.Thus Christ showed that, though the devil pretends to be the prince of the powerof the air, yet even there he has him in a chain.
6. When our dangers are over, it becomes us to take to ourselvesthe shame of our own fears and to give to Christ the glory of his power. WhenChrist had turned the storm into a calm, then were they glad becausethey were quiet, Ps. 107:30. And then, (1.) Christ gives them a rebuke fortheir inordinate fear: Where is your faith? v. 25. Note, Many that have truefaith have it to seek when they have occasion to use it. They tremble, andare discouraged, if second causes frown upon them. A little thing disheartensthem; and where is their faith then? (2.) They give him the glory of hispower: They, being afraid, wondered. Those that had feared the storm, nowthat the danger was over with good reason feared him that had stilled it, and saidone to another, What manner of man is this! They might as well have said, Whois a God like unto thee? For it is God's prerogative to still the noiseof the seas, the noise of their waves, Ps. 65:7.
II. His power over the devil, the prince of the powerof the air. In the next passage of story he comes into a closer grapple withhim than he did when he commanded the winds. Presently after the windswere stilled they were brought to their desired haven, and arrived at thecountry of the Gadarenes, and there went ashore (v. 26, 27); and he soon metwith that which was his business over, and which he thought it worth his whileto go through a storm to accomplish.
We may learn a great deal out of this story concerning thisworld of infernal, malignant spirits, which, though not working now ordinarilyin the same way as here, yet we are all concerned at all times to stand upon ourguard against.
1. These malignant spirits are very numerous. Theythat had taken possession of this one man called themselves Legion (v.30), because many devils were entered into him: he had had devils along time, v. 27. But perhaps those that had been long in possession of him,upon some foresight of our Saviour's coming to make an attack upon them, andfinding they could not prevent it by the storm they had raised, sent forrecruits, intending this to be a decisive battle, and hoping now to betoo hard for him that had cast out so many unclean spirits, and to give him adefeat. They either were, or at least would be thought to be, a legion,formidable as an army with banners; and now, at least, to be, what the twentiethlegion of the Roman army, which was long quartered at Chester, was styled, legiovictrix—a victorious legion.
2. They have an inveterate enmity to man, and all hisconveniences and comforts. This man in whom the devils had got possession, andkept it long, being under their influence, wore no clothes, neither abode inany house (v. 27), though clothing and a habitation are two ofthe necessary supports of this life. Nay, and because man has a natural dread ofthe habitations of the dead, they forced this man to abide in the tombs,to make him so much the more a terror to himself and to all about him, so thathis soul had as much cause as ever any man's had to be weary of his life, andto choose strangling and death rather.
3. They are very strong, fierce, and unruly, and hate andscorn to be restrained: He was kept bound with chains and in fetters,that he might not be mischievous either to others or to himself, but he brokethe bands, v. 29. Note, Those that are ungovernable by any otherthereby show that they are under Satan's government; and this is the languageof those that are so, even concerning God and Christ, their best friends, thatwould not either bind them from or bind them to any thing but fortheir own good: Let us break their bands in sunder. He was driven of thedevil. Those that are under Christ's government are sweetly ledwith the cords of a man and the bands of love; those that are under the devil'sgovernment are furiously driven.
4. They are much enraged against our Lord Jesus, and have agreat dread and horror of him: When the man whom they had possession of,and who spoke as they would have him, saw Jesus, he roared out asone in an agony, and fell down before him, to deprecate his wrath, andowned him to be the Son of God most high, that was infinitely above himand too hard for him; but protested against having any league or confederacywith him (which might sufficiently have silenced the blasphemous cavils of thescribes and Pharisees): What have I to do with thee? The devils haveneither inclination to do service to Christ nor expectation to receive benefitby him: What have we to do with thee? But they dreaded his power andwrath: I beseech thee, torment me not. They do not say, I beseechthee, save me, but only, Torment me not. See whose language theyspeak that have only a dread of hell as a place of torment, but no desire ofheaven as a place of holiness and love.
