Erhalten Sie Zugang zu diesem und mehr als 300000 Büchern ab EUR 5,99 monatlich.
- Herausgeber: Jazzybee Verlag
- Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
- Sprache: Englisch
This is the extended edition including * an extensive biographical annotation about the author and his life Calvin produced commentaries on most of the books of the Bible. His commentaries cover the larger part of the Old Testament, and all of the new excepting Second and Third John and the Apocalypse. His commentaries and lectures stand in the front rank of Biblical interpretation. This edition is volume two out of four of Calvin's commentaries on the four last books of Moses, arranged in the form of a harmony.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 1032
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012
Das E-Book (TTS) können Sie hören im Abo „Legimi Premium” in Legimi-Apps auf:
Ähnliche
Commentaries On The Harmony Of The Law Vol. 2
John Calvin
Contents:
John Calvin – A Biography
Commentaries On The Harmony Of The Law Vol. 2
Deuteronomy 24
Numbers 5
Leviticus 13
Leviticus 14
Leviticus 15
Deuteronomy 23
Numbers 19
Deuteronomy 23
Deuteronomy 22
Deuteronomy 14
Leviticus 19
Leviticus 20
Deuteronomy 14
Leviticus 11
Deuteronomy 14
Exodus 22
Leviticus 17
Deuteronomy 21
Deuteronomy 18
Deuteronomy 13
Deuteronomy 17
Deuteronomy 13
Deuteronomy 13
Exodus 22
Numbers 15
Leviticus 20
Exodus 12
Deuteronomy 17
Deuteronomy 20
Numbers 10
Deuteronomy 5
Exodus 34
Leviticus 19
Leviticus 26
Exodus 22
Deuteronomy 4
Exodus 34
Deuteronomy 8
Deuteronomy 11
Deuteronomy 16
Exodus 23
Deuteronomy 12
Deuteronomy 14
Exodus 20
Deuteronomy 27
Exodus 25
Exodus 35
Exodus 25
Exodus 25
Deuteronomy 27
Leviticus 24
Numbers 8
Exodus 26
Exodus 27
Exodus 27
Exodus 29
Exodus 30
Exodus 28
Exodus 29
Leviticus 8
Numbers 8
Numbers 3
Exodus 30
Leviticus 8
Leviticus 21
Deuteronomy 31
Leviticus 10
Leviticus 21
Leviticus 21
Leviticus 22
Exodus 20
Numbers 6
Numbers 35
Numbers 23
Numbers 4
Leviticus 27
Deuteronomy 27
Numbers 5
Numbers 28
Leviticus 6
Numbers 5
Leviticus 7
Numbers 18
Deuteronomy 12
Leviticus 27
Deuteronomy 14
Deuteronomy 26
Numbers 18
Deuteronomy 18
Leviticus 24
Exodus 29
Numbers 28
Numbers 28
Numbers 29
Leviticus 16
Leviticus 1
Leviticus 2
Leviticus 3
Leviticus 4
Numbers 15
Leviticus 5
Leviticus 5
Leviticus 6
Leviticus 6
Leviticus 7
Leviticus 7
Leviticus 22
Leviticus 19
Leviticus 7
Numbers 15
Leviticus 22
Deuteronomy 17
Deuteronomy 23
Leviticus 22
Exodus 22
Exodus 34
Deuteronomy 14
Exodus 23
Exodus 23
Deuteronomy 12
Exodus 34
Deuteronomy 7
Numbers 33
Deuteronomy 16
Exodus 34
Exodus 23
Deuteronomy 7
Deuteronomy 7
Deuteronomy 23
Deuteronomy 17
Exodus 20
Deuteronomy 5
Leviticus 19
Deuteronomy 6
Deuteronomy 10
Exodus 23
Deuteronomy 23
Leviticus 27
Numbers 30
Leviticus 24
Exodus 20
Deuteronomy 5
Leviticus 26
Leviticus 23
Exodus 34
Exodus 35
Leviticus 19
Exodus 23
Exodus 31
Exodus 23
Leviticus 25
Leviticus 25
Leviticus 23
Exodus 23
Exodus 34
Exodus 34
Deuteronomy 16
Commentaries On The Harmony Of The Law Vol. 2, John Calvin
Jazzybee Verlag Jürgen Beck
86450 Altenmünster, Germany
ISBN: 9783849620776
www.jazzybee-verlag.de
John Calvin – A Biography
By William Barry
This man, undoubtedly the greatest of Protestant divines, and perhaps, after St. Augustine, the most perseveringly followed by his disciples of any Western writer on theology, was born at Noyon in Picardy, France, 10 July, 1509, and died at Geneva, 27 May, 1564.
A generation divided him from Luther, whom he never met. By birth, education, and temper these two protagonists of the reforming movement were strongly contrasted. Luther was a Saxon peasant, his father a miner; Calvin sprang from the French middle-class, and his father, an attorney, had purchased the freedom of the City of Noyon, where he practised civil and canon law. Luther entered the Order of Augustinian Hermits, took a monk's vows, was made a priest and incurred much odium by marrying a nun. Calvin never was ordained in the Catholic Church; his training was chiefly in law and the humanities; he took no vows. Luther's eloquence made him popular by its force, humour, rudeness, and vulgar style. Calvin spoke to the learned at all times, even when preaching before multitudes. His manner is classical; he reasons on system; he has little humour; instead of striking with a cudgel he uses the weapons of a deadly logic and persuades by a teacher's authority, not by a demagogue's calling of names. He writes French as well as Luther writes German, and like him has been reckoned a pioneer in the modern development of his native tongue. Lastly, if we term the doctor of Wittenberg a mystic, we may sum up Calvin as a scholastic; he gives articulate expression to the principles which Luther had stormily thrown out upon the world in his vehement pamphleteering; and the "Institutes" as they were left by their author have remained ever since the standard of orthodox Protestant belief in all the Churches known as "Reformed." His French disciples called their sect "the religion"; such it has proved to be outside the Roman world.
