<023426>Exodus 34:26
26. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk. | 26. Non coques hoedum in lacte matris suae. |
<051421>Deuteronomy 14:21
21. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.
LEVITICUS 22:27. When a bullock or a sheep. God forbids the young to be taken from the womb to the altar, not only because this bad example was likely to be transferred from the sacrifices to the ordinary food, but also because the offering would have been a fraudulent one. We have seen that the sacrifices were called the bread of God, in order that men should be more liberal with respect to them, and not offer meagre victims; but to kill a young animal fresh from the womb would have been a sign of contempt; although regard was also had to humanity, lest, by eating of such sacrifices, they should grow accustomed to cruelty. The eighth day is appointed, on which the lawfulness of the offering should commence. I am afraid that the reason which some assign for this is too subtle, viz., that an animal is made perfect in seven days, because God completed the work of creation in seven days. Besides, on this ground the seventh day would be the fittest for sacrifice, because in six days God completed all His work, and the seventh was hallowed for His service. It is enough for me that regard was had to maturity of age, just as in the case of circumcision. 1
28. And whether it be a cow or ewe. Though cruelty was indeed condemned in this precept, still I make no doubt but that Moses speaks primarily of the sacrifices. I confess the word fjç, shachat, which he uses, is a general one; but since throughout the chapter he is professedly treating of the sacrifices, and in connection with these words adds the conclusion respecting the hallowing of His holy name, ver. 32, the context requires that we should consider it to be an inculcation of purity in God’s service. If any prefer to extend it further, I will not contest the point; and thus this sentence will be a supplement to the Sixth Commandment. I have, however, followed what appears most probable, and the reader of sound judgment will, I hope, agree with me. Meanwhile, I confess that all barbarity and cruelty was thus prohibited in the sacrifices, and in them the rule was laid down, that men should not be cruel in reference to their daily food. It is a sight by no means pleasant to gentle minds to see the dam killed together with her young; and, if it were a common custom, men would easily grow callous as to blood-shedding in general. God would therefore not have the exercises of religion disconnected from the duties of humanity; and the tendency of the precept is, that God’s altar should not be a Cyclopean slaughter-house.
EXODUS 23
<022319>Exodus 23:19
19. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.
19. Thou shalt not seethe a kid. The threefold repetition of the command reminds us that a serious matter is spoken of, whereas it would be a light and almost frivolous one, if, as some suppose, it is merely the prohibition of a somewhat unwholesome food. But the Jews, not considering its intent, and affecting sanctity, as they do, in trifling puerilities, dare not taste of cheese together with kid, or lamb’s flesh, until they have well cleaned their teeth. I have no doubt, however, but that this prohibition relates to the sacrifices, for in the first passage quoted, it is added in connection with the offering of the first-fruits; and in the second, we read as follows: “The first of the first-fruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God. Nor shalt thou seethe a kid in his mother’s milk;” and so also in the third passage: “Ye shall not eat of any thing that dieth of itself, etc., for thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God; nor shalt thou seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.” I allow indeed that Moses sometimes mixes together precepts respecting different things; but this running context shews that this precept is delivered among the ceremonies, and must therefore be reckoned to be a part of the legal service. Whence I conclude, that the people are not only interdicted from eating this sort of food, as if they were to partake of flesh steeped in blood; but that they should not pollute the sacrifices by the carnal mixture. It is however probable, that meat seasoned with milk was accounted a delicacy; but inasmuch as they might grow cruel, if they ate of a lamb or kid in its mother’s milk, God forbade to be offered to Himself, what was not allowable even in their common meals. The exposition of some, that kids were excluded from their tables until they were weaned, is not agreeable to reason; because they then begin to have a goatish flavor. But the reason is a very appropriate one, i.e., that God would not admit a monstrous thing in His sacrifices, that the flesh of the young should be cooked in its mother’s milk, and thus, as it were, in its own blood.
THE CIVIL SUPPLEMENTS TO THE SECOND COMMANDMENT
EXODUS 23
<022324>Exodus 23:24
24. Thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images. | 24. Destruendo destrues eos, et confringendo confringes statuas eorum. |
1. These are the statutes and judgments which ye shall observe to do in the land which the Lord God of thy fathers giveth thee to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the earth. | 1. Haec sunt statuta et judicia quae custodietis, ut faciatis in terra quam daturus est Jehova Deus patrum tuorum tibi, quo possideatis eam omnibus diebus quibns vos vivetis super terrain illam. |
2. Ye shall utterly destroy all the places wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree. | 2. Destruendo destruetis omnia loca in quibus servierunt gentes quas possessuri estis, diis suis, super montes excelsos, et super colles, et sub omni arbore frondosa. |
3. And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place. | 3. Diruetisque aras earum, et statuas earum confringetis, lucos earum comburetis igni, et sculptilia deorum earum concidetis, abolebitisque nomen earum ex ipso loco. |
<023413>Exodus 34:13
13. But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves. | 13. Aras eorum diruetis, statues eorum confringetis, lucosque eorum succidetis. |
<050705>Deuteronomy 7:5
5. But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. | 5. Sic facietis els, altaria eorum destruetis, et statues eorum confringetis, lucosque eorum succidetis, ac sculptilia eorum comburetis igni. |
<043352>Numbers 33:52
52. Destroy all their pictures, and destroy all their molten images, and quite pluck down all their high places. | 52. Destruite omnes statues earum, et omnes imagines confiatiles destruite, et omnes aras |
<051621>Deuteronomy 16:21
21. Thou shalt not plant thee a grove of any trees near unto the altar of the Lord thy God, which thou shalt make thee.
EXODUS 23:24. Thou shalt utterly overthrow them. I allow indeed that these supplements would partly agree with, and be applicable to, the First Commandment; but since express mention is everywhere made in them of idols, this place seems to be better suited to them. After Moses has taught what was necessary to be observed, he adds a political law about breaking down altars and overthrowing images, in order that the people may take the more diligent heed. These passages, however, differ from the foregoing; for in condemning thus far the superstitions which are vicious in themselves, God prescribed what He would have observed even to the end of the world. He now confirms that instruction by temporary enactments, that He may keep His ancient people up to their duty. For we have now-a-days no scruples in retaining the temples, which have been polluted by idols, and applying them to a better use; since we are not bound by what was added consequently (propter consequentiam), as they say, to the Law. I admit indeed that whatever tends to foster superstition should be removed, provided we are not too rigorously superstitious in insisting peremptorily on what is in itself indifferent. The sum amounts to this, that to shew more clearly how greatly God detests idolatry, He would have the memory of all those things abolished which had once been dedicated to idols. The second passage more fully unfolds what Moses had briefly adverted to in the first; for under the word “image,” he included all those tokens of idolatry which he afterwards enumerates, and of which he commands the whole land to be so cleared that no relics of them should remain. From the words, when ye have come into the land “to possess it,” Augustin 2 sensibly infers, that there is no command for private individuals to destroy the instruments of idolatry; but that the people are armed and furnished with this authority to take the charge of regulating the public interests, when they have obtained possession of the land. The third passage is more brief, only enumerating three kinds; the fourth adds “graven images,” (sculptilia.) The fifth omits the groves, and puts in their place images or representations made of molten materials; and here we must observe what we have before adverted to, that the name of statue (statuoe) is sometimes taken in a good sense; and therefore the Jews think that what was permitted to the fathers before the Law is now forbidden. To us, however, it seems more probable, that the statues now condemned are not such as Jacob erected only as a monument, but such as they pretended to be a likeness of God. Some translate the word “titles,” 3 others “pictures,” with what propriety I leave to the judgment of my readers. He adds “image,” 4 a word which, though not in itself sinful, is still deservedly rejected in connection with the worship of God. Man is the image of God; for Moses uses this same word, when relating the creation of man. But to represent God by any figure, before which He is worshipped, is nothing less than to corrupt His glory, and so to metamorphose Him. By speaking of molten images, he admits neither sculptures nor pictures; but since they are generally cast in the precious metals, the people were expressly to beware of keeping gods of gold or silver for ornament.
DEUTERONOMY 16
21. Thou shalt not plant there. It is plain from the end of this verse that it is part of the Second Commandment. We know 5 that amongst the heathen nations groves were sacred, so that with them no religious object would receive due reverence, except under the shade of trees. Wherefore lest conformity with this general custom should vitiate the pure worship of God, this distinction was made; and this then is the intent of the prohibition, that the Jews should fly from all strange rites, lest by too closely approaching the Gentiles, they should introduce a sinful medley. But how necessary this prohibition was, appears from their eager imitation (of the heathen), of which mention is constantly made in the sacred history. For there was scarcely any period in which they abstained from “high places.” Nor is it without reason that Isaiah and Jeremiah reprove them for “playing the harlot under every green tree.” (Isaiah 57:5; Jeremiah 2:20; 3:6.)
EXODUS 34
11. Observe thou that which I command thee this day: behold, I drive out before thee the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite. | 11. Custodi quod ego praecipio tibi hodie. Ecce ego ejiciam a facie tua Amorrhaeum, Chananaeum, Hittaeum, Pheresaeum, Hivaeum, et Jebusaeum. |
12. Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whether thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee. | 12. Cave tibi ne forte percutias foedus cum habitatoribus ejus terrae ad quam ingressurus es, ne forte sint in laqueum vel offendiculum in medio tui. |
15. Lest thou make a covenant with the illhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; | 15. Ne forte percutias foedus cum habitatoribus ejus terrae, ut scortentur post deos suos, et sacrificent diis suis: vocet autem to quispiam, et comedas e sacrificio ejus. |
16. And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods. | 16. Et forte accipias e filiabus ejus filiis tuis, et scortentur filiae ejus post deos ipsarum, et scortari faciant filios tuos post deos earum. |
<022331>Exodus 23:31-33
31. For I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand; and thou shalt drive them out before thee. | 31. Dabo in manum vestram habitatores terrae, et expelles eos a facie tua. |
32. Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. | 32. Non percuties cum ipsis foedus, nec cum diis eorum. |
33. They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me; for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee. | 33. Non habitabunt in terra tua: ne forte peccare faciant te contra me quando colueris deos eorum, quod erit tibi in offendiculum. |
EXODUS 34:11. Observe that which I command thee. Although these supplements belong alike to the First and Second Commandment, still it was fit to postpone them to this place; because in them God applied a remedy to all external and manifest superstitions, which might easily have insinuated themselves had they not been anticipated in good time. All will run eagerly into idolatry, even though there be none to impel us from without; but where the ungodly act upon us also like fans, and this must needs be the case, when the people of God entangle themselves in their society, this disease is increasingly inflamed. And truly the closer our familiarity is with them, it is like a yoke, whereby they draw others with them. In order then that the people, when they entered the land, might preserve themselves pure and thoroughly devoted to God, care must be taken lest they should contract pollution from other nations; and therefore God would have all the inhabitants of Canaan utterly destroyed, lest they should entice His elect people to their errors and the worship of false gods. He here interdicts two kinds of covenant with them, lest there should be any public or private alliance between them; and then commands that all should be slain without mercy. As regards the public covenant, it was forbidden for a special cause, that the sons of Abraham should mix themselves with the reprobate; because they would have thus deprived themselves of the lawful inheritance which God had destined for them; nor would the face of the land have been renewed by the removal of all defilements. Since then in His just judgment God had long ago determined to destroy these nations, it was not lawful for the children of Abraham to rescind the divine decree, or to make any alteration in it.
