Commentary on the Old Testament Volume 1

CHAP. XI.

THese are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts, that are on the earth. Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is cloven footed, and cheweth the cudd, &c.] In giving these Laws, Ainsworth noteth, that God speaketh to Moses and Aaron, the Magistrate and the Priest, because both must teach, and see to the practice of them. And of this we have examples, 2 Chronicles 29. 5. chapter, 30. 18. touching the Magistrate, and Ezekiel, 44. 23. touching the Priest, and Numbers. 9. 6. touching both jointly. But this reason holdeth not always, for God sometimes speaketh to them both together, as chapter 13. When no reason can be rendered thereof, and sometime to Moses alone in things, that must come under the judgment of the Priest, as Chapter 14. And whereas they are bidden to speak these things to the Children of Israel, it may rightly be noted, that the Gentiles were not bound hereby, but only the Israelites, so Solom. Jarchi.

These are the beasts: The word translated beasts in the first place here is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 living things, in the second 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 beasts or cattle. But as in our English translation, so in the Septuagint, they are rendered both alike beasts. But the first word indeed setteth forth all living things, whether beasts, fishes, fowls or creeping things in general, the next the fourfooted beasts of the earth only.

Parteth the hoof, and is cloven footed. This word cloven footed is added for further expression, to show that the foot parted both above and beneath, and not above only is meant. For some beasts have partitions in their feet above, but beneath they are joined together by a skin, as the feet of Dogs, Hares and Conies, these although they be divided, yet because they are not cloven quite through, are not the beasts to be eaten of, as is further expressed, v. 26.

The beasts, that are cloven footed and chew the cudd, are reckoned up to be ten only, Deuteronomy 14. 4, 5. These were the only clean beasts and none else in the world, yea, as the Rabbins note, if any unclean beast by ingendering with a clean brought forth the young cloven footed, and chewing the cud, this young was notwithstanding unclean, because it came of the unclean, and was not of the beasts kind here described. Maimonides.

Nevertheless, these shall ye not eat of them, that chew the cud, or divide the hoof, as the Cammel which cheweth the cud, and divideth not the hoof, he shall be unclean to you, &c. The distinction between beasts clean and unclean is not now first made, but long before, as we may see, Genesis 7. 2. Where I have shown that most probably Adam was at the first instructed herein by God, and he taught the same to his sons after him, and they to their children from generation to generation: but now it being a time of expressing all things by writing, this Law is also expressly set down. So that to eat of the clean only, and to shun eating of the unclean was a thing required at the first of all people's, but now this difference being neglected generally in the world, the Lord, having chosen the Israelites peculiarly to be his people, enjoineth it unto them, leaving the rest in that confusion, to which they had degenerated.

If it be demanded, how any living thing came to be unclean, seeing God [Quest.] made all things at the first very good?

It is answered by some, that this distinction came in after the fall of [Answ.] man, they were all at the first very good, but now some only as wholesome for nourishment are allowed, as clean to be eaten, others not so wholesome are forbidden as unclean. Yet even these are not unclean in their nature, but in their use: that is, men do naturally abominate to eat of them, although by custom some Nations have made it familiar to them to eat hereof, as Brenz saith. But what abomination it is to nature, to eat of a coney, or an hare, &c. I cannot see, and the flesh of some things forbidden is also wholesome and good for nourishment. WHerefore I rather assent to Hesychius, that some living things were appointed to be avoided as unclean only in a mystery or figure, and yet in the particularizing of them, I hold that some respect was had to this, that those which were least wholesome or nutritive were forbidden: from whence we may infer with Brenz, that even our bodies and present life are a care unto God, and therefore our souls much more.

If it be demanded, what the mystery or figure was? I answer, as the [Qu.] things, about which these Laws were made, are divers, so the mysteries were divers, of which yet before I speak, the Reader shall understand, that some insist only upon natural reasons of allowing or forbidding them.

As that the beasts, which chew the cud and divide the hoof, are neither too moist, as those that have no hoofs at all, nor too dry as those which have hoofs, but not divided, and they that chew the cud, are of a temperate constitution, and therefore fittest for meat. Some yielde this reason, the solid hoof and undivided is a sign of ferity, and such as have the hoof divided but chew not the cud, do eat filthy things, as the swine. But these, and whatsoever natural reasons else can be brought, do come short of the true reasons of these prohibitions: for the heavenly Physician seeketh medicines for his sick not by the juice of herbs, but by the mysteries of his Word, saith Origen. It is not likely that God herein took care so much for the body, but for the soul. By beasts then mystically are to be understood people's, as was in a vision shown to Peter, Acts 10. 12. the clean figured out the Jews, and the unclean the Gentiles, betwixt whom God by these constitutions made a distinction, as is expressed, Levite. 20. 25, 26. and by beasts men are also set forth in divers other places, as Esa. 11. 6, 7, 8. Ezech. 34. 31. Zeph. 3. 3. Matth. 7. 15. Now these beasts in special, which are here described, are allowed as clean, and the other forbidden as unclean, partly because they are of a better and more temperate constitution, then those, to show that the Israelites the Church of God are more excellent in God's account by his grace, then other heathen people, to which effect almost Junius speaketh, and partly because divers heathens had some of the beasts here mentioned for unclean in greatest account and sacrificed them to their gods, as Swine, Lions, Asses, &c. As Aquinas saith, and on the contrary side the Egyptians held it abomination to kill or sacrifice Sheep and Oxen; therefore to show how much they abhorred from the evil manners of these, God would have his people to kill and eat, and sacrifice Sheep and Oxen, and eschew the other as abomination, and to show by their abominating of such meats, that God did likewise abominate the heathen, as unclean; so Brenz.

And lastly, the beasts appointed to be eaten as clean did set forth virtues to be ensued, and the unclean vices to be abhorred by all the people of the Lord, and because when God would have Peter afterwards to go amongst the Gentiles to preach, he shown this by bidding him kill and eat, we may rightly gather, that the Lord would hereby have his to understand, that they should have no communion with vicious and wicked men: And Brenz addeth yet another reason, that we might take notice of our natural uncleanness, seeking to be purged, because if men were not unclean nothing should be unclean to them. And these Laws were also made to exercise obedience. More particularly then by the beasts chewing the cud, and parting the hoof are to be understood men meditating upon the Word of God, and exercising themselves therein, Psalm, 1. for the word is the food of the soul, Amos 8. 11. and must being tried be kept. 1 Thes. 5. 21. Mal. 4. 4. 1 Corinth. 11. 2. and men discerning rightly the will of God by his Word, distinguishing aright betwixt the Law and the Gospel, and walking with a right foot therein, Galat. 2. 14. so Ainsworth, and before him Calvin, and the ancient fathers Tertullian, they divide the hoof, who make the journeys of their life by the sure footing of innocence; and Augustine, the divided hoof belongeth to manners, and chewing the cud to wisdom. The divided hoof, saith Irenaeus, doth set forth the Father and the Son, to whom we must go by faith, lib. 5. cap. 8. Righteousness, saith Clemens Alexandrinus, is bifida, or of a divided hoof, because it sanctifieth both here, and in the world to come. The divided hoof, saith Thomas Aquinas, setteth forth either the Father and the Son, the two Testaments, or the two Natures of Christ. But Origen will have the discerning betwixt this life, and that which is to come, understood by dividing, and the calling of things back to a spiritual sense, by the chewing of the cud. Hesychius and Rupertus contrary to all others, will having eructing by good works understood by chewing the cud, and dividing between the letter and the spirit by the divided hoose.

I think it best to hold to that of meditation meant by chewing the cud, and to this of distinguishing rightly betwixt the letter and the spirit, the Law and the Gospel by parting the hoof, unto which may be added to distinguish betwixt the good and the evil, to embrace the one and eschew the other, as in effect was first said.

So then here is intimated, that if we would not be unclean beasts, but [Note.] clean, we must both meditate upon the Word daily, and in our actions put a difference betwixt the good and the evil, not walking indifferently in either of them, and betwixt the literal and spiritual sense of the word, lest cleaving to the letter of the Law only we err with the veiled Jews, and other Heretics. If we either meditate upon the word only but walk not accordingly, or distinguish only between good and evil, but exercise not ourselves in the word, we are judged as unclean, as if we neither meditated nor distinguished at all: because in our exactest walking there are errors from which we are not sanctified, but by the Word, John 17. 17.

The Camel because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof, shall be unclean to you.] The Camel is a beast with a long neck, having a bunch on his back, upon which a burden might be laid and carried, he hath his name from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to recompense, because he recompenseth abundantly with his labor his keeper for his meat.

He cheweth the cud, saith Aristotle for the defect of teeth above, as horned beasts do, and the matter that should go to those teeth is spent in strengthening the palate of his mouth. He divideth not the hoof, that is, not clean through, but a skin and some flesh closing all the fissures together underneath. The Camel is noted by Aristotle to be the largest of all beasts, that are cloven footed, for which cause he is spoken of as most opposite to a little gnat in that Proverb, They strain at a gnat, and swallow a Camel.

For their properties, they are 1. Obedient to their keepers, for Abraham's servant is said to have made his Camels to kneel down, Genesis 24. 2. They are very swift upon the way, especially the Dromades, that come of them. Aristotle saith, they exceed in swiftness the Nissan horses through the greatness of their stride. 3. The Camel is a great enemy to an horse, so that with his sight and strong smell he terrifieth the horse, and maketh him to flee. 4. The Camel hath a bunch on his back signifying the swelling of pride, whereupon it is said, as a Camel cannot go through the eye of a needle, &c. 5. The Camel abhorreth incestuous copulation with the damme.

Aristotle saith, that one having covered the damme of a certain Camel with a cloth, and so deceived him, when the cloth being taken away, he perceived that he had covered his damme, he ran to his keeper that had done it, and bit him that he died. 6. The Camel can go without drink 4 days, but when he drinketh, he loveth to drink troubled and thick water. 7. The female having brought forth doth not again couple with the male in an whole year. 8. The Camel liveth to 100. years, of all which the said Aristotle speaketh. Now whereas Camels flesh is forbidden to be eaten, and the flesh of some other beasts as unclean, the Rabbins except, if Jewish soldiers come into an enemies Country, and can get none other meat to eat, they may in the case of necessity eat Camels or swine's flesh, &c. That men of other Countries did eat Camels flesh appeareth, because it is a common meat amongst the Arabians, at this day, and of old according to Diodorus. And before a Persian King for ostentation was set an whole Camel roasted by his Cook; so. Athenaeus and Heliogabalus is said to have eaten cocks combs, and Camels heels being cut from them alive. And the Turks feed their gally-slaves with Camels flesh at this day. But Galen saith, that it is unwholesome meat.

The mystery of the Camels flesh forbidden to be eaten may be first to show, that a man should not remember a wrong done to him to be revenged for it, because the Camel is noted to remember injuries a long time. 2. That a man should flee pride like the bunch on the Camels back hindering him from entering into Heaven. 3. That a man should not read the Scripture, as the Jews do, without distinguishing between the spiritual and literal sense, as the Camel cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof. And what other ill properties of the Camel have been set down before may be likewise applied, and the good to condemn much more those that come short of that goodness, if an unclean doth so, how much should we be ashamed to be worse then it for abstinence, chastity, &c.

The conie also because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof, shall be unclean to you. The word translated coney, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to hide in holes, whereupon Prov. 30. 26. it is said, The conies make their houses in the rocks, Psalm. 104. 18. The rocks are a shelter for the conies. After the Camel the greatest of cloven footed beasts, the conie, the least is named, saith Cirillus Alexandrinus to include all others of the like sort between these. The Septuagint render this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and some hereupon translate it chaerogrill, or Hedghog, and Hesychius, Histrix, Echinus. Jnnius, Mus montanus, which he saith, is a beast not greater then an Hedghog, partly like a Mouse, and partly like a Bear, being called in Palestine for this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and of them there are great abundance in those parts, and they keep in the cavernes of rocks and holes of the earth, all which he hath from Hieronym. and he inclineth the rather to this, because a coney is of the kind of an hare next mentioned, and therefore it is not probable, that it should be mentioned, but understood under that. But this is no reason, seeing a Coney differeth much from an Hare, for that it liveth in holes of the earth, as an Hare doth not, and amongst the fowls afterwards, things, that are as like as the Coney and the Hare are mentioned severally, as the Eagle, Ossifrage and Osprey, the great Owl and the little Owl; and lastly, the Coney agreeth to this description, as a Mouse or Hedgehog do not, for it cheweth the cud, but these not, and whether the mountain Mouse doth so or not I cannot tell, and therefore I rather understand a Coney to be meant here.

The properties of a Coney are. 1. That it skippeth and leapeth, being for this called by the Chaldee Taphsa, a skipper. 2. It is dangerous for undermining of walls. Pliny writeth, that Majorica an Island, was ruinated by the burrowing of Conies, and a town in Spain, as one in Thessaly was by Moles. 3. The Conie is very timorous, and ready to run away at the least noise. 4. So soon as she hath kindled, she goeth to buck again, to say nothing of the property here expressed, that she divideth not the hoof, but cheweth the cud which she hath in common with the Camel and Hare. In forbidding the Conie to be eaten, then levity and vanity in our gate is forbidden, as set forth by the skipping and leaping thereof, and treacherous undermining and circumventing of our neighbor, set forth by the Conies burrowing; and to be fearful and unbelieving, and libidinous and insatiable in fleshly lusts.

Touching the Hare, verse. 6. upon the same reason forbidden; some have held, that it was forbidden the Jews, because in color like the Ass, whom they did venerate, and for the swiftness in running counted a divine creature, as Plutarch; or because all are females amongst them, and there is no distinction of sex, as Gesner and Munster, because the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying the Hare is feminine. But all men know, that there are both males and females, and howsoever the Egyptians had the Hare in such venerable account, yet the Jews were directed in all things to be opposite unto them.

The properties of the Hare are the same with the Conie, saving that the Hare burroweth not, as the Conie doth, and moreover the Hare, as she hath very long ears, so she excelleth in hearing, for which cause the Egyptians in their Hieroglyphics expressed the sense of hearing by an Hare. Again, the Hare hath the name from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to lie in wait, because all men lie in wait for her, and pursue her.

And lastly, the Hare in sleeping shutteth not the eyes, and is very dull sighted, to say nothing of her swiftness of foot, and up hill more then down hill, because her hinder legs are longer then her fore legs In that the Hare having these properties was forbidden to be eaten, it was to intimate that we should not be light of hearing slanderous reports and tales against our neighbors, or ready with our feet to run to do evil, or to put on headily in unknown ways without due advice and deliberation, or such as for our ill deserts men do lie in wait for, as willing to destroy us; or lastly, dim sighted in spiritual things.

And the Swine, although he divideth the hoof, yet because he cheweth not the cud, shall be unclean to you.] The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Swine signifieth to return or wallow, wherefore it hath the name in Hebrew from wallowing in the mire, in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 filthiness, and in Latin Porcus, quasi Spurcus filthy.

Tacitus hath devised this for a reason, why the Jews ate no swine's flesh, viz. because it breedeth the leprosy. Plutarch, because Adonis, whom Bacchus loved, who was worshipped of the Jews, was slain by a Boar; and because the Swine by rooting in the soft ground in Egypt served instead of a plow. But these are far fetched, and experience teacheth, that swine's flesh eating breedeth no leprosy.

The true reason is set down in the Text, the swine parteth the hoof, but cheweth not the cud, wherefore God would hereby teach us not to make a show of good works being without all soundness of knowledge and grace within, as Hypocrites do. Moreover, respect was doubtless had also to the properties of the swine, which are first feeding upon filthy things, and wallowing in the mire, and making more account hereof, then of Pearls, for these the swine trampleth under his feet. 2. The swine diggeth in the ground, and turneth it up with the snout. 3. He eateth husks and shells without substance in them. 4. The legion of Devils entered into an herd of swine. 5. The swine being washed returneth to wallowing in the mire. 6. The swine never looketh upward, but always to the ground, wherefore being cast upon the back, the strange unwonted sight of Heaven above being seen, causeth him to stay his clamour; so Plutarch. 7. The swine in all his life time is good for nothing, but is nourished up only against the day of slaughter. 8. Having lost any one of his eyes he dieth forthwith; so Aristotle. 9. The swine only of all those beasts, that bring forth many at once bringeth them forth perfect, and not blind. 10. The swine is more prone to lust then other beasts, for they couple at eight months old, and the males are so eager in the pursuit of their lust, that they will fight most eagerly one with another. 11. The swine is given only to his belly and feeding, and is most dull and indocile, wherefore the life and soul, saith Cleanthes, is given to a swine only as salt to keep the flesh from putrifying. Wherefore God's debarring of his people swine's flesh, was also to show, that we should not delight in the filthiness of sin, or have familiarity with filthy wicked persons; so Lactantius applieth it, and Clemens Alexandrinus, but the Pearls of divine instructions we should contrariwise have in singular account. 2. That we should not root up the Vine of God, which is his Church, as wild Boars do, but rather plant and settle it. 3. That we should not feed upon vanities here, but containing earthly things feed in our minds upon spiritual by musing thereon. 4. That we must not be so given to the belly, lest the Devil, who desireth to enter into such, possess us and carry us into perdition. 5. That being once washed by repentance we should never relapse, living in those sins again which we have left. 6. That we should be heavenly minded. 7. That we should be full of good deeds, and not live altogether to ourselves, lest we be slain in the end, as being ordained thereunto. 8. That the soul dieth for want of knowledge, which is the eye thereof. 9. That the impure wicked have more prosperity oft times here, then the Godly. 10. That we should not suffer lusts to reign in our mortal bodies, but mortify them. 11. That we should be easy to be taught and instructed in those things that be good, setting our minds upon them.

