Unclean. This shews, that they could not be peace-offerings. (Menochius) (Chap. xiii. 15.) (Calmet) CHAPTER XV. Corn. Hebrew abib, "green ears of corn," when barley begins to ripen, and wheat is yet green in Palestine; at the time of the year which corresponds with half of our March and April. The Chaldeans called this month Nisan, "of the standards;" because the armies then left thir winter quarters. The first-fruits of the barley harvest were offered on the second day of the paschal solemnity, Leviticus xxiii. 10., and Exodus xiii. 4. (Calmet) --- Night. We read (Exodus xii. 22., and Numbers xxxiii. 3,) that the Hebrews were ordered not to leave their houses till morning, and that they departed from Ramesses on the day after the passage of the destroying angel. They began, therefore, to prepare for their journey on the evening of the 14th, and began their march at day-break on the 15th of Nisan, ver. 6. Their departure may be considered in its different stages: 1. Of eating the paschal lamb, with their staves in their hands; 2. of being urged by the Egyptians to depart, at midnight; 3. of their leaving their respective homes, to meet all together at Ramesses; and lastly, [ 4. ] of their beginning their march from that place to leave Egypt. They did not, however, quit the confines till they had passed the Red Sea, which took place effectually in the night, Exodus xiv. 20, 24. (Haydock) --- Thus they departed in the evening, at night, in the morning, and in the open day. (Calmet) Phase. Hebrew and Septuagint, "the Phase (or lamb) to the Lord thy God, sheep and oxen," or "of the flock and the herd," (Protestant) offered on the same festival, (Haydock) or victims proper for the solemnity, besides the paschal lamb, Numbers xxviii. 19., and 2 Paralipomenon xxx. 15. Peace-offerings were also made; (Leviticus vi. 12., and 2 Paralipomenon xxxv. 7,) and of these free offerings some explain the words of the Jews, (John xviii. 28,) as they suppose the lamb had been eaten the night before. (Menochius; Bochart; Tirinus) --- They might, however, have refrained from eating of these on that day. (Calmet) --- But they perhaps did not choose to be debarred of that privilege. --- There. The place peculiarly consecrated to the worship of God, for length of days. (Haydock) Affliction. Hebrew also, "of poverty." Syriac, "of humility." Septuagint, "of evil treatment;" or such bread as the poorest sort of people and slaves are forced to eat. The Jews serve the bread in small pieces, to denote their former poverty. This unleavened bread is also less palatable, and less wholesome. --- Fear. Septuagint, "in haste," Exodus xii. 11. The psalmist (Psalm civ. 43,) mentions the exultation and joy of the Hebrews, but it was mixed with fear, lest they should lose so great a benefit. Phase, or paschal lamb, which was to be sacrificed between the two evenings, during the space of about four hours, in the court before the ark. Some think that this precept was binding only in times of peace; and that when the people could not assemble in the place appointed, they might sacrifice the lamb elsewhere, which seems very probable, though no positive proof can be adduced. In the reign of Amon, when the priests could not perform their sacred functions in the temple, they removed the ark to another place: but Josias caused it to be brought back, 2 Paralipomenon xxxv. 3. (Calmet) --- As the Jews have now no temple, they cannot sacrifice the paschal lamb. (Tirinus) --- The priests were very expert, and observed an admirable order in offering such a surprising multitude of victims, (Calmet) as would be offered by every family of ten people. (Haydock) --- The blood, and perhaps the fat also, was presented on the altar of holocausts, which was very large, and the court exceedingly spacious. (Calmet) --- Which. This may not signify the precise hour, but may refer to all the time while the Hebrews were preparing for and commencing their journey. (Menochius) Ver. 1. --- Hebrew, "at the (return of the) season in which," &c. Dress, ( coques .) Hebrew bashal means frequently, to boil, and sometimes to roast, as it must here, if it refer to the paschal lamb; the other victims might however be boiled, and the Septuagint use both expressions, "Thou shalt boil and roast." See 2 Paralipomenon xxxv. 13. It seems that Moses speaks only of the lamb, the method of preparing which he had abundantly explained before. (Calmet) --- Hebrew has not it, and of course the passage may be understood of all the victims offered on this solemnity. On the morning after it was concluded, people might all depart to their respective homes. The Rabbins observe, that the could not do this on the morning of the 15th Nisan, as it was a solemn festival, on which long journeys were prohibited, and they ought to wait till the end of the seventh day, to make their offering. Under Ezechias and Josias the people appear to have continued together during the whole octave, 2 Paralipomenon xxx., and xxxv. 17. (Haydock) --- Others are of opinion that the people might retire home after the 15th, (Tostat) or in the morning after they had eaten the paschal lamb. (Calmet) Six days after the solemn day is ended, or in all seven (Exodus xiii. 7.; Calmet); or the seventh day is here remarkable for some particular distinction. (Menochius) --- Assembly. Hebrew, " the feast of prohibition, or of withholding," or rather the festival day, in which all must make their appearance, to do homage to their Lord, Leviticus xxiii. 