5. They are perfectly at the command, and under thepower, of our Lord Jesus; and they knew it, for they besought him that hewould not command them to goeis ton abysson—intothe deep, the place of their torment, which they acknowledge he could easilyand justly do. O what a comfort is this to the Lord's people, that all thepowers of darkness are under the check and control of the Lord Jesus! He hasthem all in a chain. He can send them to their own place, when hepleaseth.
6. They delight in doing mischief. When they found therewas no remedy, but they must quit their hold of this poor man, they begged theymight have leave to take possession of a herd of swine, v. 32. When thedevil at first brought man into a miserable state he brought a curse likewiseupon the whole creation, and that became subject to enmity. And here, as aninstance of that extensive enmity of his, when he could not destroy the man, hewould destroy the swine. If he could not hurt them in their bodies, he wouldhurt them in their goods, which sometimes prove a great temptation to men todraw them from Christ, as here. Christ suffered them to enter into the swine,to convince the country what mischief the devil could do in it, if he shouldsuffer him. No sooner had the devils leave than they entered into the swine;and no sooner had they entered into them than the herd ran violently down asteep place into the lake, and were drowned. For it is a miracle ofmercy if those whom Satan possesses are not brought to destruction andperdition. This, and other instances, show that that roaring lion and red dragonseeks what and whom he may devour.
7. When the devil's power is broken in any soul that soulrecovers itself, and returns into a right frame, which supposes that those whomSatan gets possession of are put out of the possession of themselves: The manout of whom the devils were departed sat at the feet of Jesus, v. 35. Whilehe was under the devil's power he was ready to fly in the face ofJesus; but now he sits at his feet, which is a sign that he is come tohis right mind. If God has possession of us, he preserves to us thegovernment and enjoyment of ourselves; but, if Satan has possession of us, herobs us of both. Let his power therefore in our souls be overturned, and let himcome whose right our hearts are, and let us give them to him; for we are nevermore our own than when we are his.
Let us now see what was the effect of this miracle of castingthe legion of devils out of this man.
(1.) What effect it had upon the people of that country who hadlost their swine by it: The swineherds went and told it both in cityand country (v. 34), perhaps with a design to incense people against Christ.They told by what means he that was possessed of the devils was healed(v. 36), that it was by sending the devils into the swine, which was capable ofan invidious representation, as if Christ could not have delivered the man outof their hands, but by delivering the swine into them. The people came out,to see what was done, and to enquire into it; and they were afraid(v. 35); they were taken with great fear (v. 37); they were surprised andamazed at it, and knew not what to say to it. They thought more of thedestruction of the swine than of the deliverance of their poor afflictedneighbour, and of the country from the terror of his frenzy, which was become apublic nuisance; and therefore the whole multitude besought Christ to departfrom them for fear he should bring some other judgment upon them; whereasindeed none need to be afraid of Christ that are willing to forsake their sinsand give up themselves to him. But Christ took them at their word: He went upinto the ship, and returned back again. Those lose their Saviour, and theirhopes in him, that love their swine better.
(2.) What effect it had upon the poor man who had recoveredhimself by it. He desired Christ's company as much as others dreadedit: he besought Christ that he might be with him as others were thathad been healed by him of evil spirits and infirmities (v. 2), that Christmight be to him a protector and teacher, and that he might be to Christ for aname and a praise. He was loth to stay among those rude and brutish Gadarenesthat desired Christ to depart from them. O gather not my soul with thesesinners! But Christ would not take him along with him, but sent him home, topublish among those that knew him the great things God had done for him, that sohe might be a blessing to his country, as he had been a burden to it. We mustsometimes deny ourselves the satisfaction even of spiritual benefits andcomforts, to gain an opportunity of being serviceable to the souls of others.Perhaps Christ knew that, when the resentment of the loss of their swine was alittle over, they would be better disposed to consider the miracle, andtherefore left the man among them to be a standing monument, and a monitor tothem of it.
