Commentary on Genesis and Exodus, Chapter 34 · Questions · Question 40 – Question 44
QUEST. XL. Why mention is made only of asses of the uncleane beasts.
Vers. 20. THe first of an asse, thou shalt buy out with a lambe. 1. Tostatus thinketh, that concerning other uncleane beasts, as horses, camels, that the first borne were not required, because the Hebrewes had none of them in Egypt, and such things of theirs only, which were preserved at their comming out of Egypt, from the destruction of the first borne, they were to pay the first of them unto God: dogs and cats they had, but they came not forth with them; and yet they were saved alive; as he would prove by that place, chap. 11.7. that among the Israelites a dog should not so much as move his tongue; which sheweth that they perished not. Tostatus hath another answer beside, concerning those base creatures, which shall be remembred afterward, quast. 18. Contra. 1. It is not like that the Hebrewes had no horse or camels, but only asses for carriage; seeing Egypt so much abounded with horse, being a plaine country and full of gr…sse, it cannot be thought, but they had of those kinde for their necessary use. 2. And for the other, it is very like, that no living thing among the Israelites miscarried, though that place prove it not: for the meaning is, that a dog-shall not move his tongue, lecol, against any of the children of Israel, not among them, Iun. But it cannot be imagined, that the dogs, unlesse their masters killed them of purpose, which is not to be thought, would leave them, when they went out of Egypt.
2. Some Hebrewes are of opinion, that the word behemah, beast, the firstlings whereof they were to give unto God, doth signifie, bestias comestibiles, beasts which may be eaten, and are not wilde, as chaj…th signifieth beasts as well not to be eaten, as those that are wilde: and therefore they thinke that under that word behemah, only three kindes are signified, bullocks, sheepe, and goats. But if this were so, then asses should be excluded out of the Law of the first borne, which were not to be eaten, though not wilde: and Tostatus also giveth an instance of swine, that they also should be included, which might be eaten, and yet they were not offered, nor any thing for them, because the Hebrewes brought none such out of Egypt. But he faileth in this last instance: for swine were neither beasts allowed to be eaten among the Hebrewes: and though they were uncleane, yet the first borne of them were to be redeemed, as other uncleane beasts were. Wherefore the word behemah, rather signifieth all domesticall beasts, whether cleane or uncleane, the firstlings whereof were due unto God: which is expressed here by another word, miknah, which signifieth a possession: whatsoever beasts then were in ones possession, he was to pay the first borne of them; wild beasts then were excepted, as not being in a mans possession. And Calvin inferreth as much upon these words, all the first borne among the children of Israel, chap. 13.2. to make a difference betweene domesticall beasts, which were among them, and wild beasts.
3. Simlerus thinketh, that the firstlings of dogs were due unto the Lord, but they were to be killed, not to be redeemed at all, because it is forbidden, Deut. 23.18. that they should not bring the price of a dog into the house of God. But it rather seemeth that God would not have such a vile creature to be counted as due unto him at all: for then it had beene lawfull to redeeme it: as they were to redeeme all uncleane beasts by the Law, Numb. 18.15. Therefore, seeing it was not lawfull to redeeme the firstling of a dog, it followeth that the Lord challenged no right in such.
4. Wherefore, concerning all uncleane beasts, which were profitable, as horse, camels, I agree with Iunius against Tostatus, that the first borne of them were all due unto God, and that by the asse, all other like uncleane beasts must bee understood, which Oleaster also concludeth out of those generall words Numb. 18.15. The first borne of uncleane beasts shalt thou redeeme. And concerning dogs and cats, and other vile beasts, I judge rather with Tostatus against Simlerus, that they were not due at all, because they were vile and of no account; which is his other answer: for whereas they were to exchange the foale of an asse with a lambe: Non erat aliquod animal immolabile tam parvi valoris, &c. There was not any beast for sacrifice of so small value, to be exchanged with any of those vile and contemptible creatures.
5. Oleaster yeeldeth two reasons why the asse was to be redeemed: either because it was a vile creature, or for that it was not apt for food, because the sacrifices were, cibationes Domini, as the Lords meat or food. Pellican understandeth it mystically, Quia Deus stoliditatem asininam abominatur; God abhorreth asmine foolishnesse and blockishnesse. So Isidore, and the Interlinearie Gloss. give this sense, that to change an asse with a sheepe, Est immunda vitae prim…rdia, ad innocentia simplicitatem convertere; Is to convert the beginnings of an uncleane life, into innocent simplicity. But the reason indeed is, because such beasts were counted uncleane, and so more vile, whereas the Lord would have of the best: and being uncleane, and unapt for food, they were consequently unfit for sacrifice, because some part thereof, unlesse only in burnt offerings, was for the Priests food, and in some sacrifices, the owner and offerer also had part.