For refraining from swine's flesh, especially the Jews have been most noted, and their faith hath been exercised by Tyrants pressing them hereunto, or killing them. And of the Jews, the Arabians and Indians, learned to abstain from swine's flesh, and the Phoenicians, and Scythians would not suffer any swine at all to be kept in their Countries, and in Crete they would eat no swine's flesh, because a Sow giving suck to Jupiter being a child, her gruntling drowned his crying so, that it could not be heard; and therefore in Mysia, wherein there was a Temple of Jupiter, it was counted a most heinous thing to kill, or to eat of a swine.

Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcass shall ye not touch.] Here have but four sorts yet been named; the Camel, Conie, Hare and Swine, but by these all other like beasts are to be understood, according to the general rule, verse 4. of the touching of the carcass of an unclean beast it was spoken before, Chapter, 5. 2, 3. It is not meant either there or here, that these beasts might not be touched being alive, but dead, in which case only they are carcasses, because the Cammel and Ass, &c. being for service must be touched: And by the carcass of one of these is not only meant of them dying alone, but also if they were killed; yet of clean beasts the carcass was not unclean if they were killed, but only in case that they died alone.

Rab. Solomon restraineth this prohibition of touching the carcass to a Priest only alleging, Leviticus, 21. 1. but these Laws are plainly given to all the people, and in the place alleged nothing is spoken of the carcass of a beast, but of a man, called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 this he is forbidden to touch; of the mystery of this Law against touching a carcass, see before, ch. 5. 2.

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters, whatsoever hath sins and scales, &c.] The sins of fishes are those, whereby they guide their way, being as wings unto them; and the scales those that grow all over the body and cover it, the Rabbin's note, that whatsoever hath sins, hath scales also, and if a fish hath but one sin and one scale only, it is lawful, because the Hebrew word here is singular, sin and scale. Maimonides, but one is both here, and often put for many, neither was there ever any fish seen with one only.

The word translated sins, Senappir, is only found here, and Deuteronomy, 14. 9, 10. it is rendered by the Septuagint, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 wings, because there is the same use of sins unto fishes, that there is of wings unto Birds, the sins on each side serve them to move withal right forward, and that on the tail to turn any way, as the Fowls tail serveth for an help to her herein; and to some sins serve instead of feet to go upon, when they are out of the water, as Pliny writeth; and from the Fishes tail, whereby he turneth his body, he thinketh that the invention of the rudder in vessels upon the water was taken. The word, Haskeseth a scale, is rendered in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , whence cometh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Leper, because there is some similitude to the eye outwardly betwixt the scurfe of Leprosy, and scales.

These two sins and scales are general marks of clean fishes, and they that want them are unclean, and all things else that live and move in the waters, that is, worms, horseleaches, and the wild beasts of the the Sea, as Sea dogs, frogs, &c. as Maimonides explaineth it. All these unclean things must be had in abomination, therefore it was not lawful, saith Cazkuni, to make merchandize of them. Here are none named, as amongst the unclean beasts, because the Hebrews had no particular names for them, seeing they were not, as other living creatures, brought before Adam to be named.

If it should seem that they had names, because the Whale is called Leviathan, it is answered, this name is not proper, but appellative from Lavah, signifying to join together, because his scales are so joined together, that they cannot be parted as the Lord speaketh of him; as the Elephant is there called Behemoth a Beast, because the greatest of Beasts.

That reason of passing over fishes without naming any of them, which is brought by Hesychius, viz. that by fishes the believing Gentiles are set forth, who desire not to have their names written in earth, is of little force, for why then are the clean beasts serving to figure out the faithful also here named? Wherefore I rest in the former, only we may add, that because no sacrifice was to be made of Fishes, and God was most careful to distinguish betwixt the clean and unclean in those creatures, that were for sacrifice, he passeth over Fishes more lightly not standing to name any particulars.

And herein we may observe again the opposition, that God would have [Note.] betwixt his people and the Heathen. The Egyptians and those of the Isle Pharos and the Bactrians sacrificed Eels, but chiefly the Syrians and Phoenicians prized Fish for sacrifices, and Dagon the Philistines idol had the name from a Fish, being also like a Fish from the navel downward, and like a man from thence upward, therefore the Israelites must not sacrifice any Fish.

Touching sins and scales, the Lord in allowing Fishes to be eaten, as clean, which had these, but forbidding others, that wanted them, would mystically teach, that we must have the sins of Faith like wings carrying us above the mudd of incredulity into the Lord's net, and not to be altogether carnal, like those Fishes that want scales; so Origen and Theodoret likewise, these Fishes set forth such as are endued with the sins of Faith, and are everywhere compassed about with the ornaments of virtue, as with scales, so as the carnal are not. And the carrying of the sins of Faith into God's net is by Gregory otherwise set forth; saying, hereby is figured skipping and ascending by heavenly Contemplations.

Isidore by those without scales will have the Leves, elubrici, & effoeminati set forth, but it is better to rest in the more general of Origen before, and that of some others, by Faith we must direct our going as by sins in all things, and be clad all over with the scales of good works.

Hesychius is far wide in applying the scales to the scales of ignorance, which fall from their eyes, that meditate in the Scriptures. And hitherto of the mystery of these things; now of refraining from Fishes, that have neither sins nor scales, a natural reason also may be yielded, because they are more moist, and through living in the mud and want of motion not so wholesome.

Rabbi Moses Gerundens. by Fish with scales, that may be rubbed off, are meant, because the Whale hath great scales, but yet is not used for meat, which note I think is not to be rejected: For the properties of Fishes, see before, Gen. 1.

And these are they, which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls, the Eagle, the Ossifrage and the Osprey, &c.] In speaking of Fowls the Lord setteth down no marks to know the clean and unclean by, as of beasts and fishes, but enumerateth the particulars unclean. Yet Tostatus giveth two marks, if they have a liver or spurr, they are clean, and Oleaster three marks of the unclean, their rapacitie, their talents, their great gullet, and indeed all the Fowls almost here forbidden are very ravenous, and therefore Lyranus holdeth, that they are forbidden to tax the vice of capacity.

But Tostatus contendeth, that their evil constitution being exceeding hot and dry is the cause, why they are pronounced unclean and not to be eaten. This I grant may be a natural reason, but not all, seeing all things here spoken of are mystical and figurative: under the prohibition of these Fowls, then which be of evil quality, the vices of men are forbidden, as Hesychius saith.

1. The Eagle in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is derived by some from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to break, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to see, because he breaketh and teareth in pieces his prey, and is most sharp sighted. In Greek he is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a year because of his annosa vita, his long life, in latin, aquila, from aquilo the North, because of his violence like the North-wind. The Eagle is a fit Emblem of a Tyrant, and therefore, Deuteronomy, 28. 49. The Nation threatened to be brought against Israel sinning is compared to an Eagle, Job 39. 30. She is a blood sucker, and is amongst the slain, and unto Eagles persecutors are compared, Lamentations, 4. 19. Jer. 4. 13. chap. 48. 40. Hos. 8. 1. Hab. 1. 8, Wherefore the Lord in forbidding the Eagle forbiddeth mystically all violence and wrong, all cruelty and blood thirstiness.

2. The Eagle flieth aloft, Job. 39. 27. and buildeth her nest on high, setting forth hereby those, that are lifted up by pride, as Jer. 44 16. Though thou make thy nest as high as the Eagle, saith the Lord of proud Edom, I will bring thee down, we must not then soar aloft by pride and ambition, as the Eagle.

3. The Eagle preyeth upon dead carcasses, and picketh out the eyes first, to which it is alluded, Proverbs, 30. 17. and herein he doth aptly set forth Heretics putting out the eye of right knowledge in those that they prey upon being dead in sin; divers other observable things there be in the Eagle, but I have spoken of them, Genesis 1. in my Sermons, and they serve to set forth good, and therefore it were improper to bring them in here, as some do, where the Eagle is propounded as unclean, and to be had in abomination, and therefore such properties only are here to be looked at, as do denote vices not virtue.

Next to the Eagle is the Ossifrage, by the Septuagint rendered Griphin, in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from breaking, because it breaketh the bones of the Fowls that it preyeth upon; an Ossifrage is a bone breaker, it is somewhat greater then an Eagle, but otherwise like it, being mentioned only here, and Deut. 14. 12.

A Griphin, as a Griphin is described, this cannot be, that is a Fowl four footed winged like an Eagle, and of that great strength, that he is able to take up horse and man with his talons, and keepeth about the Northerly mountains to defend the gold there. For no man yet ever saw such a Fowl, according to Origen, no man hath heard and can remember, that ever any Griphins flesh came into man's hands. That which is then written of the Griphin is no better then that of Pegasus, the winged horse of Heaven, unless by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Griphin, an Ossifrage be meant, so called also from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 crooked, because of the crooked talons, and beak.

This Fowl is not so quick sighted as the Eagle, but very dim, and herein he differeth from him. Under the Ossifrage then is forbidden ignorance, and want of sight into divine things, according to that Eph. 5. 17. Be not unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is, And because this Fowl teareth off the flesh, and breaketh the bones of the prey being taken with great violence, griping and oppressing of the poor is hereby forbidden; for the Prophet describing oppressors, saith likewise of them, They pluck off their skins and flesh from their bones, and chop them in pieces as for the pot. Yet there is one good property in this Fowl, she nourisheth up both her own birds and those of the Eagle also, which are cast out, charity is not acceptable at an oppressors hands, unless he turn and make restitution, as Luk. 19. 1.

Touching the Osprey, this is rendered by Willet, the Sea Eagle, and by the Septuagint indeed it is rendered by this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Sea Eagle, and therefore he will have the Osprey to be nothing else but the Ossifrage set forth also by this other word, bone-breaker, or preyer upon bones. But the Hebrew word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from strength in sight, saith Junius, being able to behold the sun in the full brightness, and if any of her young ones cannot do the like, she killeth them, but nourisheth up the rest, but some will have this name given to this Fowl from strength in flying.

The name Osprey is doubtless the most fit proper name, and the name Sea Eagle, a name further describing her to be a kind of Eagle, but seeking the prey upon the waters, as the other doth upon the land, being of as great force to break bones as the Ossifrage, and it hath a great neck and broad tail, and espieth through the strength of her sight fishes in the Sea, or in Lakes, and falleth violently upon the waters and taketh them.

And as Aristotle writeth, if the prey taken be too heavy for her to carry, she falleth down again with it into the deep; a fit type of a covetous man falling into noisome and foolish lusts, that drown the soul in perdition. Every kind of Eagle, because the Eagle was specially esteemed of amongst the Heathen, as a bringer of good luck, when they went to wars, must be had in abomination amongst the Israelites.

And the Vultur, and the Kite after his kind.] Junius and Tremell. read Kite first, and so doth the Vulgar Latin; and Willet considering the name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying to fly, holdeth that a Kite is rather meant hereby, because the Kite flieth in a singular manner even gliding as it were in the air, whence it is also called a Glede, and the Vultur is heavy and slow in flying, and therefore it is not likely, that it should be set forth by such a name

Moreover, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the second word here used is also had Job 28. 7. and is commonly translated Vulture, as by the Septuagint 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and Montanus, &c. For of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cometh a Geyre, or Vulture, and holes in the earth are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , because so much frequented by them. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth an Island, and therefore serveth most fitly to express a Vulture, that keepeth in solitary places, such as many Islands are. And the Latin word Milvus a Kite, is thought by some to come à Molliter volando, because she flieth so gently. And in our new translation, Deuteronomy 14. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is rendered a Vultur, and yet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is nearest this word is also there used, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for the likeness to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may easily be turned into it, as Ainsworth noteth. But f by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 we understand a Vultur here, as derived from flying, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which cometh from seeing will much more agree unto him, because he seeth very far off, and so maketh towards his prey.

If by the first here we understand the Kite, the forbidding of his flesh served to note out that quality of gliding stilly in the Air without any noise till he spieth his prey, but then he falleth suddenly down upon it; to have the Kite in abomination is mystically then to abhor from the sly and subtle practices of the devil and wicked men to make a prey of others: for they also are noted to crouch and bow themselves, till men fall into their nets. 2. The Kite is noted not to prey upon wild birds, that fly about, but upon Domesticke, that are always picking and scraping for a grain upon the ground, like the Devil, who prayeth upon those that are intent through the carnality of their minds to the grain of profit or pleasure, that we may take heed of being such. 3. The Kite is so hungry, that he is bold oft times to come even to children's hands, and to snatch their victuals from them; wherein he setteth forth sturdy thieves and robbers, from whose courses we must abhor. 4. The Kite although he be fierce, and will fly at anything at the first, yet he afterwards groweth so cowardly and slothful, that he will not, neither dare set upon the least, as a Gnat or the like, showing, as Saint Geminian hath it▪ that they, who begin in the Spirit, but end in the flesh are abominable before God. 5. The Kite eateth carrion, and not corn, to set forth worldly minded men, that care not for the seed of the Word. 6. The Kite taketh from the Raven that which he hath gotten, to show, as Augustine hath it, that he shall be in his wealth a prey unto others greater who preyeth upon others lesser to enrich himself. 7. Preachers, that dare not speak against the sins of Princes and great men oppressors, but dare boldly speak against simple and mean persons, are by Berchorius compared to the Kite, which maketh havoc of young pullery, but dareth not to set upon stronger fowls.

Touching the Vultur, she is noted to envy her young ones waxing fat, and to beat them with her wings to macerate them, this Fowl therefore is forbidden, to show that Parents should abhor from this ill quality to bear a spleen against their children for their thrift in grace, as Saul did against Jonathan, and the Jews against their children embracing the Christian religion; for Parents saith the Lord, shall be against their children, &c.

2. The Vultur is of that quick smelling, that she can smell carrion from one side of the Sea to another to fly to it, to denote those, that by the carrion of superstition are carried to Rome and other parts beyond the Seas.

3. Although the Vulturs flesh be not fit for meat, yet of the fat thereof an ointment is made, which healeth sick and diseased cattle: so although it be evil to company with the wicked, yet they are used ofttimes as a rod by God for the chastisement and souls health of his people.

4. The Vultur preyeth not upon things alive but dead, so saith Basil, the envious man, if he seeth anything good in another, he meddleth not with that to speak thereof to his commendation, but if he seeth anything evil, that he carpeth at, from which vile quality we must be far. Of other properties of the vultur, see Genesis 1. in my Sermons.

Every Raven after his kind.] The word in Hebrew, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying mixture, and hereby is set forth the evening for the mixture of light and darkness therein, the Raven is thus called, because some of the kind are of a mixed color, white and black. For because not one kind only is meant, but more, as the Crow, the Cuddow and the Pie, it is said, after his kind. In Greek it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from the noise that it maketh, and in English Raven, from ravening.

The Raven also feedeth upon carrion, and therefore is an unclean bird, and as some think, because the Raven was offered in sacrifice by the Heathen. The Raven is noted to be unkind to the young, neglecting to give them food, whereupon they are constrained to run up and down crying, to which it is alluded, Psalm 147. 9. He giveth food to the young Ravens when they cry, and therefore the young being grown up sometimes, set upon the old, and beat them being unable to resist. Aelian. lib. 3. De Animal. cap. 43. In forbidding the Raven then, unnaturalness in Parents towards their children is forbidden, and undutifulness and rebellion in children against their Parents. 2. Touching the Raven, it is singularly noted, that being sent out of the Ark, it returned no more; whereupon Hesychius, it hath no natural affection to the place where it had been kept, like Judas towards Christ. 3. The Raven crieth cras, tomorrow, to show that we must not defer our repentance till tomorrow; so Hugo. 5. The Raven and Fox are in a league together, but at enmity with the Hauke; so are the oppressor and deceiver. 5. The Raven picketh out the eyes of a dead carcass first and chiefly. Prov. 30. 17. and keepeth in solitary places, and flieth about in the dark, wherefore we must not love darkness, nor blindfold men's eyes, to prey upon them, by deceiving them. Who so doth thus, is like the devil, a most fit emblem of whom is the Raven, and here it is most remarkable, which Pliny relateth, a solemnefunerall was once celebrated of a Raven in Rome, which Genebrard noteth to have been done one year before the passion of Christ Jesus, to signify the death and overthrow as it were of the devil, which should be soon after amongst the Gentiles, his kingdom standing in idolatry being beaten down.