The family name, spelt in many ways, was Cauvin latinized according to the custom of the age as Calvinus. For some unknown reason the Reformer is commonly called Maître Jean C. His mother, Jeanne Le Franc, born in the Diocese of Cambrai, is mentioned as "beautiful and devout"; she took her little son to various shrines and brought him up a good Catholic. On the father's side, his ancestors were seafaring men. His grandfather settled at Pont l'Evêque near Paris, and had two sons who became locksmiths; the third was Gerard, who turned procurator at Noyon, and there his four sons and two daughters saw the light. He lived in the Place au Blé (Cornmarket). Noyon, a bishop's see, had long been a fief of the powerful old family of Hangest, who treated it as their personal property. But an everlasting quarrel, in which the city took part, went on between the bishop and the chapter. Charles de Hangest, nephew of the too well-known Georges d'Amboise, Archbishop of Rouen, surrendered the bishopric in 1525 to his own nephew John, becoming his vicar-general. John kept up the battle with his canons until the Parliament of Paris intervened, upon which he went to Rome, and at last died in Paris in 1577. This prelate had Protestant kinsfolk; he is charged with having fostered heresy which in those years was beginning to raise its head among the French. Clerical dissensions, at all events, allowed the new doctrines a promising field; and the Calvins were more or less infected by them before 1530.
Gerard's four sons were made clerics and held benefices at a tender age. The Reformer was given one when a boy of twelve, he became Curé of Saint-Martin de Marteville in the Vermandois in 1527, and of Pont l'Eveque in 1529. Three of the boys attended the local Collège des Capettes, and there John proved himself an apt scholar. But his people were intimate with greater folk, the de Montmor, a branch of the line of Hangest, which led to his accompanying some of their children to Paris in 1523, when his mother was probably dead and his father had married again. The latter died in 1531, under excommunication from the chapter for not sending in his accounts. The old man's illness, not his lack of honesty, was, we are told, the cause. Yet his son Charles, nettled by the censure, drew towards the Protestant doctrines. He was accused in 1534 of denying the Catholic dogma of the Eucharist, and died out of the Church in 1536; his body was publicly gibbeted as that of a recusant.
Meanwhile, young John was going through his own trials at the University of Paris, the dean or syndic of which, Noel Bédier, had stood up against Erasmus and bore hard upon Le Fèvre d'Etaples (Stapulensis), celebrated for his translation of the Bible into French. Calvin, a "martinet", or oppidan, in the Collèege de la Marche, made this man's acquaintance (he was from Picardy) and may have glanced into his Latin commentary on St. Paul, dated 1512, which Doumergue considers the first Protestant book emanating from a French pen. Another influence tending the same way was that of Corderius, Calvin's tutor, to whom he dedicated afterwards his annotation of I Thessalonians, remarking, "if there be any good thing in what I have published, I owe it to you". Corderius had an excellent Latin style, his life was austere, and his "Colloquies" earned him enduring fame. But he fell under suspicion of heresy, and by Calvin's aid took refuge in Geneva, where he died September 1564. A third herald of the "New Learning" was George Cop, physician to Francis I, in whose house Calvin found a welcome and gave ear to the religious discussions which Cop favoured. And a fourth was Pierre-Robert d'Olivet of Noyon, who also translated the Scriptures, our youthful man of letters, his nephew, writing (in 1535) a Latin preface to the Old Testament and a French one — his first appearance as a native author — to the New Testament.
By 1527, when no more than eighteen, Calvin's educatlon was complete in its main lines. He had learned to be a humanist and a reformer. The "sudden conversion" to a spiritual life in 1529, of which he speaks, must not be taken quite literally. He had never been an ardent Catholic; but the stories told at one time of his ill-regulated conduct have no foundation; and by a very natural process he went over to the side on which his family were taking their stand. In 1528 he inscribed himself at Orléans as a law student, made friends with Francis Daniel, and then went for a year to Bourges, where he began preaching in private. Margaret d'Angoulême, sister of Francis I, and Duchess of Berry, was living there with many heterodox Germans about her.
He is found again at Paris in 1531. Wolmar had taught him Greek at Bourges; from Vatable he learned Hebrew; and he entertained some relations with the erudite Budaeus. About this date he printed a commentary on Seneca's "De Clementiâ". It was merely an exercise in scholarship, having no political significance. Francis I was, indeed, handling Protestants severely, and Calvin, now Doctor of Law at Orléans, composed, so the story runs, an oration on Christian philosophy which Nicholas Cop delivered on All Saints' Day, 1532, both writer and speaker having to take instant flight from pursuit by the royal inquisitors. This legend has been rejected by modern critics. Calvin spent some time, however, with Canon du Tillet at Angoulême under a feigned designation. In May, 1534, he went to Noyon, gave up his benefice, and, it is said, was imprisoned. But he got away to Nerac in Bearn, the residence of the Duchess Margaret, and there again encountered Le Fèvre, whose French Bible had been condemned by the Sorbonne to the flames. His next visit to Paris fell out during a violent campaign of the Lutherans against the Mass, which brought on reprisals, Etienne de la Forge and others were burnt in the Place de Grève; and Calvin accompanied by du Tillet, escaped — though not without adventures — to Metz and Strasburg. In the latter city Bucer reigned supreme. The leading reformers dictated laws from the pulpit to their adherents, and this journey proved a decisive one for the French humanist, who, though by nature timid and shy, committed himself to a war on paper with his own sovereign. The famous letter to Francis I is dated 23 August, 1535. It served as a prologue to the "Institutes", of which the first edition came out in March, 1536, not in French but in Latin. Calvin's apology for lecturing the king was, that placards denouncing the Protestants as rebels had been posted up all over the realm. Francis I did not read these pages, but if he had done so he would have discovered in them a plea, not for toleration, which the Reformer utterly scorned, but for doing away with Catholicism in favour of the new gospel. There could be only one true Church, said the young theologian, therefore kings ought to make an utter end of popery. (For an account of the "Institutes" see ) The second edition belongs to 1539, the first French translation to 1541; the final Latin, as revised by its author, is of 1559; but that in common use, dated 1560, has additions by his disciples. "It was more God's work than mine", said Calvin, who took for his motto "Omnia ad Dei gloriam", and in allusion to the change he had undergone in 1529 assumed for his device a hand stretched out from a burning heart.
A much disputed chapter in Calvin's biography is the visit which he was long thought to have paid at Ferraro to the Protestant Duchess Renée, daughter of Louis XII. Many stories clustered about his journey, now given up by the best-informed writers. All we know for certain is that the Reformer, after settling his family affairs and bringing over two of his brothers and sisters to the views he had adopted undertook, in consequence of the war between Charles V and Francis I, to reach Bale by way of Geneva, in July, 1536. At Geneva the Swiss preacher Fare, then looking for help in his propaganda, besought him with such vehemence to stay and teach theology that, as Calvin himself relates, he was terrified into submission. We are not accustomed to fancy the austere prophet so easily frightened. But as a student and recluse new to public responsibilities, he may well have hesitated before plunging into the troubled waters of Geneva, then at their stormiest period. No portrait of him belonging to this time is extant. Later he is represented as of middle height, with bent shoulders, piercing eyes, and a large forehead; his hair was of an auburn tinge. Study and fasting occasioned the severe headaches from which he suffered continually. In private life he was cheerful but sensitive, not to say overbearing, his friends treated him with delicate consideration. His habits were simple; he cared nothing for wealth, and he never allowed himself a holiday. His correspondence, of which 4271 letters remain, turns chiefly on doctrinal subjects. Yet his strong, reserved character told on all with whom he came in contact; Geneva submitted to his theocratic rule, and the Reformed Churches accepted his teaching as though it were infallible.