If therefore any one should insist too literally on this passage to prove the unlawfulness of making any contract with the ungodly, because God forbade it of old, he will not reason soundly, since God does not now command us to execute vengeance by putting all the wicked to death; nor is a certain country assigned to the Church in which it may dwell apart and have dominion. Still I do not deny that what was enjoined upon the ancient people, in some degree has reference to us; nay, we must carefully remark what I lately adverted to, that those, who voluntarily unite themselves with the ungodly, impose as it were a yoke on themselves to draw them to destruction. And in fact Paul embraced in this comparison all the grounds upon which unbelievers insinuate themselves into familiarity with us, to ensnare us by their corrupting influence. (2 Corinthians 6:14) As much as possible, therefore, must all ties of connection be rather broken, than that by union with God’s enemies 6 we should allow ourselves to be drawn away from Him by their allurements; for they will always be attempting, by all the artifices they can, to make a divorce between us and God. Besides, if we desire faithfully to serve God, there ought to be a perpetual quarrel between us and them. God then would have us not only separate ourselves from open communion with them, but since we are too much given to depravity, He also commands us to fly from all the snares which might gradually induce us to participate in their sins. But inasmuch as Paul justly reminds us, that if we are not permitted to have any dealings with unbelievers, we must “needs go out of the world,” (1 Corinthians 5:10,) it is proper for us to distinguish between the contracts which associate us with them and those which do not at all diminish our liberty.
As long as we live among unbelievers, we cannot escape those dealings with them which relate to the ordinary affairs of life; but if we approach nearer, so that a greater intimacy should arise, we open the door as it were to Satan. Such are alliances between kings and nations, and marriages amongst private persons; and therefore Moses laid down rules respecting them both for the ancient people. And although our condition now-a-days is more free, still we are warned that all temptations are to be avoided which might give occasion to this evil. It is notorious that men are too apt to be led away by the blandishments of their wives; and also, that men in their power compel their wives to obedience. Those, therefore, who mix with idolaters, knowingly and wilfully devote themselves to idols. The same thing happens as to alliances; for men are ashamed in them to betray any marks of disrespect. Thus, to please the king of Syria, Ahaz raised an altar in the temple like that at Damascus. (2 Kings 16:10.) Thus while the Jews desired to gratify the Assyrians, they imitated their superstitions. In a word, it, is a most uncommon case that the religion of those should remain unaffected who seek to curry favor with the ungodly. But that they may cleave more earnestly to their duty, the danger I have spoken of is declared; otherwise such rejoinders as these would have been straightway in their mouths: “Although my wife is altogether averse from true piety, still I will stand firm; although my husband is not subject to God, yet I will never decline from the true course; although religion is not dear to our allies, still it shall not cease to be sacredly held in honor amongst ourselves.” God 7 therefore interferes betimes, and declares that they will not be so magnanimous in resistance, when once they have opened the window to the evil. He adds, too, another evil, i.e., that the sacred land would be thus profaned; for, although the Israelites should be separated from the impieties of the Gentiles, still it was not excusable to allow them to have altars in that land in which God had chosen a sanctuary for Himself. Yet at the same time Moses warns them that it could scarcely be but that this association would involve the Israelites also. When he says, then, “lest they go a whoring after their gods, and one call thee,” he means that the Israelites would be like panders, if under cover of their covenant, and for the sake of preserving their good-will, they gave the Gentiles permission to exercise their superstitions; and also that this would be a snare to grosser sin; since whilst they feared to give offense, they would not refuse to go to their feasts, and thus would be partakers of their guilt. Literally, it is, “Lest perhaps thou strike a covenant, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and call thee,” which words may be thus paraphrased, so as to depend on the foregoing prohibition: “Lest it should happen, after you shall have made a covenant, that they should go a whoring,” etc.; or thus, “By no means make a covenant, because they will go a whoring after their idols, and when they shall offer sacrifices will call thee.” The meaning, however, will amount to the same; for he mentions the two worst results of their unlawful covenant, i.e., that these unbelieving nations will pollute the land, and under pretext of kindness will corrupt God’s people. But in order that they may be more earnest and courageous in their duty, the promise is added, that they shall be victorious over these nations. This was almost incredible, that wanderers and exiles as they were, they should easily and quickly be enabled to gain possession of so many lands; therefore God takes away all doubt, and thus commands the Israelites to obey His dominion at the end of this war, which they shall feel that they have waged successfully under His auspices. Wherefore he convicts them of ingratitude if they shall dare to relax any of that severity which He requires; as if He had said, Since these nations far excel you in numbers, and strength, and warlike equipments, it will plainly appear that you have not conquered them by your own power; it will therefore be more than iniquitous that the war, which shall be concluded under my guidance alone, and by my hand, should be finished in opposition to my will, and that you should be the disposers of that victory which I have gratuitously conferred upon you. The discrepancy is easily reconciled, that Moses should only enumerate six nations in Exodus, and add a seventh in Deuteronomy; for often he only names the Canaanites or Amorites, yet comprising by synecdoche all the rest.
DEUTERONOMY 7
<050701>Deuteronomy 7:1-4
1. When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; | 1. Quum introduxerit te Jehova Deus tuus in terram in quam ingrederis possidendam, et avellerit gentes multas a facie tua, Hittaeum, Gergasaeum, Amorrhaum, Chananaeum, Perisaeum, Hivaeum, et Jebusaeum, septem gentes nmltas et robustiores te: |
2. And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee, thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: | 2. Et tradiderit eas Jehova Deus tuus coram to, et percusseris eas: perdendo perdes eas: non inibis cum illis pactum, neque misereberis earum. |
3. Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. | 3. Non junges te affinitate cum eis, filiam tuam non dabis filio ejus et filiam ejus non accipies filio tuo. |
4. For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods; so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. | 4. Avocabit enim filium tuum a me, et colent Deos alienos: unde irascetur furor Jehovae in vos, ut disperdat te cito. |
2. Thou shalt smite them and utterly destroy them. Those who think that there was cruelty in this command, usurp too great authority in respect to Him who is the judge of all. The objection is specious that the people of God were unreasonably imbued with inhumanity, so that, advancing with murderous atrocity, they should spare neither sex nor age. But we must first remember what we shall see hereafter, i.e., that when God had destined the land for His people, He was at liberty utterly to destroy the former inhabitants, so that its possession might be free for them. We must then go further, and say that He desired the just demonstration of His vengeance to appear upon these nations. Four hundred years before He had justly punished their many sins, yet had He suspended His sentence and patiently borne with them, if haply they might repent. That sentence 8 is well known, “The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.”
(Genesis 15:16.) After God had shewn His mercy for four centuries, and this clemency had increased both their audacity and madness, so that they had not ceased to provoke His wrath, surely it was no act of cruelty to compensate for the delay by the grievousness of the punishment. And hence appears the foul and detestable perversity of the human intellect. We are indignant if He does not smile at once; if He delays punishment our zeal accuses Him of slackness and want of energy; yet, when He comes forth as the avenger of guilt, we either call Him cruel, or at least complain of His severity. Yet His justice will always absolve Him; and our calumnies and detractions will recoil upon our own heads. He commanded seven nations to be utterly destroyed; that is to say, after they had added sin to sin for 400 years, so that their accumulation was immense, and experience had taught that they were obstinate and incurable. It will therefore be said elsewhere, that the land “spewed them out,” (Leviticus 18:28,) as if it had eased itself, when burdened by their filthiness. If impiety is intolerable to the lifeless element, why should we wonder that God in His character of Judge exercised extreme severity? But if God’s wrath was just, He might surely choose whatever ministers and executioners of it He pleased; and when He had given this commission to His people, it was not unreasonable that He should forbid them to pity those whom He had appointed for destruction. For what can be more preposterous than for men to vie with God in clemency? and when it pleases the Master to be severe, for the servants to assume to themselves the right of shewing mercy? Therefore God often reproves the Israelites for being improperly merciful. And hence it came to pass that the people, whom they ought to have destroyed, became as thorns and briars to prick them. (Joshua 23:13, and throughout the book of Judges.) Away, then, with all temerity, whereby we would presumptuously restrict God’s power to the puny measure of our reason; and rather let us learn reverently to regard those works of His, whose cause is concealed from us, than wantonly criticise them. Especially when He declares to us the just grounds of His vengeance, let us learn to subscribe to His decrees with the humility and modesty that becomes us, rather than to oppose them in vain, and indeed to our own confusion.
DEUTERONOMY 7
<050716>Deuteronomy 7:16-26
16. And thou shalt consume all the people which the Lord thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity upon them: neither shalt thou serve their gods; for that will be a snare unto thee. | 16. Absumesque omnes populos quos Jehova Deus tuus dat tibi: non parcel oculus tuus els, nec coles deos eorum, quid laqueus erunt tibi. |
17. If thou shalt say in thine heart, These nations are more than I; how can I dispossess them? | 17. Quum dixeris in corde tuo, Plures sunt gentes illae quam ego: quomodo potero expellere eas? |
18. Thou shalt not be afraid of them; but shalt well remember what the Lord thy God did unto Pharaoh, and unto all Egypt; | 18. Ne timeas tibi ab eis: recordando recorderis quae fecerit Jehova Deus tuus ipsi Plaraoni, et omnibus Aegyptiis; |
19. The great temptations which thine eyes saw, and the signs, and the wonders, and the mighty hand, and the stretched-out arm, whereby the Lord thy God brought thee out; so shall the Lord thy God do unto all the people of whom thou art afraid. | 19. Probationum magnarum quas viderunt oculi tui, et signorum, portentorumque, et manus validae, brachiique extenti quo eduxit to Jehova Deus tuus: sic faciet Jehova Deus tuus omnibus populis a quorum conspectu times tibi. Praeterea crabronem immittet Jehova Deus tuus in cos, donec pereant qui superfuerint, et quia absconderint sea facie tua. |
20. Moreover, the Lord thy God will send the hornet among them, until they that are left, and hide themselves from thee, be destroyed. | 20. Praeterea crabronem immittet Jehova Deus tuus in eos, donec pereant qui superfuerint, et qui absconderint se a facie tua. |
21. Thou shalt not be affrighted at them: for the Lord thy God is among you, a mighty God and terrible. | 21. Ne paveas a facie eorum: quia Deus tuus est in medio tui, Deus maximus et terribilis. |
22. And the Lord thy God will put out those nations before thee by little and little: thou mayest not consume them at once, lest the beasts of the field increase upon thee. bestia agri. | 22. Expelletque Jehova Deus tuus gentes illas a facie tua paulatim paulatim: non poteris absumere eas cito, ne multiplicetur contra to bestia agri. |
23. But the Lord thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they be destroyed. | 23. Attamen tradet eas Jehova Deus tuus coram to, et conteret eas contritione maxima, donec perdantur ipsae. |
24. And he shall deliver their kings into thine hand, and thou shalt destroy their name from under heaven: there shall no man be able to stand before thee, until thou have destroyed them. | 24. Tradetque reges earum in manum tuam, et perdes nomen earum de sub coelo: non consistet quisquam coram te, donec perdas cos. |
25. The graven images of their gods shall ye burn with fire: thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that is on them, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein: for it is an abomination to the Lord thy God. | 25. Sculptilia deorum ipsorum combures igni: non concupisces argentum, et aurum quae sunt super ca, et capias tibi: ne illaquees to in illo: abominatio enim Jehovae Dei tui est. |
26. Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing like it: but thou shalt utterly detest it, and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a cursed thing. | 26. Neque introduces abominationem in domum tuam, et sis anathema sicut illud: detestando detestaberis illud, et abominando abominaberis illud, quia est anathema. |
16. And thou shalt consume all the people. It is plain from the second part of the verse wherefore He commands the people of Canaan to be destroyed, when He forbids their gods to be worshipped. This precept, therefore, corresponds with the others, where He dooms in like manner these nations to utter destruction. I now pass over what I have explained elsewhere, i.e., that the vengeance which God exercised against these obstinate and ten-times lost people cannot be ascribed to cruelty. For since 400 years ago it had been said to Abraham that their iniquity was not yet full, they could not be treated with severity equal to their deserts, when they had so licentiously and wickedly abused God’s long-suffering. But we must take notice of God’s design in so particularly enjoining on the Israelites utterly to destroy whatever should be found there; for besides that He had once doomed them all to the destruction they merited, He would have the land also, in which His name was to be invoked, purged from all pollutions. Now, if any of the old inhabitants had survived, they would soon have endeavored to revive their corruptions, and since the Israelites were otherwise more disposed than enough to superstition, they would easily have been attracted to the worship of idols. This, then, is the reason why God forbids them to shew these people any humanity or clemency, as I have reminded you to be clear from the context; for these things stand in connection, that they should not spare the nations nor worship their gods. The reason which is subjoined, “for it will be a snare or stumblingblock to you,” must be extended to the whole context, viz., that it would be fatal to the Jews if they should spare the nations which would allure them to impiety.
