Engines. Hebrew matsor. Besieged cities were surrounded with palisades, for which a great deal of wood was requisite, Luke xix. 45. Josephus (Jewish Wars v. 31,) informs us, that Titus surrounded Jerusalem with a wall in the space of three days, having cut down the wood all around. See 4 Kings vi., and xvii., and xxv., and Ezechiel xxvi. 7. (Calmet) CHAPTER XX. Land. The Jewish doctors hence infer, that if the corpse was found hanging or drowned &c., or nearer a town of the Gentiles than one of the Israelites, this law did not oblige. They are so exact as to dispute whether the distance must be measured from the nose or from the naval of the deceased. (Selden, Syned. iii. 7.) But the law shews us, that the author of the murder must be discovered, if possible, as the crime is so grievous as, in a manner, to defile the land, and draw down the vengeance of God, if it be carelessly left unpunished. (Calmet) Ancients and judges. After the strictest inquiry, if the murderer could not be discovered, the magistrates and senate of the neighbouring cities measured which city the corpse was nearest. (Josephus, [Antiquities?] iv. 8.) The Rabbins pretend that five of the Sanhedrim were commissioned to make this enquiry, along with the magistrates of the neighbourhood. Others think that the ancients were only the old men. The measuring took place only when the point was contested, and those cities are probably meant, which were of sufficient importance to have twenty-three judges fixed in them. (Calmet) --- It was presumed that the nearest had been guilty of greater negligence. (Haydock) Heifer, not above three years old, say the Rabbins. The pagans esteemed those victims more agreeable to the gods, which had not been yoked. Chermon observes, that the Egyptians rejected such as had been once "consecrated to labour." (Grotius) --- This circumstance might here indicate, that the murderer was a son of Belial, or "without yoke;" (chap xiii. 13.; Menochius) and the heifer was slain to shew what he deserved, and must expect if he be discovered. (Haydock) Valley. In such places murders are most frequently perpetrated. Hebrew may signify, "a desert," deep or inaccessible torrent, (Haydock) on the side of which the heifer was to be slain, and its body was then, it seems, thrown into the water. The ancients first washed their hands over her. Thus the victim of malediction against those who break a covenant, is buried in a ditch, or cast into the sea. (Homer, Iliad i.) --- Was. Some translate the Hebrew "shall be," as if the place was to be hereafter considered as unclean and accursed. (Calmet) --- The roughness and depth of the valley, denote the hardness of the murderer's heart, and the depth of his malice. (Menochius) --- Strike off, or c\'9cdent, "cut the neck," (Haydock) at the top, without perhaps separating it entirely from the body. Blood was given for blood, and this was the chief design of the bloody sacrifices. For this reason, the Egyptians impressed a seal upon the horns of the victim, representing a man kneeling, with his hands tied behind his back, as if ready to receive the stroke of death. (Plut.[Plutarch,?] Isis.) Judged. We see here again the great authority of the priests, chap. xvii. 9. Hebrew, "by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried," as the Protestants render it. (Haydock) --- Some understand by stroke, the leprosy, of which they were undoubtedly the judges. But it is better to explain it of all wounds, and even of death, (Calmet) concerning which Moses is here speaking. (Haydock) --- The Rabbins restrain the authority of priests as much as they can, to give greater power to their chimerical Sanhedrim. They pretend here that they had only to pronounce the blessing, ver. 8. Josephus ([Antiquities?] iv. 8) joins the magistrates with them in the whole ceremony. This awful meeting of so many people, tended to discover the authors of the murder, as all would naturally converse together on the subject, and each person declaring what he knew, some suspicions might at last be formed, which might by degrees lead to the detection. Josephus says rewards were proposed to any who might make a discovery. Draco decreed, that on the very day when a murder was announced, if the author was not known, the whole people (of Athens) should be purified. (Calmet) --- Abulensis insinuates, that if the murderer was present in the crowd, he might be detected by blood gushing from to corpse of the deceased, &c., as God often brings murder to light in a wonderful manner. (Cic.[Cicero,?] Div. 1.) (Tirinus) Wash. This was intended to testify that they were not guilty of the blood which had been shed, and that they wished to remove the punishment of it from themselves upon the head of the heifer, (Calmet) the representative of the unknown murderer. So Pilate conformed to this custom, when he condemned Christ on the bare accusation of the Jews; (Matthew xxvii. 24) and the priest, at mass, washes his hands, as an emblem of that innocence, with which he ought to approach the holy of holies. (Haydock) --- Asterius was stricken with lightning, for touching the altar of Jupiter without having washed his hands. (Natal. Myth. i. 10. 14.) The pagans generally purified themselves with fumigations, or by sprinkling sea water upon their bodies. Achilles ordered the things which had been used to purify the Greeks, at the siege of Troy, to be thrown into the sea, as being unclean. (Iliad i.) It. Magistrates are in some degree responsible, if by their neglect the high roads are unsafe. (Calmet) --- They had testified that they had done their duty. (Worthington) And, &c. Hebrew, "Thou shalt put away," (Haydock) or "extinguish the voice of innocent blood," which otherwise would cry to heaven for vengeance, Genesis iv. 10. In this sacrifice, (Calmet) though it deserves not the name, (Menochius) we may consider Jesus Christ suffering for the sins of others. (Calmet) Captives. Some Rabbins say this was only lawful in what they call voluntary wars, which the Lord had not commanded, as in those which were waged against the devoted nations it was not permitted to reserve the women, even though they should embrace the true religion. Calmet seems to be of the same opinion in the proceeding chapter, to which he even refers. But here he thinks that, upon their complying with the condition specified, they might be married, as Rahab was, and consequently this law must be considered as an exception to those general laws, which prohibit matrimony with those nations of Chanaan, which were otherwise ordered to be entirely destroyed, chap. vi. 16. "We believe," says he, "that if these women changed their religion, they might be espoused, of whatever nation they may be." He seems still to exclude the Chanaanite women, (chap. xxiii. 