Commentary on Genesis and Exodus

QUEST. I. Why it pleased God to have the Priests thus consecrated.

Vers. 1. THis is that thou shalt do unto them in consecrating them, &c. 1. First, it was requisite that there should be some singled out, and appointed to minister in the Priests office, to avoid confusion: lest everyone at his pleasure might have presumed upon the Priests office; as among the Gentiles, he that was the more mighty and honorable, took upon him to be a sacrificer, Lippom. Pelican. 2. The Lord, as before he beautified the Priests with glorious apparel, so here he by certain public and solemn rites, doth cause them to be consecrated in the sight and view of all the people, for the greater reverence and authority of their calling. 3. And hereby the Priests themselves were assured also of their calling, which was sealed and confirmed unto them by these signs. 4. And these ceremonies were figures and types of the high Priest Christ Jesus, whom the Lord hath anointed: and of all the faithful and believers, whom Christ hath made Kings and Priests to God his Father, Simler.

QUEST. II. Why the calf is said to be the son of a bullock.

Vers. 29. TAke a young bullock yet under the dam. 1. Some take this to be according to the Hebrew phrase: A calf, or steare, the son of a bullock ; that no more is thereby signified, but that he should take a bullock; as, so they say, the son of a goat, the son of a dove, and such like, Oleaster. But this were in that sense a needless repetition: for a bullock must needs come of a bullock, and a goat of a goat. 2. Some make this to be the meaning, that he should take a young bullock out of the heard, de armento, so Latin. Septuag. Chaldee, Vatab. But more is signified thereby than so, for Genes. 18.7. it is said that Abraham ran to the heard, and fetched filium bovis, the son of a bullock; not out of the heard, for that is said before. 3. Rab. Solomon thinketh this is added by way of distinction, because the word phar signifieth not only a young bullock, but an old calf: and therefore by this addition it is signified, that it should be a young bullock. But this addition needed not for that cause: for the word phar, of it self signifieth a young bullock, as the Septuagint translate it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a calf. 4. Wherefore I prefer here Junius reading: who interpreteth it, juvencum filium bovis, a young bullock, the son of an ox or bullock, juvencum subrumum, a calf or bullock yet sucking, under the dam not weaned: and therefore sometime ben bakar, the son of a bullock, is put alone without the other word, phar.

QUEST. III. Why a bullock, two rams, and other things were offered at Aaron's consecration.

A Young bullock. 1. Lyranus thinketh, that they are bid to take a calf or young bullock for Aaron's consecration, to make atonement for that sin, which he had committed in making the golden calf: and the two rams were prescribed, one in remembrance of the ram, which was sacrificed in the stead of Isaac, and the other for a commemoration of the paschal Lamb, which they offered at their departure out of Egypt. But these are light conjectures: for Aaron had not yet committed that sin, in making the golden calf, neither was it a ram, but a lamb, which they celebrated the passover withal. 2. Therefore this is the reason, why all these things, and of this sort and kind are taken: According to the dignity of the persons here consecrated, such are the sacrifices and gifts of their consecration, as Levite. 4. a calf or young bullock is prescribed to be offered for the sin of the Priest, whereas but a goat was sacrificed for the sin of the Prince: because the sins of the Priests, who professed knowledge, were more dangerous, and scandalous. So then because here the high Priest with his sons are to be consecrated, a bullock must be taken. 3. And because the Priests were to offer unto God all the gifts and sacrifices of the people of all sorts: it was fit and requisite, that they should be consecrated with sacrifices of all sorts, which were three, either sin offerings, burnt sacrifices, or peace offerings: of the first kind was the bullock here; of the second, the first ram, and of the third, the second. 4. And for that there were divers kinds of meat offerings, some of things that had life, as beasts and birds; some without life, as cakes, unleavened bread, and such like: and the meat offerings of things without life, were of divers sorts, some out of the oven, some of the frying pan, some out of the cauldron, Levite. 2.4.5. here all these varieties are presented: unleavened bread out of the oven, cakes tempered with oil in the frying pan, and wafers boiled in water, as R. Solomon thinketh, like unto our fimnels, Tostat. qu. 1. 5. And because the Priests were duces & ante signani ali • rum, the Captains and ring-leaders of others, to signify, that there was a greater holiness required in them; they are consecrated all kind of ways: 1. They are washed. 2. They are clad with the Priestly robes. 3. They are anointed. 4. The sacrifices, both for sin, the burnt offerings, and peace offerings are offered for them. 5. They are purified with blood: both their ears, hands and feet are touched therewith, and they themselves and their garments are besprinkled also with blood. And this was not to be done one day, or two: but their consecration did continue for seven days together, verse. 36. Gallas.