17. If thou shalt say in thine heart. Since it was a matter of great difficulty to destroy such a multitude of men, and despair itself would drive them to madness, so that it would be frivolous for the Israelites to cut off all hope of mercy, God anticipates their fear, and exhorts them to the strenuous execution of His sentence. From whence we gather some useful instruction; whenever God commands anything which exceeds our power, we must still obey and boldly break through whatever obstacles present themselves to impede us. In all arduous matters, therefore, let this doctrine come to our aid, that whatever is contrary to God’s will may easily be annihilated by His almighty power. But since terror, presented to our eyes, immediately so lays hold of all our senses that we lie as it were torpid, God recalls to the recollection of the Israelites what abundant grounds of confidence He had supplied them with. For all the miracles He had wrought were so many proofs of His invincible power; and hence they should conclude that nothing was to be dreaded, provided God should go before them, and that, therefore, being assured of victory, they should not descend to any treaties.
20. Moreover, the Lord thy God will send the hornet. Since the destruction of their enemies might seem long, if they were only to be slain by their hands and weapons, and again, because it was scarcely credible that, without defending themselves, they would voluntarily stretch forth their own throats, God promises that in another way also He would supply the means of their conquest. Therefore, lest the Israelites, imagining that their enemies would be prompt and vigorous in resistance, should be alarmed or affrighted, God declares that other forces should be at hand, for that hornets or other poisonous insects should destroy all the fugitives. The same declaration is found in Exodus 23; and what God had promised, Joshua relates that He performed. (Joshua 24:12.) But inasmuch as these nations were not to be destroyed in a moment, lest the people should therefore grow weary or become inactive, God anticipates this, and reminds them that this delay would be advantageous, for when all the inhabitants were exterminated, the wild beasts would occupy the empty land. The prolongation of the war, therefore, ought not to trouble them, for by it God provided for His people’s welfare, since, if the men were speedily destroyed, they should have to contend with wild beasts. But though the passage which I have quoted from Exodus is similar in terms, yet I have designedly placed it under another head; for God here refers to the extermination of the Gentile nations with another object, i.e., lest any of the ancient pollutions should remain in the land, and lest the Israelites should mingle with the ungodly, by whose arts they might at length be drawn away to spurious religions.
25. The graven images of their gods. He again impresses upon them the object of the destruction of the nations, but he goes further than before. He had before forbidden them to worship their gods. He now commands them to consume their graven images with fire, for since the people were prone to superstition, such snares might easily have alienated them from God’s pure worship. Nor does he command them merely to melt the gold and silver so as to alter its shape, but he altogether interdicts its use, since it would be a contagious plague; for he shews how greatly God abominates idols, inasmuch as whosoever should touch the materials of which they were molten, would contract pollution and become accursed. This great severity might indeed seem to condemn the metals which were created for man’s use, as if they were impure, and as if the perfectness of natural things was liable to be corrupted by man. But in this way idolaters would contaminate the sun and moon, when falsely regarding them as objects of corrupt worship; and it must be answered that the gold and silver itself was by no means polluted by this impious abuse; but that, although free from all stain in itself, it was polluted in respect to the people. Such was the uncleanness of animals, not that they had in themselves any pollution, but because God had interdicted their being eaten. The pollution therefore which is now mentioned arises from a similar prohibition; for otherwise the ignorant people could not be restrained, and hence God would have that to be abominable which in itself was pure. Still this was a political precept, and only given temporarily to the ancient people; yet we gather from it how detestable idolatry is, which even infects the works of God themselves with its own filthiness.
DEUTERONOMY 25
<052517>Deuteronomy 25:17-19
17. Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt; | 17. Memento quid fecerit tibi Amalec in via, quando egressi estis ex Aegypto: |
18. How he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God. timuerit Deum. | 18. Quod tibi occurrerit in via, et te in cauda agminis aggressus sit, omnium debilium post to, quum esses lassus et fatigatus, et non timuerit Deum. |
19. Therefore it shall be, when the Lord thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it. | 19. Erit ergo quum dederit requiem Jehova Deus tuus tibi ab omnibus inimicis tuis per circuitum, in terra quam Jehova Deus tuus dat tibi in haereditatem ut possideas eam, delebis memoriam Amalec de sub coelo, ne obliviscaris. |
17. Remember what Amalek did unto thee. We have elsewhere seen how the Amalekites were the first who made a hostile attack upon the people, and endeavored to interrupt their journey; and Moses also related the sentence of God against them, the execution of which he now enjoins upon the people. God then swore that there should be perpetual war against them throughout all ages; and, that His threatening might not be frustrated, He appoints His people to take vengeance upon their great cruelty and impiety. For when the Israelites were inflicting no injury nor loss upon them, it was an act of injustice to make war upon peaceful persons proceeding, without doing any wrong, to another land. But humanity was still more grossly violated by them, inasmuch as they did not spare their own kindred, and thus cast away the feelings of nature. It is plain from Genesis 36:12, that the Amalekites were the descendants of Esau;
and hence it follows that they were both sprung from the same ancestor, Isaac. It is true that this command seems but little in accordance with religion, that the people should retaliate an injury done to them. I reply, that they are not stimulated to vindictive feelings in these words, but that they are commanded to punish the sins of Amalek with the same severity as those of the other nations. God appears, indeed, to influence them by private motives when He recounts the cruelty shewn by the Amalekites; but we must judge of the intention of the Legislator with reference to His nature, for we know that no angry or hateful passions can be approved by God; and hence it is easy to conclude that the command was such as the people might obey with well-regulated zeal. The first origin of the crime is specified, viz., because they “feared not God,” for this must not be taken in its ordinary meaning, but as expressing that they rebelled against God as it were deliberately. For the promise given to Abraham and Isaac could not be unknown to them; but, since Esau, the founder of their race, had fallen from the right of primogeniture, it came to pass that they attempted to bring God’s covenant to nought out of wicked and sacrilegious jealousy; and this is the reason why He unites them with the reprobate nations unto the same destruction. The word bnz, zineb, which means to crop the tail, is equivalent to making an attack on the rear, where the baggage and invalids are wont to be placed. 9
DEUTERONOMY 23
<052303>Deuteronomy 23:3-8
3. An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever: | 3. Non ingredietur Ammonita et Moabita congregationem Jehovae: etiam generatione decima non ingredietur congregationem Jehovae usque in saeculum. |
4. Because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor, of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee. | 4. Eo quod non exceperint vos cum pane et aqua in via, posteaquam egressi estis ex Aegypto, et quod mercede conduxerit adversum te Bileam filium Beor de Pethor e Mesopotamia Syriae, ut malediceret tibi. |
5. Nevertheless the Lord thy God would not hearken unto Balaam; but the Lord thy God turned the curse into a blessing unto thee, because the Lord thy God loved thee. | 5. Sed noluit Jehova Deus tuus Bileam, et convertit Jehova Deus tuus tibi maledictionem in benedictionem, quod diligeret to Jehova Deus tuus. |
6. Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever. | 6. Non quaeres pacem eorum et bonum eorum cunctis diebus tuis, in saeculum. |
7. Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land. | 7. Non abominaberis Edoaemum, quia frater tuus est: non abominaberis Aegyptium, quia peregrinus fuisti in terra ejus. |
8. The children that are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the Lord in their third generation. | 8. filii qui nascentur eis generatione tertia ingredientur congregationem Jehovae. |
3. An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter. As God has lately prohibited His people from all connection and alliance with the Canaanitish nations, so He now distinguishes between the aliens, and shews upon what conditions, and whom they might admit (into the Church. 10) The Moabites and Ammonites He altogether rejects; because they not only refused the common rites of humanity to the people, but also took arms against them, and even hired Balaam to curse them. They were the descendants of Lot, and ought to have embraced the children of Abraham as brethren. It was, then, inexcusable barbarity in them to make a violent attack upon those who had voluntarily offered them peace; who had promised by their messengers that they would make their way without injury or wrong; and who finally had besought that a passage might be granted them, provided they honestly paid the price of bread and water; although doubtless God took vengeance rather on their impiety than their cruelty, since they had not only endeavored to make His goodness of none effect, but also to annihilate His faithfulness. Since, therefore, it was not their fault that the Church did not perish, and the effect of His promise fail, whereon the salvation of man was based, and this they had done knowingly and wilfully, no wonder that they were excluded from the Church.
4. And because he hired. 11 Although there was a common reason why both nations should not be admitted, yet the number of the verb seems to be changed designedly, because Balac king of Moab hired Balaam; yet, inasmuch as they conspired together, the same crime is justly imputed to the Ammonites. Herein indeed their detestable impiety especially betrayed itself, that by hiring a mercenary man, to launch the thunders of his curse against the people, they sought to overwhelm God by magical incantations. Nor did they err through ignorance, since they obstinately persevered in their madness until Balaam was confounded from heaven. And on this ground it is expressly stated that he was not “hearkend unto,” but that rather his curses and prayers were “turned into a blessing.” Hence it appears how awful is the vengeance which awaits all who of deliberate malice oppose God’s grace and the welfare of the Church. Thus now-adays no stone is left unturned by the defenders of the Papacy, whereby they may disturb the course of heavenly doctrine, nay, whereby they may altogether silence the Gospel if they could.
Since another reason for this rejection is plainly signified, it is foolish in some to attribute this sentence upon them to their origin, as if the Ammonites and Moabites were excluded from the Church because they sprang from an incestuous connection.
7. Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite. In order that the punishment denounced against the Moabites and Ammonites should be more strongly marked, he commands the Edomites and Egyptians to be admitted in the third generation; the former, because they derived their origin from the same ancestor, Isaac, since they were the descendants of Esau; the latter, because they had been their hosts. For hence it was manifest that the Ammonites and Moabites had been dis-honored on account of their guilt, when not even aliens were thus dealt with. Now, although Esau had cut himself off from the prerogative of believers, yet the door was again opened to his children, provided they returned to their source and origin, and in the humility of faith admitted the primogeniture of Jacob, who had been chosen when their father was passed by or degraded. But what is meant by this inequality of punishment, when the crime was identical? for Edom appeared in arms against Israel before Moab, and compelled them to take their journey by another way. It did not contend with hired imprecations for Israel’s destruction, but since, when humbly entreated on the score of their old relationship, it had not only refused them a passage, but had advanced against them with a great army, it should have been dealt with no less severity than Amalek or Ammon. Besides, being connected to them by a closer of blood, the Edomites were less excusable in their hostility. I find, then, no reason why God shewed greater clemency to them than the others whom He treated more severely; except that He wished to shew that it depends on His own will to chastise more lightly in some the same sins on which He takes more severe vengeance in others; and, inasmuch as all are deserving of utter destruction, He justly retains in His own hand the free right of sparing whom He will. We must here adore His judgments, into the depths of which we cannot penetrate. Nor is this inequality a ground for the noisy cavils of the ungodly, as if He were inconsistent with Himself, and acted in contradiction to the rules of His Law; since in so doing He does not judge in diverse ways, but, condemning all alike, indulges whom He pleases, or remits a part of their punishment. A question may also arise as to the Egyptians, why God lays His people under an obligation to them, because they sojourned in their land. For it was barbarous and inhospitable cruelty in them to oppress the wretched fugitives who had trusted to their good faith. But God here refers to their first reception; as in Isaiah 52:4, where, comparing the Egyptians with the Assyrians, He says that the latter oppressed them like robbers, whilst the former had ruled over them not without a cause, because the people had gone down thither of their own accord. Although, therefore, the Israelites had been unworthily oppressed by their fierce tyranny, still God would have their old kindness acknowledged; since their dearth and famine had been relieved, and the refugees were kindly received, when the inhabitants of Canaan were perishing of hunger.
DEUTERONOMY 17
2. If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant, | 2. Si inventus fuerit in medio tui, in una portarum tuarum, quas Jehova Deus tuus dat tibi, vir sire mulier qui fecerit malum in oculis Jehovae Dei tui, ad transgrediendum pactum ejus: |
3. And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; | 3. Iveritque et coluerit deos alienos: et adoraverit eos, solem aut lunam, aut universum exercitum coelorum, quod ego non praecepi: |
4. And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; | 4. Et nuntiatum fuerit tibi, audierisque: tune probe inquires: et ecce, si verus et certus fuerit sermo, et facta fuerit abominatio haec in Israel: |
5. Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die. | 5. Educes virum illum, aut mulierem illam, qui commiserunt facinus illud pravum ad portas tuas, virum, aut mulierem, et obrues cos lapidibus donec moriantur. |
7. The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people: so thou shalt put the evil away from among you. | 7. Marius testium primo erit in eum ad occidendum ipsum, et manus populi postea: exterminabisque malum e medio tui. |
2. If there be found among you. The same punishment is here decreed against idolaters, to which apostates had been before condemned; and thus either transgression is declared a capital crime. Hence we gather that it is accounted before God no less weighty a sin to violate His worship by gross and impure superstitions, than openly and professedly to fall away from religion altogether. Thus in Ezekiel 20:39, He bids farewell to the Jews, and as it were emancipates them, that they may go every one after his idols, when they are no longer contented with Him alone. Whilst God, however, is so rigid an exactor of punishment, He would not have judgment pronounced precipitately. These are tokens of severity, that a woman as well as a man is to be slain; that the whole people should unite in stoning them; that the evil should be removed from the midst of the land, lest the abomination should continue unpunished. On the other hand moderation is to be observed, since diligent inquiry is to be made, nor is sentence to be pronounced unless the matter is fully proved; and again, that the trial may be lawful, the accusation of one man is not to convict the accused. God therefore would not have the judges, under pretext of zeal, shed blood inconsiderately; but only, after mature inquiry, the criminal was to be punished in proportion to his transgression. By synecdoche he speaks of their cities under the name of “gates,” and alludes to the land having been “given” them, that they might not shew their want of gratitude to God by profaning it. He marks too the heinous nature of the offense, by calling it the “transgressing of God’s covenant;” as much as to say that all who go aside unto idols are covenant-breakers. For the thief, and the fornicator, and the drunkard, and such like transgress the Law indeed, but still are not placed in this category. In fine, it is not simple impiety which is here punished, but the perfidy whereby true religion is forsaken, after men have devoted themselves to God, and professed themselves to be of the number of His people. The repetition of the words “that man or that woman,” more fully confirms what I have said, viz., that although the weakness of the female sex may extenuate their guilt, yet must they not be pardoned in such a case as this, where God’s worship is directly violated. Although mention is only made of the sun, and moon, and stars, the same thing applies to images also; nay, inasmuch as it is baser to transfer God’s honor to dead stones or stocks, than to those constellations in which something divine shines forth, so much more detestable are they who plunge themselves into such stupidity.
4. Then three shalt inquire 12 diligently. Although this moderation here refers only to the present matter, yet should it always be maintained in judicial proceedings, lest innocent persons should be treated with undue severity. Again, we must remember what I have said elsewhere, that judges are here not only restrained from precipitate condemnation, but also stimulated to beware of passing over, in idleness or negligence, anything that was necessary to be known. For they often fail in their duty, because they wilfully connive at guilt; and thus that which would be manifest if they would be at the pains to make more diligent inquiry, does not come to light. God, then, would not have them slumber nor take no notice of sinister reports, but rather inquire diligently as to things which may have come to their cars, so that no crime may remain unpunished. The same is the case as to witnesses; for whilst it would be unjust to pronounce sentence on the testimony of one man, still, if two or three will not suffice, there would be no end to litigation. Fitly, then, has God prescribed to judges both that they shall not be rashly credulous, and yet that they shall be content with the lawful number of witnesses; but this point will be more largely treated of elsewhere in commenting both on the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.
7. The hands of the witnesses shall be first. It was not without reason that God would have criminals put to death by the hand of those by whose testimony they were condemned. The ancient people did not employ public executioners, that there might be more solemnity, modesty, and reverence in the infliction of punishments. This office he peculiarly enjoins upon the witnesses, because the tongue of many is too hasty, not to say worse of it, so that they do not hesitate to stab people verbally, when they would not dare to lay a finger upon them. This, then, was an excellent remedy for the repression of light accusations, not to admit the testimony of any, whose hand was not prepared to execute the sentence. Stoning was indeed a sad and horrible kind of punishment; but it is probable that God made choice of it because it required the application of many hands. If hanging had not been in use, God would have commanded in vain that the corpse of a man who had been hanged should be taken down from the tree before sunset. (Deuteronomy 21:23.) There were, therefore, other kinds of capital punishment; but when the land was to be purged, as by a propitiation, by the death of the sinner, he was to be stoned by the hands of the whole people, since it would have been cruel for him to be slain by a lingering death, which would have been the case if they had stoned him one after another. The reason why the people were commanded to cast the stones with one consent was, that they might give proof of their zeal, and manifest their great indignation that God’s worship had been violated.
THE THIRD COMMANDMENT
EXODUS 20
<022007>Exodus 20:7
7. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. ITS REPETITION | 7. Non sumes nomen Jehovae Dei tui in vanum: quia non absolvet eum Jehova qui nomen suum sumpserit in vanum. N |
<050511>Deuteronomy 5:11
11. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
EXODUS 20:7. Thou shalt not take the name. There is a manifest synecdoche in this Commandment; for in order that God may procure for His name its due reverence, He forbids its being taken in vain, especially in oaths. Whence we infer on the other hand an affirmative commandment, that every oath should be a testimony of true piety, whereby the majesty of God Himself should obtain its proper glory. Moreover, it is clear that not only when we swear by God, His name is to be reverently honored, but whenever mention of it is made. Thus in these words He maintains His holiness not only in His word, but also in His works, against all profane contempt of it. We shall soon see that to swear by God’s name is a species or part of religious worship, and this is manifest too from the words of Isaiah 45:23; for when he predicts that all nations shall devote themselves to pure religion, he thus speaks, “As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall swear by me.” 13 Now, if the bowing of the knees be a token of adoration, this swearing which is connected with it is equivalent to an acknowledgment that He is God. Since, then, reason dictates that the species is put for the genus, we must see what is to be understood by God’s name, and by the adverb awçl, leshav. It is silly and childish to restrict this to the name Jehovah, 14 as if God’s majesty were confined to letters or syllables; but, whereas
His essence is invisible, His name is set before us as an image, in so far as God manifests Himself to us, and is distinctly made known to us by His own marks, just as men are each by his own name. On this ground Christ teaches that God’s name is comprehended in the heavens, the earth, the temple, the altar, (Matthew 5:34,) because His glory is conspicuous in them. Consequently, God’s name is profaned whenever any detraction is made from His supreme wisdom, infinite power, justice, truth, clemency, and rectitude. If a shorter definition be preferred, let us say that His name is what Paul calls τὸ γνωστόν, “that which may be known” of Him. (Romans 1:19.)
God’s name, then, is taken in vain, not only when any one abuses it by perjury, but when it is lightly and disrespectfully adduced in proof of frivolous and trifling matters: I speak with respect to oaths. In this, however, man’s ingratitude is very gross, that when God grants them His name, as if at their entreaty, to put an end to their strifes and to be a pledge of their truth, still it flies promiscuously from their mouths not without manifest disrespect. God will again condemn perjury in the Fifth Commandment of the Second Table, viz., in so far as it offends against and violates charity by injuring our neighbors. The aim and object of this Commandment is different, i.e., that the honor due to God may be unsullied; that we should only speak of Him religiously; that becoming veneration of Him should be maintained among us. The word awçl, leshau, might indeed be translated “for falsehood,” and in this sense we shall see it used elsewhere; but since it often is equivalent to µnj, chinam, which means gratuitously, or in vain, this exposition seems to be most appropriate. In this, too, fuller and richer instruction is contained, viz., that men should not drag in His name in light matters, as in sport or derision of Him, which cannot be done without insulting and profaning it. And thus the holiness of God’s name, which preserves us in His fear and in true piety, is contrasted with the particle awçl, leshau. But since nothing is more difficult than to restrain men’s licentiousness in this respect, and to excuse or at least diminish the sin, the slipperiness of the tongue is pleaded, its punishment is here denounced: that if God’s name is rashly exposed to reproach or contempt, He will avenge it. The more hardened, therefore, in their licentiousness they may be, the less will be their impunity; so far is depraved habit from diminishing the guilt.
THE EXPOSITION OF THE THIRD COMMANDMENT
LEVITICUS 19
<031912>Leviticus 19:12
12. And ye shall not, swear by my name falsely, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the Lord.
<050613>Deuteronomy 6:13
13. Shalt swear by his name. | 13. Per nomen ejus jurabis. |
<051020>Deuteronomy 10:20
20. Swear by his name.
LEVITICUS 19:12. And ye shall not swear by my name falsely.