3,) which variation of sentiment shews that the point is not to be easily decided. (Haydock) Lovest her. The Jewish doctors explain this of an action, which modesty disallows, and which they tolerate nevertheless in the first transports of victory; (Selden, Jur. v. 13,) though the pagans condemned it as unjust and contrary to reason. (Grotius, Jur. iii. 4.) --- All know with what reserve Alexander treated women; and the Romans banished one Torquatus, for having violated a prisoner of war. (Plut.) --- Yet the Jews blush not to assert, that such liberties might be taken even with married women, as their former marriage with a pagan was by some deemed null, and by others thought to be dissolved. (Josephus iv. 8.) (Calmet) --- The law, however, seems only to allow the marrying of those who had no husbands before, as the women are only said to mourn for father and mother, v. 13. (Haydock) --- On these occasions the Chinese, and probably the Egyptians also, and the Roman matrons, formerly clothed themselves in white, while almost all other nations assumed black. (Tirinus) Hair. In mourning, people did the reverse to what they were accustomed to do in the days of joy. The men let their hair grow, the women cut this ornament of their head, a thing which the prophets often threaten, Isaias xv. 23., and Jeremias xlvii. 5, &c. (Calmet) --- Nails. Some would translate the Hebrew "she shall make her nails grow, " as a mark of sorrow, perhaps usual among the pagans faciet ungues. But the Septuagint, Philo, &c. agree with the Vulgate; (Menochius) and the Hebrew may very well have the same sense. We must not judge of the idea which others have of beauty, by our own sentiments. Some women in America have long nails, and esteem them as marks of beauty and nobility; and in China, they let those of the left hand grow, and cut them in mourning. (Hist. Sin. iii. 1.) The people of Mauritania take a pride in having long nails. (Strabo, xvi.) The Duke of Burgundy, not 300 years ago, was distinguished among the slain, before Nancy, in France, (Haydock) by the length of his nails; (Calmet) and, in ancient times, people never cut them in voyages at sea, unless to express their grief in extreme danger. Huic fluctus vivo radicitus abstulit ungues. (Propertius iii.; Petron.[Petronius?]) Why, therefore, might not these captives follow the same custom, as all depends on fashion? (Calmet) --- The woman being deprived of her ornaments, the passion of the soldier might probably abate. St. Jerome (ep. 84,) applies this to worldly learning, which he endeavoured to make subservient to the truth, after he had cut away what was dead and pernicious in it. (Du Hamel) Raiment. In mourning, people wore different clothes from what they did at other times, 2 Kings xiv. 2. --- One month. So long the mourning for Aaron and Moses continued, chap. xxxiv., and Numbers xx. (Menochius) Her. Nothing shews the weakness of the Hebrews more than this liberty, which the law was in a manner forced to allow, to prevent greater evils. The soldier who has married a captive, may abandon her, if he set her free, (Calmet) which was but a slight punishment for his inconstancy. Two wives. Moses never expressly (Haydock) sanctions polygamy; but he tolerates it frequently, as excused by custom, the example of the Patriarchs, &c. a toleration which Christ has revoked, as contrary to the primary design of God, and the institution of matrimony. (Calmet) (Matthew xix.) Hated, or less loved. (Haydock) --- The inheritance goes to the first-born independently of the father's disposition, in order to prevent the disturbances which would otherwise have taken place in families, where the different wives would have been continually endeavouring to get their respective children preferred before the rest. David, indeed, assigned the throne to Solomon, to the exclusion of Adonias; but this was done by the command of God, 3 Kings i. 17. The regulation of Jacob, in favour of Joseph, was made prior to this law. The Jewish doctors inform us that a father cannot disinherit any of his lawful heirs, except the judges ratify his sentence, while he is in health. But if he be dangerously ill, his verbal declaration will suffice, provided he appoint some one whom the law does not reject. For if he were to make a Gentile his heir, the will would be null. The testament must be made in the day time, for which they cite Ecclesiasticus xxxiii. 24. They say likewise that a father may, while living, give his effects to whom he pleases, and by this means disinherit his children; or he may give the succession to one of them, who is then considered as a tutor of the rest, and is bound to maintain them with necessaries till the year of jubilee, when each may claim his respective share. (Selden, Succes. c. xxiv.) But all these regulations seem to contradict the law. (Calmet) Double portion. If a person left six children, his effects were divided into seven equal parts, and the eldest son received two of them, though others think that he was entitled to one-half of the whole, (Calmet) in order to enable him to support the dignity of the family, (Haydock) and the greater expenses which he had to incur for sacrifices and solemn feasts. (Grotius) --- If he were dead, his children or heirs were entitled to his portion. This was the prerogative of the first-born, 1 Paralipomenon v. 2. (Selden) --- The right to the priesthood, if they might have claimed it before the law, was now given to the family of Aaron. Females had no privilege above one another. They received equal shares, when there was no male issue, Numbers xxxvi. (Haydock) --- First. Hebrew, "the beginning of his strength." See Genesis xlix. 3. Son. The Rabbins do not look upon children as bound by the law, till they be 13 years old. Their faults, before that age, are imputed to the father, and he is to be punished for them. When, therefore, a son has attained the competent years, the father makes attestation of it in the presence of ten Jews, declaring that he has instructed his son in the commandments, customs of the nation, and daily prayers; and that he now sets him at liberty to answer, in future, for his own faults, praying that God would enable him to lead a virtuous life. (Calmet) Ancients. In considerable cities there was a tribunal of three, and another of 23 judges. The former took cognizance of the first accusation, and condemned the stubborn child to be scourged: but the latter sentenced him to be stoned in case of a relapse, provided both parents concurred in prosecuting their son, as they would not both surely be guided by passion. (Theodoret, q. 20.) The Rabbins, according to their custom, modify this law, and exempt girls, orphans, and boys under 13 years of age. (Selden, Syned.) --- Josephus ([Antiquities?] xvi. 17,) says that the parents laid their hands on the head of the undutiful, and then all the people stoned him. Moses has not specified the punishment of parricides, (Calmet) as he deemed it next to impossible. (Haydock) --- But we may hence judge how he would have chastised so heinous a crime. The Romans formerly sewed such wretches in a leathern sack, (Cic.