Such was the stranger whom Farel recommended to his fellow Protestants, "this Frenchman", chosen to lecture on the Bible in a city divided against itself. Geneva had about 15,000 inhabitants. Its bishop had long been its prince limited, however, by popular privileges. The vidomne, or mayor, was the Count of Savoy, and to his family the bishopric seemed a property which, from 1450, they bestowed on their younger children. John of Savoy, illegitimate son of the previous bishop, sold his rights to the duke, who was head of the clan, and died in 1519 at Pignerol. Jean de la Baume, last of its ecclesiastical princes, abandoned the city, which received Protestant teachers from Berne in 1519 and from Fribourg in 1526. In 1527 the arms of Savoy were torn down; in 1530 the Catholic party underwent defeat, and Geneva became independent. It had two councils, but the final verdict on public measures rested with the people. These appointed Farel, a convert of Le Fevre, as their preacher in 1534. A discussion between the two Churches from 30 May to 24 June, 1535 ended in victory for the Protestants. The altars were desecrated, the sacred images broken, the Mass done away with. Bernese troops entered and "the Gospel" was accepted, 21 May, 1536. This implied persecution of Catholics by the councils which acted both as Church and State. Priests were thrown into prison; citizens were fined for not attending sermons. At Zürich, Basle, and Berne the same laws were established. Toleration did not enter into the ideas of the time.
But though Calvin had not introduced this legislation, it was mainly by his influence that in January, 1537 the "articles" were voted which insisted on communion four times a year, set spies on delinquents, established a moral censorship, and punished the unruly with excommunication. There was to be a children's catechism, which he drew up; it ranks among his best writings. The city now broke into "jurants" and "nonjurors" for many would not swear to the "articles"; indeed, they never were completely accepted. Questions had arisen with Berne touching points that Calvin judged to be indifferent. He made a figure in the debates at Lausanne defending the freedom of Geneva. But disorders ensued at home, where recusancy was yet rife; in 1538 the council exiled Farel, Calvin, and the blind evangelist, Couraud. The Reformer went to Strasburg, became the guest of Capito and Bucer, and in 1539 was explaining the New Testament to French refugees at fifty two florins a year. Cardinal Sadolet had addressed an open letter to the Genevans, which their exile now answered. Sadolet urged that schism was a crime; Calvin replied that the Roman Church was corrupt. He gained applause by his keen debating powers at Hagenau, Worms, and Ratisbon. But he complains of his poverty and ill-health, which did not prevent him from marrying at this time Idelette de Bure, the widow of an Anabaptist whom he had converted. Nothing more is known of this lady, except that she brought him a son who died almost at birth in 1542, and that her own death took place in 1549.
After some negotiation Ami Perrin, commissioner for Geneva, persuaded Calvin to return. He did so, not very willingly, on 13 September, 1541. His entry was modest enough. The church constitution now recognized "pastors, doctors, elders, deacons" but supreme power was given to the magistrate. Ministers had the spiritual weapon of God's word; the consistory never, as such, wielded the secular arm Preachers, led by Calvin, and the councils, instigated by his opponents, came frequently into collision. Yet the ordinances of 1541 were maintained; the clergy, assisted by lay elders, governed despotically and in detail the actions of every citizen. A presbyterian Sparta might be seen at Geneva; it set an example to later Puritans, who did all in their power to imitate its discipline. The pattern held up was that of the Old Testament, although Christians were supposed to enjoy Gospel liberty. In November, 1552, the Council declared that Calvin's "Institutes" were a "holy doctrine which no man might speak against." Thus the State issued dogmatic decrees, the force of which had been anticipated earlier, as when Jacques Gouet was imprisoned on charges of impiety in June, 1547, and after severe torture was beheaded in July. Some of the accusations brought against the unhappy young man were frivolous, others doubtful. What share, if any, Calvin took in this judgment is not easy to ascertain. The execution of however must be laid at his door; it has given greater offence by far than the banishment of Castellio or the penalties inflicted on Bolsec — moderate men opposed to extreme views in discipline and doctrine, who fell under suspicion as reactionary. The Reformer did not shrink from his self-appointed task. Within five years fifty-eight sentences of death and seventy-six of exile, besides numerous committals of the most eminent citizens to prison, took place in Geneva. The iron yoke could not be shaken off. In 1555, under Ami Perrin, a sort of revolt was attempted. No blood was shed, but Perrin lost the day, and Calvin's theocracy triumphed.
"I am more deeply scandalized", wrote Gibbon "at the single execution of Servetus than at the hecatombs which have blazed in the autos-da-fé of Spain and Portugal". He ascribes the enmity of Calvin to personal malice and perhaps envy. The facts of the case are pretty well ascertained. Born in 1511, perhaps at Tudela, Michael Served y Reves studied at Toulouse and was present in Bologna at the coronation of Charles V. He travelled in Germany and brought out in 1531 at Hagenau his treatise "De Trinitatis Erroribus", a strong Unitarian work which made much commotion among the more orthodox Reformers. He met Calvin and disputed with him at Paris in 1534, became corrector of the press at Lyons; gave attention to medicine, discovered the lesser circulation of the blood, and entered into a fatal correspondence with the dictator of Geneva touching a new volume "Christianismi Restitutio," which he intended to publish. In 1546 the exchange of letters ceased. The Reformer called Servetus arrogant (he had dared to criticize the "Institutes" in marginal glosses), and uttered the significant menace, "If he comes here and I have any authority, I will never let him leave the place alive." The "Restitutio" appeared in 1553. Calvin at once had its author delated to the Dominican inquisitor Ory at Lyons, sending on to him the man's letters of 1545-46 and these glosses. Hereupon the Spaniard was imprisoned at Vienne, but he escaped by friendly connivance, and was burnt there only in effigy. Some extraordinary fascination drew him to Geneva, from which he intended to pass the Alps. He arrived on 13 August, 1553. The next day Calvin, who had remarked him at the sermon, got his critic arrested, the preacher's own secretary coming forward to accuse him. Calvin drew up forty articles of charge under three heads, concerning the nature of God, infant baptism, and the attack which Servetus had ventured on his own teaching. The council hesitated before taking a deadly decision, but the dictator, reinforced by Farel, drove them on. In prison the culprit suffered much and loudly complained. The Bernese and other Swiss voted for some indefinite penalty. But to Calvin his power in Geneva seemed lost, while the stigma of heresy; as he insisted, would cling to all Protestants if this innovator were not put to death. "Let the world see" Bullinger counselled him, "that Geneva wills the glory of Christ."