QUEST. IV. Why Aaron and the Priests were called to the door of the Tabernacle.

Vers. 4. THou shalt bring Aaron and his sons to the d •• re of the Tabernacle. The reasons hereof may be these, why Aaron was brought to the Tabernacle there to put on his Priestly garments: 1. Because he was to serve with the rest of the Priests in the Sanctuary within, into the which Aaron was not to enter without his Priestly attire: for his sound must be heard when he goeth in and out, lest he die; chap. 28.35. 2. Because at the door of the Tabernacle was placed the brazen Altar, where the Priests were daily to offer sacrifice: and therefore it was meet they should be there consecrated, where the chief of their service and ministry was to be executed. 3. And there between the door and the Altar was the brazen Laver, where Aaron and the Priests were to wash themselves before they put on the holy garments: thither therefore are they called, because there they were to be washed with water, Tostat. qu. 1.

QUEST. V. Why Aaron and the rest are washed, and how.

Vers. 4. ANd wash them with water. 1. Not with common or every water, but with that which was in the brazen Laver, chap. 30.18. Iun. 2. But here we must consider, that always the order of time is not set down in Scripture, in setting down the story of such things, as were done: for the brazen Laver wherein they were to be washed, is afterward appointed to be made, chap. 30. Tostat. quast. 2. 3. They were washed, not only their hands and feet, as in their daily ministry, chap. 40.33. but in their whole body, as thinketh Rab. Solomon: because their first consecration required a more solemn oblation, and washing, than their daily ministration. And like as the oil was poured upon Aaron's head, but ran down along upon his beard and other parts; so it is like the water was applied to his whole body, Lyranus. Tostat. And this washing was a figure of Christ's baptism, who went into the water when he was baptized, Matth. 3. Simler. 4. It was fit they should be washed before they put on the holy garments, both for decency and comeliness, that the soil of their body might be cleansed, before they applied the precious and glorious apparel: and for signification, that they might thereby be admonished to cleanse and purge themselves from their sins and corruptions.

QUEST. VI. Of the Priestly apparel which Aaron put on, and why the girdle is omitted.

Vers. 5. PVt upon Aaron the tunicle, &c. 1. Tostatus thinketh that this was the linen garment, which was common to Aaron and the inferior Priests. But it is shown before, chap. 28.39. that the high Priests linen coat was embroidered, and so were not the other Priests linen coats. 2. Tostatus also hath another conceit, that the high Priest did put on this linen coat, supervestes communes, upon his common wearing apparel, qu. 2. But that is not like: for Aaron put off his clothes, when he was washed, and then he is immediately clothed with his Priestly apparel. 3. Because no mention is here made of the girdle; Cajetan thinketh, that cingulum erat commune pontifici & sacerdotibus, that there was one common girdle for the high Priest and the rest: and therefore afterward verse. 9. mention is made once for all of the girdles of the Priests. But it is evident, chap. 28.39. that the high Priests girdle was embroidered of needle work: whereas the common girdles were only of linen, Levite. 16.4. This rather is to be supplied out of Levite. 8.8. where he is girded with a girdle upon his coat: and so Oleaster thinketh well, that Aaron hath seven ornaments put upon him beside the linen breeches: the tunicle, the robe, the Ephod, the pectoral, the girdle, the miter, and golden crown. 4. And whereas it is said, and shall cleanse them with the broidered gard of the Ephod: Tostatus following Josephus thinketh, that this was the girdle, wherewith his garments were girded all together, qu. 2. whereas it was the broidered gard, which was in the nether part of the Ephod, the laps whereof below, did gird the Priest in the waste, as a girdle, Iun. Lippoman. Simler. Vatab.

QUEST. VII. How Aaron was anointed, and with what.