The Owl, the night hauke, the Cuckow, and the Hauk, &c.] For Owl here the Septuagint read the Ostrich, in latin struthiocamelus, because it hath long legs like a Camel; so likewise the vulgar latin, and Vatablus, and Cazkuni. But some expound it the Owl, as Junius, Ainsworth, and Willet. But Calvin, and almost all others the Ostrich. In Hebrew, it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Eth bath hajaanah, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the daughter, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to answer, so that the word being englished is the daughter of the answerer, or crier in the way of answering; for which reason howsoever, it may seem rather to agree to the Owl, because the Owls cry and answer one to another, yet because if the Ostrich be not understood by this word, that Fowl is altogether passed over, which no man doubteth of but that it was unclean, I rather hold with them, that render it the Ostrich. And the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 indeed hath more significations, viz. to afflict, &c. And so we may expound it, the daughter of the afflicter, by which name an Ostrich may well be set forth, because of her cruelty to her young. Whereas it may seem to make against this Exposition, that the Ostrich is set forth by another name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Job 39. 13. which is from running, because the Ostrich runneth swiftly, for she hath long legs and an heavy body, so that although she hath wings, yet she cannot fly, but only helpeth herself with her wings in her running, so as that no horse can run so swiftly as she, whereupon she is said to scorn the horse and his rider. This maketh no more against expounding this word Ostrich, then the diversity of names following for Owls, against expounding it Owl. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I understand with Maimonides the eggs of the Ostrich, which some say are pleasant meat, and this in particular is spoken of, because found in the sands, where the Ostrich layeth them, and is a tempting meat for the pleasantness, yet under the egg the Ostrich also is forbidden, which is edible; for if they be old, saith Cazkuni, they are as hard as a stick and cannot be eaten, but being young they are good meat, and were so used by the Arabians, being hence called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ostrich-eaters, and Leo Africanus saith, that Heliogabalus had at one supper both the flesh of Ostriches and of Camels. The Chaldee for the pleasantness of this meat rendereth it Bathnaametha, the daughter of pleasantness. Under the Ostrich here forbidden, saith Hesychius, is forbidden to those, that are in God's warfare the entangling of themselves in things of the world, as the Ostrich, which though she hath wings, yet keepeth upon the ground altogether; or better, according to Gregory, to be an hypocrite, that is, to make a show of wings with the Ostrich to fly aloft by heavenly meditations and profession, but indeed to be worldly minded, as the Ostrich keepeth upon the ground. 2 Here is forbidden laying up treasures upon earth, as the Ostrich layeth her eggs in the sands and leaveth them, for even so must we leave all our earthly treasures, and they be ever in the midst of many hazards, as those eggs of the treading of beasts. 3 Womens refusing to nurse their children, as the Ostrich having laid her eggs leaveth them in the sands, where through the heat of the Sun they are hatched, but many of them through divers casualties miscarry, and so children being thus neglected by their mothers. The night-hawk, this in Hebrew is Tachmas, a snatcher. Jonathan rendereth it Catpitha, the Harpy. The Septuagint, the Night-owl, so also Vatablus, Montanus; Junius, the Swallow; Pagninus, the Hawk; but the Owl both little and great is spoken of by and by, and the Hawk also, and the Swallow is not ravenous. Therefore the Harpy is rather to be understood, which is a fowl of a yellow color, seeing as well and better by night then by day. In forbidding this then the seeing into the things of the Law is taxed, saith Hesychius, where the sight of the Evangelical light is wanting, as in the Jew. 2 This fowl pursueth and smiteth birds of the own kind, and preyeth upon them, it was therefore forbidden to tax men's preying upon their brethren by oppression. 3 This fowl preyeth upon the sparrow being chased by the hawk and fleeing him for succor, perfidy then towards those that repose a trust in us, is herein forbidden.

The cuckow, the Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , signifieth a consumption, whence the cuckow hath his name, because he is subject to this wasting disease, so Pagninus, reading it therefore Pthitica. Yet the Septuagint render it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Sea-meaw, which is followed by Hesychius. Montanus calling it larus, or fulica, and fonseca, which is the moor-hen; Junius, aesalo, the merlin. But the name rather evinceth it to be the cuckow, in which bird it is remarkable, that she always vainly singeth the same song cuckow, till she weareth away: in forbidding the cuckow then, vain talk is forbidden, wherein the time is spent unprofitably. 2 The cuckow is like an hawk, but hath no talons as the hawk hath, to show that we must not personate the godly being without such practice. 3 The cuckow in the end of the summer faltereth more in his singing, and is less cheerful, in which is forbidden a falling in adversity from that which we were in our prosperity in respect of diligence in God's service, and much more in the cuckows hiding himself all winter. 4 The cuckow layeth her eggs in other birds nests, in which is forbidden adulteries: and she eateth up the eggs found there: so by adulterous broods the legitimate children are deprived ofttimes of their inheritance.

The hawk after his kind. This fowl in Hebrew is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , from swift flying, and it is said, after his kind, because there are many sorts of hawks, even ten, according to Aristotle; his flesh, saith Tostatus, is too hot & dry, and therefore evil meat for nourishment; but the young are good meat, as Aristotle saith, and sweet in the eating, but by saying, after his kind, they are cut off from eating all hawks flesh. All hawks are enemies to the dove, therefore under this prohibition of the hawk, preying upon the innocent is forbidden. And again, as the dove is noted, if the kind of hawk be such as killeth upon the ground, to fly aloft; but if of the kind that killeth in flying, to sit still upon the ground to avoid it; so in Christian wisdom we should avoid the assaults of our enemies, by wisely observing their conditions. 2 The hawk is most swift in flying, and very diligent to get his prey, whereby the enemies of God's people are set forth in their swift coming against them. His wheels, saith the Prophet, are like the whirlwind. 3 The hawk is noted by Aristotle, not to eat the hearts of those birds which he taketh, but being manned and tamed, he eateth them: this setteth forth those, that not being inclined to such cruelty of themselves, yet by custom and being drawn on by others, grow most bloody and cruel, that we may beware of being thus wrought unto evil. For other properties, as cruelty to her young, and beating them out of the nest before they can well fly, and going away in winter, but coming in summer, I have spoken of the like before in describing other fowls.

And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl. The first fowl here in Hebrew is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to hide, and is commonly rendered Bubo, the great owl, and not the little; in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to make a noise; for it is an owl of the greatness of an eagle, according to Aristotle, and hideth itself in solitary places, being seldom seen, as Pliny writeth, and maketh a lamentable noise. Unto this owl the Psalmist hath reference, when Psal. 102. 7. he complaineth, I am like an owl in the desert. If this fowl be seen in the day, he is counted an ominous bird, so Pliny; and Josephus observeth it to have been so to Agrippa. This owl, although as great as the eagle, and armed with talons, yet wanteth courage; therefore in forbidding it, the Lord forbiddeth want of courage in Governors, in punishing and withstanding the evil. 2 This owl is a night-bird, doing what he doth in the night, therefore under it works of the night, drunkenness, fornication, and the like are forbidden.

The cormorant. In Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , casting, from casting itself down into the water, in Latin it is called Mergus, à mergendo, from drenching itself in the water. It diveth in and stayeth there, saith Aristotle, till a man may go over an acre of ground. This fowl swalloweth up whole fishes in great numbers, and therefore under it is forbidden devouring other men by oppressions and extortions, and insatiable desire in having, because he devouring fish after fish is never satisfied, like the Devil in devouring souls. 2 The cormorant, as Isidore noteth, is fat in winter when he resteth, but lean in summer, because that is the time of their labor, which he applieth to worldly rich men, who when the summer of the next world cometh, shall lose all the fat of their worldly wealth being left poor and miserable. Touching the last fowl in this verse, it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the twilight, and therefore most probably the owl commonly known, that flieth in the evening late, it is spoken of again, Esa. 34. 11. as a solitary bird. Ainsworth rendereth it little owl or bat. Hesychius and many others, Ibis, or the stork; but both the stork and bat follow, verse. 19. Of the properties hereof somewhat hath been said in speaking of the great owl, but here I will add some more. 1 The little birds fly about an Owl wondering at her, if she cometh abroad in the day, therefore under the Owl we are taught, what monsters and strange creatures wicked men are, that we join not with them, but seek to put them to shame, that they may be amended: yet we must not so set against them, as to be endangered in respect of other sins ourselves, as the silly Birds flying about the Owl are seized upon and killed by the Hawk. Secondly, the Owl is an enemy to the Dove and eateth up her eggs; hereby then hurting of the innocent and being at enmity with them is forbidden. Thirdly, the Owl eateth up the Crowes eggs in the night, and the Crow the Owls eggs in the day, being then stronger then it: whereby the enmity amongst the wicked themselves is set forth, they being led not by the Spirit of love, but of strife and debate. Fourthly, the Owl taketh the opportunity of the dark to seek her prey, which is of mice especially and such like vermin: so wicked men covertly circumvent others, but that which they get by it is but as vermin, base and vile.

The Swan, the Pelican, and the Gier-Eagle. The first word here in Hebrew is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 breath, and therefore by Jerome and others it is rendered Swan, because the Swan in putting forth his breath hisseth. Junius out of Rab. Solomon rendereth it Monedulam, the Daw; The Septuagint, Montanus and Ainsworth, the Red-shank, Solomon Jarchi saith it is a bird like a mouse that flieth in the night, and it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , because it is about the eyes like that creeping thing which lacketh eyes, called a Mole, for thus the Mole is also called, verse. 30. It is most probable, that a Swan is meant both for the reason already rendered from the word, and because greater fowls, such as a Swan, are here enumerated together, and the Daw belongeth to the kinds of the Raven before spoken of, and the Bat followeth, verse. 19. and to the Red-shank the name doth not so agree. As for the same word used, verse. 30. to set forth a Mole, Willet saith, some render it a Dormouse, which liveth by breathing, as it were in a continual sleep, although coming to verse. 30. he followeth that reading, wherein it is a Mole. But taking it for the Mole, it is in this like unto the Swan, that as it diveth into the water, holding the head there a long time showing in him a long breath, so the Mole always hideth itself in the earth, being herein admirable, that the breath is not yet stopped up, but that it can live and breath in such pent places, where the air is stopped out. For the properties of the Swan, he is fair and white without, but his flesh is black and unwholesome for meat, in being forbidden then, hypocrisy is forbidden, which is fair without, but foul within. 2 The Swan and other long-necked fowls draw their nourishment from below out of the water, wherein we are warned, not to dive with our minds downward, but to be lifted upward, by being Heavenly in our Meditations. 3 The Swan is cruel, and one will kill and devour another, therefore we are forbidden to do the like herein.

The Pelican, in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , hath his name from vomiting, as the word that signifieth, because he casteth up the shel-fish, which he hath eaten, in Greek he is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to pierce, or to perforate, because he pierceth his breast with his bill, so fetching out blood to cure his young ones, when they have been bitten with Serpents. It is spoken of as dwelling in the wilderness and in desolate places, Ps. 102. Esa. 34. 11. Zeph. 2. 14. yet Lostatus maketh two sorts of Pelicans, one of the wilderness, and another of the water, which flock together, as those of the desert do not: The vulgar Latin rendereth it Onocrrtalus, which is a fowl, according to Pliny, much like a Swan, but that it hath a greater gullet, so that sometime an whole child hath been found in it, yet Psal. 102. 7. the vulgar Latin readeth the same word Pelican. Touching the properties of the Pelican. 1 He keepeth alone in deserts, Psal. 102. 6. whereby, saith Augustine, are understood those that never believed, as in saying, like an Owl in vast places, he applieth it to those, that have believed, but fallen away again, and that, like a Sparrow upon the house-top, to those that believe, but are unfruitful, we must not then be like the Pelican through unbelief keeping aloof from the Church. 2 The Pelican swalloweth shel-fish, and afterwards being heat in his crop and made to gape he casteth them up again, and then pecketh out the meat, herein then is forbidden flattery to draw a man to unfold himself, and then to take advantage against him, for this is very treachery, and to be abhorred. The Gier-Eagle, in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying to love, is by the Septuagint rendered, the Swan, by the vulgar Latin, Porphyrion, a Redshanke, by Junius Merope, a Wood-pecker. And to this last doth this name best agree, because, as Aristotle hath it, the love of this bird is such to the Dam, that they nourish it being old, and before also: so likewise saith Pliny. For the properties of this bird, it hath goodly feathers, being herein like the Porphyrion, which, as Aristotle saith, hath his upper feathers pale, his low feathers blue, and his hinder feathers red, but it breedeth in holes of the ground; herein then is forbidden, when a man hath excellent spiritual gifts, to be earthly minded, which marreth all. 2 The Wood-pecker although she be kind to her kind, yet devoureth Bees, so that under it is forbidden the devouring of others, by oppressions and wrongs to enrich our families, and to raise them up.

The Stork, the Heron after her kind, the Lapwing and the Bat: the Stork Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of kindness is so called, because the young nourish the old in their age, and they are kind one unto another. The Stork is much like a Crane, but her wings are partly black, she buildeth on high firretrees, Psal. 104. 17. and on the tops of houses and chimneys, and keepeth much about waters, feeding on fishes, snakes, frogs and the like, for which cause in Thessaly, as Pliny reporteth, men might not kill them upon pain of death, she hath her name also in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 love, and in English Stork seemeth to come from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 natural affection, Ciconia in Latin, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to be profitable. The Septuagint render it, the Faulcon, but there is no reason for that. For the Storks properties, such as be good have been touched before in my Sermon upon Gen. 1. neither have they place here; The vice pointed at in the Stork is only the admitting of unclean thoughts into our minds, and thus feeding as it were upon them, as she doth upon snakes and other poisonous things, except we shall add somewhat touching the long neck of this fowl, and her diving herewith into the water, but of this before in the Swan. The Heron, Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying anger, because as Cazkuni noteth, and Solomon Jarchi, it is a furious fowl and soon angry. The Septuagint render it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and Tostatus a Crane, Uatablus a Jay, but all erroneously. The Heron then is hot and furious, and moreover noted to be hotly carried in the lusts thereof, & therefore herein we are forbidden unadvised anger and fury, as Mat. 9. 22. and to follow fleshly lusts. 2 The Heron hath many enemies; the Eagle, that seazeth upon him in the day, the Fox, that taketh him in the night, and the Hawk, that eateth up his Eggs, to all which he is therefore an enemy, hereby then is shown, that the angry and passionate man shall have many enemies, and is by his fury carried to be enemy to many. 3 There is one kind of Heron for the idleness called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , slothful, saith Aristotle, wherefore herein idleness and slothfulness is forbidden, 2 Thes. 3. 10. and there is another kind called Pella, which doth very hardly lay her eggs, the blood even startling out of her eyes, and therefore for the divers kinds of Herons it is said, the Heron after her kind, the Lapwing, Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , so called from the double Comb, it is a filthy bird, delighting in dung, and maketh her nest of man's dung, and therefore herein luxury and worldliness of mind are forbidden, as scraping continually in filthy dunghills: for as she flieth about always with a crying and careful note, so the worldly minded have their minds always distracted and grieved with worldly cares, and as Isidore further noteth, that Sorcerers abuse this birds heart in their enchantments as counting it apt therefore, so the worldly minded are most subject to the devil to be drawn, as his instruments, to any wickedness. The Bat, this bird is well known to keep in the dark, and therefore we are herein forbidden to be children of darkness, which is when we love and live in riot and intemperance, or fleshly lusts, &c. Again, the Bat is like a beast, having a mouth, teeth and members of generation, bringing forth her young alive, and giving suck, as a beast, but it flieth like a Bird, and yet herein differeth from a Bird, that the wings consist not of feathers, but of a skin, and it goeth also upon them: we are here forbidden then to mingle earth and Heaven together, divine Meditations in our prayers and hearing and terrene thoughts, we must then be all as birds flying aloft, and not in part as the beasts creeping upon the ground. If it shall be thought, that there was no need to forbid the eating of the Bat, because no man would eat of it, Strabo saith, that the people of Borsippa, a City in Babylon did use to eat thereof, and as base a creature, as it is, it was by the Heathen dedicated to Proserpina, the infernal goddess, and at this day is adored by the Mexico-Indians, saith Gyraldus. And thus we have seen the fowls forbidden, and their qualities, being twenty, all of them either ravenous, or filthy in their life and food, or ugly in their aspect. The Rabbins give this general rule to those, that know not all the particulars, all such as tread upon their meat, and so eat it, are unclean, as being of a Ravenous kind, and because, after their kind, is four times named, they account the whole number of the fowls forbidden to be 24.

All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination to you. Hereby the Rabbins understand flies, bees, hornets, ants, and the like, as Jonathan explaineth it, for these are unwholesom to be eaten, and of evil nourishment, so Tostatus. Yet here are excepted, as allowed to be eaten, such as have legs and do leap, as the locust, the bald locust, the beetle, and the grasshopper. In saying, which have legs, he useth these words Hebr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which have no legs, and thus Junius therefore rendereth them, expounding it, which have no right legs, as other creatures have, but inverted. But the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is sometime put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , signifying to him, as 2 Sam. 23. 18. 2 Chron. 11. 20. And if it be thus taken, it is, which hath legs, and so it is rendered by the Septuagint and Chaldee. But if it be read, which have no legs, the sense will be good, because then it is either meant, which have no legs, as other things have, because they are turned backward, or which have no legs in their generation; for Pliny writeth of the locust, that he hath no legs at the first, but they grow afterwards; but doubtless the common reading is best, because of that which followeth, to leap withal. Ainsworth embraceth both readings, as being from Moses, the one in the text, and the other in the margin, and so doth Oleaster; but it is not to be thought, that the word in the margin was put there at the first by Moses, but afterwards by others for explication of that in the text, and not for a divers reading. Touching the particulars, which have legs to leap, the first is the locust, Hebr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , so called from their number, and it is rendered by the Septuagint 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as some think, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , because it is shorter, and of a lesser kind. The second is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , so called from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a rock, because it is a locust bred in rocks, so Cazkuni, and agreeably hereunto Aristotle writeth, that there is a certain locust bred in rocky places; the third is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , rendered by the Sept. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a fighter with serpents, and such a kind of locusts also Aristotle writeth, saying, Many have seen the locust fighting with the serpent. And Pliny saith, there be locusts, that kill serpents. Cazkuni expoundeth this word a striver with the feet to leap withal. Junius rendereth it Cantharum, a Beetle. The fourth is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which may be thought to come of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to lift up, because the grasshopper hereby signified lifteth up itself. The Sept. render it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , because it eateth of the tops of growing things, as the word signifieth and all these are called locusts, à locis ustis, from burnt places, because they consume green things, as if they were burnt. So that all these four are divers sorts of locusts, as the Hebrews also teach; wherefore Lyranus, whom Tostatus followeth, is wide in saying, that the three first are all one, being called, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the first name, when it wanteth wings at the first breeding, by the second, when it beginneth to have wings; and by the third, when they are grown to perfection: for against this also maketh that in speaking of each of them, he addeth, after his kind, so that they are not one but several kinds. And because, after his kind, is repeated four times, the Hebrews hold, that there be four more forbidden, which are not named; and these they call, 1 Zipporeth Cramim. 2 Jotbana Jerushalemith. 3 Guartsubia. 4 Razbanith. The locusts of all sorts are but of little nourishment, as Galen writeth, observing, that the birds called Seleucidae in Asia voided them again whole, intimating, that they had but little nourishment from them. And Cardanus saith, that the eating of locusts maketh men lean, short-lived, swart-coloured, and full of lice; and Pliny, that they which eat them live not above 40 years; yet Pliny saith in the same place, that the Ethiopians did some of them use to eat them salted and dried in smoke, and in the Eastern Countries it is known, that they are still used for meat, and particularly the diet of John the Baptist was locusts and wild honey. It was indeed a poor kind of food, and therefore argued great abstinence in that holy man, and it was good sometimes to eat of them to subdue the unruly flesh.