36. (Calmet) --- Septuagint, "on the 7th is the dismission, ( or termination) a feast to the Lord." (Haydock) Corn: that is, from the 16th of Nisan, (Menochius) the second day of the paschal solemnity, on which new barley was presented before the Lord, as new wheat was on the second day of Pentecost, Leviticus xxiii. 10. Hand. Hebrew and Septuagint, "as much as thy hand is able;" an offering, bearing a due proportion with what God has bestowed upon thee. (Haydock) --- Each one was exhorted to make peace-offerings and feasts, at Jerusalem, in honour of God, ver. 11. On these festival days the first-born, fattened animals, were brought to be slain, chap. xii. 17., and xiv. 23. The Jews think that by these feasts their solemnities are very much honoured. But the intention of the lawgiver, was only to keep them at a distance from the profane rejoicings of the pagans, and to raise their thoughts and their hearts, by degrees, to the more solid spiritual delights. There were, however, too much inclined to stop at the gratification of the senses, and understood in that sense the sabbath, which Isaias (lviii. 13,) calls delightful, or delicate. (Buxtorf, Syn. x.) Commanded, in gratitude for past favours. In joy. Hebrew adds, "surely, or wholly." Hence the Rabbins esteem it unlawful to marry on these days, lest they should blend sacred and worldly joy together. Empty. All were bound to make some offering, which was left to their option, and thus the festivity was much increased, by the abundance of all things; so that all might find a particular pleasure in being present at these feasts, even though they were not influenced by sentiments of piety and of religion. See Exodus xxiii. 15. (Calmet) --- While the masters of families were from home, thrice in the year, God protected their houses and children from the incursions of enemies, so that they were never more secure. (Sanctius) (Tirinus) Magistrates, "masters;" people learned in the law, who may assist the judges with their counsel in any emergency. Hebrew shotrim, "officers, heralds, lictors," &c., chap. i. 15. (Haydock) --- Bonfrere (in Exodus xviii. 25,) thinks that these were the judges set over each tribe, or else the assessors of the judges. (Menochius) --- The Rabbins mention three tribunals of the Jews: 1. The Sanhedrim, consisting of seventy judges, with a prince at the head of them; 2. the twenty-three judges, who resided in considerable cities; 3. the tribunal of three judges, who administered justice in the villages, which had not above 120 inhabitants. But Josephus ([Antiquities?] iv. last chapter.) only mentions, that Moses established in each city seven judges, who had each two officers of the tribe of Levi. --- Gates, where the judges sat. Just. Avarice is like a cloud, (Calmet) which darkens the understanding. Oppression troubleth the wise, and (Hebrew) "a present destroyeth the heart. " A timid or interested judge is unfit for his office. Sir Thomas More was very careful not to receive presents, while he was high chancellor of England. (Haydock) --- If even the just are in danger of being perverted by presents, what must we think of others? (Du Hamel) Just. Hebrew, "thou shalt follow justice." Thou shalt be guided solely by the dictates of justice, in passing sentence, Exodus xxiii. 1, 9. (Calmet) --- That judge who passes sentence according to truth, executes his office unjustly if he be actuated by the love of a temporal reward. (St. Gregory, Mor. 9.) Tree. The pagans had consecrated different sorts of trees to their idols. They always planted groves near their temples, to increase the reverential awe, and but too often to hide the abominations which were there committed. The Hebrews frequently imitated them in these particulars. Yet Hecateus observes, that no tree was to be seen near the temple of Jerusalem. CHAPTER XVI. Statue. Hebrew matseba, means also a pillar, monument, heap of stones, image, title, &c., Genesis xxviii. --- Hateth, when they are designed for superstitious purposes. On other occasions, statues and pictures may be very instructive and commendable. (Haydock) --- The patriarchs set up pillars, altars, &c., as did also the Israelites, (Josue xxii. 10.) Samuel, &c., even after this prohibition, and without any offence. The Rabbins allow, that the proselytes of