[Cicero,?] Invent. ii.) but afterwards they enclosed with them a dog, a cock, a viper, and a monkey; and having first whipped them so as to fetch blood, placed them in a chariot drawn by black oxen, and hurled them into the sea or into some river. (Justinian) --- Solomon sentences those who contemn their parents to be the food of crows and eagles, Proverbs xxx. 17. No restraints were laid by the ancient Greeks on the authority of a father, as he was esteemed the most equitable judge. (Sopater, ap. Grotius) (Calmet) CHAPTER XXI. Gibbet. Whether the person was first killed, as the Jews assert, or he was left to die upon the gibbet, see Calmet's Diss. It is also a matter of doubt, whether he was nailed to the gibbet, or hung on it by a rope. (Bonfrere) Of God. Chaldean, "he has been fixed on the gibbet for sinning against God." Symmachus and Arabic, "he has blasphemed the Lord." Syriac, "the man who has blasphemed shall be hung." Only people accused of great crimes such as blasphemy and idolatry, were condemned to this reproachful death, and prayers were not said for them in the synagogue, as they were for other persons, during the 11 months following their decease. (Calmet) --- They are not to be remembered before God. Their dead bodies are to be buried before sun-set, that the country may not be defiled. The punishment itself is extremely infamous, and the name of God is often used by the Jews, to express something in the highest degree, as the cedars of God, &c. (Haydock) --- Some understand this passage, as if the body were not to be left on the gibbet, because man, being created to the likeness of God, he will not allow the body to be insulted. Homer (Iliad xxiv.) says that Achilles offered an insult to the earth, when he dragged the dead body of Hector round the walls of Troy. Others think, that the criminal having been treated with due severity, as accursed of God, his corpse must not be deprived of decent burial. Res sacra miser. The Jews refused this privilege to none but suicides, (Josephus, Jewish Wars iii. 25,) while the Egyptians and Ph\'9cnicians suffered the bodies to rot upon the gibbet, whose inhumanity God here reproves. St. Paul reads this verse in a different manner both from the Hebrew and Septuagint, leaving out of God, and substituting, with the Septuagint, the words every one, and on a tree. Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree, Galatians iii. 13. St. Jerome remarks, that on this, as well as on other occasions, he adheres to the sense, without following the express words of Scripture. He also observes, with Tertullian, that only those are declared accursed by the law, who are hung for their crimes; and as Jesus Christ suffered not for any fault of his own, but being willing to appear in the character of one accursed, he has procured for us all blessings. (Calmet) --- In a mystical sense, that man is accursed who is obstinate in sin, hanging as it were on the tree, which was the occasion of our first parents' transgression. (Worthington) --- St. Jerome seems to think that the Jews have inserted of God, to intimate that Christ was accursed of him. (Haydock) Pass by. Hebrew, "hide thyself," pretending not to see it. --- Brother. Any fellow creature, Exodus xxiii. 4., and Luke x. 30. (Calmet) --- "We are very inhuman, not to shew as much concern for a man as the Jews do for a beast of burden." (St. Chrysostom, ser. 13.) (Du Hamel) Not nigh, either in blood or in place, (Calmet) though the latter signification seems more applicable; as, if the person lived at too great a distance, it would suffice to inform him where he might find what he had lost; and, if the owner was unknown, the thing must be taken care of by him who finds it till he be discovered. (Du Hamel) If, &c. Hebrew, "thou must not hide thyself," so as to pass it by, nor yet conceal it from the right owner. When a thing is certainly abandoned by him, it belongs to the person who seizes it first; but if it be only lost it, must surely be restored, if possible, (Grotius, Jur. ii. 10,) as nature forbids us to take advantage of another's misfortune. (Cicero) --- The Rabbins have corrupted this law, like so many others, by their evil interpretations. They pretend that a Jew must restore what he has found belonging to another true believer, if it have certain marks by which it may be known, but not if it belonged to a prevaricator or infidel. In the former supposition, they got the thing cried on a high stone near Jerusalem four times, and if the owner did not then claim his property, the finder might keep it. (Selden, Jur. vi. 4.) --- The inhabitants of Cum\'e6 condemned the next neighbour to restore what had been lost; as Hesiod (op. 348,) very well remarks, that things would not easily be lost, if the neighbours were not ill-disposed. With him. Hebrew, "thou shalt not hide thyself, but help him to lift up," Exodus xxiii. 4. God. Some take this literally, as the contrary practice is contrary to decency, and might be attended with very pernicious consequences. All know what noise was occasioned by the action of Clodius, who put on women's apparel, that he might be present with the Roman ladies at the feast of the good goddess. Yet others think that Moses here forbids some superstitious practices. St. Ambrose (ep. 69,) remarks, that in some of the mysteries of the idols, it was requisite for those present to change clothes in this manner, sacrum putatur. Lucian testifies, that men put on women's clothes at the feasts of Bacchus. They did the like in those of Venus, while the women took men's clothes in the festivals of Mars. (Jul. Hirmic. c. 4.) (Maimonides) --- In the East, people honoured the moon, to which they attributed both sexes, and Venus in like manner. Josephus ([Antiquities,?] iv.8,) believes that women are here prohibited to engage in warfare. Hebrew, "the vessels (armour) of man shall not be upon a woman." Semiramis gained a great name by her martial exploits, and commanded all her subjects to dress like herself. (Justin., i) --- The Amazons were likewise very famous in war, and it is said