For the mystery of the flying things without legs, and of these legged skippers, the one sort is forbidden, as was said before of the Bat, to show, that we should flee mixing earthly cogitations with heavenly exercises, abusing the Evangelical doctrine set forth in the four Evangelists, pointed at in the four feet upon which they are said to go, v. 23. unto worldly ends. But the other is allowed, to show, that as they are ever skipping up and flying from the earth, so we even when we live amongst wicked men, should skip away as it were, and keep ourselves from being defiled by them, as Christ Jesus, although he ate and drank with Publicans and sinners, yet he was without all sin. And therefore he is said, Cant. 2. to have come skipping upon the mountains, as Hesychius hath it, who also maketh the locusts called fighters with serpents a figure of the fight that we should make always against the old serpent the Devil. There is also another thing in Locusts, they are always changing their places, skipping and flying from one to another, to show, that we should not make account of abiding here any long time, being but as pilgrims and strangers in this world. For other properties of the locusts which be evil, here is no place to speak of them, but rather upon Nahum 3. and Revel. 9, &c. where wicked and miserable people are set forth by them. That of the Hebrews here is most vain, that the Jews were appointed to eat locusts in remembrance of the locusts sent against Egypt, for by the like reason frogs and flies should also have been appointed, because they were sent in like manner.

For these ye shall be unclean, whoso toucheth the carcase of them shall be unclean till the even. Of this uncleanness, see before, v. 8. till the evening, at what time the day ended, according to the account then, and a new day began. Hereby was figured out, that these legal uncleannesses should then have an end, when a new day of the Gospel under Christ should begin, and that in him all pollution of sin should be done away to all his faithful people. Hesychius applieth it to repentance, which when it is, uncleanness is done away.

And whoso beareth ought of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean till the even. Touching is defined by the Rabbins to be with his flesh in any part, or with his nail or tooth being joined to his body, and bearing it, although a stone be between his shoulder and it, when he carrieth it, and it be laid upon him, he touching it not, or if he doth but draw it with a thread or the like: Maimonides. In that he which beareth the unclean thing here is appointed to wash his clothes, as he that toucheth it only is not, it is generally noted, that the bearer was more polluted then the toucher, and that not only the clothes which he did wear were polluted, but also all others being touched by him in this time. The clothes to be washed, were all the clothes then upon him, and this washing, as Exod. 19. figured out repentance, whereby we are cleansed from the pollution of sin.

The same law is made about touching or bearing the carcase of any unclean beast, which is described by not parting the hoof, and not chewing the cud, it being further inserted, Whatsoever goeth upon his paws amongst all manner of heasts, &c. v. 27. The word translated paws, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 his hands, whereupon Vatablus understandeth it of the ape which hath paws like a man's hands, but Solomon Jarchi and others better referreth it also to bears, lions, dogs and cats, there being no other word setting forth their paws, and they indeed have some similitude with hands. Hesychius for the mystery of this propoundeth embracing of the Gospel for lucres sake, as pointed at to be abominable here, because such go as it were upon all four, but it is with their hands, they receive not the Gospel set forth by the four Evangelists, but that they may have a feeling of gain with their hands.

These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep on the earth, the Weasel, the Mouse, and the Tortois after his kind. These words, that creep on the earth, are added, saith Cazkuni, because there are some creeping things in the waters. The weasel in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is so called from his hasty running from place to place, mustela, of mus and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to snatch up, because it snatcheth up mice, and destroyeth them. The weasel, as Hesychius noteth, is very crafty and thievish, and therefore under it theft and subtlety to steal is forbidden. The mouse in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a troubler or corrupter, is so called, because, as all know, the mouse marreth things by gnawing, and is a very troublesome vermin: for eating this, as of Swines flesh, destruction is threatened, Esa. 66. 17. The mouse where he aboundeth eateth up corn in the houses, and undermineth and spoileth it in the fields, for thus the Philistines were plagued with them, 1 Sam. 6. 5. But traps are set for them, and cats and other things are kept and used to destroy them, yet to the belly are they so addicted, that for it they run into all these hazards: under it then is forbidden to be a Belly-god, and so addicted to the things thereof, as not to pass for any danger in ensuing them: thus Hesychius. And because the mouse is idle, and only intendeth filching and stealing, idleness, whereby we may become burthensome to others, is forbidden. The Tortois, Hebrew, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is so called, because 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth a covered coach, as Numb. 7. 3. and the Tortois like unto it carrieth his shell upon him covering him. The Septuagint render it, the land-crocodile; O leaster, the toad, and Pagninus, the frog: but the first is best, as most agreeable to the Word. In forbidding the Tortois, which carrieth his house on his back, which is, as Aristotle saith, as hard as a stone, confidence in worldly things is forbidden, which when the worldling hath, he thinketh himself safe against all dangers, Cursed is he that maketh to himself an arm of flesh.

And the Ferret, and the Chameleon, the Lizzard, the Snail and the Mole. The Ferret in Hebrew, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , hath the name from squeeking and crying. The Septuagint render it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a mouse and weasel; because it is partly like the one, and partly like the other. Junius rendereth it. Attillabus, the Wood-seer; Rab. Solomon, the Badger; Oleaster, the Hedge-hog; Genevens. a Rat. The Ferret, saith Hesychius, as it is like the mouse and weasel, so it hath qualities like them both; it is crafty, as the weasel, and is for filling the belly with the mouse, so that under it is forbidden craft and subtlety by deceit to get gain to spend it upon the belly. Again, the ferret crieth out and squeeketh loud, if it be taken from the prey, or the prey from it, so that herein is forbidden extreme grief, and querulous complaining for worldly losses.

The Chameleon, in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 strength, as Ainsworth, or of the green color, as Willet, but by the Septuagint rendered, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a lion creeping upon the ground; because, as the lion hunteth after the beasts and preyeth upon them, so doth this little beast upon the flies. Junius rendereth it, the Lizzard, but that followeth next. The Chameleon is observed to change his color into all but white and red, he hath a thin and shining body, and therefore receiveth the color of anything that he is near unto: herein then temporizing is forbidden. And because he liveth upon the air, vain-glory, and affecting the aerean praise of men. And because, although he soon changeth his color, yet he is most slow in going, representing shows to the eye, but slow of pace, here is forbidden making shows without performances.

The Lizzard, Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , some will have to be, Stellio, which is spotted on the back, as with stars; but both are meant, as two kinds of the same, for they alike lie hid all winter for the four cold months, eating nothing; and alike in the Spring and fall, put off their old skins: so Aristotle; and they both lay eggs, and live in filthy places, but the Stellio is mostvenomous. In forbidding the Lizzard which keepeth in graves, saith Hesychius, preying upon dead men's goods, is forbidden by supposititious Testaments deceit in Executors, &c. Again, the Stellio is a fair creature to see to, by reason of his stars, but yet is very venomous: herein then is forbidden a fair show by flattery, when poisonous treachery is in the heart.

The Snail, Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , so called from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to hide or cover; because it is hid in the shell by the transposing of one letter. Yet the Septuagint render it, a Lizzard, and Junius a Chameleon. The Snail dieth if the shell be broken, therefore herein is forbidden to cleave so to the world, as the worldling doth, as that if he loseth his worldly goods, his heart dieth, his hope is altogether in this life.

The Mole is set forth by the same name with the Swan, as was said before, verse. 18. where also I have shown the reason of the name. Targum Jonathan rendereth it, Salamander, and Junius, the Dormouse; and indeed the Hebrews confess that they cannot certainly tell, what many of these creeping things, beasts and birds are. The Mole is blind, and is wholly busied in digging under the the ground, and, as some think, eateth the earth, and liveth upon it, as the Chameleon doth of the air, the Salamander of fire, and the Herring of water, according to this Distich.

In forbidding the mole, then it is forbidden to be earthly minded and blind towards heavenly things, and Hesychius noteth, that the mole is bred of the earth, and they show their breeding that are so earthly. But some write of the mole, that he beginneth to see a little before his death; a right Emblem of the state of worldlings, seeing and trembling at the judgment now ready to cease upon them at the last day, which they never had any perceivance or thinking of before.

These shall be unclean to you among creeping things, all that touch them being dead shall be unclean. The Rabbins, because bearing of these is not spoken of but touching only, hold, that bearing of them defiled not, and that the touching of them being alive, defiled not, but dead. But the last of these is false, saith Tostatus, because, Levite. 22. 5. the touching of a creeping thing defileth. And because for the touch of them only clothes must be washed, as it followeth, v. 32, 33. as was not enjoined touching the unclean things before-named, but only in case of carrying them, it may well be gathered, if touching of these did more defile then bearing of them, yet much more, and therefore it is most probable, that this is not spoken of here, but left to be understood from the former decree. In this last I will not contradict, but I marvel that Tostatus should oppose the Rabbin in the former, seeing it is so plainly expressed in the text, being dead, and therefore that Levite. 22. 5. is to be expounded by this.

And upon whatsoever any of them being dead doth fall, it shall be unclean, &c. By any of them, The Rabbins understand any of their flesh or bones, hoofs or sinews joined unto their flesh, for if they be severed, they defile not being touched, as the bones, hoofs and horns of other unclean beasts being separated after their death do not. In that the falling hereof upon anything defileth: Hesychius noteth involuntary sins to be figured out hereby, as the voluntary by touching before spoken of, so that any sin defileth, whether voluntarily committed, or against our wills. The particulars said to be defiled, verse. 32, 33. are rckoned five vessels, of wood, raiment, skins, sacks, and earthen vessels, and whatsoever vessel else a man useth to work withal, or in it, that is any tool or vessel for his service. The Rabbins number besides these five only two more, the one, vessels made of metals, Numb. 31. 21, 22. and the other of horns, or bones, or hoofs of beasts, Numb. 31. 20. all the work of goats, for hereby they say, that they have learned by tradition that the bones and horns, &c. of goats are to be understood, & consequently of other beasts, and vessels made thereof. And by vessels made of wood they understand also such as are made of barks, shells, or bul-rushes, reed or wicker, because these grow out of the earth like wood. So Maimonides, and if we add glasses also, and vessels made of stone, brick, and mortar, which come out of the earth, I think none are omitted according to this general rule, Whatsoever vessel it be, wherein any work is done. But in distinguishing between such of these, as are defiled or not defiled, they are over-curious. Things made for the use of man only, as ladders, are not, say they, defiled; but those that are for the service of men and vessels to sit upon are. Again, they which serve only for instruments to hold other things for the use of man, if they contain them but for a time, as the candlestick, they are not defiled, but if continually, as the scabbard, or sheath, they are, but these and others like unto them which they have, are curiosities, and distinctions without a ground, yea contrary to the ground laid here, for all vessels without exception are by dead creeping things defiled. But that rule of theirs is good, that although vessels be defiled by unclean things, yet nothing living is defiled hereby, but only man, neither doth any living thing defile, but man only, when he is unclean by any means. Now of the first sort of vessels here spoken of, it is appointed, that if any of them be made unclean thus, it must be put in the water, that is, according to the Hebrew Canons, dipt all over in the water, & so must a man being unclean, and nothing must be between it and the water, for if there be any pitch or clay, &c. cleaving on, it is unclean still, and it shall be unclean till the even, for being washed it must stay the time, viz. till the even, before it be perfectly cleansed. Of uncleannesses the Hebrews make these degrees. 1 The highest before washing. 2 The second from thence, till the even. 3 The third, if before the even he toucheth any holy offering, for that is hereby made unclean. 4 The fourth if he touch holy meats or drinks, for they are thus defiled, but not common meats or drinks. Lyranus thinketh, that only the water of the red cow was now to be sprinkled upon it to cleanse it; and Tostatus, that it was both dipped and sprinkled, but the one cometh short of the truth, and the other exceedeth it, for no sprinkling is here spoken of, and Numb. 19. that holy water is appointed to be sprinkled only in case of uncleanness, that lasted seven days, as none of the uncleannesses here named did, but till even only of the same day.

Touching earthen vessels, If any of them falleth into the midst thereof, for Hebr. it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , All that is in the midst thereof shall be unclean, and it shall be broken. So earthen vessels were appointed to be broken before, Chap 6. 28. Here the Rabbins distinguish between this kind of vessel, and others of stone made out of the earth also, calling this a vessel of pot-bakers earth, and yet they say, that a vessel of glass cannot be cleansed, but by breaking also. But it is to be noted, that an unclean thing touching it on the outside doth not make it unclean; but being in it, if it be but an unclean air that cometh into it, it is unclean, as may be gathered, Numb. 19. 15. because in a ten where a man dieth, all things in the tent are made unclean, but a vessel that is covered. Hereupon they observe that the air polluteth the vessel, and breaking cleanseth it, and if a man will break a vessel of wood, &c. it is cleansed also, although it be not so appointed. But when we note that an earthen vessel is not polluted, but by something falling into it, and not touching it without, it is meant only in the case here put, in other cases, as of a man that hath an issue touching it, it is unclean, Levite. 15. 12.

For the mystery of these things Hesychius speaketh excellently. By the vessel or cloth, wherein any work is done, is set forth a faithful person, who is exercised in the works of virtue, by the dead vermin falling upon it, sin, that bringeth death, which such attract not to themselves, but through infirmity fall into, such must be put into the water of repentance, as is the daily practice of the faithful, and so they shall be clean again, but the earthly and sensual, like unto the earthen vessels, entertaining sin into their middle part within, that is the heart, must be given over to Satan, as 2 Cor. 5. for their contrition in the flesh, that their spirit may be saved. Or rather such shall be utterly destroyed at the last day. Ainsworth referreth it to the utter abolishing of sin in us in death, when we are broken thereby, for we are as earthen vessels, 2 Cor. 4. 7. and their breaking setteth forth man's death, Jer. 19. 11. and Chap 48. 38. but I prefer the former, because of the distinction made amongst men, as here amongst vessels.

Of all meat that may be eaten, that on which such water cometh, shall •• unclean. Here because such water is not expressed in the text, but only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 water, a question ariseth, whether this be to be understood of all water, or [Quest.] of water contained in the vessel made unclean by the falling of any dead vermin into it? But it is easily answered, that only the water contained in these unclean vessels is meant, or in any place, into which they chance to fall, except in pits and ponds, where there is plenty of water, as is excepted, v. 36. for it is immediately added, likewise all drink, that may be drunk in every vessel shall be unclean, which it were absurd to expound of any other vessels, but only of such as were polluted by these dead things, and therefore as absurd is it to expound this touching water of all water. Moreover, ponds and wells of water are expressly said to be clean, and therefore could not pollute anything. Thus also Augustine, The water is meant, which came out of vessels made unclean by unclean dead things, and Tostatus and Junius, &c. yet the Rabbins expound it of all waters, for nothing that is man's meat, saith Solomon Jarchi, is unclean, till water cometh upon it, but after water is come upon it, it receiveth uncleanness forever. And Maimonides enlarging it, saith, It is not made unclean, till it receiveth one of the seven liquors, water, dew, wine, oil, milk, blood or honey. Neither do they wrest this Law only herein, but in divers other of their canons, as 1 That no liquor coming from fruits can be made unclean at all contrary to verse. 32. and to this verse, nor any meat, upon which water hath not been put, because, till water be upon it, it is not apt to receive uncleanness, for anything in an unclean vessel without exception is unclean. 2 Such things, as are used for sauce with meat are not by any water made unclean, against this text, wherein no meat is excepted. 3 The meat here meant is holy flesh, and not any other. 4 The Priests only were tied by this Law, and not the people, contrary to Levite. 5. 2. 5 The touching of their carcases is not defiling to the people, but at the time of solemn feasts only, for the Law tieth to all times. So that we may see, they began betimes to corrupt the Laws of God by their traditions through a desire of more liberty, then they gave them. But in their Expositions hereupon this may be received, that things living and herbs growing are not to be counted amongst those that are made unclean, because they cannot yet be properly said to be meat, and this also, that liquors and meats corrupted are not made unclean by such means, because they were vile and unfit for meat before. Mystically by the meat and drink made unclean here spoken of by the uncleanness of the vessel, becoming such by a dead thing falling into it, saith Hesychius, we are to understand virtuous actions, in which to be conversant it is meat and drink to the faithful, but they are made unclean by pride, vain-glory, or other sinister affections falling upon them, when they are done, or in the doing, although they were not hereby set awork at the first to do them, as hypocrites are.