justice do well in erecting such monuments of religion, provided they be not intended for false worship. (Selden, Jur. ii. 6.) (Calmet) --- How blind then must be our dissenting brethren, who cannot make this easy and obvious distinction, but indiscriminately condemn all Catholics as guilty of idolatry, because they make and keep in their chapels, and bow down before images of the saints. This trifling objection is pressed with great vigour by J. Wesley, the founder of the Methodists. "The Papists," says he, "set up their idols in their churches---they worship the picture of the Queen of heaven---they idolize a dead man or woman." To whom Dr. Parker, a Protestant bishop, replies: (Disc. for the Abrog. of the Test.) "Yet, after all, we have no other ground for the bold conceit, than some crude and rash assertions of some popular divines, who have no other measures of truth and zeal, but their hatred to popery....As to the use of images in the worship of God, I cannot but admire at the confidence of these men, to make so bold a charge against them in general, when the images of the cherubim were commanded by God himself, Exodus xxv. 22. They were the most solemn and sacred part of the Jewish religion, and therefore, though images, so far from idolatry, that God made them the seat of his presence, and from between them delivered his oracles. This instance is so plain and obvious to every reader,....that it is a much greater wonder to me that those men, who advance the objection of idolatry so groundlessly, ( against the greater part of Christendom, as he observed before) can so slightly rid themselves of so pregnant a proof against it." See an answer to the Rev. J. Wesley's Misrepresentations, &c., by the Rev. N. G. published at Whitby, 1811, where some of the variations in doctrine of the pillars of Methodism, are also briefly noticed, as well as the absurdity of a man setting up for a reformer of religion, who at the time did not believe in Christ, (Journal ii. p. 102-3,) and for forty-two years afterwards preached a doctrine either Popish (Jour. for 1739) or Antinomian, than which, to use the words of his own recantation, " nothing could be more false. " (Minutes of a conference, 1770.) It may not be improper to observe, that in the last great deluge of error, the Methodist Society began, 1st May, 1738, at London, though it had a more obscure beginning at Oxford, 1729, and another at Havannah, 1736. Yet even when this third grand attempt was made to spread it wider, and to rectify former mistakes, the author acknowledges that he was not converted, no not till many days afterwards, when, being in a Lutheran society! (26th May) "an assurance, says he, was given me, that Christ had taken away my sins, even mine;" (Journal) and still, in the year 1770, he had to "review the whole affair." Such is the man who has deluded so many thousands! Out of thy own mouth will I condemn thee. Surely those who wilfully follow such blind guides, deserve to fall into the ditch. What confidence now can the Methodists have in the interpretations which Wesley has given them of the Scriptures, since he stumbled in broad daylight; and even preached for above thirty years together, that the observance of God's law is not only unnecessary, but sinful, an error to which he was forced, at last, to open his eyes by the scandalous immoralities of several of his deluded admirers, whom he had been all along foolishly flattering with the assurance that faith alone would insure their salvation. Strange it may appear, that he should not be put on his guard by the fall of Luther, who split against the same rock, and scrupled not to condemn the Epistle of St. James as not worth a straw, stramineam epistolam, an expression for which he is said afterwards to have been sorry, as Wesley was for the doctrine which he had been delivering for so many years. But the evil was then done. Multitudes had been deceived by these arch impostors. Their surviving followers might, however, if they would, derive this lesson from their tardy repentance and recantation, to examine with more caution their other doctrines, which they have delivered with the like confidence; and as they have reason to fear the yielding of an implicit belief to such innovators, so they may be induced to flee to the ark, the true Catholic Church, that they may be protected from the contradiction of tongues, Psalm xxx. 21. (St. Augustine, ibid.) "After Christ and the gospel, we have no farther inquiry to make." (Tertullian) --- We know that novelty in religion is a sure mark of falsehood, as no one can place any other foundation besides that which has been fixed by the beginner and finisher of our faith. From the written and unwritten Word of God, we learn what He has taught, and among the rest, we are authorized to keep holy pictures with respect. This is not an attempt against the worship of God, but