Vers. 7. ANd thou shalt take the anointing oil. 1. Though it be called oil, yet was it more than oil: for it was a precious ointment, made of Rosin, Myrrh, Cinamom, and other things, as it is prescribed, chap. 30. Iun. 2. The high Priest was anointed in his head, but it is not expressed how the inferior Priests were anointed; it is like, but in their hands: though Tostatus useth but a slender conjecture to prove it, because now their Bishops use to be anointed in the head, the inferior Priests but in the hands, to signify that the one receive a superiority in their consecration, the other but a kind of service and ministry: for what warrant have they to use the Jewish rites and ceremonies under the Gospel, in their consecrations? 3. Now because it would seem an uncomely thing, that all Aaron's garments should be besmeared with this ointment, if it had been poured on Aaron's head; R. Solomon thinketh that Moses took his finger and dipped it in the oil, and so strake it on Aaron's forehead. But the text is against his conceit, both in this place; because it is said, and shalt pour it upon his head ; and likewise Psal. 133. where it is expressed, that the ointment ran down upon Aaron's beard, and so to the skirts of his clothing, Tostat. qu. 2.

QUEST. VIII. How the ordinance of the Priesthood is said to be perpetual.

Vers. 9. THe Priests office shall be theirs for a perpetual law. 1. Whereas the like phrase is used, chap. 28.43. This shall be a law forever, &c. which some restrain unto the particular precept of wearing linen breeches, because the law of comeliness and decency is perpetual: here it is evident, that it is generally meant of the exercising and execution of the whole Priesthood, Calvin. 2. Therefore this ordinance is said to be eternal, and perpetual in respect of the subject, because it was to continue, toto tempore, quo durarent sacrificia, all the time that the sacrifices were to continue: the sacrifices then in Christ being determined, (for the Jews themselves at this day forbear to sacrifice, nay they would choose rather to die, than offer sacrifice, out of the land of Canaan, and especially because they have no Tabernacle nor Temple, where only by the law they were to sacrifice:) the law of the Priesthood must also cease, the sacrifices, wherein the Priesthood was exercised, being abolished, Tostat. cap. 28. qu. 21. 3. Augustine giveth another reason why it is called perpetual, quia res significaret aeternas, because it signified eternal things. So also Gloss. interlin. it is so called, quia perpetuam futuram, id est, Christianam religionem significabat: because it signified the Christian religion, which should be perpetual. And Calvin also approveth this sense: Hac vera est ceremoniarum perpetuitas, &c. This is the true perpetuity of the ceremonies, that they have their being in Christ, the substance and truth of them.

QUEST. IX. The spiritual application of Aaron's manner of consecration.

NOw this manner of consecrating of Aaron, by offering sacrifices, washing, putting on the Priestly apparel, in being anointed, hath this signification: 1. The presenting of the bullock to be sacrificed, Aspersionem designat sanguinis Domini nostri, doth signify the sprinkling of Christ's blood, Beda. The two rams do set forth Christ, ex anima & corpore, &c. consisting in his human nature of body and soul, Strabus : or they signify, duplicem populum, &c. the two people, the old and new, Lippom. panes azymi munditiam vita, the unleavened bread betokeneth the holiness of life, without the leaven of maliciousness, as S. Paul expoundeth, 1 Cor. 6.

2. The solemn washing of Aaron and his sons, did signify the Sacrament of Baptism: and as they do not put on their garments, until first the filth of the flesh be washed away: Sic nisi in Christo novi homines renaseantur ; So unless they become new men in Christ, they are not admitted unto holy things, Jerome. They which come unto God must first be purged, and cleansed from their sins, Pelarg. And hereby more specially was signified in this solemn washing with water, the public Baptism of Christ, which though he needed not in respect of himself, yet thereby he would consecrate that Sacrament for us, Osiander.

3. By the putting on of the Priestly garments, after they were washed, is signified the putting on of Christ, cum tunicas polliceas deposuerimus, after we have put off our old vestures, Jerome. So Procopius applieth those words of the Apostle, Put on the Lord Jesus Christ ; So also Pelarg.

4. By the oil, wherewith Aaron was anointed, Beda understandeth, Gratiam Spiritus sancti, The grace of the Spirit. And Jerome here applieth that saying of the Prophet David, Psal. 45. God even thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Therefore was Aaron only anointed in the head, and none of the rest: because Christ received the Spirit beyond measure; and the holy Ghost descended and lighted upon him, when he was baptized, Matth. 3. Osiander.

QUEST. X. Why the Priests lay their hands upon the head of the beast.