And everything, whereupon any part of their carcase falleth shall be unclean, whether ovens or ranges, &c. Ovens were for the baking of bread, and the ranges for pots, for flesh to be baked or boiled in, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is rendered by Solomon Jarchi and Cazkuni, pots, or by others bake-pans, and Jarchi saith, that both the Ovens and pots were moveable instruments made of potters earth, the Septuagint render it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , pots with feet. And meat or bread was made unclean by dead vermin, so were the things, wherein they were baked and prepared, and these being of the same substance with other earthen vessels must, as they, in this case be broken down.

Nevertheless a pit, or fountain, wherein there is plenty of water shall be clean, but that which toucheth their carcase, shall be unclean. Here is an exception made of such things as shall not be counted unclean by the falling of dead vermin into them, a cistern or any vessel holding water shall be polluted, and the water in it together, but not a pit or Fountain, but only so much of the water therein, as toucheth the carcase: under pit and Fountain ponds also and all other places of water upon the earth, wherein there was much, are to be understood. The Lord would not have these counted unclean. Because all other things must be cleansed with these waters. 2 Because there was necessary use of them every day, although waters in vessels might be emptied out, and they might again be supplied from fountains, &c. yet they could neither be so easily emptied, nor supplied. 3 Because the corruption coming from a carcase in a place of much water is dispersed and vanisheth, yet the carcase must be taken out, and some water about it cast out, that the Fountain might be clean. Hesychius inquiring into the reason, why vessels with water should be unclean and pots and Ovens, but not the collection of waters, resolveth that mystically hereby is set forth, that particular Doctors in the Church, who are as vessels of water, which they afford unto the people, and as Ovens and pots to bake and to prepare the spiritual food, if they fall into any gross sin, are corrupted so hereby, as that they shall be destroyed, according to that, Rom. 2. 22. but yet the Doctrine taught generally in the Church of God set forth by the collection of waters is not the worse to be esteemed of, but only that which toucheth the carcase, that is, the Doctrine of an evil life in any, for after their works thou must not do, Mat. 23. 1.

If it falleth upon any sowing seed, it shall be clean, but if water be upon the seed, &c. it shall be unclean. Solomon Jarchy by seed understandeth that, which is rooted in the ground, and Maimonides expoundeth the water coming upon seed, of water voluntarily put on by the owner, it being thus prepared for food, and if it be wetted against his will, or through necessity, as to hide it in water from thieves, it is not unclean. But these are Rabbinical inventions, the true reason is, seed that is dry is not so apt to take pollution, as seed being wetted whether voluntarily or by rain falling upon it, and it is not meant of corn for meat, but to be sown, as is plain in the text, and not sown already and rooted, as Solomon Jarchi. But herein, saith Hesychius was a mystery, it shown, that sin fallen into after wetting by Baptism polluteth him that was cleansed, but not him who is indeed towards Baptism, but not yet sufficiently instructed, his ignorance yet in some sort excuseth him, but after that one is better instructed and Baptized to fall into foul sin, is more heinous, and to be made unclean again after the partaking of so great a grace of being cleansed in Baptism.

If any beast, whereof ye may eat, dieth, he that toucheth his carcase shall be unclean till the even. Here as the carcase of an unclean beast, so of the clean, when it dieth alone, is determined by polluting, but as Solomon Jarchi noteth upon both, only the carcase maketh unclean, not the bones, horns or hoofs. And the like is to be held of a beast torn or killed for killing of man or woman, Exod. 22. 31.

He that eateth of it, shall wash his clothes, &c. Unto the first here are added two ways more of becoming unclean by dead carcases- 1 By eating thereof. 2 By bearing them, and these were somewhat greater then the first, because such must wash their clothes, as the other was not commanded to do. And by eating here must be understood eating ignorantly or through necessity, for otherwise not only legal uncleanness was contracted, which was without sin, ag ainst the soul, but uncleanness through transgressing of God's command to the destruction of the soul, as being a presumptuous sinning. If a clean beast be killed, it is every whit clean, but the unclean being killed or dying alone is a like unclean and of the clean beast dying alone the fat is clean and may be used, but not eaten, Levite. 7. 24.

Every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, shall not be eaten, it shall be an abomination. From henceforth to verse. 46. is a Law against eating all creeping things, so that not only the eight forbidden, verse. 29. but all others also must be abhorred, those defile by eating or touching, these by eating only, and these are described to be such as go upon the belly, as Serpents, Gen. 3. 14. or upon all four, as the Scorpion, Neut or Toade, or which hath many feet, as the Nadal, so Solomon Jarchi, and this last we call, Centipoda, in English the Cancer.

Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth. In the former verses it was said, that creepeth upon the earth, but here earth is left out, wherefore all creeping things also in the waters are meant: so Maimonides, and to this agreeth the enumeration made, v. 46.

For I am the Lord your God, you shall therefore sanctify yourselves that ye may be holy, for I am holy, &c. Here is the end set down, why all these laws must be kept, that they might be preserved holy and undefiled in all things, as the people of an holy God: and it is here added, That ye defile not yourselves with any manner of creeping thing. For, yourselves, Hebrew is, your souls; but soul is put sometime for the body, as Numb. 9. 7, 10. and sometime for the whole man, as Chap. 5. 1. and so here their bodies are meant, for they properly were defiled by these things, but if willingly they transgressed herein, their souls also were defiled by sin, or if being defiled, they neglected washing. But the thorough sanctification of God's people in soul, spirit and body was h erein respected; it being his will, that from corporal uncleannesses those of the soul by touching sin bearing about, or feeding upon sin, should be looked at and avoided, of which these things were but shadows for a time, and now the time of teaching by shadows and figures being past, there is no further use of these laws for the ordering of the outward man, but of the inward only. And into this did some of the Rabbins see, and write of it, as Rab. Menahem, who saith, the these things are figures of heavenly things; by unclean beasts, heathen people are meant; and by forbidding to eat or to touch them, making marriages with such is forbidden, and the washing from these uncleannesses with water, setteth forth God's washing of us with the water abov e, which is the water of mercy. And Maimonides upon these words; thus the keeping of the body clean bringeth one to the cleanness of the soul, and the cleanness of the soul to be like unto God, as it is said, Be ye holy, for I am holy.

This is the law of every creeping thing that moveth in the waters or creepeth. Here besides creeping, moving is spoken of; because, as the Rabbins observe, creeping things are bred by generation of male and female; but besides these there are worms and maggots, &c. coming of corruption, which are the moving things also to be abhorred. But here they are over-nice in distinguishing between worms in fruit, they being eaten in the fruit defile not, but being separated, and yet if they were bred in the fruit before the gathering, they defile, but not if they were bred after, &c. but who taught them these things? Moreover, they add, that the milk and the eggs of unclean beasts, fowls or fishes may not be eaten, yet honey of Bees or hornets is lawful, and a woman's milk, although her flesh may not be eaten.

CHAP. XII.

IF a woman hath conceived seed and born a man-child, she shall be unclean seven days, &c. The Lord having hitherto determined outward uncleannesses by the means of things without, here beginneth to set down laws touching uncleannesses coming from within, and as in the Creation, beasts, fowls, and creeping things were first made, and then man; so first the uncleanness of beasts, &c. is set forth, and then the uncleanness of men and women, as Solomon Jarchi noteth, If a woman hath conceived seed, Hebrew, seeded seed: Ibn-Ezra, Yielded seed unto conception, because there is a concourse of the woman's seed unto conception, as well as of the man's, and Rab. Menahem observeth hence, that if the woman yieldeth seed first, a male is brought forth; if the man, a female; but not such thing can be gathered hence, because of her seeding here spoken of a female may come as well as a male, v. 5. Touching the child brought forth, the Hebrews hold, that if 40 days after the conception be once past, although it be brought forth before the time and dead, this law holdeth, but not for any miscarrying before the 40 days expired. According to the days of her separation for her infirmity she shall be unclean. Of this separation see Chap. 15. 19, 20. it was for seven days, and in that time everything that she touched was unclean, as it is meant it should be now, yea the Hebrew Canons say, although no blood appeared, as in the time of her menstruous disease.

After these seven days, viz. upon the eighth, the child must be circumcised, And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying 33 days, shall touch no hallowed things, &c. Of circumcising the flesh of the fore-skin upon the eighth day enough hath been said, Gen. 17. 11. But for the reason of the woman's continuing in her uncleanness now 33 days more, and if she had a Female, 14 and 66. it is hard to determine, what that may be. Some yield a natural reason, because the male is forty days a forming in the womb, or as Augustine hath it 45. Six days it is like milk, in nine 'tis turned to blood, twelve, more do make it flesh, eighteen bring fashion good. But this reason cannot stand, because here only 40 days are spoken of, and distinguished by 7 and 33; these are 45: and for the female, which they say, is twice as long in forming, there is the like reason against that also, because then the time should not be 80 but 90 days. Tostatus will have it to be merely Ceremonial without any reason. But Hesychius and others better, after the bringing forth of a male, she must continue 40 days in purifying, to figure out our great humiliation for our sins, in which we come into the world, and which we daily multiply and increase. For the woman's uncleanness at this time did doubtless set forth original sin and pollution, wherein everyone is born, as Rom. 5. 12. which maketh us unworthy of God, but by Christ, who fasted 40 days for us, and was separated in the desert, pointed at herein, we are cleansed, but on our parts great humiliation & penitency is required, like that of the Ninevites 40 days, and of Moses 40 days fasting, and Elias likewise. And Rab. Menahem hereupon saith, there is a mystery in this matter, respect being had unto the serpents deceiving of the woman, Gen. 3. and circumcising of the child was appointed for the like signification, and the offering by the woman to be brought. Whereas the time upon bringing forth of a female is doubled, this was upon a natural reason; because more pollutions accompany this birth then the other, and be longer in purging; and if she had both male and female together, the Hebrews say, that she must be purifying 80 days. And we may add further out of Hesychius the time was doubled for a female, because of her double sin, at the first in eating, and then tempting: or that the female is twice as long in forming in the womb as the male, with which times a proportion is here held in both, to show, that we cannot enter into the heavenly Sanctuary, till we be regenerate as the woman could not come into the Sanctuary here till so much time expired, as in the forming of the child in her womb. Or lastly, it may be said, the males circumcising was a cause of cutting off the time for time. Now for the distinction of these days into 7 and 33, and 14 and 66, it is to be understood, that during the first times nominated she was unclean, so as that her husband might not company with her, and all things that she touched were polluted by her, as in the time of her menstruous disease spoken of, Chap. 15. 20. and if her husband did in that time company with her to lie with her, he was guilty of cutting off, but after 7 days expired by her that brought forth a male-child, and 14 by her that brought forth a female, she was clean to all civil actions; only, as it is here said, she might not, during this time, touch any of the hallowed things of the Lord: so Maimonides. In these days last mentioned then, she was in her purifying, and not in her uncleanness, as before. Calvin thinketh that longer time was set to her that had a female then for a male, because the male was circumcised the eighth day. but the best reason of this hath been already given out of Junius and others.

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb, &c. This, the Rabbins observe, must be done not upon the 40 or 80 day, but the day after; and if any deferred longer, they were not counted clean to come into the Sanctuary, till this were done. But why must sacrifices be brought now to be offered for her self, or for her child for the purging of her bodily uncleanness, or for her sins? Some, because it is said, For a son or a daughter, answer, that this oblation was brought for the child, as Augustine, Rupertus, Hugo, &c. Some, for both the mother and the child, because in the Syriac Interpretation it is said, When the days of their purifying were accomplished, Luc. 2. Some, for the man and the woman, whose the child was upon the same ground, as Theophilact; some, for them and their child also, as Euthymia. But the words, For a son or daughter, imply nothing else, but that the purifying of the mother was by reason of the uncleanness upon her by bringing forth her child, as will be plain to any that shall look into the Text; and therefore to show for whom this offering was made, v. 7. it is added. And the Priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. As for the child, the circumcising was a purifying to it, and the offering, if it were the first-born, five shekels. And for the other opinions there is no ground at all in the Text, Luk. 2. because it is not there said, for whom that offering was made; wherefore it was doubtless for the mother only. Again, some hold, that this offering was broug ht for her sins in general, as Tostatus, Junius and Cajetan: some, for her sin in the Matrimoniall act, as Lyranus: some, for her impatience in her travel, as some Rabbins: and some, for her legal uncleanness by child-bearing, as Oleaster, Burgensis, &c. I, as Willet, subscribe to Junius, the offering was brought, as to cleanse from the effect, that issue and impurity hereby, so from sin, the cause thereof, and the thing signified by it, because in all oblations a respect was to be had to original corruption, the fountain of [Note.] all uncleanness. And thus God would have the woman, by whom sin entered, specially confirmed touching being received to grace by Christ, when there was thus atonement made for her by the blood of Christ, set forth by the blood of the lamb. Now besides the offering brought by a woman in this case, there were three more, in which offerings must also be brought, if a woman had an issue, or if a man had an issue, and if any were a leper, and these were the uncleannesses from within, touching uncleannesses from without, and the offerings to be brought therefore, see Chap. 5. 2, 3, &c.

Touching the lamb for a burnt-offering here appointed, and a young pigeon for a sin-offering or a Turtle Dove, and how they were offered, see before, Chap. 1 and Chap. 5, 6.

And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtle Deves, or two young Pigeons, &c. Thus it is also provided before in other cases, Chap. 5. 7. For the practice of this we have the example of the blessed Virgin Mary, Luc. 2. 24. whereby his poverty appeared: so Beda, Haimo, Origen, Lyranus, and all the Ancients. Yet Tostatus and some others labor to confute this, saying, that she could not be so poor considering the presents of gold, &c. offered to the child by the wise men, Matth. 2. and if she had been so poor, she could not have paid the Redemption-money for her first-born, being five shekels. To this I will not say with Bonaventure, that the holy babe turned away his face, and refused those gifts; or with Maldonatus, that they were spent upon the poor or upon the Sanctuary; but rather with Calvin, that it was no great quantity, but a little for honors sake, which the wise men brought, so that having five shekels to pay for the childes redemption, and other charges both there and in their travel down into Egypt, that must necessarily be defrayed, they were not so enriched hereby, as to bring the offering of the rich, seeing the Lord did not require that a poor body, who had but a little, should lay out all upon his offerings. Whereas the Virgin Mary at the time of her offering did more then is here appointed, viz. presented the child, as being her first-born, Luk. 2. 22, 23. It is to be understood, although it be not here expressed, that the first-born ought to be redeemed, being a month old, Numb. 18. 16. and therefore not being done at the end of a month, it was done now at the end of 40 days, and this was usually permitted so to be for the ease of the woman, that she might not be forced to send before about it, and then come after herself at another time to make her offering, but these times being so near the one to the other, both might be done together, it being also most necessary for the mother to come with the child, which she could not do till the time of her purification ended, because till then might not enter into the Sanctuary, v. 4.

Thus it was under the Mosaical law, for their uncleanness after child-bearing women were debarred from entering into the Sanctuary, but now they are not debarred a month after for any uncleanness: for, as Gregory saith, if the woman should come into the Church the same hour that she bringeth forth, she is not pressed with any burden of sin, because the superfluity of nature now upon her is only a punishment for sin, and cannot be counted a sin, and if the woman having the bloody issue might come to Christ and touch his garment, why may not one in her flowers come to his Church? Wherefore, it is for other reasons, that this order is appointed in Christian Churches, and not grounding upon this law of Ceremonies, which is abolished in Christ, although the Christians in Ethiopia seem to ground it upon this law, for they say, Pro ancilla tua quaesumus, quae servavit constitutionem tuam, nor is it appointed in imitation of the blessed Virgin Mary, as in the Church of Rome, for she was then bound by that law. But first, for the safety of the woman, who might otherwise be endangered by coming abroad too soon. Secondly, because modesty requireth, that she should not immediately accompany with her husband again after her deliverance. Thirdly, because piety requireth, that before her returning to her old course of bedding with her husband, she should thankfully acknowledge the benefit already received in the Congregation.

CHAP. XIII.