QUEST. XLI. Whether the Israelites were absolutely bound to keepe the rest of the Sabbath, in earing time and harvest.
Vers. 21. BOth in earing and harvest time thou shalt rest, &c. 1. Like as before, chap. 31. when mention was made of making the Tabernacle, the observation of the Sabbath is urged, lest they might thinke, that the rest thereof upon that necessary occasion of working in the Tabernacle, might be dispensed with, Oleaster: So here in this place it being required that the people should goe up thrice in the yeere to the three solemne feasts, they might have thought it lawfull to travell upon the Sabbath, when they went up to the Tabernacle, and therefore is that precept of the Sabbath also mentioned here, to take away all such scruple, Tostat. quast. 17.
2. Mention is made of resting in seed time and harvest, as the most necessary workes: not as giving them liberty at other times to breake the rest of the Sabbath: but exclusis his, videantur omnia alia exclusa, that even these necessary times being excluded, all other might seeme also to be excluded. So also Augustin. By this it is signified, Omni tempore Sabbato debero cessari; That they ought to rest at all times upon the Sabbath.Quast. 160. in Exod.
3. Calvin affirmeth, that this is so straitly commanded: Vt dies septimus servetur etiam sub periculo communis jacturae; That the seventh day should be observed, even with the hazard and danger of the common losse. But Gallasius better concludeth out of Christs words, The Sabbath was made for man: Mark. 2.… ▪that the Jewes were not tied to such necessity, in keeping the Sabbath in harvest and seed time, but that in any common and apparent danger, they might periculo occurrere ▪ prevent it,
4. Some of the Hebrewes therefore understand this precept, of the carnall act of generation, which they would have here insinuated by the sowing of seed. But beside that, if the Scripture here had any such meaning, it would have expressed it in plaine words: for of such things the Scripture useth to speake exactly and plainly: this were to make matrimony and the use thereof unholy, Tostat. Though it must be confessed, that greater moderation in such carnall delights is to be used, when solemne and publike prayer is offered unto God, according to S. Pauls counsell, 1 Cor. 7.5.
5. Therefore the better opinion is, that even the rest of the Sabbath was dispensed withall to the Israelites, in the times of seed time and harvest upon urgent necessity, to prevent some common and imminent danger: as if suddenly any inundation were feared, which breaking in, would destroy the seed or corne; or any enemies should attempt to destroy the corne, or it should chance to be set on fire, it was lawfull even upon the Sabbath, laborando succurrere, to helpe to save it by labour: for if it were lawfull to lead their cattell to water, and helpe them out of the ditch upon the Sabbath, as our blessed Saviour sheweth, Luk. 13, and 14. which concerned but the state of private men; much more for the common good was it permitted, Tostat. qu. 18. Gallas. R. Salom. thinketh it was lawfull upon the Sabbath, to gather a sheafe of corne for the first fruits. But he hath no warrant for that out of Moses.
QUEST. XLII. Whether now Christians are necessarily tyed to keepe the Lords day in seed time and harvest.
1. THe Jewes to this day thinke that these workes, to sow and reap are by no meanes upon any occasion never so necessary, now to be dispensed with; and some Christians are as strict now in the keeping of the rest upon the Lords day. But this were to Judaize, and to enthrall our Christian liberty: and to bring us in bondage unto the service of dayes, which were appointed for mans benefit: as our blessed Saviour saith, that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath, Mark. 2.21.
2. Some on the other side give too great liberty upon the Lords day. As Calvin hath these words, writing upon Exodus, chap. 31.1… ▪ Sabbatum, quamvis hod…t non sit in usu ejus externa observatio, aeternum manet ipso effectu sicut circumcisio; The Sabbath, although the externall observation thereof be not now in use, yet it remaineth in the effect, as circumcision doth, &c. This permanent effect of the Sabbath, is our cessation and rest from sinne. This seemeth to give too great liberty, to say that all externall observation of the Sabbath, that is, of the day of rest, should now be out of use: and that the Sabbath all rest how no more remaineth, than circumcision: for this were to make it arbitrary and indifferent, whether Christians now should observe a day of holy rest unto the Lord at all, or not.