Vers. 10. AAron and his sons shall put their hands upon the head, &c. 1. Augustine by this ceremony understandeth the receiving of power, Vt ipsi etiam aliquid consecrare possent, that they also might consecrate afterward unto God. So also Lyranus. But because the people also did use to lay their hands upon their sacrifices which they brought, Levite. 4. who received thereby no power to sacrifice, this seemeth not to be the meaning. 2. Junius thus expoundeth it, Quasi seipses sisterent. & sacrificarent Iehovae: As though they did present themselves to be sacrificed unto God, yet not in their own person, but Christ's. But this cannot be the meaning, for the former reason, because the people did also lay on their hands, who were therein no type of Christ that sacrificed himself for us. 3. Some think, that by this ceremony in imposing of their hands, they did resign their right in that beast, Tostat. Et destinarunt illud, ut fieret sacrificium, and ordained it to be a sacrifice, Osiander. 4. But there is more in it than so: they hereby confess, that they were worthy to die in God's justice for their sins: Sed ex divina misericordia mors in animal transferebatur: But by the divine mercy, their death was transferred upon the beast, Lyranus. wherein Christ is lively shadowed forth, who died for us, Simler.

QUEST. XI. Of the divers kinds of sacrifices, and why some kind of beasts were taken for sacrifice, and not other.

Vers. 11. SO thou shalt kill the calf, &c. 1. There were three kind of sacrifices which were usually offered: the first was called holocaustum, a burnt offering, because it was wholly consumed upon the Altar: and this kind was offered specially, ad reverentiam majestatis, for reverence of the divine majesty, to testify our obedience and service. The second was the sacrifice for sin: whereof part was burned upon the Altar, part was for the Priests use, unless it were a sin offering for the Priest or the people: in which cases all was consumed on the Altar. The third sort were peace offerings, which were offered in sign of thanksgiving for some benefit received, or to be received, whereof part was burnt upon the Altar, part was for the Priest, and the rest was for the offerer, Thom. 2. Now although there were many clean birds and beasts, yet there were only two kind of the one, the pigeon, and turtle dove; and three of the other, bullocks, sheep, and goats, which were taken for sacrifice: whereof Philo giveth this reason; because both among the fowls and beasts these are of the meekest and mildest nature, the pigeon and turtle dove, and amongst the beasts these three sorts are tamest, when we see, that whole herds and flocks of them may be driven by a boy: and they have neither paws or claws to hurt, as ravenous beasts; nor yet armed with teeth to devour, wanting the upper row: wherein appeareth the harmless disposition of these creatures. Philo addeth further, that these beasts of all other are most serviceable unto man's use, sheep and goats for clothing and food, and bullocks beside the use of their flesh for meat, and their skins for leather, they serve with their labor in the tilling of the ground. To these may a third reason be added: because the land of Canaan most abounded with these kinds of fowls and beasts, they are prescribed for sacrifice. And a fourth also may be this: they were not to offer of wild beasts, because they could not easily be had, and hardly are they gotten alive: for which cause they were not appointed to offer fishes, which could not so easily be taken; and very hardly alive: but their sacrifices must be brought alive, Riber. 3. Now in the consecration of Aaron and his sons, all these sacrifices are offered; a bullock for a sin offering, one ram for a burnt offering, and another for a peace offering.

QUEST. XII. Why the blood was laid upon the horns of the Altar.

Vers. 12. THou shalt take of the blood, and put it upon the horns, &c. 1. The blood here was not used▪ to confirm any league or covenant between God and his people, as chap. 24. for in that case, first the words and articles of the covenant were read, before the blood was sprinkled, and beside each party, between whom the covenant was made, were besprinkled; not only the Altar, which represented God, but the people also. But here neither of these is performed, there is no covenant rehearsed, neither are the people sprinkled with the blood. 2. There was then another use beside this of the sprinkling of blood, which was to purge and cleanse, and so to pacify and appease: as this reason is yielded why they should not eat the blood, because the Lord had given it to be offered upon the Altar, to be an atonement for their souls, Levite. 17.11. And not only the Altar of burnt offering was cleansed by blood, but the whole Tabernacle; the high Priest in the day of reconciliation sprinkled the blood upon the Mercy seat, and before the Mercy seat, the Altar and Tabernacle also, to purge them from the sins and trespasses of the people, Levite. 16.16. Therefore the Apostle saith, Almost all things by the law are purged with blood, Heb. 9.22. The blood of the sacrifices then was put upon the Altar, that thereby, as if it were their own blood, God's wrath might be appeased: by which blood of the external sacrifices Christ's blood of atonement was prefigured, whereby indeed the wrath of God is appeased toward us, Tostat. q. 5. 3. And although the sin offerings were specially intended for the remission of sins, and so the blood in such sacrifices was to that end laid upon the horns of the Altar, to purge and reconcile: yet in other sacrifices also, as in burnt offerings, Levite. 1.11. and in peace offerings, Levite. 3.2. the blood was sprinkled round about upon the Altar; because in them also there was atonement made with God, Levite. 1.4. though not so directly as in sin offerings, Tostat. qu. 6. 4. R. Solomon here is of opinion, that the blood was not laid upon all the four horns of the Altar, but only in two corners thereof one opposite to another, and not upon the same side. But Levite. 16.18. it is said in express words, that he should put of the blood upon the horns of the Altar round about.