designed to promote it. We do not make them to ourselves, without a divine authority. The same things which we are not allowed to adore, we must not make. Yet Methodists have and make pictures. We have God's will clearly expressed to us by his Church, which he has commanded us to hear and obey. If we be led astray by so doing, we may at least plead that we did, to the best of our judgment, as we were ordered by God; which those, who choose for themselves, cannot do. If this Church, so strongly recommended to us in Scripture, be capable of deceiving us in an affair of so great consequence as in that of idolatry, to what article of the Christian revelation can we yield our assent with safety? So, on the other hand, if Luther and Wesley have grossly imposed on their followers, by teaching them to believe that Catholics are idolaters, and that faith alone is necessary for salvation, as they are self-convicted in the latter point, how can their disciples forget the old proverb, "A liar is not believed even when he speaks the truth;" and consequently, how can they take up their faith on their bare word, though they may pretend to ground their doctrine on the word of God? They confessedly misapplied that sacred word, with respect to faith alone, and they shut their eyes to the obvious meaning of the texts which forbid graven things. Ought not, therefore, the unlearned and the unstable to dread lest they may have wrested the other Scriptures to their own perdition? (2 Peter iii. 16.) See Exodus xx. This subject is of such vast importance, the accusation of idolatry is of so black a nature, that it deserves to be accurately and frequently refuted. It is not an accusation brought only by a few obscure individuals, who have not the power to do any great harm to it; the most exalted dignitaries of the Protestant church, such as Dr. Shute, of Durham, in two charges to his clergy, the most famous modern reformers, like Wesley, &c., have not scrupled to repeat the calumny; and the Legislature has, for many years, been actuated by what they perhaps have thought a pious zeal, to exterminate the imitators of the Chanaanites! They may have listened too attentively to the intolerant institutor of the love-feasts, (who seems, nevertheless, to threaten the overthrow of the established church) and who, in the excess of his zeal, exclaims, "I insist upon it that no government, not Roman Catholic, ought to tolerate men of the Roman Catholic persuasion." (Letter written 1780, a short time before the riots.) They must then be murdered, banished, or forced into the church, that little society which began in the evening of the 1st of May, 1738, in Fetter-lane; (Journal i.) for Methodists assert, that the God of this world has hitherto triumphed over every revival of true religion, (Dedic. prefixed to the Life of J. Wesley, by Drs. Coke and Moore) and consequently over the reformed Church of England; so that they can hardly insist, that we should embrace her doctrine, and thus increase the triumph of the devil. We have therefore no alternative left, but either to abandon our country or our religion. These are the apostles, worthy of Mahomet, who would have us believe that they are inspired by the Holy Ghost, and divinely commissioned to raise another holy temple out of the scattered lively stones of that once beautiful building, which was erected by Jesus Christ, against which they say (Ibid.) the gates of hell have never wholly prevailed. These are the teachers whom they have heaped up to themselves, having itching ears, 2 Timothy iv. 3. These are the interpreters of the sacred oracles. Both Wesley and Coke have, at least, acquired great celebrity with their adherents, by their labours in this way; but how much their explication may be depended upon, we may form some judgment from the preceding remarks. The character of bishop, which Dr. Coke extorted from the hands of his great master, 10th of Sept. 1784, at Bristol, will not give us any higher idea of the sagacity of either. It disgusted all thinking men, as a similar action of Luther, a fallen priest, consecrating a bishop had done long before. Mr. Charles Wesley upon hearing of his brother having ordained a bishop, being but a presbyter himself, is said to have exclaimed,"So easily are bishops made, by man's or woman's whim; Wesley his hands on Coke has laid---but who laid hands on him? See Nightingale, &c., for further information on Methodism, which now makes such a noise, though its novelty, variations, acknowledged mistakes, calumnies, spirit of persecution, want of lawful pastors, &c., here briefly instanced, might suffice to put people upon their guard. (Haydock) Ox. By this name all bulls, cows, &c., are designated. For it was not lawful to sacrifice any thing which had lost any member, Exodus xii. 5., and Leviticus i. 3. Covenant, by incurring the evil of idolatry. (Calmet) (Hebrews x. 29.) The