Accordingly, sentence was pronounced 26 October, 1553, of burning at the stake. "Tomorrow he dies," wrote Calvin to Farel. When the deed was done, the Reformer alleged that he had been anxious to mitigate the punishment, but of this fact no record appears in the documents. He disputed with Servetus on the day of execution and saw the end. A defence and apology next year received the adhesion of the Genevan ministers. Melanchthon, who had taken deep umbrage at the blasphemies of the Spanish Unitarian, strongly approved in well-known words. But a group that included Castellio published at Basle in 1554 a pamphlet with the title, "Should heretics be persecuted?" It is considered the first plea for toleration in modern times. Beza replied by an argument for the affirmative, couched in violent terms; and Calvin, whose favorite disciple he was, translated it into French in 1559. The dialogue, "Vaticanus", written against the "Pope of Geneva" by Castellio, did not get into print until 1612. Freedom of opinion, as Gibbon remarks, "was the consequence rather than the design of the Reformation."
Another victim to his fiery zeal was Gentile, one of an Italian sect in Geneva, which also numbered among its adherents Alciati and Gribaldo. As more or less Unitarian in their views, they were required to sign a confession drawn up by Calvin in 1558. Gentile subscribed it reluctantly, but in the upshot he was condemned and imprisoned as a perjurer. He escaped only to be twice incarcerated at Berne, where in 1566, he was beheaded. Calvin's impassioned polemic against these Italians betrays fear of the Socinianism which was to lay waste his vineyard. Politically he leaned on the French refugees, now abounding in the city, and more than equal in energy — if not in numbers — to the older native factions. Opposition died out. His continual preaching, represented by 2300 sermons extant in the manuscripts and a vast correspondence, gave to the Reformer an influence without example in his closing years. He wrote to Edward VI, helped in revising the Book of Common Prayer, and intervened between the rival English parties abroad during the Marian period. In the Huguenot troubles he sided with the more moderate. His censure of the conspiracy of Amboise in 1560 does him honour. One great literary institution founded by him, the College, afterwards the University, of Geneva, flourished exceedingly. The students were mostly French. When Beza was rector it had nearly 1500 students of various grades.
Geneva now sent out pastors to the French congregations and was looked upon as the Protestant Rome. Through Knox, "the Scottish champion of the Swiss Reformation", who had been preacher to the exiles in that city, his native land accepted the discipline of the Presbytery and the doctrine of predestination as expounded in Calvin's "Institutes". The Puritans in England were also descendants of the French theologian. His dislike of theatres, dancing and the amenities of society was fully shared by them. The town on Lake Leman was described as without crime and destitute of amusements. Calvin declaimed against the "Libertines", but there is no evidence that any such people had a footing inside its walls The cold, hard, but upright disposition characteristic of the Reformed Churches, less genial than that derived from Luther, is due entirely to their founder himself. Its essence is a concentrated pride, a love of disputation, a scorn of opponents. The only art that it tolerates is music, and that not instrumental. It will have no Christian feasts in its calendar, and it is austere to the verge of Manichaean hatred of the body. When dogma fails the Calvinist, he becomes, as in the instance of Carlyle, almost a pure Stoic. "At Geneva, as for a time in Scotland," says J. A. Froude, "moral sins were treated as crimes to be punished by the magistrate." The Bible was a code of law, administered by the clergy. Down to his dying day Calvin preached and taught. By no means an aged man, he was worn out in these frequent controversies. On 25 April, 1564, he made his will, leaving 225 French crowns, of which he bequeathed ten to his college, ten to the poor, and the remainder to his nephews and nieces. His last letter was addressed to Farel. He was buried without pomp, in a spot which is not now ascertainable. In the year 1900 a monument of expiation was erected to Servetus in the Place Champel. Geneva has long since ceased to be the head of Calvinism. It is a rallying point for Free Thought, Socialist propaganda, and Nihilist conspiracies. But in history it stands out as the Sparta of the Reformed churches, and Calvin is its Lycurgus.
COMMENTARIES ON THE HARMONY OF THE LAW VOL. 2
Deuteronomy 24
Deuteronomy 24:8, 9
8.Take heed in the plague of leprosy, that thou observe diligently, and do according to all that the priests the Levites shall teach you: as I commanded them, so ye shall observe to do. 8.Observa in plaga leprae, ad observandum diligenter et faciendum secundum omnia quae docuerint vos sacerdotes Levitae: sicuti praecepi eis, ita observabitis ad faciendum.
9.Remember what the Lord thy God did unto Miriam by the way, after that ye were come forth out of Egypt. 9.Recordare quid fecerit Jehova Deus tuus Mariae in itinere, quum egressi estis ex Aegypto.
8.Take heed in the plague of leprosy. I am aware how greatly interpreters differ from each other and how variously they twist whatever Moses has written about Leprosy. Some are too eagerly devoted to allegories; some think that God, as a prudent Legislator, merely gave a commandment of a sanitary, nature, in order that a contagious disease should not, spread among the people. This notion, however, is very. poor, and almost unmeaning; and is briefly. refuted by Moses himself, both where he recounts the history of Miriam's leprosy, and also where he assigns the cause why lepers should be put out of the camp, viz that they might not defile the camp in which God dwelt, whilst he ranks them with those that have an issue, and that they are defiled by the dead. Wherefore, I have thought it well, previous to attempting the full elucidation of the matter, to adduce two passages, by way of preface, from whence the design of God may more fully appear. When, in this passage from Deuteronomy, He commands the people to "take heed" and "observe diligently" the plague of leprosy, there can be no question but that He thus ratifies what He had before set forth at greater length in Leviticus. And, first of all, He refers the judgment of the matter to the priests, that what they pronounce should be firm and unalterable; and secondly, He would have the priests, lest they should pronounce rashly, and according to their own wishes, to follow simply what He prescribed to them, so that they may only be the ministers, or heralds; whilst, as to the sovereign authority, He alone should be the Judge. He confirms the law which He imposes by a special example; because He had cast out Miriam, the sister of Moses, for a time, lest her uncleanness during her leprosy should defile the camp. For the view which some take, that He exhorts the people lest, through sin, they should bring upon themselves the same evil as Miriam, is not to the purpose. But that which I have stated makes excellent sense, viz., that God's command, whereby He prohibited Miriam from entering the camp, was to have the force and weight of a perpetual law; because He thus ordained what He would always have done.