QUEST. XIII. What became of the blood, which was poured at the bottom of the Altar.

Vers. 12. THou shalt pour the rest of the blood at the foot of the Altar, &c. 1. Lyranus thinketh that there was some pipe full of holes in the bottom of the Altar, whereby the blood soked into the ground, and was so dried up. But the ground could not drink up all the blood of the sacrifices: especially in their solemn feasts, when many sacrifices were offered: as when Solomon at the dedication of the Temple offered so many thousands of beeves and sheep: the ground being so filled with blood would have been very noisome. 2. Tostatus therefore saith, that this blood, miraculose de • iccabatur was miraculously dried up, and converted by God's power into some other element, qu. 6. But where any other reason may be found out, we must not run unto miracles. 3. Cajetan here maketh mention of his former conceit, that the Altar was filled with earth within, which might be imagined to serve to drink up the blood, and that there was some void place left beside. But the same inconvenience in the noisome smell of the earth so tainted, would have followed. But Cajetan addeth further, that jugis ignis altaris tollebat • mnem inde •• utiam foet • ris, the continual fire upon the Altar did take away the stench of the blood. 4. But the more probable opinion is, that not only the smell was taken away by the smell of the fire, but sanguis ipse consumebatur: but the blood it self was consumed by the heat of the fire, being poured at the bottom of the Altar on the inside, Oleast. Simler.

QUEST. XIV. Why the fat was burned upon the Altar, and how.

Vers. 13. THou shalt take all the fat. 1. The Lord commanded the fat of the offerings to be burnt upon the Altar, ut obviaretur ritui idololatrarum, to contrary the rite and custom of Idolaters, who used to eat the fat of their sacrifices, as Deut. 32.38. they did eat the fat of their sacrifices, Lyranus. Tostat. qu. 6. And another reason is this: Deus optim • qua{que} sibi offerri, &c. God will have the best of the sacrifice to be offered to him, Lippoman. 2. Together with the fat, and caul they must also take the kidneys, which are not properly taken for any part of the flesh: for the flesh must be burnt without the host, yea all the flesh, Levite. 4.11. 3. Because the word katar, doth properly signify thur • ficari, to burn, as incense: and so the fat here is prescribed so to be burned. Cajetan would infer, that it was to be burned as incense, that is, not to be consumed with the flame, sed instar thuri • paulatim resolvi in fumum: but as incense to be resolved into smoke by little and little. But this seemeth to be too curious. Oleaster giveth a better reason, why this word is used, because God being displeased with the stinking smell of our sins: Hujusmodi suffumigationibus occurrebatur ; These suffumigations were used by way of remedy whereby the Lord smelled a savor of rest, as the Scripture speaketh, and yet but typically: for the true sweet smelling sacrifice was Christ.

QUEST. XV. Why the flesh, skin, and dung was burned without the host.