host of heaven. That is, the stars. (Challoner) --- This species of idolatry was the most ancient and common in the East. Job (xxxi. 26, 28) takes notice of the adoration of the sun and of the moon, and calls it a very great iniquity, and a denial against the most high God. He lived in Arabia, and probably not far from the place where Moses was addressing the Israelites. (Haydock) --- The pagans looked upon the sun and moon as the king and queen of heaven, and the stars as their guards. Plato says (in Ph\'e6dro) that "the sun marches at the head of the gods, in a winged chariot, and the eleven other gods lead on their bands of demons," or the stars, &c. Stoned, not far from the gates, where they received sentence. Thus the sabbath-breaker was stoned without the camp, (Numbers xv. 35,) and St. Stephen out of the city of Jerusalem, Acts vii. 57. When only a few were concerned, the twenty-three judges passed sentence: but if a whole tribe had been guilty, the cognizance of the affair was left to the Sanhedrim. When a city was infected with this abomination, it was wholly destroyed. But no one was punished, except two witnesses (ver. 6,) attested that formal idolatry, by sacrifice, &c., had been committed. (Selden, Syned. iii. 4.) Slain. When the action was public, this formality was not requisite, chap. xiii. 9. --- Him. One witness was never admitted to prove any crime; neither would the Jews receive for witnesses, women, infants under thirteen, slaves, publicans, thieves, &c. (Josephus, [Antiquities?] iv. last chapter.) The Rabbins also reject other notorious offenders, enemies, relations, and those who had not a competent knowledge of the law, &c. (Ap. Selden, Syn. ii. 13. 11.; and Grotius) --- But we could wish for some authors of more credit. (Calmet) Kill him. Thus testifying that they approve the sentence, and are willing that his blood should be required at their hands, if they had accused him falsely. The criminal was hurled down a precipice by one of the witnesses, and, if he survived, he was stoned by the other, and by the whole people. Maimonides asserts, that the execution took place on some great festival, for the terror and instruction of the multitude; but others call this in question. (Fagius) (Calmet) If thou perceive, &c. Here we see what authority God was pleased to give to the church-guides of the Old Testament, in deciding, without appeal, all controversies relating to the law; promising that they should not err therein; and punishing with death such as proudly refused to obey their decisions: and surely he has not done less for the church-guides of the New Testament. (Challoner) --- Hard. Hebrew also means, "doubtful, hidden, divided;" so that the opinions of the judges do not agree. In matters of fact, the thing is more easily investigated on the spot. But in these cases, where the law is ambiguous, as even the divine ordinances frequently are, being delivered in human language, (Grotius) a living judge is necessary. God remits the Jews in the council of the priests, at the head of whom was the sovereign pontiff, who was the natural and supreme judge of such difficulties, ver. 9, 12. (Haydock) --- And blood, to decide when murder must be punished with death, and when the right of an asylum may be claimed. (Calmet) --- The Vulgate renders the same words, 2 Paralipomenon xix. 10. --- Between kindred and kindred, as the different degrees cause many embarrassments, with regard to marriages, &c. (Tirinus) --- The Rabbins understand that the judge had to declare when a woman was rendered unclean, Leviticus xii. 4. (Lyranus) --- And cause, or law-suit; some thinking that a greater sum for reparation of an injury should be required, others judging that one of the contending parties should be set at liberty, while the other judges are of a contrary sentiment. Hebrew, "between judgment and judgment," when a doubt arises whether laymen or the Levites may be the proper judges. The Rabbins only remit three cases to the tribunal of the latter, respecting, 1. The red heifer; 2. the woman accused of adultery by her jealous husband; 3. the heifer to be offered in sacrifice, for a murder committed by a person unknown, chap. xxi. 5. --- And leprosy. Various difficulties might arise concerning this matter, of which the priests had to pass sentence, Leviticus xiii. Some render the Hebrew negah, "wound." The law of retaliation required a scrupulous nicety. Blood, cause, and leprosy, may denote lawsuits of a criminal, less important, and ceremonial nature. (Jansenius) --- Vary. Hebrew, " which are matters of contention within thy gates." Judge. Moses does not specify whether the contending parties, or the judges themselves thought proper to have the matter debated before a higher court. The Rabbins observe, that appeals to the Sanhedrim were only the last resort, and that the sentence of that tribunal was to be complied with under pain of death, ver. 12. (Selden, Syned. iii. 2. 