Verses 40-56
Christ was driven away by the Gadarenes; they were wearyof him, and willing to be rid of him. But when he had crossed the water, andreturned to the Galileans, they gladly received him, wished and waitedfor his return, and welcomed him with all their hearts when he didreturn, v. 40. If some will not accept the favours Christ offers them,others will. If the Gadarenes be not gathered, yet there are many amongwhom Christ shall be glorious. When Christ had done his work on the otherside of the water he returned, and found work to do in the place whence he came,fresh work. They that will lay out themselves to do good shall never wantoccasion for it. The needy you have always with you.
We have here two miracles interwoven, as they were in Matthewand Mark—the raising of Jairus's daughter to life, and the cure of the womanthat had an issue of blood, as he was going in a crowd to Jairus's house. Wehave here,
I. A public address made to Christ by a ruler of thesynagogue, whose name was Jairus, on the behalf of a little daughterof his, that was very ill, and, in the apprehension of all about here, lay adying. This address was very humble and reverent. Jairus, though a ruler,fell down at Jesus's feet, as owning him to be a ruler above him.It was very importunate. He besought him that he would come into hishouse; not having the faith, at least not having the thought,of the centurion, who desired Christ only to speak the healing wordat a distance. But Christ complied with his request; he went along withhim. Strong faith shall be applauded, and yet weak faith shall not be rejected.In the houses where sickness and death are, it is very desirable to have thepresence of Christ. When Christ was going, the people thronged him, someout of curiosity to see him, others out of an affection to him. Let us notcomplain of a crowd, and a throng, and a hurry, as long as we are in the way ofour duty, and doing good; but otherwise it is what every wise man willkeep himself out of as much as he can.
II. Here is a secret application made to Christ by awoman ill of a bloody issue, which had been the consumption of her bodyand the consumption of her purse too; for she had spent all her living uponphysicians, and was never the better, v. 43. The nature of her disease wassuch that she did not care to make a public complaint of it (it was agreeable tothe modesty of her sex to be very shy of speaking of it), and therefore she tookthis opportunity of coming to Christ in a crowd; and the more people werepresent the more likely she thought it was that she should be concealed.Her faith was very strong; for she doubted not but that by the touchof the hem of his garment she should derive from him healing virtuesufficient for her relief, looking upon him to be such a full fountain ofmercies that she should steal a cure and he not miss it. Thus manya poor soul is healed, and helped, and saved, by Christ,that is lost in a crowd, and that nobody takes notice of. The woman foundan immediate change for the better in herself, and that her disease was cured,v. 44. As believers have comfortable communion with Christ, so they havecomfortable communications from him incognito—secretly, meat to eatthat the world knows not of, and joy that a stranger does notintermeddle with.
III. Here is a discovery of this secret cure, to theglory both of the physician and the patient.
1. Christ takes notice that there is a cure wrought: Virtueis gone out of me, v. 46. Those that have been healed by virtue derived fromChrist must own it, for he knows it. He speaks of it here, not ina way of complaint, as if he were hereby either weakened or wronged,but in a way of complacency. It was his delight that virtue wasgone out of him to do any good, and he did not grudge it to the meanest; theywere as welcome to it as to the light and heat of the sun. Nor had he the lessvirtue in him for the going out of the virtue from him for he isan overflowing fountain.
2. The poor patient owns her case, and the benefit she hadreceived: When she saw that she was not hid, she came, and fell down beforehim, v. 47. Note, The consideration of this, that we cannot be hid fromChrist, should engage us to pour out our hearts before him,and to show before him all our sin and all our trouble. She came trembling,and yet her faith saved her, v. 48. Note, There may be tremblingwhere yet there is saving faith. She declared before all the people for whatcause she had touched him because she believed that a touch would cure her,and it did so. Christ's patients should communicate their experiences to oneanother.
3. The great physician confirms her cure, and sends her awaywith the comfort of it: Be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole,v. 48. Jacob got the blessing from Isaac clandestinely, and by a wile; but, whenthe fraud was discovered, Isaac ratified it designedly. It was obtained surreptitiouslyand under-hand, but it was secured and seconded above-board. Sowas the cure here. He is blessed, and he shall be blessed; sohere, She is healed, and she shall be healed.