Vers. 14. THe flesh, his skin and dung shalt thou burn without the host, &c. 1. In this special sacrifice for sin, which was offered in the consecration of Aaron, the skin, together with the flesh was burnt without the host: but in burnt offerings, because all was to be burned upon the Altar, and yet it was not fit the skin should be consumed with the rest, that belonged to the Priest, Levite. 7.8. but in peace offerings the skin was the offerers, as the rest which remained beside the Priests portion, Tostat. 2. All is commanded to be carried out of the host and there burned, not only to signify, as Lyranus • aith, Quod peccata longe esse debene à sacerdotibus ▪ That sins must be far off from the Priest: for the like was to be done also in the sin offering for the whole congregation, Levite. 4.1. but in every sin offering they did not so; as if the sin offering were for the Prince, or any other private person, they did not then carry it without the host: this was done therefore, in detestationem peccati sacerdotis, to show the greatness of the sin of the Priest, as likewise of the whole congregation, Tostat. qu. 7. 3. And whereas this is added as a reason, for it is a sin offering, it must not be so understood, as though generally every sin offering was so to be served: for in the sin offerings for the Prince, or any private person, that usage of burning without the host, was not observed: but it must have special reference to the thing here sacrificed for sin, which was a young bullock. Now for the Prince or private person a goat was offered, not a bullock: but when a bullock was offered, as for the sin of the Priest, or of all the whole congregation, then it was to be so burned without the host: this then is the sense, because this bullock is sacrificed for sin, Tostat. qu. 7. 4. Though here no mention be made what shall be done with the inwards and legs, and other parts of the beast, which are not here rehearsed: yet it may be supplied out of Levite. 4.11. that all those likewise should be carried without the host, and there burned, Tostat. qu. 6.

QUEST. XVI. Of the mystical application of the sacrifice of the bullock, with the rites thereof.

THis first sacrifice of the bullock is thus mystically applied: 1. By the fat of the inwards, the liver and kidneys, Theodoret understandeth the affections: Adeps, qui ventriculum oper • t, gulae vitium indicat, &c. The fat which covereth the belly, signifieth the vice of gluttony, &c. that which covereth the reins and kidneys, the pleasure of the flesh; and the liver, unto which the seat of choler is annexed, betokeneth anger: H • c omnia consecrarijubet ; He commandeth these things to be consecrated. To the same purpose also Basil, Quibus omnibus id nobiscum agitur, ut adversus voluptatem totam, quasi contra multorum capitum hydram, &c. By all these we are moved, that we should fight against all pleasure, as a serpent of many heads, &c. 2. So Borrhaius thereby understandeth the mortifying of the old man: and by the carrying of the flesh, skin and dung without the gate, as a thing ignominious, the suffering of Christ, which took upon him our reproach without the gates of Jerusalem, as the Apostle applieth it, Hebr. 13.12. So also Gallas. Marbach. 3. By the four corners of the Altar, which were touched with blood, Lippoman interpreteth the shedding of Christ's blood, who is our Altar and sacrifice, by the which we are redeemed: Terra quoque nostris sceleribus polluta, &c. hausto Christi sanguine reconciliatur, &c. The earth also, being polluted with our sins, having as it were drunk in Christ's blood, is reconciled: which otherwise would cry out for vengeance against us. 4. Marbach. by the laying the blood upon the four corners of the Altar, would have signified the preaching of the shedding of Christ's blood, and the dispersing thereof to the four corners of the world. And by the inwards, liver, and reins, which are the seats of pleasure, the willingness of Christ, and delight in fulfilling the will of his Father. So also Osiander. 5. But this is the most proper signification thereof: by the fat is understood the grossness of our nature, in all the faculties and powers of the soul: which are three, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the understanding in the heart, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the angry motion in the liver, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the concupiscence or desiring faculty in the reins: all which by nature are corrupted: and therefore they must be offered unto God, to be purged by the fire of his Spirit. So Junius, Pelargus, Simlerus.

QUEST. XVII. Why the sacrifice for sin was offered first.

Vers. 15. THou shalt also take one ram. Now followeth the second kind of sacrifice, which was the burnt offering: 1. The bullock, the sacrifice for sin, was first to be offered, that thereby the other sacrifices might be accepted: for as it is in the Gospel, John 9.31. God heareth not sinners: neither doth he accept the sacrifice of sinners. And hereof it was, that in the solemn day of reconciliation, the high Priest first prayed for his own sins, and made reconciliation for himself and his house, Levite. 16.11. and then for the people. So in this place the burnt offering and peace offering would not have been accepted, unless first the Lord were appeased toward them for their sins: it was requisite therefore, that the sacrifice for sin should be the first, whereby the rest might be sanctified. 2. But it will be objected, that by the same reason neither can the sacrifice for sin be accepted, because he that offereth it, hath not yet obtained remission of his sins. The answer whereunto is this: That it must be considered, whether he that sacrificeth for sin doth it for his own sins, or another's: for others, his sacrifice cannot be accepted, as long as he is in sin, but for his own sins such sacrifice is available. As concerning prayer likewise, which is the spiritual sacrifice of Christians: a man yet in his sins shall not be heard, praying for another: but for his own sins he shall be heard: otherwise it would follow, that he which hath committed any sin, should never have remission and forgiveness of them, if his prayers should not be received. 3. Beside, as it is in the Sacraments of the New Testament: Quadam requirunt dispositionem in suscipiente, quaedam non ; Some required a disposition and preparation in the receiver, some not: as in the Eucharist, unless one examine himself before, and so be prepared to receive that holy Sacrament, he is an unworthy receiver, and eateth and drinketh hi • own damnation, 1 Cor. 11.29. But in the other Sacrament of Baptism no such disposition in the receiver is required: for infants that cannot examine themselves, neither have faith, are thereunto admitted. So the like difference there was in the sacrifices of the Law: some served to prepare and dispose the offerer to perform other duties, as the sacrifices for sin: some required a preparation, and disposition going before, as the burnt offerings, and peace offerings, Tostat qu. 9.