2.) The judge here mentioned, according to them and the generality of commentators, after Josephus, Philo, &c., is no other than the high priest, as the Scripture plainly indicates, chap. xxi. 5., and Ezechiel xliv. 24. He abode near the tabernacle, and God enabled him to explain the law, when he was arrayed with the ephod, and the Urim and Thummim. Some moderns, who have an interest to lessen the authority of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, with Calvin, Ainsworth, &c., pretend that an appeal was to be made to the priests, in disputes which concerned religion, and to the civil magistrate in other cases. The latter were indeed commissioned to pass sentence in the different cities. 2 Paralipomenon xix. 5. (Calmet) ---But an appeal to the high priest, in doubtful cases, could not be denied. The government of the Jews was a theocracy, and the pontiff acted as the vicegerent of God. (Haydock) Preside. The high priests who are to succeed each other. (Worthington) According, &c. This law was to be the rule of the priests, in passing sentence. It was not left to the judgment of individuals to comply or not, according as they might explain the law for themselves. Such a proceeding would be nugatory, as they would thus be themselves the ultimate judges of their own cause. (Haydock) --- They shall seek the law at his (the priest's) mouth, Malachias ii. 7. Protestants make, therefore, a very frivolous restriction, when they allow his sentence to bind only "so long as he is the true minister of God, and pronounceth according to his word." (Bible, 1603.) (Worthington) --- If any had been proud enough among the Jews, to persuade himself that he understood the law better than the high priest, he would not on that account have escaped death. (Haydock) --- The authority of the Christian Church is not inferior to that of the Synagogue, only, "instead of death, excommunication is now inflicted" on the rebellious. (St. Gregory, Matthew xviii. 17.; St. Augustine, q. 38.) In effect, St. Paul assures us that the priests of the law, serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. But now he (Christ) ...is the mediator of the better covenant, which is established on better promises, Hebrews viii. 5. If therefore the privilege of deciding points of faith and morality, without danger of mistake, was granted to the synagogue, can any one doubt but that Christ would provide as ample a security to his Church, with which he has promised to remain for ever, and with his Holy Spirit to teach her all the truth ? (Haydock) --- St. Augustine dwells upon this argument (Doct. 4.) and proves the infallibility both of the Jewish and of the Christian Church. Hence Christ said, with respect to the former, which was not yet rejected, All therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works, do ye not: for they say the truth, and do not practise what they require of others. If the heads of the Catholic Church should be equally immoral, their true doctrine must not therefore be despised, lest Christ and his Father be at the same time despised. For this is the express admonition of our heavenly lawgiver, hear the Church: (Matthew xvii. 17,) and this he does not require without giving us a full assurance, that we may do it without fear of being led astray. The sole command of God implies as much, if he had said no more. For can he order us to sin? The pretended reformers, who blushed not to make this blasphemous assertion, might easily swallow down the other, respecting the defection and fallibility of the whole Church; and might even believe, that the whole world had been drowned in abominable idolatry for eight hundred years and more. (Hom. on the peril of idolat. p. 3.) How much more they do not determine, lest they should be forced to tell when the religion of the Catholics began, and that they will never do without dating from Christ and the apostles, the foundations of the only true Church. (Haydock) --- The Jews had such a respect for the decisions of their Rabbins, in consequence of this command of God, that some hesitate not to assert, that if one of them should declare that the left hand was the right, they would believe him; and they condemn the refractory to most grievous torments in hell. (Buxtorf, Syn. i.) --- We must shew the most profound submission to the decrees of the Church. (Calmet) --- Yet we are not bound to assent to the decisions of every teacher. Only, when the Church speaks, we must not refuse to obey, nor pretend to appoint ourselves judges of what she teaches. A private doctor, however eminent, may fall into some absurdities, but the major part of the pastors of the Church, with the Pope at their head, never can. In vain have the records of nineteen centuries been ransacked, to find a single instance of such a general agreement in error. If the Synagogue