Although Moses is treating of the duties of the Second Table, and had previously forbidden men to deal fraudulently with their neighbors, he still adds this sentence by way of confirmation. It may, however, be inferred from the second clause of the verse that He directly had regard to the glory of God when he says, “Thou shalt not profane the name of thy God.” For raging greediness after gain causes the avaricious and rapacious man not only to defraud men, but to become insolent to God Himself. Moses, therefore, although he is professedly condemning the falsehood and deceit whereby our neighbors are injured, at the same time takes occasion to introduce the declaration that we must beware lest, whilst covetousness impels us to do wrong, injury should be done not only to men but to God Himself also. The word used here, however, is not awç, shau, as before, but rqç, sheker, which properly signifies deceitfulness; and therefore I have said that it enjoins us to beware lest any one by his perjury should do any injury to his neighbor; nevertheless, that this prohibition has direct reference to the Third Commandment, since Moses especially insists on this point, that God’s name is profaned by perjury, and thus he not only inculcates integrity, but also has regard to religion, that God’s majesty may not be violated. The expression is worthy of notice, “Thou shalt not pollute the name of God,” because God, who is eternal and immutable truth, cannot be more grossly insulted than by being summoned as a witness to falsehood, which is assuredly a shameful and wicked pollution. This was not regarded by the heathen, who, although they pretended to reverence God’s name in their oaths, yet made no scruple of deceiving, if he whom they had promised deserved it. Thyestes in the poet says, “I never have pledged my faith, nor do I pledge it to any faithless person;” 15 since his brother was a villain, he considered that he lay under no valid obligation to him. This is as if God’s majesty were dependent upon men’s deservings, so that it was allowable to call Him to witness whilst we deal deceitfully. Let this, then, be our firm conclusion, that in our oaths God is first to be regarded, whose holy name is more precious than a hundred worlds.
EXODUS 23
<022313>Exodus 23:13
13. And make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth.
13. Make no mention of the name of other gods. There is no sort of doubt but that this declaration should be connected with the Third Commandment. Moses explains that God’s name is taken in vain and abused, if men swear by other gods; for it is not lawful to refer the judgment of things unknown to any other than the one true God. Consequently, the glory of the Deity is transferred to those by whose name men swear. Therefore by the Prophet God pronounces a severe denunciation, that He will destroy all those that swear by His name, and also by Malcham, (Zephaniah 1:5,) since thus the Jews mixed Him up with their idol, and so profaned His holiness. In sum, since by swearing we profess that He is our God, whom we declare to be both the knower of our hearts and the judge of our souls, the true God justly claims this honor for Himself alone, inasmuch as the glory of His name is detracted from, not only if we speak less reverently than we should of Him, but also if we associate with Him such as may usurp a part of His rights. And this more clearly appears from the two passages which we have adduced from Deuteronomy, wherein the people are commanded to swear by the name of the one God, which is equivalent to rendering to His sacred name in our outward profession of service the unmixed reverence which it deserves. 16
Still God does not exhort the people to indulge themselves freely in oaths, as if by frequent oaths they exercised themselves in the duties of piety, but simply means that when there is occasion for it or necessity, and a just cause shall demand it, they must swear in no other way than by invoking Him alone as their witness and judge.
DEUTERONOMY 23
<052321>Deuteronomy 23:21-23
21. When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee. | 21. Sed erit ager quum egredietur jubilaeus, sanctitas Jehovae, sicut ager anathematis: sacerdoti erit possessio ejus. |
22. But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee. | 22. Si vero agrum emptum a se qui non erat de agro possessionis suae, consecraverit Jehovae: Tunc supputabit illi sacerdos numerum aestimationis tuae usque annum jubilaei, dabitque aestimationem tuam in die illo sanctitatem Jehovae. |
23. That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt keep and perform; even a free-will-offering, according as thou hast vowed unto the Lord thy God, which thou hast promised with thy mouth. | 23. quod egressum fuerit e labiis tuis observabis, et facies sicut vovisti Jehovae Deo tuo liberaliter, et sicut loquutus es ore tuo. 27-29 |
21. When thou shalt vow a vow. The rule of vowing also pertains to the keeping of the Third Commandment, since, by vowing, men exercise themselves in the sanctification of God’s name, and to promise anything to God is a kind of swearing. For what between men is called a covenant or agreement, with respect to God is a vow; and therefore it may be fitly called a sacred engagement, which not only is made with God as its witness, but which is contracted with God Himself. We have elsewhere cursorily touched upon certain oaths, such as that of the Nazarites; but since that consecration was a part of God’s worship, I have placed it under the First Commandment. Nor indeed did Moses there treat directly of the obligation itself of the vow, but of that exercise of piety which stimulated the people to the pursuit of purity, sanctity, and sobriety. I have followed the same course as to the free-will-offerings, which were certainly for the most part votive, but I have considered what was the main thing in them without much troubling myself as to what was accessory. But now under another head Moses confirms what he taught before, that God’s name was not to be taken in vain; therefore he commands them to pay their vows, by withholding which the glory of God’s name is diminished, whilst He is Himself defrauded of His right, and the promise ratified before Him is set at nought. Moreover, it is to be observed that all the vows which were ever acceptable to God were testimonies of gratitude, lest the recollection of His benefits should fail, forgetfulness of which is too apt to steal over us. When, therefore, the saints were conscious of tardiness or listlessness in proclaiming His goodness, they made use of this aid and spur, as it were, to correct their sloth. Thus, when they asked anything of importance from God, they were often accustomed to bind themselves by some promise as a manifestation of their thankfulness. Such are the vows which Moses commands to be solemnly and faithfully paid, that they might not cheat God when they had escaped from peril or had obtained what they wished, whereas in their anxiety they had been humbly suppliant. For we know with what facility or rather levity many are hurried into making vows, who afterwards, with the same fickleness, think little of breaking their promise.
On this point, then, God justly rescues His name from contempt, and to this end demands that what has been promised to Him should be paid. But inasmuch as superstitious persons apply this, or rather wrest it indiscriminately to all vows, their error must be refuted, so that we may understand the genuine meaning of Moses. The Papists would have all vows kept without exception, because it is written, “Thou shalt not slack to pay whatever hath passed your lips.” But a definition of vows must first be given, or at least we must see what vows are lawful and approved by God; for if all vows must be effectually kept, however rashly made, of old under the Law it would have been right to kill their sons and daughters, to erect altars to idols, and thus under this pretext the whole Law of God would have been entirely brought to nought. Wherefore a distinction between vows must be laid down, unless we wish to confound right and wrong. This then is the first point, that nothing can be properly vowed to God, except what we know to be pleasing to Him; for if “to obey is better than sacrifice,” (1 Samuel 15:22,) nothing surely can be more absurd than to indulge ourselves in the liberty of serving God, each according to his own fancy. If a Jew had vowed that he would sacrifice a dog, it would have been sacrilege to pay that vow, since it was forbidden by God’s Law. But inasmuch as there is an intermediate degree between that which God has expressly prescribed and forbidden, it might be objected that it was allowable to make a vow in respect to things which are called indifferent. My reply to this is, that since the principle ought always to be maintained by the godly, that nothing is to be done without faith, (Romans 14:23,)it must ever be considered whether a thing is agreeable to God’s word, otherwise our zeal is preposterous. 17
God formerly did not forbid many things which He still was not willing to have offered to Him in worship; and so now-a-days, although it would be lawful not to taste meat all our lifelong, still if any one should vow perpetual abstinence with respect to it, he would act superstitiously; since he would inconsiderately obtrude upon God what we gather from His word that He does not approve. Wherefore if all our vows are not reduced to this rule, there will be nothing in them right and sure. Another very gross error in the Papists may also be condemned, viz., that they foolishly promise God more than they can pay. Assuredly it is more than blind arrogance, nay, diabolical madness, that a mortal man should wish to present as if it were his, what he has not received; as if any one should vow that he would not eat during his whole life, or should renounce sleep and the necessary supports of life, by common consent he would be convicted of madness. No gift, then, can be acceptable to God, except what He in His goodness has conferred upon us. But what is done in the Papacy? Monks, and nuns, and priests, bind themselves to perpetual celibacy, and do not consider that continency is a special gift; and thus whilst none of them has regard to the measure of his ability, they wretchedly abandon themselves to ruin, or envelop themselves in deadly snares. Besides, every one should consider his vocation. A monk will vow himself to his abbot, and throw off the paternal yoke: another, who was adapted for the transaction of public business, will abandon his children under cover of the monastic vow, and thus acquire immunity, Hence it appears, that whether a vow should be kept or not, is to be estimated from the character of him that vows. But a more gross and more common error is committed in respect to the object of vows. I said above that the godly never made vows to God, except in testimony of gratitude; whereas almost all the vows of the superstitious are so many fictitious acts of worship, having no other aim than to propitiate God by the expiation of sin, or to acquire favor meritoriously. I will not pursue at length those more detestable hallucinations whereby they defile themselves and their vows, when they substitute their idols in God’s place; as for instance, when a man vows 18 an altar to Christopher or Barbara. To sanction this barbarous impiety, this passage of Moses is alleged, which certainly contains something quite different, viz., that those who vow to any other being, pervert the worship of God; and in which also Moses takes it for granted that a vow is not accounted legitimate, except what is made to God Himself in accordance with the rules of religion and the prescription of the Law. Thus in this exordium the doctrine is laid down, that guilt is incurred unless what is promised is paid.
22. But if thou shalt forbear to vow. He confirms what he said, that they would be guilty before God who have broken their promises to Him, because no necessity compelled them to promise, and consequently that their guilt was doubled, inasmuch as they chose rather to sin when it was at their option not to vow. Thus Peter, reproving the faithlessness of Ananias and Sapphira, says, 19
“Who hath compelled you to lie to the Holy Ghost? was not the field your own, which you might have retained? but now to defraud God of part of the price, is impious hypocrisy.” (Acts 5:4.)
Meanwhile God indirectly inculcates sobriety in vowing, when He discharges them from it as a duty; as if He had reminded them, that there was no reason why they should incur guilt by idly promising what He does not require. And surely nothing is wiser than to be very sparing of vows; since those who run into them inconsiderately, either presently repent of them, or else pay them in a servile manner, as if it were a task to which they are driven by force, and not without annoyance and disgust, and thus destroy the grace of the act. As to the words, “that which is gone out of thy lips,” they do not refer to the ceremony, on which the Jew’s as usual too unscrupulously insist; but He puts a restraint by them on vowing, to which we are of ourselves but too much inclined. Whence it is said in Psalm 66:13, 14,
“I will go into thy house with burnt-offerings; I will pay these my vows, which my lips have uttered, and my mouth hath spoken, when I was in trouble;”
although the Prophet intimates that in his sore straits he had always retained his composure and presence of mind, so as expressly to implore God’s help, and to manifest his constancy and confidence by making vows, still it is signified at the same time that he did not precipitately utter empty words, but spoke with serious reflection. And indeed since the tongue of many is too voluble, and goes before their heart, the main obligation of vows is not to be sought in the act of their utterance; but, to make them truly complete, a mutual agreement is required between the heart and tongue. The same expression will often occur again; and its repetition shews that it is meant to remove the scruples of the weak, lest 20 as soon as any desire to vow shall have entered their minds, they should fancy that it imposes a religious obligation. We know that among heathen nations, in the solemn dedication of their temples, a priest was appointed who should 21 first recite the words; by which ceremony they were reminded that nothing is duly offered to God except He Himself should dictate it, as it were. I allow that this reason was but little considered by them; nevertheless, by their example, God would condemn all levity, or inconsiderate fervor in sacred offerings.