Numbers 5
Numbers 5:1-3
1.And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 1.Et loquutus est Jehova ad Mosen, dicendo:
2.Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead: 2. Praecipe filiis Israel ut ejiciant e castris omnem leprosum, omnem seminifluum, et omnem immundum super anima.
3.Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell. 3.Tam masculum quam faeminam ejicietis: extra castra ejicietis eos, ne contaminent castra sua, quia ego habito in medio eorum.
2.Command the children of Israel. This passage clearly shews that God, in desiring the lepers to be put out of the camp, was not acting as a physician by any means, and merely consulting the health of the people: but that by this external rite and ceremony He exercised them in the pursuit of purity; for, by joining with the lepers those who had an issue, f2and who were defiled by the dead, He instructs the people simply to keep away from all uncleanness. The reason, which follows, confirms this, — "that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof He dwells." It is just as if He had said, that all the habitations of His elect people were parts of His sanctuary, which it was a shame to defile with any pollution. For we know what license men give themselves in corrupting f3 the service of God, by mixing, as the proverb says, sacred things with profane. Thus we see that the very worst of men boast themselves to be anything but the least zealous of His worshipers, and spare not to lift up polluted hands, although God so sternly repudiates them. It was, then, profitable that the ancient people should be reminded by this visible proof, that all those who are defiled cannot duly serve God, but that they rather pollute. with their filthiness what is otherwise holy, and thus grossly abuse religious exercises; and again, that they ought not tobe tolerated in the holy congregation, lest their infection should spread to others. Let us now briefly examine Leviticus 13.
Leviticus 13
Leviticus 13:1-59
1.And the Lord spake untoMoses and Aaron, saying, 1.Et loquutus est Jehova ad Mosen et Aharon, dicendo:
2.When a man shall have in the skin of his flesh a rising, a scab, or bright spot, and it be in the skin of his flesh like the plague of leprosy; then he shall be brought unto Aaron the priest, or unto one of his sons the priests. 2. Homo quum fuerit in cute carnis ejus tumor, vel scabies, vel alba macula, et in cute carnis ejus fuerit plaga leprae, ducetur ad Aharon sacerdotem, vel ad unum e filiis ejus sacerdotibus.
3.And the priest shall look on the plague in the skin of the flesh: and when the hair in the plague is turned white, and the plague in sight be deeper than the skin of his flesh, it is a plague of leprosy and the priest shall look on him, and pronounce him unclean. 3. Tune videbit sacerdos plagam in cute carnis: quod si pilus in plaga versus fuerit in albedinem, et superficies plagae profundior fuerit cute carnis ejus, plaga leprae est, et postquam viderit eum sacerdos judicabit illum contaminatum, (vel, contaminabit illum.)
4.If the bright spot be white in the skin of his flesh, and in sight be not deeper than the skin, and the hair thereof be not turned white; then the priest shall shut up him that hath the plague seven days. 4. Quod si macula alba fuerit in cute carnis ejus, et profundior non fuerit aspectus ejus cute, nec pilus ejus versus fuerit in albedinem, includet sacerdos plagam septem diebus.
5.And the priest shall look on him the seventh day: and, behold, if the plague in his sight be at a stay, and the plague spread not in the skin; then the priest shall shut him up seven days more. 5. Posted videbit eum sacerdos die septimo et si plaga fuerit aequalis coram oculis ejus, nee creverit plaga in cute, includet eum sacerdos septem diebus secundo.
6.And the priest shall look on him again the seventh day: and, behold,if the plague be somewhat dark, and the prague spread not in the skin, the priest shall pronounce him clean; it is but a scab: and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean. 6.Tune inspiciet sacerdos ipsum die septimo itcrum, et si subnigra futerit plaga, (vel, obscurius contracta,) nec creverit plaga in cute, tune mundum declarabit (vel, mundabit) eum sacerdos: scabies est: et lavabit vir vestimenta sua, et mundus erit.
7.But if the scab spread much abroad in the skin, after that he hath been seen of the priest for his cleansing, he shall be seen of the priest again. 7. Quod si crescendo creverit scabies in cute postquam ostensus fuerit sacerdoti in purgatione ejus, inspi-cietur secundo a sacerdote.
8.And if the priest see that, behold, the scab spreadeth in the skin then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a leprosy. 8.Ubi autem viderit sacerdos; crescere scabiem in cute, immundum judicabit cum sacerdos, lepra est judicabit cum sacerdos, lepra est.
9.When the plague of leprosy is in a man, then he shall be brought unto the priest;, 9. Quoties plaga lepre fuerit in homine adducetur ad sacerdotem;
10.And the priest shall see him: and, behold, if the rising be white in the skin, and it have turned the hair white, and there be quick raw flesh in the rising, 10.Et aspiciet sacerdos, et si tumor albus fuerit in cute, et mutaverit pilum in albedinem, et ailmentum carnis vivae in tumore,
11.It is an old leprosy in the skin of his flesh: and the priest shall pronounce him unclean, and shall not shut him up; for he is unclean. 11.Lepra inveterate, est in cute carnis ejus: ideoque contaminabit eum sacerdos, quia immundus est.
12.And if a leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague, from his head even to his foot, wheresoever the priest looketh 12. Sin germinando germinaverit lepra in cute, et operuerit lepra totam cutem plagae, a capite ejus, et totum aspectuum oculorum sacerdotis:
13.Then the priest shall consider: and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague; it is all turned white: he is clean. 13.Tunc inspiciet sacerdos, et si operuerit lepra totam carnem ejus, tunc mundam judicabit plagam: ubi tota versa est in albedinem, munda est, (vel, mundus.)
14.But when raw flesh appeareth in him, he shall be unclean. 14. Quo autem die visa fuerit in co cato viva, immundus erit.
15.And the priest shall see the raw flesh, and pronounce him to be unclean;for the raw flesh is unclean: it is a leprosy. 15.Et ubi viderit sacerdos carnem vivam, immundum judicabit ipsum, caro viva immunda est, lepra est.
