Jerusalem's Predicament Was Largely Due To The Priests And The Prophets Who Would Suffer Accordingly (Lamentations 4:12-17).
The prophet now draws attention to the fact of how much of Jerusalem's predicament could be laid at the feet of the priests and prophets, the very people who should have been guiding them aright, and he goes on to point out what this would involve for them.
(Lamed) The kings of the earth did not believe,
Nor all the inhabitants of the world,
That the adversary and the enemy,
Would enter into the gates of Jerusalem.
He pictures the whole world as astonished at what had happened to Jerusalem, unable to believe that it could be taken. This statement is probably hyperbole, although having said that it must be admitted that we do not know what the kings and the inhabitants of the world really thought at that time. It may be seen as looking at the view of the kings and the inhabitants of the world from Judah's point of view. How could they not be astonished?
On the other hand, while it was true that Jerusalem had been take a number of times in the past, that had been before it was so heavily fortified. Even its capture in 597 BC by Nebuchadrezzar had been by surrender and not by its being breached. It may well be therefore that it had gained a powerful reputation so that it was commonly thought that it could not be taken. But what is really behind these words is the fact that they were taken by surprise. They ‘could hardly believe their eyes'.
And they had reason to be surprised. Jerusalem was a powerful fortress city well able to withstand a siege, its elevated location and strong walls making it appear almost impregnable. And when we add to that the tales of how God had delivered it in times of trouble, most noticeably in the time of Hezekiah, it may well have gained a reputation for such impregnability. Jerusalem had after all been one of the few cities to successfully resist Assyria. Given the fact that it was also ‘a holy city' it would certainly have had a certain reputation, and people in those days had an awe of something that was ‘holy'. They would remember that Assyria had been unable to take it, and that even in 597 BC its walls had not been breached.
(Mem) It is because of the sins of her prophets,
And the iniquities of her priests,
Who have shed in the midst of her,
The blood of the righteous.
But the prophet has an explanation of why it had now been taken. It was because of the sins of her prophets and the iniquities of her priests (see Jeremiah 6:13; Jeremiah 23:11) who had shed innocent blood in the midst of her, especially the blood of the righteous, that is, those who were truly loyal to the covenant and to YHWH. We note immediately that the primary reason has to do with morality, and a gross breach of the covenant. YHWH was very much concerned about the behaviour of His people, and the shedding of blood was seen as especially horrific. One example of such shedding of the blood of the righteous was the prophet Uriah. See Jeremiah 26:20-24 for details. Consider also the death of Zechariah the son of Jehoiada (2 Chronicles 24:21), the innocent blood shed by Manasseh (2 Kings 21:16), and the attempts on Jeremiah's own life (Jeremiah 26:7).
(Nun) They wander in the streets,
Like those who are blind,
They are polluted with blood,
So that men cannot touch their clothes.
(Samek) ‘Depart you,' they cried to them,
‘Unclean! depart, depart, touch not!'
When they fled away and wandered, men said among the nations,
They will no more sojourn here.
The consequence for the priests and prophets is now vividly described. The opening description is probably metaphorical, indicating their then spiritual condition. As they wandered around the streets they were like the ‘blind. They were so blind that they had no understanding of what was true and right. All that they could do was proclaim falsehood. Or it may indicate their condition as a result of the lack of food. Even the priests and prophets were blinded by hunger so that they reeled as they walked.
And because they had ignored the covenant their blindness had resulted in them shedding innocent blood. Many a law case which resulted in such a conclusion would have been decided by the priests or the prophets, who would have been called on to pass a verdict, and whose influence was great in such matters. In consequence they were as men covered with blood, they were ‘polluted with blood', so that to touch them would render someone unclean. Whether it was metaphorical blood or actual we do not know.
They are therefore seen as wandering around like lepers (Leviticus 13:45) crying out, ‘Depart. Unclean, unclean. Depart, depart. Do not touch us.' Alternately the cries might be seen as coming from the onlookers seeking to avoid contact with them. There is something especially poignant in this in that the touching of a pries or prophet would normally have been seen as unthinkable because they were ‘holy'. But now they were being seen as untouchable for the very opposite reason.
The ‘fleeing away and wandering' may indicate that these are seen as part of the party that went to Egypt. On the other hand it may well indicate their situation wherever they went. Once in exile they are pictured as pariahs, as those who should be avoided, so that men recoiled from them and cried out, ‘they will no more sojourn here'. They would incur a great deal of religious blame for what had happened to the Temple.
But however we interpret them the real purpose of these verses is in order to bring out the horrific nature of what they had done. The men who should have been ensuring that the covenant was maintained at all costs, had in fact participated in ignoring it.
(Pe) The anger of YHWH (literally ‘the face of YHWH') has scattered them,
He will no more regard them,
They respected not the persons of the priests,
They did not show favour to the elders.
It was the face of YHWH revealed in anger which had scattered them. He had no regard for them as priests and prophets. Their status meant nothing to Him. And this was also true of ‘they'. This could mean people in general among the nations, or simply the Israelite exiles. They too did not respect the persons of the priests, who would once have been seen as sacrosanct. Nor did they show favour to the elders, those rulers who had brought them to this situation. Those who had been the most respected of men were now despised.
Alternately ‘the elders' might be translated ‘the old' indicating that even the old among the priests and prophets, those who would have been especially honoured, received no favour from the people..
(Ayin) Our eyes do yet fail,
Looking for our help in vain,
In our watching we have watched,
For a nation which could not save.
The prophet's thoughts now turn to the days of the siege when they had vainly watched from the walls of Jerusalem, looking out eagerly for those who had promised to assist them against the Babylonians, constantly expecting help. After all Egypt had made such great promises, and who could withstand mighty Egypt? This would especially have been so when the news came of the advancing Egyptian army. But they had watched in vain. No help had come. Egypt had turned out to be a nation which could not save.