LEVITICUS 27
1. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, | 1. Loquutus est autem Jehova ad Mosen, dicendo: |
2. Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation. | 2. Alloquere filios Israel, et die els, Vir quum separaverit votum animarun secundum estimationem tuam Jehovae. |
3. And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. | 3. Erit aestimatio tua pro masculo, a filio viginti annorum usque ad fillum sexaginta annorum, erit aestimatio tua quinquaginta siclorum argenteorum, secundum siclum sanctuarii. |
4. And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels. | 4. Quod si foemina fuerit, erit aestimatio triginta siclorum. |
5. And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels. | 5. Si autem a filio quinque annorum usque ad filium viginti annorum, erit aestimatio tua pro masculo viginti siclorum, pro foemina vero decem siclorum. |
6. And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. | 6. Si vero a filio mensis usque ad fillum quinque armorurn, erit aestimatio tua pro masculo, quinque siclorum argenteorum,pro foemina vero aestimatio tua erit trium siclorurn argenteorum. |
7. And if it be from sixty years old and above, if it be a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female ten shekels. | 7. At si a filio sexaginta annorum, et supra, si pro masculo, erit aestimatio tua quindecim siclorum, et pro foemina decem siclorum. |
8. But if he be poorer than thy estimation, then he shall present himself before the priest, and the priest shall value him; according to his ability that vowed shall the priest value him. | 8. Quod si panperior est quam ut aestimationem tuam possit solvere, tune statuct ilium coram sacerdote, et aestimabit eum sacerdos: secundum quod apprehenderit marius voventis, aestimabit eum sacerdos. |
9. And if it be a beast, whereof men bring an offering unto the Lord, all that any man giveth of such unto the Lord shall be holy. sanctitas. | 9. Si autem animal voverit de quo offernut oblationem Jehovae, onme de quo dederit Jehovae erit |
10. He shall not alter it, nor change it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good: and if he shall at all change beast for beast, then it and the exchange thereof shall be holy. | 10. Non mutabit illud, neque commntabit illud, melius deteriore, aut deterius meliore: quod si commutando commutaverit animal animali, et illud et commutatio ejus erit sanctitas. |
11. And if it be any unclean beast, of which they do not offer a sacrifice unto the Lord, then he shall present the beast before the priest; | 11. Si autem fuerit quodlibet animal immundum, de quo non offerunt oblationem Jehovae tunc statuet animal coram sacerdote. |
12. And the priest shall value it, whether it be good or bad: as thou valuest it, who art the priest, so shall it be. | 12. Aestimabitque illud sacerdos, sive bonum sit, sive malum, secundum aestimationem tuam sic erit. |
13. But if he will at all redeem it, then he shall add a fifth part thereof unto thy estimation. | 13. Si vero redimendo redemerit illud, addet quintam ejus partem ultra aestimationem tuam. |
14. And when a man shall sanctify his house to be holy unto the Lord, then the priest shall estimate it, whether it be good or bad: as the priest shall estimate it, so shall it stand. | 14. Vir autem quum consecraverit domum suam consecrationem Jehovae, aestimabit earn sacerdos, sive bona sit, sire roma: secundum quod aestimaverit earn sacerdos, sic manebit: |
15. And if he that sanctified it will redeem his house, then he shall add the fifth part of the money of thy estimation unto it, and it shall be his. | 15. Si autem consecrans redemerit domum suam, addet quintam partem pecuniae aestimationis tuae super earn, et illius erit. |
16. And if a man shall sanctify unto the Lord some part of a field of his possession, then thy estimation shall be according to the seed thereof: an homer of barley-seed shall be valued at fifty shekels of silver. | 16. Si vero de agro possessionis suae consecraverit quis Jehovae, erit aestimatio tua secundum sementem ejus, semen cori hordeorum quinquaginta siclis argenteis sestimabitur. |
17. If he sanctify his field from the year of jubilee, according to thy estimation it shall stand. manebit. | 17. Quod siab anno jubilaei consecraverit agrum suum, secundum aestimationem tuam |
18. But if he sanctify his field after the jubilee, then the priest shall reckon unto him the money according to the years that remain, even unto the year of the jubilee, and it shall be abated from thy estimation. | 18. Si vero post jubilaeum consecraverit agrum suum, tum supputabit cum eo sacerdos pecuniam secundum annos qui reinanent usque ad annum jubilaei, et detrahetur de aestimatione tua. |
19. And if he that sanctified the field will in any wise redeem it, then he shall add the fifth part of the money of thy estimation unto it, and it shall be assured to him. | 19. Si autem redimendo redimat agrum qui consecravit ipsum, addet quintam partem pecuniae aestimationis tuae super eam, et manebit el. |
20. And if he will not redeem the field, or if he have sold the field to another man, it shall not be redeemed any more. | 20. Si vero non redemerit agrum, et si vendiderit agrum viro alteri, non redimet ultra: |
21. But the field, when it goeth out in the jubilee, shall be holy unto the Lord, as a field devoted; the possession thereof shall be the priest’s. | 21. Sed erit ager quum egredietur jubilaeus, sanctitas Jehovae, sicut ager anathematis: sacerdoti erit possessio ejus. |
22. And if a man sanctify unto the Lord a field which he hath bought, which is not of the fields of his possession; | 22. Si vero agrum emptum a se qui non erat de agro possessionis suae, consecraverit Jehovae: |
23. Then the priest shall reckon unto him the worth of thy estimation, even unto the year of the jubilee: and he shall give thine estimation in that day, as a holy thing unto the Lord. | 23. Tunc supputabit illi sacerdos numerum aestimationis tuae usque ad annum jubilaei, dabitque aestimationem tuam in die illo sanctitatem Jehovae. |
24. In the year of the jubilee the field shall return unto him of whom it was bought, even to him to whom the possession of the land did belong. | 24. In anno jubilaei revertetur ager ad eum a quo emerat ipsum, ad eum eujus erat possessio terrae. |
25. And all thy estimations shall be according to the shekel of the sanctuary: twenty gerahs shall be the shekel. | 25. Omnis autem aestimatio tua erit secundum siclum sanctuarii: viginti obolorum est siclus. |
27. And if it be of an unclean beast, then he shall redeem it according to thine estimation, and shall add a fifth part of it thereto: or if it be not redeemed, then it shall be sold according to thy estimation. | 27. Si vero fuerit ex animalibus immundis, redimet juxta aestimationem tuam, et addet quintam partem ejus ultra eam, et si non redimatur, vendatur juxta aestimationem tuam. |
28. Notwithstanding, no devoted thing that a man shall devote unto the Lord, of all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted tiling is most holy unto the Lord. | 28. Veruntamen omne anathema quod consecrabit aliquis Jehovae ex onmibus quae habet, de hominibus et animalibus, et de agris possessionis suae, non vendetur neque redimetur. Omne enim anathema sanetitas sane titatum erit Jehovah. |
29. None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed; but shall surely be put to death. | 29. Omne anathema quod consecrabitur de hominibus non redimetur: moriendo morietur. |
1. And the Lord spake unto Moses. In this chapter Moses shews in what manner and at what price what once has been offered is to be redeemed, supposing that the vows cannot be conveniently paid. Now it is to be observed, that among the ancient people there were two modes of consecration, the one by anathema, which the Hebrews call µrj, cherem, the other for the use of the temple, and other exercises of religion. The anathema 22 might be made of unclean animals, and other unholy things, as we may see in respect to the city of Jericho, and similar instances; but it was not properly allowable to make vows, except of a clean man or animal, or something else which might be appropriated in the service of God. Thus of their flocks they vowed goats and sheep; of their herds, oxen or calves, that they might experience God’s goodness in their fecundity. If a person was aggrieved at being without offspring, in asking it of God he offered in his vow his son, or daughter; on which ground Samuel, before he was conceived in the womb, was dedicated to God. (1 Samuel 1:22.) If any one had a weakly child born to him, or if one of his children was very ill, or if he himself was in any difficulty, it was customary to have resort to vows, that God might protect what was dedicated to Him. Nor can it be doubted but that many abused this and fell into foolish practices; but God tolerated these errors as long as they were not opposed to His Law. Moreover, since it often happens that those who are under the obligation of a vow change their minds, and are not very eager and ready to pay it, nay, discharge it with much pain and unwillingness; God permitted that what was promised might be redeemed at a certain price, in order that their offerings might be voluntary. By the imposition of this ransom, which was of the nature of a fine, rashness was punished, and future inconsideration prevented, so that they might consider well what they were about before they made their vow, and that it might not be disagreeable to them to stand by their promises. Besides, it is to be remarked, that these vows were confirmed, not because they were altogether pleasing to God, but lest the people should accustom themselves to impious contempt of Him, if the deceiver might with impunity refuse God what he had promised, Moses first treats of persons; and estimates a male at fifty shekels of the sanctuary from twenty-five years of age to sixty; since this is the best time of life in which a man’s work is profitable. A woman he estimates at thirty shekels; since for the most part less profit is made by a woman than a man; and although it might occur that some women would be much more valuable than men, since sometimes women are found to be industrious, prudent, discreet, and strong to labor, whilst men are idle, dull, lazy, and weak, still a general law must needs be given, for the examination would have been too difficult if each individual was to be estimated according to their good qualities. God then does not pay exact attention to the merits of each, but is contented with the common calculation. He then lays down rules as to an earlier age, viz., from five to twenty, and rates the male at twenty shekels, the female at ten. He afterwards descends to infants, and appoints the price of a male from one month to five years, at five shekels, and a female at three. Fourthly, he estimates those who are more than sixty, the male at fifteen shekels, the female at ten; since old age debilitates the vigor both of mind and body, and gradually destroys it. In the fifth place, an exception is made lest the poor should be burdened beyond their slender means, that the priest should diminish the price as much as he saw fit. Still this diminution had reference also to the rich, if the person to be redeemed was not worth the ordinary price, though it appears that God here especially makes a provision for the poor from the words, “according 23 to what the hand of him that vowed shall attain;” by which clause Moses 24 is wont to express poverty, or want, because the poor and needy are not supplied with sufficient for their desires.
11. And if it be any unclean beast. Moses now, in the second place, treats of brute animals; which God commands to be sacrificed to Him, if they are suitable for it, and does not suffer the vow to be altered. But if they be imperfect or unclean, He lays down the rule for their redemption. But the question here arises, How it can be allowable to vow what God had forbidden to be offered to Him, and so had prohibited from being brought into the temple, as being unclean? Surely if it had entered into any one’s mind to sacrifice an unclean animal, the superstition would be rejected, nay, there would be need of expiation. But here, in my opinion, another kind of offering is adverted to, which did not vitiate the sacrifices and service of God by being contrary to the injunctions of His Law. There was therefore nothing strange in His accepting such a vow, though He punishes its levity by a pecuniary fine. Besides, suppose a strong and well-tried horse was in danger, his master made a vow that if it were saved he would be bound to pay its price; and so also in the other cases. To vow was nothing else than to commit to God’s faithfulness and protection whatever they wished to be preserved. Hence the too great commonness of vows, which still it was necessary to discharge in some way, lest God’s sacred name should be exposed to ridicule. This estimation God left to the arbitration of the priest. But if an animal might be offered in sacrifice, no redemption was allowed; and if any one had substituted another animal, or paid the price of it, he was punished for his fraud, for both (i.e., the animal, and its substitute or price) were consecrated to God. The estimation, which is imposed upon one who had vowed, is irreversible, since God simply commands the Israelites to stand by the judgment of the priest, and to abide by the taxation, as it is called, enjoined upon them as a fixed rule; and, besides, they were to add a fifth part, as an additional fine, to the price appointed by the priest.