ANd the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, saying, When a man shall have in the skin of his flesh a rising, scab, or bright spot, and it be like the plague of leprosy, he shall be brought to Aaron, &c. The plague of leprosy, saith Lucretius, is bred in the midst of Egypt, and nowhere else, so that it seemeth to have taken the beginning there by reason of the corruption of the air through muddy vapors coming from the river Nile. And from hence it is likely, that the Hebrews brought this disease with them. Appion, Manethon and some others report, that they were a leprous and loathsome people cast out by the Egyptians, and so Moses became a captain unto them leading them into the land of Canaan. But this appeareth to be most false, because it is a common disease in Egypt, and as Josephus saith, if it had been so, Moses would never have made such a law to the ignominy of the leprous. The leprosy, saith Bodin, and Methodins, is so common also in Mauritania, and among the Abissens, and in other hot countries, that they converse with others, and are not separated. The Physicians say, that the leprosy is a canker of the whole body, as they call the canker in any member the leprosy thereof, it eateth as a canker to the very bones and the marrow, and maketh him that hath it most loathsome. In Hebrew it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as Willet thinketh, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 evil, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to shut up, but Ainsworth rendereth it a fretting sorenesse or infectious scabbednesse; to the first, the word Segiruth in Chaldee, signifying shutting up, giveth some light, and to the other Grab, the Syriac word signifying scabbednesse. The Septuagint render it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , from scales, because it is like white scales upon the body, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because of the ruggednesse and spots like those of the Elephant, white and black. In speaking of the leprosy. 1 That upon man or woman is handled. 2 Upon garments in this Chapter. 3 In an house, Chap. 14. 34. Of the leprosies upon man there are three sorts set forth in this verse. 1 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a swelling or rising. 2 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a scab. 3 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a bright spot, the last of which the Rabbins reckon first, describing it to be such a bright whiteness appearing in the skin, as that there is nothing brighter, even as the snow; then the first, likening it unto the white wool of a lamb being but a day old. Lastly, the second, likening it to the plaster of a wall upon an house growing from the bright whiteness. And unto these they add a fourth, which is like unto the filme of an egg: so Maimonides; and this scab he therefore distinguisheth into two, because sometime there is such a scab next unto the bright spot, and sometime next unto the swelling or rising, as an adjunct thereof. Like the plague of leprosy, it is thus spoken of, because not yet judged of. Here because it is said, in the skin of his flesh, the Rabbins teach, that the places within the ear, the eye, the nostril or the mouth, the wrinkles of the neck, belly and breast, beneath the arm-holes also, and soles of the feet, the nails, head and bread being hairy, are not defiled with the bright spot, because they are not in the open skin, but herein they are over-curious and forgetful, because, verse 29. the leprosy upon the head or bread is spoken of. They note also, that if the whiteness be not at least as much as that of the filme of an egg, it is no leprosy, but a speckled spot or Morphew.

The uncleanness of the leprosy is the third set forth in this book, the first was by touching unclean things, the second in a woman having brought forth, and the third the leprosy upon man or woman. The uncleanness of the body by the leprosy of divers sorts figured out the uncleanness of the soul by divers sorts of sins, for which God plagued men; for Miriam was thus plagued for sin, and Gehazi, and King Uzziah, Numb. 12 2 King. 5. 2 King. • 5. So all Expositors generally, but Brenz standeth for corrupt doctrine to be set forth hereby, because that is likened to the Canker, 2 Tim 2. which is a kind of leprosy, and this may be admitted also, as being a soul sin in whomsoever. He also saith, that there was a reason, according to the letter, why these laws touching the leprosy are so copiously and exactly set down, viz. both to meet with cavillers that the Lord knew would arise to obscure the glory of his miraculous gests in bringing the Israelites out of Egypt, as Apion, &c. For if all this people had been now leprous, there should never have been such laws made about separating such, and also to intimate his care of the health and welfare of their bodies, that in the time of sicknesses and infections we may call upon him, and health and sanity being restored, we may render him the praise. To judge of the leprosy the Priest is appointed, and afterwards to offer for the leper being cleansed, to show that Christ our true Priest should take care for the cleaning of our souls from all our sins, and the expiating of them forever. The reasons why the Priest must be Judge herein, and not Moses the Magistrate, or the Physician, were 1 Because the Priest properly was to judge, who might be admitted into the Sanctuary, or be kept out. 2 Because the rites and ceremonies for the cleansing of lepers were to be performed by the Priest. 3 Because he had the power of shutting up, or opening the door to the party in question, so Tostatus. Lastly, the Priest must judge, in a mystery to show that the judgment of sin set forth by the leprosy belongeth to the Priest, and because Aaron and his sons, who were the chief, only are appointed to judge of it, that men's sins are to be brought to the judgment of the chief, who have the power of excommunicating, that as the leprous for fear of infecting others were put out of the camp, so they, lest others being led by their example, should grow bold to live in the same foul sins, might by excommunication be cast out of the Congregation. The Papals hence infer the necessity of confessing all sins once a year to the Priest, and his power to bind or loose, to retain or to forgive them, and the infallibility of the Popes judgment, because as the Priest judged, so it should be, and if so, then his judgment must needs be always sound and right.

But, as Calvin well noteth, we may rather gather hence, that secret sins are not to be shown to the Priest, but only he is to judge of, and to centure those that break openly out, as the Priest judged only of the leprosy appearing in the skin. And what have I to do with men, saith Augustine, that they should hear my confessions, as though they could heal my desenses? Again, for judging, and binding, or loosing, the Priest might in his judgment have erred, if he had not gone by the directions set him down in everything, and he was but God's instrument going according to these, to shut up or to set at liberty. Foul sins indeed, whereby men have broken out, are to be confessed openly, as the people were with John the Baptist confessing their sins, and secret sins troubling the conscience privately to some faithful Minister of God's word, but not otherwise. And when foul sins break out in any, they must be brought forth that they be considered of and censured, lest others hereby be corrupted also, neither must any partiality be used. For, as Ambrose hath, It is an unprofitable pity in a Physician, if because of the pain in burning or incision he suffereth all the body to languish, wherefore the Priest must, as a good Physician cut off the wound, that it creep not further upon the whole body of the Church, and not cherish it, lest whilst he refraineth from excluding one, he make many worthy to be excluded. It is an observation of the Hebrews, that although it be said, The Priest shall make him unclean, or make him clean, for so the Hebrew words here by & by following rendered, shall pronounce him unclean, or shall pronounce him clean, do signify: yet the power in the Priest was not so to do, but only to pronounce this or that, and if he pronounced any unclean that was clean, or clean that was unclean, he did nothing, because it is said, He is unclean, and the Priest shall make him unclean, &c. which maketh against that arrogated power, to bind and loose in the Romish Church.

This sending of the leprous to the Priest, and not to the Physician, shown [Note.] that in time of sickness, God should be first sought unto by the acknowledgement and bewailing of sin the cause thereof, and his Priest that he may pray for the sick.

And the Priest shall look on the plaegue in the skin of the flesh, and when the hair of the flesh is turned white, and the plague is deeper then the skin, &c. Here the Lord beginneth to show by what signs the Priest may know, whether it be the plague of leprosy. But here the Rabbins put in, A Priest may not look upon this plague to judge of it, until he hath been taught by the masters, and knoweth perfectly all these things, and the signs and names thereof.

Otherwise he shall not go upon his own judgment, but some wise man seeing and telling him, the person is unclean or clean, or to be shut up, he shall pronounce accordingly, and then it shall be so, but not otherwise, and thus the Priest may judge, although he be a fool, and understandeth nothing of himself, so Maimonides.

Touching the hair in the sore, they say also that they must be two hairs at the least, and white at the root, and made such by the sore, for if they were white before through old age, their whiteness was no sign. And whiteness in these hairs, saith Cazkuni, was a sign of the leprosy, because they shown a decay of natural strength in the flesh through the force of this evil, as white hairs commonly argue a decay of nature in the aged: deeper then the skin this plague is said to be, because the nature of it is to fret and eat into the flesh and to consume it, for which cause Naaman being cured hereof, his flesh is said to have come again, as the flesh of a young child, see also Numb. 12. 12.

For the mystery, Hesychius saith, that the leprosy in one part signified sin against any one Commandment, for although a man faileth but in one point of the Law, he is guilty of all, and is so defiled, that he shall be shut out of the heavenly Sanctuary. The hairs, which are made signs, set forth the cogitations of the mind, for as hair adorneth the head, so good cogitations adorn the mind; and as the Priest judged by the hairs in the midst of the leprosy, so God will judge men by the cogitations of their hearts, and if they be weak unto good, as hairs turned white argue weakness, and be lower and baser then the hearts of other Christians, set forth by the sore appearing lower then the skin, they are unclean and shall be judged so, and excluded. Not that God expecteth, that all should be as excellent one as another, but as those of their quality and condition, and by the thoughts of the heart God will judge, because he seeth not as man seeth, but looketh to the heart.

Agreeable to this is that of Ainsworth, The hairs turned white signified the decay of spiritual strength and grace in the soul by the power of sin reigning therein, Hos. 7. 9. Ezech. 16. 30 Rom. 7. 5, 9, 13. and the sore lower then the skin did set forth the fretting nature of sin, eating into and consuming the soul, as it is said of heresy, 2 Tim. 2. 17. All such are unclean and filthy before God.

But if the white spot be bright in the skin, and be not deeper, and the hair be not turned, the Priest shall shut him up seven days, &c. In Hebrew it is, he shall shut up the plague seven days, by plague the man infected with the plague being meant, so uncircumcision is put for the uncircumcised, Rom. 2. 26. wickedness for the wicked, Prov. 13. 6, &c. Here God showeth both, that he would have good deliberation used in censuring of a sinner, and that nothing be judged before the time, when God will reveal all sins, because, as some men's sins go before, so in some they follow after. So Ainsworth: and also that a man may be by a natural passion carried away to sin, and yet his heart remain unaltered in the spiritual thoughts, and in the height thereof, for that it may still be set upon things above. In this case much discretion must be used, he must indeed be shut up for seven days, that is, be cast out for his greater humiliation a certain time, but afterwards being found penitent, he must with much commiseration be restored to the Church again, as Saint Paul dealt with the incestuous person, 1 Cor. 5. and 2 Cor. 2. 6. 7. and this is intimated.

If it be dark in appearance, and spread no further, it is a scab, he shall therefore wash his clothes and be clean. But if any man being censured for his sin is restored again, and falleth into sin afterwards, becoming the more remiss for this gentle correction, he shall be reviewed and condemned then as unclean, verse. 7. 8. thus Hesychius, who hereupon exhorteth delinquents patiently to bear the censures of the Church, because it will end in the greater consolation, after a little time of suffering; but let such as have fallen, and have been thus dealt withal, not wax from thenceforth secure, for if so, he shall come to a second censuring, and then his state will be most dangerous. And as for the time of seven days, he saith, by seven this life's time is set forth▪ after which judging of all men shall be, the clean being pronounced clean, and the unclean unclean, and so cast out: but the natural reason of seven days here set for the time of judging is, because, as Physicians observe, the seventh day is the critical day for all diseases to judge 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And that this touching the leprosy must needs have a mystical sense he showeth, because when a man is in misery, as the leproud person is, it were injustice to debar him from the comfort or the Sanctuary, if none other respect were had herein but to the bodily malady, seeing this was but a punishment laid upon him, which he could by no means avoid. And again, it is against sense, which followeth, verse. 12, 13. that he, who is all over leprous, should be pronounced clean, but contariwise he that is leprous in some part of his body, wherefore there must needs be a mystery herein.

Hitherto two signs of the leprosy have been given, verse 5, 6, 7, 8. there is a third, viz. the spreading of the sore after seven days, for if the party having been shut up seven days, it looketh somewhat dark and spreadeth not, he must be shut up seven days more, and then if it spreadeth not, he is to be pronounced clean, but if it spreadeth, unclean, it is the leprosy. The Priest, that must look upon it, saith Maimonides, at the end of seven days, must be the same, that looked upon it and shut him up at the first, and not another, although he be sick or dead, because another cannot tell, whether it be increased. Again, if the seventh day falleth out upon a festival, or the Sabbath, he must not look upon it them, but the day following, Lastly, the person shut up must do nothing to his sore place by cutting or searing to alter the apearance of it, which last standeth with good reason, but the two former are additions of the Rabbins, for if that Priest be dead, then another must needs judge, although he tarry seven days more, after his first inspection. Maimonides also expoundeth this, If the plague be somewhat dark, in comparison of the whitenesses before described, verse. 2. For the spreading of the sore, he saith also, that if it be a freckled spot that spreadeth, it is no leprosy, as verse. • 9. and that the spreading of the sore after the first seven days did not make him unclean, but after the second only: whereas he that is pronounced clean, must yet wash his clothes; Ainsworth noteth, that even the righteous have their sins, and therefore have need daily to wash them by repentance, Prov. 20. 9. 1 Joh. 1. 8, 9. Here another case is put if the hair be turned white, and there be quick raw flesh, without the delay of shutting up seven days, he shall immediately be pronounced unclean, it is an old leprosy, but if the leprosy be spread all over his body, he shall be pronounced clean. but only in case that raw flesh appeareth. By quick flesh here the Rabbins understand sou nd flesh in the midst of the sore, such as the flesh is, when a man is recovered, Hebrew liveliness of living flesh, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and by the Septuagint it is rendered, sound flesh both here and verse. 15. Livelinesse, saith Solomon Jarchi, is saniment, or soundness. Others read it raw flesh, the skin being eaten off with the leprosy, as Vallesins ac sacra Philosoph. cap. 9. But there must be as much of this, say they, as a lentile, or else he shall not be pronounced unclean, and in the midst of a bright sore, if it be as little as a grain of mustard-seed, and so in divers places, yet he is not unclean. This quick flesh in any case is a sign of the leprosy, if in him, that hath been pronounced clean, it breaketh out again and again an 100 times, because it is a sign, that the disease prevaileth, when it is thus in any man. And because it is said, the Priest shall view him well all over, the Rabbins say, that he must have both his eyes, and perfect sight, that judgeth, and must look upon the diseased neither in the morning nor evening, nor in a dark house, but when and where the light is clearest. This passage about the uncleanness by reason of sound flesh, and about cleanness in the case of being sore all over, is most strange. But, as Ainsworth well noteth, hereby was shown, that they only who acknowledge no whole part to be in them, but that they are all over most sinful and undeserving in their best actions, are justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed unto them, and contrariwise such as think some sanity to be in themselves, relying in any part upon that which they do for justification and salvation, are rejected, as unclean, 1 Joh. 1. 9. 1. Cor. 11. 31 Ps. 38. 4, 8. Gal. 5. 4. Gal. 2. 16, &c. Hesychius referreth the shining brightness of the leprosy to manifest and notorious sins, which are always a sign of an unclean and filthy person, and the lively flesh to the Levitical ordinances under the Gospel: for now he, that goeth from them all whether they concern times, or meats, or other rights to a better Law of the Gospel in the presence of Christ our High Priest, is clean, but he that goeth from them so, as that he observeth them still in part as having some lively flesh, is pronounced unclean: so Gal. 5. 1. Gal. 4. &c. I prefer the former.

But if he that had some sound flesh hath that changed afterwards into white like the rest of his body, he shall then be pronounced clean, a man repenting him of his error, in relying in any part upon his own righteousness, and now acknowledging the spreading of sinfulness all over, even his best actions shall be reputed clean. Some refuse this and all other mystical applications here, saying that the sore breaking out in some part only, and having raw flesh in it, this argued less strength of nature to expel the disease, but when it came out all over, more strength of nature to expel it, the leprosy being herein like unto a River, being deepest where it is narrowest, and fleetest where it is broadest. But although I embrace this, as some natural reason, yet because God being the Physician of the soul principally in all his constitutions had respect unto the soul, I cannot but receive the other also, serving so aptly to illustrate a true and necessary Tenet in Divinity.

The flesh also, in which there was a bile in the skin thereof, and was healed, but in the place thereof there is a white rising or a bright spot, white and somewhat reddish, &c. From hence to verse. 24. is set forth another case, in which the judgment must be made by the hairs turned white, and the sores being lower then the skin, as was said before, and if these signs were not, he must be shut up seven days, and if then the sore spreaded further, he was unclean if not, clean, it was nothing but a burning bile. The color somewhat reddish, the Rabbins distinguish into four sorts, as was said, that they distinguished the white before, likening the first to the redness of a little milk, having in it two drops of blood: the second, to milk of the same quantity with four drops of blood: the third, to milk with eight: the fourth with 16 drops.

For the mystery, a bile setteth forth sin, as Psal. 38. 4. he then that by true penitency is healed of his sin, if he falleth into a sinful course again, the hairs being turned into white, that is, his heart being corrupted in the thoughts and studies thereof, and the sore is, as white, so somewhat reddish, that is, he is thus corrupted both against the law and against the Gospel, not unaptly set forth by red, because Christ came all red with blood, as out of Bozra, as the Prophet Isaiah, speaketh, his case is now worse by far then it was before, he hath the plague of leprosy, or if after a certain time this being doubtful for the present, he waxeth worse and worse in the course of his life, set forth in the spreading of the sore after seven days shutting up, he is likewise foul and unclean, but if there be some show of evil, but no signs of relapsing, it is but an infirmity, such as all, even the best are subject to, a burning bile, but he is clean. Of the first sort was Pilate, washing his hands, as if his bile had been healed, but by and by delivering Christ to be crucified, whereby it spread as a filthy leprosy, and his case became much worse. Of the second David repenting of his adultery and murder, and Paul of his persecuting and blaspheming: to this effect almost Hesychius.

From hence to v. 29. another case is put of an hot burning with a white spot in it, in judging of which it must be proceeded, as in the former, but only that live flesh is here mentioned as a sign, wherein it differeth from that. This hot burning the Rabbins define to be with an hot iron, fiery coal or the like; and by live flesh here, saith Ainsworth, sound flesh and healed after the burning must needs be meant, or the healed scar, and so the Septuagint render it, and healed place; and if it be so understood, the description hereof is altogether as that of the former, v. 18. Hereby, saith Hesychius, was set forth the fire of evil zeal to hinder from good through envy, and to further evil, for a burning coming upon the soul hereby, if by penitency it be healed, may break out again, that is, the sinner in this kind may relapse again, but then it is a filthy leprosy, he is most unclean.

