| Barnes' Notes on the Bible The Lord smote the king, so that he was a leper - The circumstances under which this terrible affliction befel one of the greatest of the Jewish kings, are given at some length by the author of Chronicles (marginal reference), who supplies us with a tolerably full account of this important reign, which the writer of Kings dismisses in half-a-dozen verses. A several house - "A house of liberation," or, freedom. On the necessity, under which the Law placed lepers, of living apart from other men, see marginal reference Jotham became regent in his father's room, and exercised the functions of judge (1 Kings 3:9 note), from the time that his father became a leper.
Clarke's Commentary on the BibleThe Lord smote the king, so that he was a leper - The reason of this plague is well told in the above quoted chapter, 2 Chronicles 26:16. That his heart being elated, he went into the temple to burn incense upon the altar, assuming to himself the functions of the high priest; that Azariah the priest, with fourscore others, went in after him, to prevent him; and that while they were remonstrating against his conduct, the Lord struck him with the leprosy, which immediately appeared on his forehead; that they thrust him out as an unclean person; and that he himself hurried to get out, feeling that the Lord had smitten him; that he was obliged to dwell in a house by himself, being leprous, to the day of his death; and that during this time the affairs of the kingdom were administered by his son Jotham. A poet, ridiculing the conduct of those who, without an episcopal ordination, think they have authority from God to dispense all the ordinances of the Church, expresses himself thus: - But now the warm enthusiast cries, The office to myself Itake; Offering the Christian sacrifice, Myself a lawful priest I:make: To me this honor appertains, No need of man when God ordains. [Some go into the contrary extreme, and in effect say, no need of God when Man ordains.] Though kings may not so far presume, 'Tis no presumption in a clown, And, lo, without a call from Rome, My flail or hammer I lay down; continued...
Gill's Exposition of the Entire BibleAnd the Lord smote the king,.... With leprosy; the reason of it was, because he intruded into the priest's office, and went into the temple to burn incense on the altar of incense, 2 Chronicles 26:19, so that he was a leper unto the day of his death; but how long it was to it from his being smitten cannot be said with certainty; Dr. Lightfoot (l) thinks he died the same year he was smitten: and dwelt in a several house: without Jerusalem, as the Targum; for lepers, according to the law, were to dwell separate without the camp or city, Leviticus 13:46 the word for "several" signifies "free" (m); here he lived alone, free from the company and conversation of men, free from the business of government, his son doing that for him, and in the country, where he might freely walk about, as lepers did, and take the air; the Jews say (n), his house was among the graves, where he was free among the dead, as the phrase is, Psalm 88:5, but not likely; much better is what Abendana observes from R. Jonah, that the word, in the Arabic (o) language, signifies a little house, and so this might be in which he dwelt out of the city, in comparison of his palace: and Jotham the king's son was over the house; had the direction of the palace, and the management of all affairs in it: judging the people of the land; administering justice in all cases, for which they came to him, and so filled up his father's place; he did not depose his father, nor take upon him to be king, only did the business of one. (l) Works, vol. 1. p. 99. (m) "in domo libero", V. L. Tigurine version, &c. (n) T. Hieros. apud Jarchium in loc. (o) "in exiqua domo resedit assidue", Castel. Lexic. col. 1345.
Geneva Study BibleAnd the LORD {b} smote the king, so that he was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house. And Jotham the king's son was over the house, {c} judging the people of the land. (b) His father and grandfather were slain by their subjects and servants, and he because he would usurp the priest's office contrary to God's ordinance was smitten immediately by the hand of God with the leprosy, 2Ch 26:21. (c) As viceroy or deputy to his father.
Wesley's Notes 15:5 A leper - The cause whereof see 2Chron 26:16.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary15:1-7 Uzziah did for the most part that which was right. It was happy for the kingdom that a good reign was a long one.
Matthew Henry's Whole Bible CommentaryChapter 15 In this chapter, I. The history of two of the kings of Judah is briefly recorded:-1. Of Azariah, or Uzziah (v. 1-7). 2. Of Jotham his son (v. 32-38). II. The history of many of the kings of Israel that reigned at the same time is given us in short, five in succession, all of whom, except one, went down slain to the pit, and their murders were their successors. 1. Zachariah, the last of the house of Jehu, reigned six months, and then was slain and succeeded by Shallum (v. 8-12). 2. Shallum reigned one month, and then was slain and succeeded by Menahem (v. 13-15). 3. Menahem reigned ten years, or tyrannised rather, such were his barbarous cruelties (v. 16) and unreasonable exactions (v. 20), and then died in his bed, and left his son to succeed him first, and then suffer for him (v. 16-22). 4. Pekahiah reigned two years, and then was slain and succeeded by Pekah (v. 23-26). 5. Pekah reigned twenty years, and then was slain and succeeded by Hoshea, the last of all the kings of Israel (v. 27-31) for things were now working and hastening apace towards the final destruction of that kingdom. Verses 1-7 This is a short account of the reign of Azariah. 1. Most of it is general, and the same that has been given of others; he began young and reigned long (v. 2), did, for the most part, that which was right, v. 3 (it was happy for the kingdom that a good reign was a long one), only he had not zeal and courage enough to take away the high places, v. 4. 2. That which is peculiar, v. 5 (that God smote him with a leprosy) is more largely related, with the occasion of it, 2 Chr. 26:16, etc., where we have also a fuller account of the glories of the former part of his reign, as well as of the disgraces of the latter part of it. He did that which was right, as Amaziah had done; like him, he began well, but failed before he finished. Here we are told, (1.) That he was a leper. The greatest of men are not only subject to the common calamities, but also to the common infirmities, of human nature; and, if they be guilty of any heinous sin, they lie as open as the meanest to the most grievous strokes of divine vengeance. (2.) God smote him with this leprosy, to chastise him for his presumptuous invasion of the priests' office. If great men be proud men, some way or other God will humble them, and make them know he is both above them and against them, for he resisteth the proud. (3.) That he was a leper to the day of his death. Though we have reason to think he repented and the sin was pardoned, yet, for warning to others, he was continued under this mark of God's displeasure as long as he lived, and perhaps it was for the good of his soul that he was so. (4.) That he dwelt in a separate house, as being made ceremonially unclean by the law, to the discipline of which, though a king, he must submit. He that presumptuously intruded into God's temple, and pretended to be a priest, was justly shut out from his own palace, and shut up as a prisoner or recluse, ever after. We suppose that his separate house was made as convenient and agreeable as might be. Some translate it a free house, where he had liberty to take his pleasure. However, it was a great mortification to one that had been so much a man of honour, and a man of business, as he had been, to be cut off from society and dwell always in a separate house: it would almost make life itself a burden, even to kings, though they have never any to converse with but their inferiors; the most contemplative men would soon be weary of it. (5.) That his son was his viceroy in the affairs both of his court (for he was over the house) and of his kingdom (for he was judging the people of the land); and it was both a comfort to him and a blessing to his kingdom that he had such a son to fill up his room. | 