IV. Here is an encouragement to Jairus not to distrustthe power of Christ, though his daughter was now dead, and they thatbrought him the tidings advised him not to give the Master any furthertrouble about her: Fear not, saith Christ, only believe. Note,Our faith in Christ should be bold and daring, as well as our zeal forhim. They that are willing to do any thing for him may depend upon his doinggreat things for them, above what they are able to ask or think. When thepatient is dead there is no room for prayer, or the use of means; but here,though the child is dead, yet believe, and all shall be well. Postmortem medicus—to call in the physician after death, is anabsurdity; but not post mortem Christus—to call in Christ afterdeath.
V. The preparatives for the raising of her to life again.1. The choice Christ made of witnesses that should see the miraclewrought. A crowd followed him, but perhaps they were rude and noisy;however, it was not fit to let such a multitude come into a gentleman's house,especially now that the family was all in sorrow; therefore he sent themback, and not because he was afraid to let the miracle pass their scrutiny; forhe raised Lazarus and the widow's son publicly. He took none with himbut Peter, and James, and John, that triumvirate of his disciples that he wasmost intimate with, designing these three, with the parents, to be the onlyspectators of the miracle, they being a competent number to attest the truth ofit. 2. The check he gave to the mourners. They all wept, and bewailedher; for, it seems, she was a very agreeable hopeful child, and dear notonly to the parents, but to all the neighbours. But Christ bid them not weep;for she is not dead, but sleepeth. He means, as to her peculiar case, thatshe was not dead for good and all, but that she should now shortly be raised tolife, so that it would be to her friends as if she had been but a few hoursasleep. But it is applicable to all that die in the Lord; therefore we shouldnot sorrow for them as those that have no hope, because death is but a sleepto them, not only as it is a rest from all the toils of the daysof time, but as there will be a resurrection, a waking and risingagain to all the glories of the days of eternity. This was acomfortable word which Christ said to these mourners, yet they wickedlyridiculed it, and laughed him to scorn for it here was a pearl castbefore swine. They were ignorant of the scriptures of the Old Testament whobantered it as an absurd thing to call death a sleep; yet thisgood came out of that evil that hereby the truth of the miracle wasevinced; for they knew that she was dead, they were certain of it, andtherefore nothing less than a divine power could restore her to life. Wefind not any answer that he made them; but he soon explained himself, Ihope to their conviction, so that they would never again laugh at any word ofhis. But he put them all out, v. 54. They were unworthy to be thewitnesses of this work of wonder; they who in the midst of their mourning wereso merrily disposed as to laugh at him for what he said would, it may be,have found something to laugh at in what he did, and therefore are justlyshut out.
VI. Her return to life, after a short visit to the congregationof the dead: He took her by the hand (as we do by one that we would awakeout of sleep, and help up), and he called, saying, Maid, arise, v. 55.Thus the hand of Christ's grace goes along with the calls of hisword, to make them effectual. Here that is expressed which was only impliedin the other evangelists, that her spirit came again; her soul returnedagain to animate her body. This plainly proves that the soul exists and acts ina state of separation from the body, and therefore is immortal; that death doesnot extinguish this candle of the Lord, but takes it out of a darklantern. It is not, as Grotius well observes, the krasisor temperament of the body, or anything that dies with it; but it is anthypostatonti—something that subsists by itself, which, after death, issomewhere else than where the body is. Where the soul of this child was in thisinterval we are not told; it was in the hand of the Father of spirits, towhom all souls at death return. When her spirit came again she arose, andmade it appear that she was alive by her motion, as she did also by herappetite; for Christ commanded to give her meat. As babes newly born, sothose that are newly raised, desire spiritual food, that they may grow thereby.In the last verse, we need not wonder to find her parents astonished; butif that implies that they only were so, and not the other by-standers,who had laughed Christ to scorn, we may well wonder at their stupidity, whichperhaps was the reason why Christ would not have it proclaimed, as well as togive an instance of his humility.