that half the army of Bacchus was composed of women. Alb. Gentil maintains that Moses here condemns an abominable crime, which he did not wish to mention, at which the Book of Wisdom hints, (chap. xiv. 26,) and which St. Paul condemns more explicitly, Romans i. 26. Moses had already denounced death against the perpetrators of it; and surely the manner in which he now speaks, seems to forbid something more than simply putting on the garments of the other sex, for he, &c. (Calmet) --- Yet that disorderly conduct deserved to be reprobated in strong terms, (Haydock) when it was not excused by some necessity or proper motive, such as actuated some holy virgins, St. Theodora, &c. (Tirinus) Thou shalt not take, &c. This was to shew them to exercise a certain mercy even to irrational creatures; and by that means to train them up to a horror of cruelty; and to the exercise of humanity, and mutual charity one to another. (Challoner) --- Some were of opinion that the person who could take the old bird on the nest might assure himself of good fortune, fecundity, &c. (St. Thomas Aquinas, [Summa Theologiae ] i. 2, q. 102, a. 6.) Such superstition is reprehensible. Phocilides advises not to take all the young ones, nor the hen, in consideration of one's having more birds. (Calmet) Time. Those who refrain from cruelty, even towards beasts, will be induced more easily to shew mercy to their fellow creatures, (Tertullian, contra Marc. ii.) and will draw down the blessings of God upon themselves. (Menochius) Battlement. This precaution was necessary, because all their houses had flat tops; and it was usual to walk and to converse together upon them. (Challoner) --- King Ochozias had the misfortune to fall from the top of his house, (4 Kings i. 2,) and David saw Bethsabee when he was walking on the roof of his palace, 2 Kings xi. 2. Saul slept at the top of Samuel's house, 1 Kings ix. 25. See Josue ii. 6., and Matthew x. 27. (Haydock) Together. If wheat was sown in a vineyard, it would ripen much sooner than the grapes; and as the first-fruits of both were offered to the Lord, the owner would lose the profit which he had too greedily sought after, the place being esteemed both pure and impure at the same time. This mixture of seeds would also impoverish the land, so that it would be like a place defiled, and unfit for cultivation. (Jansenius in Leviticus xix. 19.) Maimonides supposes that the practice of the Zabians is here reprobated. They sowed the land with corn and dry grapes, in honour of Ceres and Bacchus, (More. Nev. p. 3. c. 37,) who presided over the harvest and vintage among the pagans. (Wm. of Paris. Leg. 13.) --- Moses might also, by this symbolical language, condemn unnatural connexions, as he perhaps does, ver. 10. Plough. In Leviticus xix. 19, this law is expressed, so as to forbid the procreation of mongrels. See Judges xiv. 18. People who have treated on agriculture observe, that it is a pernicious practice to make animals of unequal size and speed work together. (Columella vi. 2.) --- St. Paul explains to us the mystical sense of this passage. Bear not the yoke together with infidels, 2 Corinthians vi. 14. (Calmet) --- Marry not with such. (Haydock) --- Employ not in the sacred ministry the imprudent and wicked with those of a virtuous disposition. (St. Gregory, Mor. i. 16.) Together. This is now lawful. But a virgin consecrated to God, must not dress like a married woman: the different states of life must not be confounded. (St. Augustine, contra Faustus vi. 9.) (Du Hamel) Strings, Probably to gird the outer garment round the loins. See Numbers xv. 38. Name. Hebrew, "and occasion reports against her to bring an evil name upon her," (Haydock) that he may not have to return her dowry. For, according to many of the Rabbins, he might give her a bill of divorce, simply if he did not like her. (Selden, Uxor. iii. 1, &c.) --- They allow the proof here specified, only with respect to a Hebrew woman between twelve and twelve and a half years old, during the period of her being espoused, but not taken home by her husband. The cause was to be tried before the 23 judges. Oftentimes only witnesses, probably matrons, were examined in defence of the woman. (Josephus, [Antiquities?] iv. 8.) St. Ambrose (ep. 8. 64. ad Syagr.) highly disapproves of such unsatisfactory methods. The marks assigned by the law were commonly observed in Syria, Persia, &c. The Arab physicians speak of them. See Valesius, c. xxv. The age in which women were then married, the climate, &c., caused these indications to be more clear, and deposed for or against the fidelity of the bride. The mother had them entrusted to her care by the friends of the husband, who had kept watch at the door on the wedding night. (M.[Menochius;?] Nachman, ap. Fagium.) Her. It does not appear that the woman was present at the trial: she remained at her father's, or rather at her husband's house, till sentence was passed. (Calmet) --- Hebrew, "then shall the father of the damsel and her mother take and produce the damsel's virginity," or the tokens of it. Beat him. Hebrew, "chastise." Septuagint may signify also, "reprimand him." But (Haydock) Josephus says the husband was to receive 39 lashes; and Philo informs us that the woman might leave him, if she thought proper, though, if she were willing to stay, he had not the power to divorce her, ver. 19. A hundred. Josephus only mentions 50. As it was presumed that the false accusation proceeded from a desire to defraud the woman of her dowry, the law obliged the husband to allow her double (Calmet) the usual sum. Yet this punishment, together with the scourging, was very inadequate to what the woman would have had to suffer if she had been condemned. (Haydock) --- St. Augustine (q. 33,) is surprised at this decision, as in other cases calumny was subjected to the law of retaliation, or punished with death. This shews also that wives, among the Jews, were considered as little more than servants. (Calmet) Die. It was concluded that she had committed the sin after her espousal. If it had happened before, she was to receive only 25 sicles for a dowry; though, if she took an oath that violence had been offered to her, she was entitled to 50: which opinion of the Rabbins seems very equitable. \'c6schines (in Timarch.) relates, that a man at Athens punished the transgression of which his daughter had been guilty, while she was at home, by shutting her up with a horse, in order that she might be torn in pieces by the famished animal. (Calmet) Die. The man was to be strangled as well as the married woman; if she were espoused only, she was to be stoned. The daughter of a priest was burnt