16.Or if the raw flesh turn again, and be changed unto white, he shall come unto the priest; 16.Vel si reversa fuerit caro viva, et conversa in albedinem, tunc veniet ad sacerdotem:
17.And the priest shall see him: and, behold, if the plague be turned into white; then the priest shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: he is clean. 17.Et inspiciet sacerdos: et si versa fuerit plaga in albedinem, mundam judicabit sacerdos plagam illam: munda est.
18.The flesh also, in which, event in the skin thereof, was a bile, and is healed, 18.Et si fuerit in cute carnis alicujus ulcus, (vel, pustula ardens,) et illud sanatum fuerit.
19.And in the place of the bile there be a white rising, or a bright spot, white, and somewhat reddish, and it be shewed to the priest; 19. Et extiterit in loeo ulceris tumor albus, aut macula alba subrufa, ostendetur sacerdoti:
20.And if, when the priest seeth it, behold, it be in sight lower than the skin, and the hair thereof be turned white, the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a plague of leprosy broken out of the bile. 20.Et quum inspexerit sacerdos, si pilus profundior fuerit cute, et pilus conversus fuerit in albedinem, contaminabit eum sacerdos: quia plaga leprae est ex ulcere germinans.
21.But if the priest look on it, and, behold, there be no white hairs therein, and if it be not lower than the skin, but be somewhat dark; then the priest shall shut him up seven days. 21. Et si viderit cam sacerdos, et non fuerit in ea pilus albus, nec fuerit profundior cute, sed fuerit subobscura, tunc includet eum sacerdos septem diebus.
22.And if it spread much abroad in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a plague. 22.Si vero crescendo creverit per cutem, immundum judicabit eum sacerdos: plaga est.
23.But if the bright spot stay in his place, and spread not, it is a burning bile; and the priest shall pronounce him clean. 23.Si vero suo loco constiterit macula alba, nec ereverit, adustio ulceris est: mundum (vel, mundam) judicabit eum sacerdos.
24.Or if there be any flesh, in the skin whereof there is a hot burning, and the quick flesh that burneth have a white bright spot, somewhat reddish, or white; 24.Quum fuerit caro in cujus cute erit adustio ignis, et in viva carne adustionis macula alba subrufa, vel alba.
25.Then the priest shall look upon it: and, behold, if the hair in the bright spot be turned white, and it be in sight deeper than the skin, it is a leprosy broken out of the burning: wherefore the priest shall pronounce him unclean; it is the plague of leprosy. 25. Inspiciet eum sacerdos: et, si versus fuerit pilus in albedinem in macula illa, et superficies ejus fuerit profundior cute, lepra est in adustione germinans: ideo immundam judicabit eam sacerdos, plaga leprae est.
26.But if the priest look on it, and, behold, there be no white hair in the bright spot, and it be no lower than the other skin, but be somewhat dark; then the priest shall shut him up seven days. 26. Quod si inspexerit eam sacerdos, et non fuerit in macula pilus albus, nec profundior cute, sed fuerit subnigra, includet eum sacerdos septem diebus.
27.And the priest shall look upon him the seventh day: and if it be spread much abroad in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean; it is the plague of leprosy.27.Postea inspiciet eum sacerdos die septimo: et si crescendo creverit in cute, immundam judicabit eam sacerdos, plaga leprae est.
28.And if the bright spot stay in his place, and spread not in the skin, but it be somewhat dark; it is a rising of the burning, and the priest shall pronounce him clean: for it is an inflammation of the burning'. 28. Quod si in loco suo steterit macula, nec creverit per cutem, et eadem fuerit contracta, (vel, subnigra,) tumor adustionis est: ideoque mundum judicabit eum sacerdos: quia ardor exustionis est.
29.If a man or woman have a plague upon the head or the beard; 29.Si viro aut mulieri exorta fuerit plga in capite, aut in barba.
30.Then the priest shall see the plague: and, behold, if it be in sight deeper than the skin, and there be in it a yellow thin hair; then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a dry scall, even a leprosy upon the head or beard. 30.Tune inspiciet sacerdos plugam: et si superficies ejus profundior erit cute, et fuerit in ea pilus flavus et tenuis, immundum judicabit sa-cerdos: macula nigra est, lepra capitis aut barbae est.
31.And if the priest look on tile plague of the scall, and, behold, it be not in sight deeper than the skin, and that there is no black hair in it; then the priest shall shut up him that hath the plague of the scall seven days. 31. Si autem inspexerit sacerdos plagam maculae nigrae, et superficies ejus non fuerit profundior cute, nee pilus niger in ea, includet sacerdos plagam maculae nigrae septem diebus.
32.And in the seventh day the priest shall look on the plague: and, behold, if the scull spread not, and there be in it no yellow hair, and the scall be not in sight deeper than the skin; 32.Et quum inspexerit sacerdos die septima, si non creverit macula illa nigra, nec in ea fuerit pilus, et aspectus maculae nigrae non fuerit profundior cute:
33.He shall be shaven, but the scall shall he not shave; and the priest shall shut up him that hath the scall seven days more. 33. Tune radetur, sed maculam nigram non radet, includetque sacerdos maeulam nigram septem diebus secundo.
34.And in the seventh day the priest shall look on the scall: and, behold, if the scall be not spread in the skin, nor be in sight deeper than the skin; then the priest shall pronounce him clean: and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean. 34.Postea, inspiciet sacerdos maculam nigram die septima: et, si non creverit macula nigra in cute, nee superfides cjus profundior fuerit cute, mundum judicabit eum sacerdos: lavabitque vestimenta sua, et mundus erit.
35.But if the scall spread much in the skin after his cleansing; 35. Si autem crescendo creverit macula per cutera post purificationem suam,
36.Then the priest shall look on him: and, behold, if the scall be spread in the skin, the priest shall not seek for yellow hair; he is unclean. 36.Tune inspiciet cam sacerdos: et, si creverit macula illa in cute, non requiret ad examen sacerdos pilum flavum: immundus est.
37.But if the scall be in his sight at a stay, and that there is black hair grown up therein; the scall is healed, he is clean: and the priest shall pronounce him clean. 37.Quod si in oculis ejus constiterit macula, et pilus niger fuerit in ea, sanata est macula illa, mundus est, et mundum judicabit eum sacer-dos.
38.If a man also or a woman have in the skin of their flesh bright spots, even white bright spots; 38. Quum in cute carnis viri aut mulieris fuerint macu!ae, maculm inquam albae.
39.Then the priest shall look: and, behold, if the bright spots in the skin of their flesh be darkish white; it is a freckled spot that groweth in the skin: he is clean. 39.Inspiciet sacerdos, et, si in cute carnis corum fuerint maculae albae, subnigrae (vel, contractae,) macula alba est quod floret in cute, mundus est.