passed a wicked sentence upon Jesus Christ, we must reflect that the forms here required (ver. 8,) were neglected; and it was then expiring, and giving place to a better covenant, as the prophets had foretold. Yet even in that sentence, which was so unjust on the part of Caiphas, St. John (xi. 51.) acknowledges the truth of God. And this he spoke not of himself: but being the high priest, that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not only for the nation, but to gather together in one the children of God that were dispersed. The Synagogue could claim submission no longer, after the great prophet had come to abrogate the law of fear, and to substitute that of love. Hence while he was there to teach himself, (Hebrews i. 2,) there was no danger of deception for the people. But the covenant which he has established is to last for ever: no prophet or lawgiver is promised to introduce any change, or greater perfection, so that no one can plead for an excuse of his rebellion, that the Church may deceive and pass an erroneous judgment; or, if he do, he must be cut off from the society of the faithful, by the spiritual sword; and, dying in that state, without the Church for his mother, he need never expect that God will acknowledge him for his son. See St. Cyprian, Unity of the Catholic Church. If an individual pastor should pass such a perverse sentence, the case would be very different. Yet, even in such trying cases, an humble conduct will be the best security and proof of innocence, and God will reward those who have suffered unjustly. (Haydock) And the decree. Some copies read with Sixtus V ex decreto, by &c., "decree," (Haydock) as if a lay-judge stood ready to put the sentence in execution. (Calmet) --- But there was no necessity of any farther judgment after the high priest had spoken, who is here declared the sovereign judge. (St. Cyprian, ep. 55.) Hebrew, "or to the judge." Amama ridicules his friend, Ant. a Dominis, for saying that the Hebrew and Vulgate have et decreto. (Haydock) --- The Rabbins inform us, that if any judge refused to acquiesce in the decision, and endeavoured to draw others into his opinion, in matters of consequence, (as those are where the guilty is ordered to be cut off,) he was to be strangled, on a festival day, at Jerusalem, that all the people hearing it might fear, ver. 13. (Selden, Syned. iii. 3.) (Calmet) Pride. Hebrew, "do presumptuously," as the Protestants translate. How will they excuse their leaders, Luther, &c., and themselves, from this grievous charge? If the person, who presumed to assert that the leprosy had not infected some one, whom the priests condemned, (ver. 8,) could not escape death, shall we esteem those innocent whom the whole Church rejects? Hic niger est, hunc tu Romane caveto. (Horace) (Haydock) King. The Rabbins observe, that one was to be elected before the place for the temple was fixed upon, that the tribes might not contend about that honour. (Grotius) --- God foresees that the people will insist upon having a king, and gives his consent, reserving to himself the choice, and appointing laws for him, that he may not forget that he is the only lieutenant of the most high. Yet God testified his displeasure, when the Israelites demanded a king, because they did it in a seditious manner, so as to reject the prophet Samuel, whom he had given them for a ruler, in whom they could discover no fault. (Calmet) (1 Kings viii. 7., and x. 19.) Choose, as he did Saul, David, and Solomon, who succeeded to the throne of his father, though he was not the eldest son. (Menochius) --- Then the throne began to be hereditary, in virtue of God's promise to David. (Calmet) --- Brother. The Jews neglected this law, when they willingly recognized the authority of Herod, two years after the birth of Christ. See Genesis xlix. 10. (Haydock) --- A stranger might attempt to draw off the people from the service of the true God, and mutual love would not so easily subsist between them. (Menochius) Horses. Josue and David rendered the captured horses useless, (Josue xi. 6., and 2 Kings viii. 4,) and the judges rode on asses, Judges x. 4., and xii. 14. Solomon began to keep some, and in his days in Egypt was noted for the traffic of horses; though, after Sesostris had intersected the country with canals, they were more neglected. (Marsham, Canon. s\'e6c. xiii., and xiv.) God did not wish his people to engage in the tumults of war, nor would he permit their king to be puffed up with his own strength, Psalm xix. 8., and xxxii. 