alive. (Rabbins) (Calmet) See Leviticus xx. 10. CHAPTER XXII. Wife. After the woman was espoused, (ver. 23,) she was called a wife, and punished accordingly, if she proved unfaithful. Hold. Septuagint, "offering violence," as also [in] ver. 28. (Haydock) --- Die. Moses supposes that the woman in the field had made all possible resistance, and that the one in the city had, by silence at least, consented. But if the case were otherwise, the judges were to make all necessary inquiries, and pass sentence accordingly. (Calmet) Life. A law nearly similar occurs, Exodus xxii. 16, (Haydock) only there Moses speaks of seduction. (Menochius) --- If the father or the woman refused their consent to the marriage, the person had only to pay 50 sicles; which the woman received, if her father was not alive. But if they consented, the person who had been condemned by the judge, was bound to marry the woman, how deformed soever. (Selden, Uxor. i. 16.) (Calmet) Covering. See Leviticus xx. 11. A wife should be hidden from all but her husband. (Haydock) Eunuch. By these are meant, in the spiritual sense, such as are barren in good works. (Challoner) (Theodoret, q. 25.) (Worthington) --- The Hebrew also specifies three sorts of eunuchs, though the Septuagint and Chaldean have only two. No mention is made of natural eunuchs, who are not excluded from the church of the Lord. (Calmet) --- This outrage of castration was first offered to nature by Semiramis. (Am. Marcellin. 14.) --- Church. That is, into the assembly or congregation of Israel, so as to have the privilege of an Israelite, or to be capable of any place or office among the people of God. (Challoner) --- Philo says, they were not to enter the court of the temple. See Lamentations i. 10. Others think they could not embrace the Jewish religion, Exodus xii. 48. But this privilege could not be refused. Most probably the custom of making eunuchs is forbidden, and if any were found among the Jews, they should not be admitted to any place of authority. Isaias (lvi. 5,) speaks of some faithful eunuchs, to whom God will give a place in his house; but he alludes to those of the new law, who embrace the state of celibacy, Matthew xix. 12. Eunuchs were rejected from the magistracy among the Romans; and when some were at last received, it was deemed unnatural, as their disposition is generally cruel and selfish. Omnia cesserunt Eunucho Consule monstra. (Claud. in Eutrop. i.) (Calmet) --- Those who had the misfortune among the Jews to be eunuchs, did not perhaps (Haydock) lose the right of citizenship. (Tirinus) Mamzer, &c. The author of the Vulgate adds the explication of mamzer, which only occurs again, Zacharias ix. 6. It may in both places denote a stranger, or one of a different religion from the Jews, as Jephte was the son of a prostitute, (Judges xi. 1,) and yet became a judge of Israel. But strangers, as long as they professed a false religion, could not be entitled to the privilege of Jewish citizens; and even after they had relinquished their false worship, they were bound to wait ten whole generations, or a long time, before they could fill the posts of honour and command. (Calmet) --- This, however, seems to be contrary to the disposition made in favour of the Idumeans and Egyptians, who were admitted in the third generation. A mamzer may, therefore, be (Haydock) a bastard of a different nation from the Jews, (Menochius) which was not the case of Jephte. (Haydock) --- The Rabbins specify three sorts of mamzers: 1. those born of parents who, by the law, are forbidden to marry, being to near akin; 2. those who are the fruit of adultery, or some criminal commerce, which is punished with death; and 3. those whose birth subjects the parents to be cut off or retrenched from the people. (Selden, Jur. v. 16.) --- the Septuagint, &c., exclude the children "of a harlot," which is the sense of mamzer in the canon law. The Christian Church rejects such from holy orders, and the Athenians would not suffer bastards to offer sacrifice in the city, but only in the cynosarge, dedicated to Hercules, whose birth any doubts might be entertained. (Calmet) --- It is observable, that such often imitate the wicked conduct of their parents; in which case, they are unfit for the magistracy; and though they may lead a very exemplary life, the law is intended to discourage such practices in parents, which may entail dishonour and loss upon their children; that, if they be not sufficiently restrained by their own personal disgrace, they may at least by the love for their innocent offspring. (Haydock) --- Tenth. In the 11th generation, when the stain was obliterated, the descendant might become a magistrate. (Menochius) --- Some understand that they were excluded for ever, as when the judges of the Areopagus ordered a man to appear again before them in 100 years' time, they meant that his cause was entirely rejected. (Vatable; Casaub. in Atheneus vi.) Ever. This shews that the former verse only excludes bastards for a time. But why are these nations treated with more severity than the Edomite and Egyptian? Because their enmity seemed to proceed from pure malice, and they attempted to ruin the souls of the Hebrews by lust and by idolatry, without any prospect of interest to themselves. Their parents were also of very base origin, and Abraham had rescued their father, Lot, from destruction; so that for his children to oppose with such virulence the descendants of Abraham, manifested a degree of ingratitude and perversity. (Calmet) --- They had found their attempts to hurt Israel abortive, and yet ceased not to persecute their near relations, (Haydock) by drawing them into carnal sins. Those who are obstinate in their evil ways can never be rightly received into the Church of God. (Worthington) --- Achior and Ruth embraced the Jewish religion, but it does not appear they were admitted to places of trust, Judith xiv. 6. (Haydock) --- These regulations were observed till the Babylonian captivity, while the genealogies might be ascertained. (Calmet) --- In cases of extraordinary merit, as in that of Achior, the Ammonite, (Judith xiv.,) a dispensation might be granted. (Tirinus) Water: the necessaries of life. This inhumanity is highly resented. --- Son. Hebrew, "of Beor, of Pethor, a city of Mesopotamia, to curse thee." (Haydock) (Numbers xxii. 5.) Peace. Hebrew, "ask or seek not their peace nor their advantage" as a nation; keep at a proper distance; have no familiarity with them. (Haydock) --- Their vices, not their persons, are to be hated. David behaved in a friendly manner with the king of Ammon, 2 Kings x. 2. He was afterwards forced to make war upon the people, though, without