14. And when a man shall sanctify his house. A third kind of vows follows, viz., the consecration of houses and lands; under which head also an alternative is appointed, so that religion may not be despised, and still the just possessors should not be driven from their houses, or the lands be rendered useless from the want of cultivation. Those persons vowed their houses, who sought of God for themselves and families that they might inhabit them in health, and safety, and in general prosperity; and he who wished to obtain fertility for his fields, vowed one of ten or twenty acres. Undoubtedly superstitious prayers were sometimes mixed up with this exercise of piety, as if they might acquire favor for themselves by making a bargain with God. Still, inasmuch as the thing was not wrong in itself, God indulgently bore with the errors which could not be very easily corrected, lest, in His hatred of them, He might altogether abolish what was useful and laudable. Hence the redemption both of house and land was permitted. But if any one had committed fraud in selling a piece of land that was vowed, a heavier punishment is added, i.e., that he should go without it for ever. We shall speak more fully elsewhere of the year of jubilee. 25 At present this must be observed, that, lest the partition of land made by Joshua should ever be altered, since God had clearly shewn that it was done by His authority, God recalled each of the tribes every fiftieth year to their original share, and thus entirely restored the possessors whom poverty had driven out. In proportion, then, to the closeness or remoteness of that year, since possession would be so much the shorter or longer, land was cheap or dear. God does not here measure the fields by the pole or chain, but estimates them simply, as among a rude people, by the seed; viz., if a field in sowing takes a homer 26 of barley, it shall remain in the hands of its possessor if he pays fifty shekels of the sanctuary. We have elsewhere seen that these were double the ordinary shekel. But since vows were often made in the middle or towards the end of the jubilee, a distinction is stated; and God commands the priests to take the time into consideration, and the nearer the jubilee-year may be to diminish so much of the price. Where, however, a fraud had taken place, God would not have the honest purchaser ejected; but, when the jubilee was over, He assigned the field, which had been held for a time in sacrilege, to the priests for ever. Moses compares this consecration to an anathema, which the Hebrews call µrj, cherem, 27 a word whose radical meaning is destroying or abolishing; for which reason the Latins take a “devoted” thing in a bad sense, as what is destined to final destruction. The law is then extended to lands which had been sold, and which, in the year of jubilee, returned to their former owners; because the first allotment of the land was then wholly restored. For these fields God commands a price to be paid, upon a calculation of the time, so that only the produce and not the fee should be taken into account.
Now, since people have improperly and in foolish mimicry imitated the vows which God permitted to the Jews under the Law, so the Pope, in providing for their redemption, has dared in his diabolical arrogance to rival God. The titulus 28 is well-known in the Third Book of Decretals; “De voto, et ejus redemptione;” wherein its concocter, whoever he was, has so sought to impose upon the world with his shameless nonsense, as not to hesitate to heap together directly contradictory sentences; and even if there were no contradictions there, still nothing is laid down except how votive pilgrimages are to be redeemed, which plainly appear from Christ’s declaration to be wrong since the preaching of the gospel. (John 4:21.) And assuredly it was a marvellous fascination of the devil, that what was said under the Law as to the payment of vows at Jerusalem, should be transferred to Christians, when Christ had pronounced that the time had come when the true worshippers without distinction of place should worship God everywhere in spirit and in truth. If the hired wranglers 29 of the Pope object that the same rule obtains in the redemption of vows, since a remedy or mitigation must not be denied, if any should be too burdensome or grievous, I answer, that men act wickedly, when they wrest to themselves what God has reserved for His own discretion; for neither under the Law of old was it allowable for a mortal man to alter a vow, unless by His permission. If again they object, that the judgment was given to the priests, here their folly is twice refuted; since they cannot shew that they have been appointed judges; nor can they escape from the accusation of temerity, since without any command they pronounce as to this redemption of vows, whereas the priests of old advanced nothing except from God’s mouth, and according to the fixed rule here laid down.
The exception as to the firstlings and the tithes sufficiently proves that some vows were illicit, and such as God repudiates; and therefore that they must not be made indiscriminately, for it would have been a mere work of supererogation to vow to God what He had already made His own; as we have shewn elsewhere, 30 where I have inserted this passage. With respect to what is said of the anathema, it must not be understood generally, since it was not lawful to subject a man to it, unless he were worthy of death. This, then, must be restricted to their enemies, whom they were otherwise at liberty to destroy; a notorious example of which was the city of Jericho, with its inhabitants and spoils. Now, since whatever was brought under this anathema was devoted and accursed, God would have it destroyed, nor does He allow of any compensation. Wherefore they anathematized their fields I do not understand, unless perhaps they wished to expiate some crime whereby pollution was contracted.
NUMBERS 30
<043001>Numbers 30:1-16
1. And Moses spake unto the heads of the tribes concerning the children of Israel, saying, This is the thing which the Lord hath commanded. | 1. Et loquutus est Moses ad capita tribuum in Israel, dicendo: Hic est sermo quem praecepit Jehova. |
2. If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth. | 2. Vir qui voverit votum Jehovae, aut juravefit jusjurandum, quo constringendo constrinxerit animam suam, ne violet verbum suum: sed secundum omne quod egressum fuerit ex ore ejus, faciat. |
3. If a woman also vow a vow unto the Lord, and bind herself by a bond, being in her father’s house in her youth; | 3. Mulier autem si vovetit votum Jehovae, et constringendo constrinxerit in domo patris sui in pueritia sua: |
4. And her father hear her vow, and her bond wherewith she hath bound her soul, and her father shall hold his peace at her; then all her vows shall stand, and every bond wherewith she hath bound her soul shall stand. | 4. Et audierit pater ejus votum ipsius, et oblationem qua adstrinxit animam suam, et tacuerit ei (vel ad eam) pater ejus, stabilia erunt omnia vota ejus, omnisque obligatio qua constrinxit animam suam stabilietur. |
5. But if her father disallow her in the day that he heareth; not any of her vows, or of her bonds wherewith she hath bound her soul, shall stand; and the Lord shall forgive her, because her father disallowed her. | 5. Si autem irritum fetetit pater ejus illo die quo audierit omne votum ab ea factum, et obligationem ejus quibus constrinxerit animam suam, non stabilietur: et Jehova parcet el, quia pater ejus irritum fecerit. |
6. And if she had at all an husband when she vowed, or uttered ought out of her lips, wherewith she bound her soul; | 6. Quod si fuerit sub viro, et fuerint vota ejus super eam, aut prolatio labiorum qua constrinxerit animam suam: |
7. And her husband heard it, and held his peace at her in the day that he heard it; then her vows shall stand, and her bonds wherewith she bound her soul shall stand. | 7. Et audierit maritus eius, et die quo audivit tacuerit el: tunc stabilietur vota ejus, et obligationes quibus constrinxerit animam suam stabilientur. |
8. But if her husband disallowed her on the day that he heard it; then he shall make her vow which she vowed, and that which she uttered with her lips, wherewith she bound her soul, of none effect; and the Lord shall forgive her. | 8. Quod si quo die audivit marl tus ejus irritum id fecerit, et dissolverit vota ejus quae erant super eam, et prolationem labiorum ejus relaxaverit, qua constrinxerat animam suam, tunc Jehova propitius illi erit. |
9. But every vow of a widow, and of her that is divorced, wherewith they have bound their souls, shall stand against her. | 9. Votum autem omne viduae et repudiatae quo constrinxerit animam suam, stabilietur super eam. |
10. And if she vowed in her husband’s house, or bound her soul by a bond with an oath; votum fecerit, aut constringendo constrinxerit animam per jusjurandum: 11 And her husband heard it, and held his peace at her, and disallowed her not: then all her vows shall stand, and every bond wherewith she bound her soul shall stand. | 10. Porro si in domo mariti sui |
11. | 11. Et maritus ejus audierit et tacuerit ei, nec irritum fecerit illud: tune stabilientur omnia ejus vota, et omnis obligatio qua eonstrinxerit animam suam stabilietur. |
12. But if her husband hath utterly made them void on the day he heard them; then whatsoever proceeded out of her lips concerning her vows, or concerning the bond of her soul, shall not stand: her husband hath made them void: and the Lord shall forgive her. | 12. Quod si dissolvendo dissolverit illa maritus ejus, quo die audivit omnem prolationem labiorum ejus, ad vota ejus, et obligationem animae ejus, non stabilietur; maritus ejus dissolvit ea, et Jehova propitius erit el. |
13. Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void. | 13. Omne votum, et omnejusjurandum obligationis ad affligendam animam maritus ejus stabiliet, et maritus ejus dissolvet. |
14. But if her husband altogether hold his peace at her from day to day; then he establisheth all her vows, or all her bonds, which are upon her: he confirmeth them, because he held his peace at her in the day that he heard them. | 14. Sin tacendo tacuerit maritus ejus a die in diem, tune stabiliet omnia vota ejus, et omnes obligationes ejus: quae sunt super eam, stabiliet, quia tacuit ei quo die audivit. |
15. But if he shall anywise make them void after that he hath heard them; then he shall bear her iniquity. | |
16. These are the statutes which the Lord commanded Moses, between a man and his wife, between the father and his daughter, being yet in her youth in her father’s house. | 16. Haec sunt statuta quae praecepit Jehova Most inter virum et uxorem ejus, inter patrem et filiam ejus quae est in pueritia in domo patris sui. |
1. And Moses spake. Moses teaches in this chapter that the vows which were made by persons who were not free, were not held good before God; and although no mention is made of male children, still, as their condition was the same, it seems that by synecdoche they must be included with the daughters and wives, unless perhaps God chose to pay regard to the weaker sex. But since He permits females, who were not under their father’s power, to make vows in spite of their sex, nor does He make it to be an excuse for levity or thoughtlessness, it seems that the object proposed was, that the right of the father over his children as well as of the husband over the wife, should be maintained inviolate.
2. If a man vow a vow. Wishing to modify the general law, lest any one should think that there was any contradiction in this exception, he begins by repeating the law itself, that every one should faithfully pay whatever he had vowed; as much as to say, that this stands good, but that he only refers to such as are their own masters; and that women or girls who are under the power of another, were not free to make vows without the concurrence of their fathers’ or husbands’ consent. This preface, however, must be understood, as I have already pointed out, of lawful vows, whereby neither is religion corrupted nor the holiness of God’s name profaned. And assuredly, unless what we offer is acceptable to God, there can be no obligation on the conscience. Moreover, since there is here a distinction made between males and females, it may be probably conjectured that boys of ten years old, although still united with their family, are bound by their promises; and therefore I will not pertinaciously contend about this, because it is better to leave undecided whatever is doubtful, and disputable, as it is commonly called, on either side.
3. If a woman also vow. He now proceeds to the point of which he proposed to treat, i.e., that vows made by persons who are not their own masters do not hold good; and he mentions two cases. For, in the first place, he teaches that if a daughter, whilst living with her father, has vowed anything without his knowledge, it is of no force. He lays down the same rule, if the father, hearing the vow, has disallowed it; but if he has held his peace, it is declared that his silence is equivalent to consent. Hence we gather that all those who are possessed of power do not do their duty unless they frankly and discreetly express their opposition whenever anything displeases them; since their connivance is a kind of tacit approbation. In the second place, he treats of married women, whose vows, made in the absence or with the disapproval of their husbands, he commands to be of none effect; but if the husbands have known of them, and been silent, he obliges their performance. For many deceptions might have thus arisen; since it is usual with many when they wish to gratify their wives, to conceal their opinion for the time, but, when the period of actual performance arrives, to elude what may have been promised. But unless they use their privilege in proper time, God would have them bear the punishment of their servile indulgence and dissimulation; but because women are often urged to deceive by their levity and inconstancy, this danger is also anticipated. It may also happen 31 that a woman, when subject to her husband, may make a vow in the precipitate fervor of her zeal, and when he is dead, may retract it under the specious pretext that she was not then free and her own mistress; the same thing may occur when a divorced woman shall bind herself, and then when she has married, shall appear to herself to be released. Since instances of this wicked change of mind are too frequent, no wonder that this special precaution should be added, to prevent frauds. Wherefore God declares that the period when the vow was made is to be considered, so that they are no less liable than as if their condition had remained the same. He therefore condemns to the performance of their vow those women who have been emancipated from their fathers’ authority by marriage, and also who have been set free by death or divorce; yet it appears from the last verse of the chapter, that two exceptions, modifying the general law, are here peculiarly treated of.