17. Philo says he would not have them to listen to any one who might promise to conduct them to a better country and thus teach them to lead a wandering life. (Calmet) --- He precludes also the attempt to conquer Egypt. Hebrew, "he shall not make the people return to Egypt, in order that he may multiply horses," by their buying them for him in that country, 3 Kings x. 29. --- Way. When the people proposed returning, God severely punished them, Numbers xiv. 5. Mind, and reign in his name. Hebrew, "and his heart turn not away" from the worship of the true God, as it happened to Solomon, and to many other kings, whom Moses seems to have had in view. Too great a number of wives would tend to perplex and enervate the king, and to eat up the treasures of his people. The Jewish lawyers allow the king only 18, and they say David and Roboam had that number. But the latter had moreover 60 concubines, (2 Paralipomenon xi. 21,) and Solomon had many more. In effect, the number seems not to be restricted, and, what is very singular, the Rabbins allow all but the high priest and the king as many as they can keep, though the sages advise people to have no more than four, which seems to be the sentiment of the Mahometans. This liberty was taken by the Jews till the emperors restricted them, A.D. 593. (Selden, Uxor. i. 8, &c.) Plurality of wives was not formerly a sin, though Solomon offended by too great excess. (St. Augustine, q. 27.) (Worthington) --- Gold. Immense riches are seldom possessed even by kings, without the oppression of their subjects, and great danger of falling into extravagance. If David amassed so much gold, it was destined for the building of the temple. But Solomon laying on heavy taxes, alienated the hearts of his people, and gave occasion to the revolt of 10 tribes; and Ezechias brought on a severe chastisement by making a parade of his treasures to the ambassadors of the king of Babylon, 4 Kings xx. 15. (Calmet) Of this law, perhaps from the 14th verse to the end of the chapter (Haydock) or the whole Book of Deuteronomy, which contains an abridgment of the law, (Josue viii. 32.; Menochius) or even the five books, which were formerly written without any division, and went under the name of the law. (Grotius; &c.) --- Hebrew seems favourable to this last opinion, (Calmet) "he shall write a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is kept by the priests," unless Moses might only require that he should have a copy of what he was then delivering. (Haydock) --- Some say that the king was obliged to take two copies, one of which he was to have always about him. It is not certain whether he was obliged to write himself, as Philo asserts, or another might do it for him. The diadem and the law were presented to Joas, when he ascended the throne, 2 Paralipomenon xxiii. 11. (Calmet) --- If (Haydock) Josias had not seen a copy of the law before the 18th year of his reign, this precept must have been very ill observed, 4 Kings xxii. 11. (Calmet) --- But, very probably, that book, which Helcias discovered in the temple, was the autograph of Moses, and therefore made a deeper impression upon all who saw and heard it read, than if it had been read than if it had been only an ordinary copy. This copy might have been mislaid or secreted in those troublesome times; and then the high priest brought it to light again, he as well as the king and all the people, were filled with joy and amazement. (Haydock) --- It was the custom of the Jews to present a copy of the law to their kings, when they first sat upon the throne; and hence, perhaps, they make a similar present to the Pope, when he goes to take possession of the Lateran church. (Morus.) --- They presented one to Innocent II when he made his entry into Paris, 1146, and another to king Louis the Fat, as Suger informs us. (Calmet) --- Priests. Temporal princes who desire to become virtuous and wise, will ever take the law of God at the priest's hands. (Worthington) Law. Pious Christian emperors and kings have esteemed it their greatest glory and happiness to read and meditate on the holy commandments of God, in order to regulate their conduct, amid the various dangerous occupations of their station. (Haydock) --- Constantine the Great, Charlemagne, St. Stephen of Hungary, Alphonsus I of Spain, were noted for the zeal which they shewed in the particular. Alphonsus of Arragon, had read the Bible, with the Commentaries, 14 times over, and the great Alfred wrote all the New Testament twice over with his own hand. (Calmet) --- He had translated into English Saxon all or most of the Bible before 900, as king Athelstan did about 925. (Encyclopedia Britannica, Bible, &c.) Yet the Catholic Church never condemned this conduct of her children, as Protestants would insinuate. (Cath. Doct. by N. G.) With pride. This is not expressed in Hebrew, but it is clearly (Haydock) implied. Humility is the most difficult virtue for a prince to practice, amid the flattery of his courtiers, and the splendour with which he is environed. See St. Augustine, City of God v. 24. (Calmet) --- His sons. Wicked kings seldom left a quiet possession of the throne to their heirs. (Menochius) --- David and his posterity reigned in succession, by an effect of the divine bounty. (Calmet)