such extraordinary provocations, war was not to be declared against them. (Calmet) --- Prosperity. Have no intercourse with them. (Menochius) --- Septuagint, "Salute them not, wishing them what may tend to their peace and advantage." Brother. Esau and Jacob were twins. --- Land. The Egyptians had for some time afforded the Hebrews an asylum in their country, and though the kings of late had persecuted them, the people seem not to have entered into the views of their rulers, and spared the male children notwithstanding their cruel edicts. They gave them also very rich presents before their departure, Exodus xii. 35. Gratitude required that these things should be considered, (Haydock) and God orders his people generously to pass over the subsequent ill treatment of these two nations. Lord. The Rabbins explain this of the permission to marry the grand-children of such as had embraced the Jewish religion, though some of them suppose that an Idumean or an Egyptian woman might be taken to wife, as Solomon took the daughter of Pharao; but the Israelites could not give their children in marriage to the men of those nations. The grand-children of converts are rather hereby entitled to the privileges of other Jewish citizens. (Calmet) Thing, rapine, libertinage, &c., which are but too common among soldiers. (Calmet) --- We know what instructions St. John the baptist gave to those who followed that lawful profession, Luke iii. 14. (Haydock) Camp of the Levites, according to the Rabbins. (Calmet) --- Bonfrere explains this of priests. (Menochius) --- But it rather refers to all who dwelt in the camp, where the ark seems to have been generally present, along with the armies, ver. 14., and Numbers xxxi. 6. (Calmet) --- It is not clear, however, that the law alludes to any other camp, but that in the midst of which the tabernacle was fixed; and Calmet elsewhere, denies that the ark commonly followed the army. (Haydock) Water of the fountain. (Menochius) Girdle. Hebrew azon, means "a balance," as the Hebrews generally carried weights, &c., about them, chap. xxv. 13. Moderns translate, "a paddle upon thy weapon," But the Septuagint seem to have read ezor, "a girdle," (Calmet) which is more intelligible, as the Jews were accustomed to carry the necessary utensils, money, &c., not in their pockets, as we do, but in a bag, which they fixed to their girdles, or belts. All the Jews who dwelt in the camp, were bound to have a paddle, for the purpose here mentioned. (Haydock) --- Josephus (Jewish Wars ii. 7,) observes, that the Essenians always made use of one, with which they made a hole a foot deep, and covered it with their robes, that nothing indecent might be exposed to view. (Haydock) --- The Turks still follow the same custom, when they are encamped. (Busbec, ep. iii.) (Calmet) No uncleanness. This caution against suffering any filth in the camp was to teach them to fly the filth of sin, which driveth God away from the soul. (Challoner) Those who have had the misfortune to fall into the sink of iniquity, must not fail to use the sharp instrument of compunction, with which they may hide the enormity of their crimes. (Haydock) --- Incessanter terram mentis nostr\'e6 p\'9cnitenti\'e6 dolore confodiat &....abscondat. (St. Gregory, Mor. iii. 13.) --- In a camp where three million people were collected, if some such regulation had not been made, great and serious inconveniences would have ensued. The lawgiver, therefore, descends to several particulars which to us might appear minute; but besides the obvious meaning, which is very rational, the words convey other mystical instructions of the highest importance. --- God was pleased to assume to character of a powerful monarch, residing among his people, and hence every appearance of indecency must be removed. (Haydock) To thee, from among the Gentiles. The promised land was thus declared a land of liberty, (Calmet) to encourage poor slaves to embrace the service of the true God, and to flee from the slavery of the devil, and from the society of those who adored him in their idols. The whole earth belongs to the Lord, and He was thus pleased to punish those who might claim a right to these slaves. (Haydock) --- Some believe that the price was given to the owner, at the public expense. The Rabbins allow this privilege of an asylum, only to those who fled from a foreign country, or from an infidel master, to embrace the true religion. Circumcision was given to them as an inviolable mark of liberty. (Chaldean) Those who had been sold for their crimes, or for debt, by the sentence of the judge, could not claim this exemption. (Grotius, Jur. iii. 7.) --- Philo (de humanit.) says, it would be unjust to give up a slave who has sought refuge with us. We ought either to reconcile him to his master, or sell him to another, and give the price to the former owner. Some translate the Hebrew in a contrary sense, "Thou shalt not shut up the slave who has fled to thee from his master," as if it were unjust to refuse to deliver him up. But the law points out some cases where it is lawful for a slave to flee away, and consequently people must be allowed to receive him. The following verse is decisive in favour this explanation. Israel. Some hence very erroneously infer, that before this prohibition the thing was not criminal. (Selden, Jur. v. 4.) Notwithstanding the law, such lewd practices continued to be very common. The original expresses that both the women and men were consecrated, " kadash, " in all probability to some idol, whom they intended to honour by abominable prostitutions, a thing very common in all the East, as we learn both from profane and sacred authors. (Aten. xiii. 5.) (4 Kings xxiii. 