5. But if her father disallow her. The expression is remarkable, “And the Lord shall forgive her,” whereby Moses gently reproves the foolish thoughtlessness of the girl; and soon afterwards the same thing is spoken of married women. And surely their rashness is worthy of reprehension, if unmindful of their condition, they, as it were, shake off the yoke and hastily commit themselves. God therefore hints that they are not without blame; but lest they should be tormented by secret remorse, He removes every scruple, declaring that He will forgive, if the performance of the vow shall have been prevented in any other quarter. When the dissent of the father or the husband is required on the same day, it is tantamount to saying that what they have once approved of cannot be disallowed. Further, to “hold his peace” to a wife or daughter, signifies that he does not oppose, but give by silence a token of consent.
9. But every vow of a widow. I have stated why widows are expressly named, viz., lest a woman should think that by a second marriage she would escape, as being no longer free, and again under the yoke; since by such subtle excuses people often extricate themselves. No other subject is referred to down to the end of the last verse but one; for they have made a very gross mistake, who interpret it as applying to a family and its master. 32 The subject itself certainly does not admit of such an explanation; and the words of Moses forbid it: so that it is the more surprising that persons skilled in the Hebrew language have not seen the matter clearly.
POLITICAL SUPPLEMENTS TO THE THIRD COMMANDMENT
LEVITICUS 24
15. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin. | 15. Ad filios Israel loqueris, dicendo: Homo qui maledixerit Dec sue, portabit scelus suum. |
16. And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death. | 16. Et qui transfixerit nomen Jehovae, morte moriatur: lapidando lapidabit eum universus coetus, sive indigena fuerit, sive peregrinus, quum transfixerit nomen, moriatur. |
15. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. Hence it now more clearly appears that the object of the Third Commandment was that God’s holy name should be honored with the respect and veneration which it deserves, since the insult whereby it is violated is condemned to capital punishment. By the expression “cursing,” Moses designates all profane and impure words which tend to brand it with dishonor; as if any one should accuse God either of injustice or cruelty; or should assail Him with blasphemies; or designedly detract from His glory either in anger or wantonness, since many, when exasperated, launch forth horrible blasphemies, whilst others make a parade of their audacity by scoffing at Him. The second verb, which is twice repeated in the next verse, bqn, nakab, 33 means in Hebrew to hollow out or perforate, and metaphorically to unfold, thus the Latins say that what is thoroughly brought out is “enucleated.” The source of the metaphor as applied to contumely is not very dissimilar. The translation “he who shall have expressed,” which some give, is lame; to me the word “transfix” seems to be very suitable in the present passage, nor are the Latin phrases proscindere or lacerate very different. As to the meaning there is tolerable agreement, i.e., that God would not have His holy name disrespectfully traduced; and assuredly it is insupportably impious when the tongue of mortal man, which was created to celebrate the praises of God, is employed in insulting Him. The kind of death is also appointed, when He commands the offender to be stoned by the whole people, so that all may learn from the sight that such a monster should be annihilated as contaminating the earth. God also would prove the zeal of His people, by calling them all forth in defense of His glory, and arming them for vengeance. Moreover, He did not subject to this punishment the Jews only, who professed to be His worshippers, but also strangers who were dwelling in the land in the exercise of their business; viz., that they might more severely punish the crime in His own servants who were less excusable.
This closing sentence is omitted in Fr. ↩
“Hostes nos dicunt idolorum suorum. Sic praestet Deus, et det omnia in potestate, quomodo dedit quod fractum est. Hoc enim dicimus caritati vestrae, ne faciatis ista, quando in porestate vestra non est, ut faciatis illud. Pravorum hominum est, furiosorum Circumcellionum, et ubi potestatem non habent saevire, et velle mort properant sine causa. Audistis quae vobis legimus, omnes qui nuper in Mappalibus adfuistis. ‘Cum data vobis fuerit terra in potestatem (prius ait in potestatem, et sic dixit quae facienda sunt;) aras eorum, inquit, destruetis, lucos eorum comminuetis, et omnes titulos eorum confringetis.’ (Deuteronomy 7:1, and 12:9.) Cum acceperitis potestatem, hoc facite. Ubi nobis non est data potestas, non facimus; ubi data est, non praetermittimus,” etc. — Aug. Serm. 62 (Opp. Edit. Bened. T.v.p. 364.) ↩
Numbers 33:52, µtykçm. A.V., their pictures. ↩
ymlx, tsalemey — “metallic talismanical figures, made under certain constellations, and supposed, in consequence, to be possessed of some extraordinary influences and virtues.” — Ad. Clarke, in loco. ↩
See Lucian in Dea Syria, sub initium; Πρῶτοι μὲν ω̈ν ἀνθρώπων, τῶν ἡμεῖς ίδμεν, Αἰγύπτιοι λέγονται θεῶν te ἐννοίαν λαβεὶν, καὶ ἱρὰ είσασθαι, καὶ τεμένεα, k. t. l., — Tacitus Germ. 9. “Lucos et nemora consecrant.” Virgil. Eccl. 6:73. “Ne quis sit lucus, quo plus se jactet Apollo.” ↩
The Fr. here has “ceremonies de Dieu,” which seems to be a misprint for “ennemis de Dieu.” ↩
Addition in Fr., “Qui est plus sage.” ↩
“On sait ce qui fur dit a Abraham,” etc. — Fr. ↩
Addition in Fr., “Dont il s’ensuit, que les Amalechites ont assailli le peuple comme en trahison;” whence it follows that the Amalekites assailed the people treacherously. ↩
Added from Fr. ↩
A. V. “They hired.” Malvenda in Poole’s Syn. “Hebrews et conduxit, nempe Moabita.” Ainsworth’s translation is, “because that they met you, etc., — and he hired, etc.” ↩
A.V., translates this word in the past tense, “and hast inquired.” ↩
The quotation more nearly accords with the Apostle’s citation in Romans 14:11, than with the original passage in Isaiah. See Owen’s note in C.’s Romans, (C. Society’s Edition, p. 503.) ↩
“Au mot Hebrieu, qui nous translatons l’Eternel;” to the Hebrew word, which we translate the Eternal. — Fr. ↩
Cic. de Off. 3 28, 29. “Deinde illud etiam apud Actium Fregisti fidem. Neque dedi neque do infideli cuiquam, quanquam ab impio rege dicitur, luculente tamen dicitur.” ↩
“Ce qui vaut autant comme de luy rendre l’hommage qu’il merite, en le constituant tesmoin des choses cachees, et confessant que c’est a luy seul de maintenir la verite;” which is equivalent to rendering to Him the homage He deserves, in constituting Him the witness of hidden things, and confessing that it is His alone to maintain the truth. — Fr. ↩
“Nos voeus sont pervers et esgarez.” — Fr. ↩
“Une chapelle a sainct Christofle, ou a saincte Barbe.” — Fr. ↩
It will be seen that C. paraphrases, and does not quote literally the words of St. Peter. ft315 “Afin qu’ils ne se forgent point un remors de conscience, si tost qu’il leur sera renu en fantaste de vouer;” lest they should conceive a remorse of conscience, as soon as they shall have taken a fancy to make a vow. — Fr. ↩
“Afin qu’ils ne se forgent point un remors de conscience, si tost qu’il leur sera renu en fantaste de vouer;” lest they should conceive a remorse of conscience, as soon as they shall have taken a fancy to make a vow. — Fr. ↩
“Pour dicter, et suggerer les mots;” to dictate and suggest the words. “Mos erat, ut in exsecrationibus, et devotionibus, in foederibus, in dedicationibus, in votis, juramentis et aliis hujusmodi, certa verba adhiberentur (quod carmen dicebatur) a quibus ne minimum quidem licebat discedere. Itaque ne quo in verbo peccaretur, praesto erat pontilex, aut sacerdos, qui vel memoriter, vel de scripto dictabat, quae dicenda erant. Liv. 8:9; 31:17; Val. Max. 4:l, 10,” etc. — Facciolati in voce Praeco. ↩
“Qui vaut antant en Hebrieu, comme destruction, ou desolation;” which is equivalent in Hebrew to destruction, or desolation. — Fr. ↩
“According to his ability that vowed.” — A. V. “According to that which the hand of him that vowed can attain.” — Ainsworth. ↩
“Car cela signifie disette, ou defant, d’autant que les povres n’ont pas en main ce qui seroit a souhaiter;” for this signifies want or deficiency, since the poor have not in hand what might be desired. — Fr. ↩
“Sur le quatrieme commandement;” under the fourth commandment.— Fr. ↩
Lat. “Corum,” from the LXX. translation κόρος. ↩
“A field devoted.” — A.V. “Interdit.” — Fr. ↩
The reference is to Book 3 of the Decretals of Gregory IX. He was Pope from 1227 to 1241; and these decretals form the fifth division of the Papal Canon Law. A section of Book 3, technically styled Titulus 34, is headed “Concerning a vow and its redemption;” and all the eleven chapters of this Titulus relate to the commutation of vows to go on pilgrimage, or on a crusade. The portion especially alluded to by C. in the above remarks was obviously ch. 7, which consists of extracts from an answer of Pope Innocent III. to a Suffragan of the Archbishop of Sens, who had taken a crusader’s vow for the purpose of obtaining access to the Count of Champagne, then in Palestine, and wanted to know whether the Pope would sanction his staying at home, since he had heard that the Count was dead. The Pope replies, that as the cause which had induced him to make his vow no longer existed, he might stay in his diocese; but that he should send to the holy land a sum equal to what would have been the cost of his going, staying, and returning. The notes to the same chapter quote other parts of Innocent’s rescript, in which that Pope said, “Since the Word of God is now fulfilled, saying, The hour shall come and now is, when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem shall ye worship, etc., it may be seen, that not less in your own Church than in the Eastern country, you may advance the deliverance of that country by your pious prayers.” — Corpus Juris Canon. Lugd. 1522, cum licentia. — W. ↩
“Rabulae.” — Lat. “Les caphards, qui ont leurs langues a loage pour maintenir la Papaute.” — Fr. ↩
See vol. 1 pp. 478-480, where ver. 26 is commented on, amongst the supplements to the First Commandment. ↩
The Lat. is, “Accidet ut mulier in vidaitate viro non subjecta, praecipiti zeli fervore voveat, eo mortuo retractet specioso praetextu, quia tunc libera non erat, nec sui juris.” The Fr., “Il adviendra qu’une femme estante en sujection de mari, vouera par une ardeur hastive de zele, le marl trespasse, elle prendra honneste couverture de se retracter, d’autant qu’elle n’estoit pas libre pour lors.” I have translated the latter, not being able to understand the original, nor to reconcile them. ↩
Ver. 10, hçya tybAµaw. Literally, “And if the house of her husband.” C. and A.V. follow LXX. in assuming that the preposition in should be supplied before the house. S.M., on the other hand, translates the word tyb, family, which is undeniably allowable; but says in a note, “By family, is to be understood the wife here, as the chief personage in it after its master.” To this treatment of the text C. here adverts, as strange on the part of one so skillful in the Hebrew tongue. — W. ↩
Here C. again gives an opinion as to the best way of rendering bqn in this passage, for which he is not indebted to S.M.; and modern lexicographers have given their sanction to C.’s view. — W. ↩