40.And the man whose hair is fallen off his head, he is bald; yet is he clean. 40.Vir quum depilatum fuerit caput ejus, calvus est, mundus est.
41.And he that hath his hair fallen off from the part of his head toward his face, he is forehead bald: yet is he clean. 41.Quod si ex parte faciei suae caput habuerit depilatum, recalvaster est, mundus est.
42.And if there be in the bald head, or bald forehead, a white reddish sore, it is a leprosy sprung up in his bald head, or his bald forehead. 42.Quod si in calvitio ejus aut parte depilata fuerit plaga alba, subrufa, lepra germinans est in calvitie, vel parte ejus depilata.
43.Then the priest shall look upon it: and, behold, if the rising of the sore be white reddish in his bald head, or in his bald forehead, as the leprosy appeareth in the skin of the flesh, 43. Aspiciet ergo eum sacerdos: et, si tumor plagae albus, rufus in calvitio ejus aut parte depilata, sicut species leprae in cute carnis,
44.He is a leprous man, he is unclean: the priest shall pronounce him utterly unclean; his plague is in his head. 44.Vir leprosus est, immundus est: contaminando contaminabit illum sacerdos: in capite ejus est plaga ejus.
45.And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean. 45.Leprosi autem in quo fuerit plaga illa, vestimenta erunt scissa, et caput ejus nudum, et pilum labri operiet, et Immundus, immundus sum clamabit.
46.All the days wherein the plague shall be in him he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his habitation be.46.Cunctis diebus quibus fuerit plaga in eo, contaminabitur, immudus est: seorsum habitabit: extra castra mansio ejus erit.
47.The garment also that the plague of leprosy is in, whether it be a woollen garment or a linen garment, 47. Si in veste fnerit plaga leprae, in veste lanea, aut in veste linea,
48.Whether it be in the warp or woof, of linen, or of woollen, whether in a skin, or in anything made of skin; 48. Aut in stamine, aut in subtegmine ex lino, aut ex lana, aut in pelle, aut in quovis opere pelliceo:
49.And if the plague be greenish or reddish in the garment, or in the skin, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in any thing of skin; it is a plague of leprosy, and shall be shewed unto the priest. 49. Et fuerit plaga illa viridis aut rufa in veste, aut in stamine, vel in subtegmine, vel in quovis opere pelliceo, plaga leprae est, ostendetur sacerdoti.
50.And the priest shall look upon the plague, and shut up it that hath the plague seven days. 50. Et inspiciet saccMos plagam, includetque plagam illam septera diebus.
51.And he shall look on the plague on the seventh day: if the plague be spread in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in a skin, or in any work that is made of skin, the plague is a fretting leprosy; it is unclean. 51. Postea inspiciet plagam illam die septimo: si creverlt plaga illa per vestera, vel per subtegmen, vel pellem in omni opere pelliceo, lepra corodentis plagae est, immunda est.
52.He shall therefore burn that garment, whether warp or woof, in woollen or in linen, or any thing of skin, wherein the plague is: for it is a fretting leprosy; it shall be burnt in the fire. 52.Comburetque vestem, vel stamen, vel subtegmen ex lana, vel ex lino, vel quodvis opus pelliceum in quo fuerit plaga illa: quia lepra corrodens est, igni comburetur.
53.And if the priest shall look, and, behold, the plague be not spread in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in any thing of skin; 53. Quod si, ubi inspexerit sacerdos, ecce non creverit plaga illa in veste, vel in stamine, vel in subtegmine, vel in quovis opere pelliceo.
54.Then the priest shall command that they wash the thing wherein the plague is, and he shall shut it up seven days more. 54.Tune praecipiet sacerdos, et lavabunt id in quo est plaga: et recludet illud septem diebus secundo.
55.And the priest shall look on the plague, after that it is washed: and, behold, if the plague have not changed his color, and the plague be not spread, it is unclean; thou shalt burn it in the fire: it is fret inward, whether it be bare within or without. 55. Inspiciet vero sacerdos, postquam lotum fuerit, plagam illam: et, si non mutaverit plaga illa colorem suum, nee plaga creverit, immunda est, igni combures illud: corrosio est in calvitio ejus vel in parte ejus depilata.
56.And if the priest look, and, behold, the plague be somewhat dark after the washing of it; then he shall rend it out of the garment, or out of the skin, or out of the warp, or out of the woof. 56.Quod si dum inspexerit sacerdos, ecce, subobscura fuerit plaga postquam lota fuit, abscindet eam e veste, vel epelle, vel e stamine, vel e subtegmine
57.And if it appear still in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in any thing of skin, it is spreading plague: thou shalt burn that wherein the plague is with fire. 57. Quod si comspecta fureit ultra in veste, vel in stamine, vel in subtegmine, vel in quovis opere pelliceo lepra germinans est, igni combures illud in quo fuerit, lavabitur secundo, et mundum erit.
58.And the garment, either warp or woof, or whatsoever thing of skin it be, which thou shalt wash, if the plague be departed from them, then it shall be washed the second time, and shall be clean. 58.Vestis autem, sive stamen, sive, sbtegment, aut quodivis opus pelliceum quod laveris, si recesserit ab eis plagra, lavabitur secundo, et mundum erit.
59.This is the law of the plague of leprosy in a garment of wollen or linen, either in the warp or woof, or any thing of skins, to pronounce it clean, or to pronounce it unclean. 59. Haec est lex leprae vestimenti lanei, vel linei, vel staminis, vel subtegminis, vel cujusvis operis pellicei ad judicandum illud mundum vel immundum.