3. Oleaster goeth not so farre, but he thinketh, that though it were not lawfull for the Jewes to intermit the Sabbath then, in earing time and harvest, yet it is lawfull for Christians now. Gallasius giveth this reason, Quia ceremoniali observatione liberati sumus; Because we are freed from the ceremoniall observation of the Sabbath; and therefore he taketh it to be a needlesse question, to dispute whether Christians are now bound to keepe the day of rest in seed time, and harvest. But this is no ceremoniall thing, but morall, to abstaine from all such workes upon the Lords day, which may hinder the service of God.
4. Osiander thinketh, that by this instance of earing time, and harvest, all kinde of works were not forbidden the Jewes upon the Sabbath: but onelyonly quotidiana illa & profana, those daily prophane works, which might hinder them from the service of God; and the same reason may seeme to hold now. But there are certaine bodily works, which are a greater prophanation of the Lords day, than the ordinary works of the calling: as to dance, to play at football, and such like, are worse than to dig or delve, as Augustine saith of the Jewes: Melius toto dit ararent, quàm toto die saltarent; It were …etter for them to plow all day, than to dance all day.
5. I therefore rather condescend to Simlerus, that thinketh these things given in instance to be lawfull now upon the Lords day, necessitate id postulante, necessity so requiring: longe arctior fuit observatio Sabbati in lege, &c. the observation of the Sabbath was more strict in the Law, than now under the Gospell, &c. But men must take heed in earing time, and harvest, that they make not a necessity without a necessity: it ought to be an urgent and extreme necessity indeed, which should cause the service of God either wholly to be intermitted, or in part hindred.
QUEST. XLIII. Why the people were charged to goe up thrice in a yeere to the feasts.
Vers. 23. THrice in a yeere shall all your men children appeare, &c. 1. There is a spirituall worship of God, which the Israelites were to exhibite unto God at all times, and in all places, but the externall service, which consisted in sacrifices, and other solemnities, was only to be performed in the Tabernacle, whither the people were commanded to resort thrice in a yeere, that whereas in their Synagogues at home, they had nothing but Moses read unto them, lest that they might by discontinuance grow into oblivion of the sacrifices, and other solemnities prescribed for the Lords service: they were commanded to that end to goe up to revive the memory of them. 2. They went up alwayes with some gift, as they were not to appeare before the Lord empty, ut populus Deo praestaret obsequium, that the people might shew their duty unto God. 3. And because there was a collection yeerely in the feast of Tabernacles, gathered of the people, toward the maintenance of the Tabernacle, and the services thereof: the people were to goe up to contribute to that end, Tostat. quaest. 20. 4. Necessarium erat ad mutuum consensum in religione fovendum; It was necessary also to maintaine a mutuall consent in religion, Gallas. Whereas, if they should have had their severall places of meeting, they might have devised new rites. 5. And by this meanes the Lords feasts were celebriora, more solemne, and kept with greater majesty. 6. Hereby also Christ and his Church was prefigured: that in him there should be but one shepheard, and one sheepfold: he should be the only Priest and Mediatour, and he should prescribe, one Faith, one Baptisme, Simler. See more hereof, quest. 36. chap. 23.
QUEST. XLIV. Who were bound to goe up to the feasts.
NOw whereas the males only were to appeare before the Lord: 1. The women are excepted, because they were unfit, both in respect of their domesticall businesse, which was to be cared for in the absence of their husbands: as also for that they might be often letted by giving sucke, or being with child: and they were not in regard of the tendernesse of their sex, to take so long a journey. And yet devout women, specially when they dwelt not farre off from the place of the Sanctuary, did use to goe up, as Anna the mother of Samuel, and the Virgin Marie, Tostat. quaest. 22.
2. As for their servants, the men were bound to goe up, as well as their masters; there was one Law for both: the maids also sometime went up with their masters, but they were not bound, as Deut. 12.18. and chap. 16.14. both they, their sonne, daughter, servant, maid, were to rejoyce before the Lord in their solemne feasts.
3. Neither were all the males bound to go up, as the children which were not able to goe, nor yet were of discretion to understand what they there heard, or saw done, Tostatus ibid.
4. Neither were the male children bound to goe up, as soone as they began to be of discretion: as Tostatus giveth instance of our blessed Saviour, who at twelve yeeres old went up with his mother, for both that example was extraordinary; no childe at those yeeres was to be compared unto Christ: and beside, when such children went up with their parents it was voluntary, not exacted by Law.
5. Wherefore, such males must be understood, qui sub censum transibant, which passed under the summe, or account, who were under twenty, Calvin: and exceeded not fifty, as the Hebrewes thinke, Simlerus.