7.) The men were called the effeminate, 3 Kings xiv. 24. (Calmet) --- Some copies of the Septuagint have a double translation of this verse, and add, "None of the daughters of Israel shall bear the mysteries, nor shall any of the sons of Israel be initiated (in these mysteries of idols) to make every vow." Telesphoros denotes a strumpet for hire, ver. 18; or, according to Vossius, one who is initiated or performs the pagan mysteries, as fornication and idolatry, commonly go together in the sacred writers. Hesychius seems to understand, that it refers to "the house where a person has been delivered of a child." But Tertullian (pudic. ix.) explains it thus, "No one....shall pay tribute;" as telos means tribute, (Haydock) and the Jews are supposed to have refused to pay any to the Romans on the authority of this verse. See Casaub. in Baruch ii. 19. (Grotius) (Calmet) --- But it seems far more probable, that it is a farther elucidation of the text, and prohibits that scandalous impiety by which may were not ashamed publicly, like dogs, to commit the most obscene actions, and to present the hire of their bodies to the idols, Micheas i. 7. (Clement of Alexandria, Exhort.; Villalpand in Ezechiel xliii.) We could hardly give credit to those who have attested such things, did not God here find it necessary to caution his people not to fall into such blindness and delusion. That the poor ignorant idolater should think by these means to appease those gods who, while here on earth, had been infamous for the like excesses, needs not so much to excite our surprise. But that the Gnostics, Manichees, and other heretics, almost of all ages since the light of the gospel shone forth, should have thought that they could honour the true God by abusing the flesh, is truly astonishing. Yet they gave into this delusion, by first persuading themselves that the flesh was the creature of an evil principle, fighting against the author of the spirit and of all good, with whom they intended to take part. The way of a fool is right in his own eyes. Yea, there is a way that seemeth to a man right, and the ends thereof lead to death, Proverbs xii. 15., and xvi. 25. These wretches grounded their opinion on the authority of their gods, or of the Scripture. Will this excuse be admitted by the Sovereign Judge? But these delusions are perhaps now at an end. --- A principle, however, is still maintained of a far more pernicious tendency, inasmuch as it strikes at the root of every law, divine and human. This horrible doctrine was inculcated by J. Wesley for above thirty years, as we have already observed, chap. xvi. 22. "O natural man," says he, (Serm. on Orig. Sin,) "thou canst do [no] good. Thy natural actions are sin; thy civil actions are sin; thy religious actions are sin. As many thoughts, words, and actions, so many sins; for nothing but sin comes from thee. Thy duties are sins. Can an evil tree bring forth good fruit?" Thus Scripture teaches him that to work for one's family, to pay taxes, to pray, read the Scriptures, or even to believe, will be a sin! "Knowest thou not that thou canst do nothing but sin, till thou art reconciled to God." (Sermon on the Righteousness of Faith.) Hence arose the Still-Methodists, Jour. iv. p. 92.. Even after this celebrated reformer had begun, when almost 70 years of age, to discover "the subtle poison which," he says, (Jour. viii. p. 90,) "has infected, more or less, almost all, from the highest to the lowest among us," it is astonishing that he still acknowledges those who were infected with it, as "the real children of God by faith." Many of these, he says, (serm. on the law) lay it down as an unquestionable truth, that when we are come to Christ, we have done with the law; and that in this sense, Christ is the end of the law to every one that believeth. We need, therefore, no longer wonder that the pagans should think they honoured their idols by prostitution, (which on other occasions they condemned as "a great disgrace," oneidos mega, as Musonias calls it,) since in this enlightened age, a man of no mean abilities, and far advanced in years, a man who requires that all the preachers in his connexion shall conform to his Sermons and Notes on the New Testament, or be superceded, (Jour. xx. p. 34,) could decide that those who maintain this principle, and make it a branch of their religion to bread the law of God on purpose, are the "real children of God by faith;" people, "whom God has taken out of the world." As well might he say that a man may live on subtle poison, and please God, by following a doctrine than which "nothing can be more false," as he styles this very principle of Antinomianism, to which he and his preachers had "leaned" for such a length of time. "If, says a great admirer of his, Mr. Fletcher, (1 Check, 4th letter,) the three first propositions of the minutes are scriptural, Mr. Wesley may well begin the remaining part, by desiring the preachers in his connexion to emerge along with him from under the noisy billows of prejudice, and to struggle quite out of the muddy streams of Antinomian delusions which have so long gone over our heads, and carried so many souls down the channels of vice into the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone." This is then to be the abode of those whom "God has taken out of the world, and who are real children of God by faith!" This is the heaven, of which they may boast in dying that they are infallibly sure of! At least, the man whom they have so eagerly followed as their judge, has passed this woeful sentence upon them, as if he had a mind to laugh at their credulity. If he join us also in the same condemnation, and say, "I have the same assurance that Jesus is the Christ, and that no Romanist can expect to be saved, according to the terms of his covenant;" (Jour. iii. p. 94) we are not solicitous about his good opinion; we have not chosen him for our judge, nor have his writings given us reason to think that he knew the nature of our covenant. If he did, so much the more dreadful must have been his reckoning with that unerring Judge, before whom he has appeared 20 years ago. It is the glory and happiness of the Catholic Church, that no one attempts to assail her, but he presently betrays the spirit by which he is inspired, the spirit of calumny, and of the perverse application of Scripture. It was thus that our divine head was treated by the father of lies, who alleged Scripture to encourage suicide, or presumption, Matthew iv. 6. So in the various points of faith which Mr. Wesley attacks, he shamefully misrepresents our doctrine, that he may have something to oppose. We have seen how unjustly he accuses us of idolatry, chap. xvi. 22. But in order, perhaps, to comfort us with the reflection, that we have many partners in guilt, he represents the Protestants as equally criminal. "They set up their idols in their churches; you set up yours in your heart....Oh how little is the difference before God! How small pre-eminence has the money worshipper at London over the image worshipper at Rome; or the idolizer of a living sinner over him that prays to a dead saint." (Word to a Protestant.) How much soever the Protestants may be entangled in this species of idolatry, they do not at least pretend to authorize it by the principles of religion, as some of the Methodists have done. Witness the man with whom J. Wesley conversed at Birmingham. "Do you believe that you have nothing to do with the law of God? He answered, I have not, I am not under the law....Have you also a right to all the women in the world? Yes, if they consent. And is this not a sin? Yes, to