If a man or woman have a plague upon the heard or bread, &c. In this case besides the lowness of the hair being yellow and thin, is made a sign of uncleanness, and v. 31. if it be no lower, and there be no black hair in it, he must be shut up 7 days, as in a doubtful case, and if the scall be not spread by that time, nor yellow hair appeareth, he must be shaven, and then shut up other seven days, and then if it be not spread, &c. he must be pronounced clean; but if it be spread, although no yellow hairs appear, he is unclean, but the scall standing still at a stay, and black hairs growing, he is sound and clean. The plague of leprosy in the head or beard is called by a divers name from all the rest, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , from breaking or plucking up, because as the Rabbins say, the hairs in this plague fall off from the head or beard by the roots, as if it were plucked up. Whereas the head or beard of man or woman is spoken of, a question is moved by some, why women's beards should be spoken of, seeing they have none? But it is easily answered; In Hebrew it is, A man or woman, if there be is him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the plague of leprosy in head or beard: and yet Hippocrates maketh mention of two women that had beards, Phathusa and Namisia. And Herodotus telleth a tale of the Priest of Pallas, being a woman that had a beard, but these were rare and preternaturall. Touching the yellow hairs in the scall here made a sign of leprosy, they must be, say the Rabbins, two at the least yellow as gold, and small and short, for if they be long, although they be thus yellow, they are no sign thereof. Black hairs are spoken of, it being said, that if they be wanting, he shall be shaven, and then shut up 7 days, because black hairs, as they argue strength of nature, so they are a sign of soundness, as v. 37. wherefore if they had appeared at the first, he should not have been shut up. But the Rabbins in speaking of these black hairs, say also that they must be two at the least, and long enough to bow again to the roots: for if there be one yellow and one black, he is not freed, but if by such black hairs he be once freed, although they fall off afterwards, he is clean still, unless yellow hairs come in their stead. For the shaving, it was thus, all the hairs about the scall were shaved off, except two on each side, whereby it might be seen whether it spreaded or not: so Maimonides.

By the plague in the head Hesychius understandeth error touching the Deity, in which case it must be considered with what mind a manuttereth such error, whether being simply misled by others, or out of his own evil heart set forth by the lowness of the stall, and the thin yellow hairs or subtle hairs; because, as these argue a corruption in a great degree in the humors, so such errors coming from himself argue great corruption in the heart; and if so, he is unclean: but if this be uncertain, because there be no black hairs denoting soundness, that is, it doth not appear whether his heart be corrupted or no, he must be shaven, that is, the words wherein he spake must be cut off; others, according to the truth, being propounded unto him, and he is to be censured for a time, and then if no signs of such a corrupt heart appear, but of a penitent heart set forth by the black hairs, he shall be set free, he is no heretic, but a member of the true Church again. But if after being so dealt withal, as hath been said before, the scall shall spread, that is, he persisteth in this error without humiliation, no inquiry shall need any further to be made, whether he hath yellow hairs, that is, with what mind he spake so, for it is apparent by this that he is impure and filthy.

If a man or woman have bright spots, if they be darkish white, it is a freckled spot that groweth in the skin, he is clean. Although such spots come from corruption of the humors, and are oftentimes fore-runners of the leprosy, yet the Lord would not have those that had such only to be counted unclean, showing hereby, that out of his great grace he passeth over many imperfections in his, and layeth them not to their charge, as malignant sins. Or with Hesychius, we may apply this to the ignorance of some Ceremonial laws in the common people of the Jews, which notwithstanding they were clean, if they eschewed the gross sins forbidden in the Moral Law.

Here it is shown, that a man shall not be counted unclean merely for the want of hair which is fallen off from his head, but bald only, yet if in his bald head a white reddish sore ariseth, he is unclean, and hath the plague of leprosy. Here, because it is said, v. 43. As the leprosy appeareth in the skin of the flesh, the Rabbins note, that the proceedings in judging hereof must be according to all the rules before-going, if there be a white brightness, or if it be lower, or if it be a burning boil, or if there be quick flesh, or a spreading as v. 19, 20 &c. and they say accordingly it is to be understood, that such should upon the like reasons be shut up 7 days, and 7 days. Touching baldness, some are born so, as a people called Myconii, so Pliny; some become such by sickness, or other infirmities; and some by old age, or by sores growing upon their heads, which cause their hair to go off. Now because the hair is given for an ornament, and a cover to the head, it is a disgrace to be bald, wherefore Julius Caesar being bald, did always wear a lawrell Crown to hide it, and Otho an hat, and Domitian being bald forbade that any should be derided or mocked for his baldness. Hair, saith Ambrose, is reverend in old men, venerable in Priests, terrible in Warriours, comely in young men, and trim in women. Yet Synesius defended baldness, because he himself was bald, saying, that it was a preservative from many diseases. But although baldness was some blemish, a man was not to be counted unclean therefore, except a sore white and reddish did arise therein, whereby was set forth, saith Hesychius, that although a man be simple, yet being of an innocentt life, he shall not be rejected for this, but only if he committeth any soul sin, because none are so simple but that they know such evils are not to be done, because the hairs do set forth the cogitations of the mind, and the want of them, want of wise thoughts and understanding. Willet applieth it to such as renounce the world and the cares thereof, but are afterwards tainted with pride in their so doing. I think rather, as in speaking of the freckled spot was said, so here only it is generally signified, that little imperfections make not a man unclean, so as that he may therefore be judged unregenerate, but if amongst them there be any great enormity breaking out; this showeth a wicked man indeed,

And the leper, in whom the plague is, shall have his clothes rent, and his head bare, and put a covering upon his upper lip, and cry, Unclean, unclean. He shall dwell alone without the campe, &c. The renting of his clothes is a sign of mourning, for he ought, saith Cazkuni, to mourn for his evil deeds, for which this plague was sent upon him. And for his head being bare, how it is to be understood, see before, Chap. 10. 6. where both these are spoken of. The Rabbins here distinguish and say, A leprous woman rendeth not her clothes, nor maketh her head free, nor covereth her upper lip, but only sitteth without the City, and makes it known to others that she is unclean. For the covering of the upper lip, this was a sign also of sorrow and shame, as it is spoken of, Ezek 24. 17. Micah 3. 7. and therefore the Chaldee rendereth it, cover as a mourner. His upper lip or mouth according to the Septuagint was covered, saith Maimonides, to show, that he should now salute no man; and as some add well, to keep in his breath, that others might not be infected with it. His crying, Unclean, was to give warning to all men to avoid him that they might not be polluted by him. For as the Rabbins note, of all unclean things he was the most unclean and defiling; for if a man did but come and stand under the same tree with him, he was unclean hereby: so Maimonides. Jonathan rendereth it, Avoid, avoid, be not ye made unclean. For their dwelling alone without the campe, the reason hereof is given, Numb. 5. 3. that the campe might not be defiled in the midst whereof the Lord dwelled, afterwards they were likewise put out of Cities: Calvin. If it be demanded, whether a man being [Quest.] married were in this case to be excluded from his wife? It is answered, that the marriage is not hereby dissolved, quoad vinculum, according to that general rule; two being married together, & afterwards an infirmity happening to one of them, whatsoever it be, the marriage cannot therefore be dissolved, because nothing but fornication is a sufficient reason of divorcement. And some go further, saying, Wives are not to be dismissed for the leprosy, but they desiring it, the debt of marriage ought to be rendered to them, because none ought to be dismissed, but for fornication. Yet this is well interpreted of duties which may be done without the danger of infection. Such a disease so polluting and infecting is a sufficient cause of separating from bed and board, although not à vinculo aut subsidio, giving help and comfort to the infected.

For the mystery, this appointing of the leprous to mourn, and to live alone, shown, how sorrowful and contrite we should be for our foul and filthy sins, never ceasing our contrition, until that we be healed of them, which is not till we have utterly abandoned them, and therefore we must cry for grace, that we may thus do. And we must be so far from drawing others to the same wickedness, and polluting them, as that we must rather give them warning that they fall not into such sins. And that sinners may be the more humbled, they must be cast out of the Church by excommunication, none being spared, of what condition soever, as Azarias the King, being a leper, was made to dwell apart, and Myriam was shut out of the campe, although the sister of Moses. This also shown, that wicked persons shall be shut out of heaven, as Rab. Elias noteth saying, When a man considereth these things, he will be abashed and ashamed of his iniquities, for every iniquity is a plague and blemish in his soul, and as the body for the plague of leprosy must be removed far out of the campe of Israel, so the pollution of the soul removeth it far from the holiness which is on high. And if a man turneth by repentance, he shall be cleansed, and by receiving chastisements, otherwise, he shall in the World to come be far removed from all the camp that is on high. In this verse and hence forward to the end of the chapter, the case of any garment having the plague of leprosy upon it is handled, whether it be linen or woollen, whether it be in the warp or in the woof, or if it be in any garment of skins. But here by woollen garments the Rabbins understand such only, as are made of sheep's wool and nothing else, and by the linen such as are made of flax only, so that if a garment be made of wool and camels hair together, or of flax and hemp together, and the most part be camels hair, or hemp, it is not made unclean, or if the warp or woof be in the one camels hair, or in the other hemp, but otherwise if it be most linen, or woollen, it is unclean. And they add, that the woof and warp are distinctly named, because if the plague be in the one only and not in the other, that other is not unclean, and moreover that all this is to be understood of clothes not died, for if they be died, they are not unclean, but only being white; so Maimonides & Talmud Babyl. And for skins, they say only skins of such things as the earth bringeth forth are meant, and not any skins of those in the waters. But all these are curiosities and additions of their own put to the Law of God: woollen and linen garments are named, because they were most usual, but all others are doubtless comprehended under these and skins, of which hair cometh. The signs of the leprosy in garments are colors greenish or reddish and spreading, or after seven days and washing, the color continuing, as it was, although it spread not. And in case that it be judged the leprosy, it must be burnt, otherwise fourteen days being past, and it being washed the second time, it was clean. Here the Rabbins expound the greenish and reddish colors of very green and very red like crimson. And of an unclean garment they say, it defileth so, that if but so much as an Olive be in any house, both it and all things therein are defiled with the greatest defilement, even as by the dead. The infection spoken of here in garments, and afterwards, Chap. 14. 34. in houses was peculiar to this people, for in other countries leprosies are not observed thus to infect; wherefore this was a plague, whereby God did specially chastise his people for their sins, upon which observation Calvin toucheth. For the mystery, hereby was shown, that all things about us are made unclean and defiled to us by sin, according to that saying, To the pure all things are pure, but to the impure their very conscience is defiled And because the body is as the garment of the soul, that not only the soul, but the body also is defiled by sin, for which cause we read of garments spotted with the flesh, which must be hated, & of some that have kept their garments, and not defiled them. But by washing in the blood of the Lamb set forth by washing here, we come to have our robes made all white again. And as for the burning of garments infected, this figured out the end of those bodies, which are polluted with sin, they shall burn in the unquenchable fire of Hell. Hesychius more particularly by the garments of woollen will have those virtues understood, in which more heat of grace is shown, as chastity, and the abdication of worldly riches; and by the linen, such virtues as wherein there is less heat of grace, as conjugal chastity and liberality to the poor; by those of skin, the virtues attained to by sufferings, which mortify; by the warp, good motions from above; and by the woof, our good intentions and endeavors concurring herewith. If being endued with any of these virtues, there be pride taken therein set forth by the greenish color, or vain glory set forth by the reddish, these virtues are in us corrupted, and burning in Hell fire shall be our end; but if it be not so apparently, yet some show hereof continueth, and after admonition there is no reformation, the case is naught, and the soul must come to the same fearful end: but if otherwise, there must yet be repentance and humiliation for the cause of suspicion given set forth by washing, and these virtues shall be clean and undefiled.

There remaineth now in this chapter only one phrase, verse. 55. bare within, or without, by which if it be demanded what is meant? It is answered, the same words are her used, which were used in speaking of a man's baldness, [Quest.] verse 42. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the baldness before or behind, and hereby is meant bareness on the inside or outside being caused by the fretting of the leprosy. The Chaldee rendereth it, on the old, or new part thereof, so likewise Maimonides, the Septuagint in the warp or the woof thereof.

CHAP. XIIII.

IN this chapter it is shown, what sacrifices must be offered by the leper being cleansed, but no means of curing this malady are prescribed in the Law, which shown the insufficiency of the Law to justify from sin, and that Christ alone doth this, who cleansed the lepers at his coming, Mat. 11. 5.

If any leper were cleansed, he must be brought to the Priest, and the Priest must go out of the camp, and look, and behold if the plague of leprosy be cleansed. This, say the Hebrews was done thus: the leper was brought to the utmost part of the camp, and afterwards when they dwelt in cities, to the gates of Jerusalem, and thither the Priest went to look upon him, no medicine was used to heal him, saith Rab. Menahem▪ neither was it lawful, because the leprosy came by the finger of God, only the Priest made an atonement for the leper by mercy, whereby alone iniquity is done away, as the filthiness of the flesh by water.

Then the Priest shall command to take for him, that is to be cleansed, two birds alive and clean, and cedar-wood, and scarlet, and hyssop, &c. Peter Comestor saith, that the leper brought the birds, scarlet, cedar and hyssop with him, and an earthen pot with running water in it, as verse. 5. the Septuagint, They shall take, that is, he or any of his friends for him. The two birds were any, except the unclean, Levite. 11. but the Hebrews say, that they must be free, not tame, as is also here intimated, because one must be let to fly away. The cedar-wood, they say, was a stick of cedar a cubit long and square, of the thickness of a beds foot. The scarlet was scarlet-wool, Heb. 9. 19. and of this, they say, there must be a shekel weight. The hyssop must be garden-hyssop, and not any other, and as long as an hand is broad. The earthen vessel must be new, and the running water in it must be out of a spring that ceaseth not running, and such as is clean and hath not been before used, in quantity a quarter of a log, that is, an egg and half; because, as Cazkuni noteth, the blood of a bird alone is not enough to dip the cedar, scarlet and hyssop, without this addition of water. One of the living birds brought was killed by the leper recovered, or by another for him at the Priests command, and the blood mixed with the water for the dipping of the living bird, and the other things therein. Then the ground was digged, and the bird killed buried; and into the blood and water the living bird, and scarlet, and cedar, and hyssop were dipped, and the leper to be cleansed sprinkled seven times, which dipping was thus; the scarlet, cedar, and hyssop were bound up together length-wise, and about them the living bird with the tips of the wings, and the tail, and so they were all together dipped. Thus Maimonides. The seven times sprinkling signified his perfect purging from his uncleanness, because seven ever since the creation, from which God rested upon the seventh day, hath been counted in remembrance thereof a number of perfection. Touching the cedar-wood, the scarlet, and hyssop, Maimonides saith, they might be kept to cleanse other lepers withal, and the live bird, if it were taken again, might be used for another leper agai • ▪ and so likewise for a third, fourth, &c. but the dead bird might not be put to any use after this. Whereas verse. 7. it is said, He shall let the living bird loose in the open field, Hebr. in the face of the field, Maimonides saith; that he must not let her fly to the sea, having his face turned thither, or to the city, or to the wilderness, but only to the field. And Cazkuni noteth, that this was done to express the liberty which the leper now had to return to his fellows, as the bird having been held in the hands of men was now set at liberty to fly away amongst other birds, because the leper had hitherto in like manner been held in place by himself from the society of other men. And hitherto the Rabbins. But touching the two birds, some render them sparrows; in Hebrew it is Tsippor, signifying generally any small bird, and so Junius rendereth it, the Septuagint and Vatablus: and so the word is used, Gen. 15. 12. yet sometime it is also put for a sparrow, as Psal. 102. 10. But sparrows fly not but to houses, and so do doves, and therefore it is most likely that some other small birds, and not these were meant. Touching the mystery of all these things; there was, I grant, a moral end of them, that the leper having had so foul a disease might not at his own pleasure return into the camp when he was clean, but a solemn order of declaring him to be cleansed, having been thus first observed for the satisfaction of all men, and to the Priest he must be brought, and with these ceremonies appointed by him declared to be clean, that he might thus be put in mind to whom to refer his healing, viz. to God, whose Priest came out to cleanse him, and to him give all the praise. But these are only general considerations, the taking of two live birds, cedar, scarlet and hyssop, and the earthen vessel with living water, &c. did more particularly doubtless figure out Christ Jesus, by whom alone we are cleansed from all filthiness of sin. The two birds, whereof one was killed, but the other let go free, as the two goats afterwards, Levite. 16. 7, 10. did set forth the two natures of Christ, in the one of which only he suffered death, but the other went free, as 1 Pet. 3. 18. the cedar, scarlet, and hyssop are the same which were used about the purifying water, Numb. 19. the cedar-stick was that unto which the rest were bound, that a man holding it in his hand might sprinkle therewith; the cedar is the tallest of all trees, some of them growing to an hundred and thirty foot in height, according to Pliny, and it is incorruptible wood, and there is pitch which cometh out of it, whereby dead bodies are kept from corrupting, but the living are corrupted, and it is good to heal leprosies, and other foul diseases. And the cedar is spoken of, as signifying Christ, the highest and chiefest of all, and the Author of incorruption and immortality, Ezech. 1. 22, 23. Again, as the cedar is tallest, so the hyssop is lowest, but it hath also virtue to heal wounds, wherefore hereby Christ's humility was set forth, by which we are healed, Esa. 53. the scarlet shown the fervency of his charity; the blood and water, that Christ should not come by blood only, but by water and blood; and the earthen vessel, that the Ministers who preach Christ and his passions, are earthen vessels, yet having this rich treasure in them, 2 Cor. 4. 7. the seven times sprinkling, our perfect purging from all uncleanness of sin through his blood, and thus are all these things briefly applied by the Apostle, Hebr. 9. 19, 20, &c. And lastly, the water is called living water, to set forth the grace of the Spirit of Christ compared to living water, Joh. 4. 10. chap. 7. 38. Hesychius beginning the figure a little higher saith, that the Priests going out of the camp to view the leper, figured out Christ's going out of the city of suffer, the two sparrows, his two natures, both clean; the cedar-wood, his cross; the scarlet, his passion; the hyssop smelling sweet, the comforts of his Spirit; the water in the earthen pot, the water of baptism upon us, that are as potters vessels; the dipping of all herein, the concourse of all things about Christ in baptism, seeing it is a representation of his passions. Some will have the scarlet being red to signify the perfect cure of the leprosy, which was white and the sweet smelling hyssop, the doing away of the ill smell thereof; but these are only moral reasons.