2.When a man. shall have in the skin. Since every eruption was not the leprosy, and did not render a man unclean, when God appoints the priests to be the judges, He distinguishes by certain marks a common eruption from the leprosy; and then subjoins the difference between the various kinds of leprosy. For the disease was not always incurable; but, only when the blood was altogether corrupted, so that the skin itself had become hardened by its corrosion, or swollen by its diseased state. This, then, must be observed in the first place, that the Greek and Latin word lepra, and the Hebrew t[rx tzaragmath, extend further than to the incurable disease, which medical men call elephantiasisf4both on account of the hardness of the skin, and also its mottled color; not, however, that there is an entire agreement between the thickness of the man's skin and that of an elephant, but because this disease produces insensibility of the skin. This the Greeks call Yw>ra, and if it be not a kind of leprosy, it is nearly allied to it. Thus we see that there was a distinction between the scab and leprosy; just as now-a-days, if it were necessary to judge respecting the itch, (which is commonly called the disease of St. Menanus,f5the marks must be observed, which distinguish it from leprosy. But, as to the various kinds of leprosy, I confess that I am not a physician, so as to discuss them accurately, and I purposely abstain from close inquiry about them, because I am persuaded that the disease here treated of affected the Israelites in an extraordinary manner, which we are now unacquainted with; for what do we now know of a leprous house? Indeed it is probable that, since heathen writers knew that the Jewish people suffered from this disease, they laid hold of it as the ground of their falsehood, that all the descendants of Abraham were infected with the itch, and were driven away from Egypt, lest others should catch it from them. That f6 this was an ancient calumny appears from Josephus, both in the ninth book of his Antiquities, and in his Treatise against Apion; and it is repeated both by C. Tacitus and Justin. Yet I make no doubt that the Egyptians, a very proud nation, in order to efface the memory of their own disgrace, and of the vengeance inflicted upon them by God, invented this lie, and thus grossly turned against this innocent people what had happened to themselves, when they were smitten with boils and blains. But we shall see hereafter, amongst God's curses, that He chastised His people with the same plagues as He had inflicted on the Egyptians:
"The Lord will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab," etc.(Deuteronomy 28:27.)
Whence it may be probably inferred, that God avenged the crimes of His ancient people with special judgments, which are now unknown to us; just as afterwards new diseases arose, from which those in old times were free. At any rate, Josephus, by clear and solid arguments, exposes the absurdity of this accusation, that Moses was driven from Egypt with a crowd of exiles, lest they should infect the country with their disease; because, if they had been universally affected with this malady, he never would have imposed such severe laws for separating the lepers from general society.
God first commands that, whenever a suspicion of leprosy arose, the man was to present himself to the priest; if any symptom of leprosy appeared, He commands him to be shut up for a period of seven days, until it should appear from the progress of the disease that it was incurable leprosy. That God should have appointed the priests to be judges, and those, too, only of the highest order, is a proof that His spiritual service was rather regarded than mere bodily health. If any shall inquire whether leprosy is not a contagious disease, and whether it be not therefore expedient that all who were affected by it should be removed from intercourse with others, I admit, indeed, that such is the case, but I deny that this was the main object in view. For, in process of time, physicians would have been better able to decide by their art and skill: whereas God enjoined this decision upon the priests alone, and gave them the rule whereby they were to judge. Nor did He appoint the Levites indiscriminately, but only the sons of Aaron, who were the highest order, in order that the authority of the decision might be greater. It was, then, by a gross error, or rather impudence, that the Papal priests (sacrifici) assumed to themselves this jurisdiction. It was (they say) the office of the chief priests under the Law to distinguish between the kinds of leprosy; and, therefore, the same right is transferred to the bishops. But they carry the mockery still further: the official f7the bishop's representative, sits as the legitimate judge; he calls in physicians and surgeons, from whose answers he pronounces what he confesses he is ignorant of himself. Behold how cleverly they accommodate a legal rite to our times! The mockery, however, is still more disgusting, when in another sense they extend to the whole tribe of priests what they have said to belong solely to the bishops; for, since the sin under which all labor is a spiritual leprosy, they thence infer that all are excluded from the congregation of the faithful until they shall have been purged and received by absolution, which they hold to be the common office of all the priests. They afterwards add, that judgment cannot be pronounced till the cause is heard, and so conclude that confession is necessary. But, if they choose to have recourse to subtleties, reason would rather conduct us to the opposite conclusion; for God did not desire the priests to take cognizance of a hidden disease, but only after the manifest symptoms had appeared: hence it will follow, that it is preposterous to bring secret sins to judgment, and that wretched men are dragged to their confession contrary to all law and justice. But, setting aside all these absurdities, an analogy must be observed between us and God's ancient people. He of old forbade the external uncleanness of the flesh to be tolerated in His people. By Christ's coming, the typical. figure has ceased; but we are taught that all uncleanness, whereby the purity of His services is defiled, is not to be cherished, or borne with amongst us. And surely excommunication answers to this ceremony; since by it the Church is purified, lest corruptions should everywhere assail it, if wicked and guilty persons occupied a place in it promiscuously with the good. The command of God that, whilst the disease was obscure and questionable, the infected person should be shut up for seven days, recommends moderation to us, lest any, who is still curable, should be condemned before his time. In fact, this medium is to be observed, that the judge should not be too remiss and hasty in pardoning, and still that he should temper severity by justice; and especially that he should not be too precipitate in his judgment. What we translate "shall pronounce him clean, or unclean," is in Hebrew, "shall clean, or unclean him; " thus the dignity of the judgment is more fully established, as though it had proceeded from God Himself; and assuredly no medical skill could declare on the seventh day a leprosy to be incurable, respecting which there was doubt so short a time before, unless God should in some special manner discover the uncleanness, and guide the eyes of the priests by His Spirit.
29.If a man or woman.What is here spoken of is not the baldness which so often occurs in old age; but that loss of hair, which is the consequence of leprosy, is distinguished from any other, the cause of which may be some indisposition, and which yet does not pollute a man. But, inasmuch as some kinds of baldness do not so greatly differ at first sight from leprosy, — such, for instance, as ophiasis and alopecia f8 — it is therefore necessary to distinguish them.
44.He is a leprous man, he is unclean. In the first part of the verse he says that the leprous man must be counted unclean; but, in the latter part, he commands the priest to give sentence against this uncleanness, lest it should be carried into the congregation. On this ground he says, "his plague is upon his head," which is as much as to say, that he is sentenced to just ignominy, for Moses takes it for granted that God holds up to public infamy whomsoever He smites with leprosy, and thence reminds them that they justly and deservedly bear this punishment.
The two following verses contain the form in which the sentence is executed, viz., that the man should wear a rent in his garment, which is to be the mark of his disgrace, that he should walk with his head bare, and with his mouth covered, (for this I take to be the meaning of the covering of his lip;) and besides this, that he is to be the proclaimer of his own pollution; finally, that he must dwell without the camp, as if banished from communication with men. Moses here f9 refers to the existing state of the people, as long as they sojourned in the desert; for after they began to inhabit the land, the lepers were driven out of the towns and villages to dwell by themselves. I know not whether the opinion of some is a sound one, that they were enjoined to cover the mouth or lip, lest by the infection of their breath they should injure others. My own view is rather, that because they were civilly dead, they also bore the symbol of death in having the face covered — as their separation deprived them of the ordinary life of men. Where we translate "shall cry, Unclean, unclean," some, taking the verb, arqy yikra, f10