him who thinks it is a sin; but not to those whose hearts are free. The same thing that wretch, Roger Ball, affirmed in Dublin. Surely these are the first-born children of Satan." (Journal vi. p. 133.) Witness Mr. Fletcher, a celebrated clergyman in the Methodist connexion, who has informed us that Antinomian principles and practices had spread like wild fire among the Methodists. "Nor need I go far, says he, for a proof of this sad assertion. In one of his (Wesley's) societies, not many miles from my parish, a married man, who professed being in a state of justification and sanctification, growing wise above what is written, despised his brethren as legalists, and his preachers as persons not clear in the gospel. He instilled his principles into a serious young woman; and what was the consequence? Why they talked about finished salvation in Christ, and the absurdity of perfection in the flesh, till a perfect child was conceived and born; and, to save appearances, the mother swore it to be a travelling man that cannot be heard of. Thus, to avoid legality, they plunged into hypocrisy, fornication, adultery, perjury, and the depth of ranterism, &c." (Check i. Let. 2.) But enough of such absurdity. We may now easily believe to what lengths the dissolute examples and maxims of the heathenish mythology would lead their unhappy votaries, when we behold the purest lessons of the gospel so strangely perverted. (Haydock) --- Whoremonger. It is very probable that the Scripture here means such as were guilty of unnatural impurities, "consecrated," as it were, to some idol of lust, as these crimes were common under several faithless kings of Israel and of Juda, 3 Kings xv. 12., and xxii. 47. Simple prostitutes are styled zona. (Calmet) --- God will not allow these to be publicly tolerated, though they contrived but too often in private to ensnare the hearts of God's people, 3 Kings iii. 16. (Tirinus) --- Onkelos translates, "No Israelite shall give his daughter in marriage to a slave, nor take one for his son's wife," as the contract would be null, according to the Rabbins, for want of liberty. (Calmet) --- He may, perhaps, have given this singular turn to this verse, because the preceding one speaks of fugitive slaves. Dog. Many explain this in a figurative sense, as we have done in the last verse, to denote the public impudence by which some thought to honour their gods. (Haydock) --- Such impiety the Lord abhors, though practiced by all the surrounding nations, as ancient records unanimously attest. How incredible soever it might otherwise appear, that a false notion of religion, joined to a natural depravity, could prompt people to such excesses, we cannot call in question the veracity of so many historians. See Herodotus i, and ii.; Just.[Justinian?], xviii. 6.; Eusebius, pr\'e6p. iv. 6.; St. Augustine, City of God iv. 10; and the sacred writers, Baruch vi. 42., and Proverbs xix. 13. The Rabbins explain dog literally, and observe that a prostitute, or one who has had any commerce with a man with whom it was not lawful for her to marry, could not offer what she had thus gained to the Lord, nor what had been received in exchange for a dog. Josephus ([Antiquities?] iv. 8,) understands it of such hunting or shepherds' dogs as had been lent for hire to propagate the breed. Maimonides thinks that what the strumpet had received in kind, could not be presented, but with the price of it she might buy suitable victims. But Josephus and Philo admit of no such exceptions. They reject all sorts of presents made by strumpets, in detestation of their crimes; and it was probably from the same motive that the Jews concluded it was unlawful to put the price of blood into the treasury of the temple, Matthew xxvii. 6. In the Christian Church, the offerings of public sinners were not received, even to be distributed among the poor. These would not even take an alms from the hands of St. Afra, while she remained a courtesan of Augsbourg. Even the pagan emperor, Severus, refused to admit into the sacred treasury the tribute arising from such unworthy means. (Lamprid.) --- Some believe that Moses forbids the price of a dog to be presented, as the Egyptians had a sovereign respect for dogs; and many nations offered them in sacrifice, particularly for expiation. All the Greeks purified themselves, by making a dog be carried round them. (Bochart, p. 1, B. ii. 56.) Isaias (lxvi. 3,) seems to insinuate that dogs were sometimes immolated. St. Augustine, (q. 38,) and others, believe that dogs are not to be redeemed, as the first-born of other things are, probably because they were too mean, and the price to insignificant to purchase another victim. But we may adhere to the explication which was first proposed. (Calmet) --- Both. The dog was an unclean animal, and strumpets defiled their own bodies, and draw down the indignation of that God, who is a pure Spirit, and loves chaste souls. Without are dogs and sorcerers, and unchaste, and murderers, and servers of idols. (Apocalypse xxii. 15.) (Haydock) To the stranger. This was a dispensation granted by God to his people, who, being the Lord of all things, can give a right and title to one upon the goods of another. Otherwise the Scripture every where condemns usury as contrary to the law of God, and a crying sin. See Exodus xxii. 25., Leviticus xxv. 36, 37., 2 Esdras v. 7., Psalm xiv. 5., and Ezechiel xviii. 8, 13, &c. (Challoner) --- The stranger means the devoted nations of Chanaan, &c., whom God authorized his people to destroy. "Exact usury of him whom thou mayst kill without a crime," says St. Ambrose., (de Tob. c. 15,) though this principle will not always excuse usury. This practice was always considered as unjustifiable, except when God gave permission to his people to get by this means the possession of the property of the stranger, the right to which he had already given to them; unless we may consider, that he only tolerates this practice towards the stranger, on account of the hard-heartedness of the Jews. Christ has now expressly declared it unlawful for any one. See Exodus xxii. 25. (Calmet) Delay, beyond the time appointed. (Menochius) --- If no time was specified, the vow must be fulfilled without any unnecessary procrastination. See Numbers xxx. 2. (Haydock) --- Vows induce an obligation which before did not exist. (Worthington) Thee. Hebrew, "thou shalt not put into thy vessel," or basket. This privilege is restrained by the Chaldean, &c., to vintagers. But Josephus ([Antiquities?] iv. 8) extends it to all; and he says that those who did not even invite travellers to partake of their grapes, and other fruit, were to be punished with 39 lashes.