The leper being thus cleansed, must further shave off all his hair, and wash his clothes, and come into the camp, but not into his tent for seven days, and upon the seventh day he must shave his head, beard and eye brows, and wash his clothes and flesh, and upon the eighth day bring two he-lambs, &c. God would not have the man who had had the leprosy, to come to the Tabernacle, but by degrees in process of time to move to the more reverence of his Sanctuary. The hair which he must shave off, was all, as the Rabbins explain it, all over his body, yea upon his secret parts. And the like was appointed to be done to the Levites at their consecration, Numb 8. 7. and of this shaving, Rab. Menahem saith, it was needful to beat down the power of uncleanness, which abounded in the leper. And it is said, that he should thus shave himself, and wash, That he might be clean, not that he was perfectly cleansed so soon as he had done thus, but that having done thus, and proceeding to other Rites that follow, he might in the end be perfectly clean. But immediately upon this shaving, saith Maimonides, he was clean to come into the campe, and did not by lying or sitting pollute his bed or seat anymore. In that it is said, after this shaving and washing he shall not come into his tent in seven days, it is also gathered, that yet he might not lie again with his wise. The second shaving and washing upon the seventh day argued his uncleanness still all those days, and if he touched any man or vessel in this time, they were defiled, as his clothes after his first washing, because whatsoever defileth clothes, defileth men and vessels also: Maimonides, Treat. of leprosy, Chap. 11. This washing of clothes, saith Rab. Menahem, was to show, that the spirit of uncleanness should be put away from him. For the mystery of all these things, shaving the hair did set forth the weakening of the strength of sin in those that are cleansed herefrom, because hair showeth strength of heat, and humors abounding in the body; and therefore Samson's hair being cut off, it shown the decay of his strength, and when the Lord threateneth to weaken the people, he speaketh by this phrase, I will shave with a razor, Esa. 7. 20. washing the first time figured baptism, and washing the second time upon the seventh day, repentance, whereby we must again and again, wash and makes us clean continually to our lives end, and shaving the second time of the h airs that grew in the seven days figured out our proceeding to subdue and bring under the power of sin, and, as Maimonides noteth, shaving must be of every hair, not two being left upon all the body; and if two be left, the shaving is as nothing; so no sin must be suffered to remain in the strength in us, it must not reign in our mortal bodies. But whereas he saith, The Priest only must both kill the bird, sprinkle the blood, and shave him, but other acts about his cleansing might be done by others; this is besides the Text, for here it is left undetermined, who should do it. Touching his coming first into the campe, and afterwards to the tabernacle, this shown how we should be going on continually towards the Kingdom of heaven, for grace is not perfected at the first, but must increase and grow in us degrees to the end. In which last, and in that of washing twice Hesychius agreeth. But by clothes to be washed he understandeth virtues in us to be cleansed; by the hairs to be shaved off, evil and carnal cogitations to be put away, whether touching the highest things set forth by the hairs of the head and eye-brows, or touching the things of manlike discretion; by the beard, not one old thought must be suffered to remain, and as a man shaved all over is as it were a new man, so must we be to be accounted clean.

Touching the lambes to be brought upon the eighth day, they must be two males, one for a trespass-offering, and another for a burnt-offering, and one female for a sin-offering. For all these offerings must now be made as we may see, v. 12. and v. 19. and for the two former, males must be brought, Levite. 1. and Chap. 6. 6 and verse. 12. of this Chapter, for the sin-offering of a private person, a female, Levite. 4. 28. For their age, and being without blemish, and presenting at the door of the tabernacle, and the manner of killing and offering, see before, Levite. 1, &c. and for the quantity of the meat-offering here also appointed to be brought, and of the oil, Levite. 2. a log of oil is half a pinte. For the Ceremonies that are singular. The Priest shall take of the blood of the trespass-offering, and put thereof upon the tip of his right ear, upon the thumb of his right hand, and the great toe of his right foot. And he shall take of the log of oil, and pour it into his left hand, and with his right sprinkle it with his finger seven times before the Lord. Then shall he put of the oil upon the tip of his right ear, the thumb, &c and pour the residue thereof upon his head. The like Ceremony of putting blood upon the right ear, thumb and toe was prescribed before in the consecration of the Priests, Exod. 29. 20. whilst this was done, the party to be cleansed stood not in the Court, into which other Israelites came that were clean, for none unclean, till they had received their atonement, might come in thither, but stand without in the women's Court which was next to it, and he that was now to be cleansed standing therefore in that Court at the gate, put in his head, that the Priest might put the blood upon it, and then his hand and his foot. And Maimonides saith, If he had not a right ear, thumb and toe, he could never be cleansed; and for the oil, the residue whereof is to be poured upon his head, he saith, It was that remaining in his hand, and so it is expressed, v. 17. for that which remained more of the log, the Priests had amongst them. For the mystery of the blood putting upon these parts, see before, Exod. 29. 20. and as the blood setteth forth the blood of Christ, sanctifying the hearing, the actions, and the ways, so the oil setteth forth the Holy Ghost guiding us in all these parts for God's glory and the good of our souls. A trespass-offering, and then a sin-offering, v. 19. must be offered first, to show, that we must be purged from all our sins both great and small, before we can become an holocaust, or whole burnt-offering to God, as we are exhorted, Rom. 12. 1. and afterwards it is said to show this the burnt-offering must be offered. And for the sin and trespass-offering were taken both a male and a female lamb, to show, that by Christ we are saved from our sins both men and women. And a meat-offering also must be offered, v. 20. because this always accompanied the burnt-offering, Chap. 2. But the Rabbins note, that with none other sin-offering or trespass-offering a meat-offering was brought, saving in this case of a leper cleansed. The eighth day, when all this was done, figured out the resurrection of Christ upon the eighth day to glory, being the ground also of our rising again, and entering into the Tabernacle of the most High, as the leper being cleansed upon this day came to the material Tabernacle: so also Hesychius.

But if he be poor, he shall take one lamb for a trespass-offering, and one tenth deal of fine flour, and a log of oil, and two turtle Doves, or two young Pigeons, &c.

For the pigeons see the like Proviso before, Chap. 5. 7. But why must he needs bring one lamb? Tostatus answereth, because the blood of the fowls [Quest.] would not have been sufficient to put upon all those parts: Pelican, because the lamb figured out Christ, without whose bloodshed there is no remission of sins. The first is most probable, because a pigeon or turtle, as well as a lamb, did figure Christ out; but I cannot rest in either, seeing a very little blood would serve to put upon the tip of the ear and thumb, &c. Rather according to the greatness of the deliverance, a greater sacrifice then ordinary must be brought, even by the poor in this case, for he must offer all manner of sacrifices, the trespass-offering, sin-offering, and burnt-offering, and meat-offering, and therefore for one he must needs bring a lamb. For the Rites to be performed about the poor man's offerings, they were the same with the rich, and are set forth, v. 22, &c. to v. 33. The birds brought, whereof one was killed before without the came, v. 5. and the Cedar, Wood, Scarlet and Hyssop, &c. cannot be said to have been done by way of sacrificing, because there was no fit place, nor fire, but those were certain rights to cleanse the leper so far, that he might be fit to come to the Tabernacle with these sacrfices.

In this verse, and hence-forward the Lord setteth down laws touching houses infected with the leprosy. When it beginneth to be suspected, the house must be emptied, and then the Priest must come to view it, and if in the walls hollow strakes appear greenish and reddish lower then the wall, it must be shut up for 7 days, and then being viewed again, if they be spread, the stones wherein they are must be taken away, and new stones be supplied, and the walls must be scraped within and without, and new plaistering put on, and if thus being used it breaketh out again, it must be pulled down, and carried away to an unclean place, &c. But if the plague spreadeth not, the house shall be pronounced clean, and certain rites must be done for the cleansing thereof, as was before appointed, verse 5. in the case of a man being cleansed.

Now in the beginning of these Ordinances, whereas it is said, If I put the plague of leprosy into an house of your possession, v. 34. the Rabbins observe, that the leprosy in garments and houses was not elsewhere in the world, but was sent miraculously amongst them, as a punishment for an evil tongue: so Maimonides; because Miriam was thus punished for this disease, Numb. 12. and it was for an evil tongue against God's ministers; 2 Chron. 36. 16. But it is strange that he noteth further, that houses in Jerusalem were never thus infected, for that was not divided amongst the Tribes of Israel, nor yet the houses of strangers dwelling in the land. And whereas, v. 35. it is said, he shall come and tell the Priest, saying, There is as it were a plague in my house, they say, that he must speak thus, and not say, There is a plague, because although he be a wise man, till the Priest hath judged it, neither he nor any man else may presume to call it so. And whereas three inspections of the Priest are appointed for an house, one 7 days after his first shutting it up, v. 39. another to put new stones and mortar on, where the old stones and plaster were taken away, v. 41. and a third to see whether the plague did yet break out again after all this, v. 44. Maimonides also saith, that the first of these times was upon the 7 day; the second upon the 13; and the third upon the 19 day, so that there was one time more of viewing houses then men, before they were pulled down, but two times of inspection only after the shutting up can be gathered from the Text. Touching the stones, of which it is said, that they should be pulled out, he also noteth, that bricks and marble are not meant, because they were not capable of infection. And for the uncleanness of an house infected, that it is one of the most unclean things, if it be touched being pulled down, it polluteth: if any of it, yea, but so much as an olive be brought into any other house, it is made unclean hereby. Touching the stones carried away from a leprous house, and others brought in their stead, they must be, saith he also, no more but just so many. Cazkuni enquiring the reason, why houses were smitten with his plague, saith, that it was for the idolatory of the Canaanites that had dwelt in them, and committed idolatry there, that they might be known and pulled down. But this is improbable, because for this reason all their houses must have been smitten, for they dwelt in houses which they built not, but the Canaanites. It was rather for their own foul idolatries and apostasies from the true religion, and other foul sins, as may be gathered from some examples before pointed at, Chap 13.

Whereas v, 46, and 47. it is said, If any man cometh into this house, he shall be unclean until the even, but if he lieth in it, he shall wash his clothes, and be unclean till the even; the Hebrews note, that he is much more defiled that lieth in a leprous house, then he that only cometh into it. And that by the house into which, is meant in the time of the being shut up: for then it defileth only such as enter in, but after the Priests pronouncing of it unclean, all that touch it on the outside also.

For the mystery. By the houses in the land of their possession are to be understood Christian families, which are Churches, and so the houses of God: he that dwelleth in the house suspected is the master of such an house: and the plague of leprosy, corrupt doctrine entertained in that house; if therefore he suspecteth any such thing, he must make it known to the Priest, and he shall first separate all others, from thence that have formerly used to make their Conventicles there, if he shall see that pride and vain-glory have born sway set forth by the greenish and reddish color, and afterwards he shall put out the stones and parget, bringing in new instead thereof, that is, he shall assay be excommunication and casting out of the Church, which is meant by the City to reform that family, and if so he cannot prevail, it shall finally at the day of Judgment be destroyed, and cast out from the new Jerusalem, and if any come into this house, that is, be tainted with this corrupt doctrine, he shall be unclean; but if he lieth there, that is, be settled in it, he shall be much more polluted. To this effect Hesychius in many more words, pursuing every circumstance, but this I think is not done without much wresting, and therefore I omit it, as not so allowable.

CHAP. XV.

WHen any man hath a running issue out of his flesh, because of his issue he is unclean, &c. Here beginneth the law of issues, it being determined both, that the man having an issue was unclean, and how many ways other men or things were defiled by him. And this is the fourth sort of uncleanness, and because it is said, Speak to the children of Israel, saying; The Rabbins note, that the Israelites only, and not the Heathen were made unclean by issues, but only they and their servants, male or female. For, when any man, Hebrew it is, man, man, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is, a young man or an old. By the running issue here is to be understood the flux of seed, called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which is, when involuntarily in the night in time of sleep seed cometh forth, as Maimonides saith, without any desire or pleasure through infirmity of the concavities, or spermaticall parts; wherein it is gathered, we call it the running of the reins.

Whether his flesh run with his issue, or be stopped from his issue, it is his uncleanness. Upon these words Solomon Jarchi gathereth two sorts of uncleanness. 1 When the seed runneth thin continually. 2 When because it is thick, it runneth but at certain times, stopping and running again. And Maimonides for this kind setteth down these rules, if it runneth once, he is like him that hath an accident of uncleanness, as Deut. 23. 10, 11. if twice, he must count seven days, and go to the water; if thrice, he hath the issue complete, and must bring the offering here prescribed, verse. 14. By the words, an issue running out of his flesh, not any but this of the flux of seed out of his secret parts are meant, because flesh is spoken of in this sense, Gen. 17. Thou shalt circumcise the foreskin of thy flesh: so the Rabbins, and generally all Expositors: whereas v. 17. the flux of man's seed is expressly spoken of, Brenz saith well, that this is one kind of issue, being a disease, that another upon dreaming, the seed being put forth with pleasure. Touching a man having the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , his uncleanness is so great, as that he defileth. 1 His bed. 2 His seat. 3 The man or woman touching his bed, seat, or body. 4 Then that he spitteth upon. 5 His saddle, and such as touch or bear that. 6 Such as he toucheth, he not having first rinsed his hands in water. 7 Vessels, and if they be earthen, which he toucheth, they must be broken, if wooden, or of any other matter, they must be rinsed in water. Touching the bed or seat, Maimonides saith, it is to be understood, that it is not defiled, but when most part of his body hath been upon it, yet if he standeth upon two beds together with one foot upon one, and the other foot upon the other, they are both defiled: but these are curiosities, and divers from the text, for here it is, the bed whereupon he lieth, and the seat whereupon he sitteth, so that not standing with his foot, but lying or sitting defileth one or more beds or seats together. For those that touch him, or these; whereas it is said, they shall wash their clothes and flesh, he noteth, that no part of the body must be left unwashed, no not one finger or lock of hair upon the head. And whereas his spittle is spoken of, as polluting, he addeth his urine, and the snivell coming out of his nose also: and thus Talmud. Babyl. And for anything, that he sitteth upon, if it be a piece of timber, or a boat, &c. he that sitteth upon the same with him, they say, although their clothes touch not, is polluted, and he that beareth his seat, although there be somewhat between, is defiled: whereas it is said, not having rinsed his hands, the Rabbins also expound this of all the body as if the part were put for the whole: but if it had been so meant, it had been as easy to have said, himself, or his flesh, and it was not required, that he who had this disease, should wash himself all over every day: but civility required, that he should wash his hands, which was a thing usual amongst all people's, especially before meat: so Athenaeus writeth of the Greeks, and Lampridius of the Romans. A gain, they add to the Law of God in making urine, &c. a defiler as well as spittle, for spitting in special is spoken of as a defiling and disgracing, Num. 12. 14. and they spat upon Christ's face, and Dionysius the Tyrant did spit upon Aristippus in disdain. Saint Augustine noteth, that spitting before others is only of fools, children, mad men, Epileptickes, Daemoniacks, or other diseased persons: wherefore Constantine the Emperor is noted never to have been seen to spit in public, and Jerome would not have his Scholars to spit in the Auditory, and the Persians held it uncomely to spit or purge the nose before others. But these things upon the by, because the pollution by spitting is here spoken of. To come now to the reason of these Laws, they were made for outward purity and cleanness amongst the people of God, whom he would teach the inward of the soul by the outward of the body. And as the uncleanness of the leprosy before spoken of came by sin, so did this of an issue, as we may gather from 2 Sam. 3. 29. and therefore it also aptly figured out sin, and the uncleanness thereof.

Hesychius saith, As there were divers sorts of sins, so they were diversely figured out to the people of Israel, who for their rudeness and ignorance were taught all things by figures, wherefore the Lord having done with that of leprosies, cometh now to another of issues. Whereas in speaking of the man that hath an issue, it is said with a gemination in Hebrew, the man, man, he both understandeth this of the great care, which the Lord had, that this Law should be observed, and also that the Preacher of God's word, as being a singular man amongst others is specially pointed at, as being the man here figured out, he hath an issue, when the seed of spiritual generation is let flow forth by him against the nature thereof, not to beget men unto God, but to corrupt them. As if he be addicted to any sin of adultery, drunkenness, or ambition, to preach in the favor of these sins, or to let them pass unreproved. Here is a double uncleanness, one of the first body, from whom this seed cometh, and the other of the second corrupted hereby, as he that hath an issue, is both determined himself to be unclean, and the seed coming from him. Touching the things defiled by him, his bed, seat, saddle, or vessels, these do aptly set forth his Auditors, that are so taken with his corrupt teaching, as that they make themselves as a bed, &c. for him to rest upon by their ready embracing his Doctrine and him: as the good Preacher