QUEST. XVIII. How the blood of the burnt offering was bestowed upon the Altar.

Vers. 16. THou shalt take his blood, and sprinkle it round about upon the Altar. 1. This must be understood to be all the blood, which was to be bestowed round about upon the Altar: for it was not lawful to carry any part of the blood to any other profane place: and it was the law of burnt offerings, that all the blood should be offered unto God, Levite. 1.5. 2. Concerning the manner of sprinkling or pouring this blood round about upon the Altar, neither is the opinion of R. Solomon and Lyranus to be received, that think, this was not done in parte superiore, sed magis circa basin, in the upper part of the Altar, but rather toward the bottom: for it was sprinkled upon the Altar, therefore not under; and it was offered unto God: but all offerings were offered upon the Altar. And again, Levite. 1.15. it is said the blood should be strained, shed or pressed forth on the sides of the Altar: it seemeth then that it was sprinkled above▪ and so ran down by the sides of the Altar. Neither yet doth Tostatus guess aright, that the blood being poured aloft did run down per partem exteriorem, by the outward part or side of the Altar: for it could not be conveniently so poured without, as to run down by the sides: therefore the blood was rather poured on the inside of the Altar: because it was part of the burnt offering, and therefore was to be consecrate unto God by fire, as it is said, verse. 18. It is an offering made by fire unto the Lord. And by this means the fire licked up the gross substance of the blood, and so dried up the vapors thereof, which otherwise would have been very noisome, Simler.

QUEST. XIX. Why the horns of the Altar are not here touched with blood.

Vers. 16. ANd thou shalt sprinkle it round about upon the Altar. 1. Some things are common to the burnt offering, and the sacrifice for sin; as that Aaron and his sons did stay their hands upon the head thereof, that it was killed before the Lord, and that the blood thereof was laid upon the Altar: but these things were peculiar unto it; the dividing of the parts, not to burn them by piece-meal one after another, but to couch them better together, and to lay one part upon another: then the inwards and legs were washed, and all was burnt upon the Altar, Simler. 2. But here the blood is not appointed to be laid upon the horns of the Altar, as in the sin offering: not because, as some think, in the sin offering expiation was made for sin, and therefore the horns of the Altar were touched with blood: for in other sacrifices also there was expiation of sin: as Levite. 1.4. it is said of the burnt offering, It is his atonement ▪ and the peace offering also was for a sweet savor, Levite. 33. And generally in every sacrifice, the blood which was offered upon the Altar, was for atonement, Levite. 17.11. now the Altar was sprinkled with blood both in the burnt offerings, Levite. 1.5. and in the peace offerings, 3·2. therefore in them also there was atonement made. But because the sin offering was specially and principally intended to be a sacrifice for sin, whereas the other directly were referred to the praise of God: therefore after a more special manner the horns of the Altar are touched with blood in the sacrifice for sin, and not in the other, Tostat. quast. 8.

QUEST. XX. Why the dung in the sin offerings, being an unclean thing, was prescribed to be burned.

Vers. 17. ANd wash the inwards, and the legs, &c. This rite and usage was not observed before in the sin offering, for there the skin and dung was burnt without the host. But here this doubt will be moved, seeing that no unclean thing must be offered unto God, how the dung could be burnt with fire. For answer whereunto: 1. It must be considered, that this was no part of the sacrifice properly: for the sacrifices which were offered unto God, were burnt upon the Altar: but these things were burnt without the host: so likewise the red cow which was burnt without the host, with the skin and dung, Numb. 19. was not properly a sacrifice offered unto God, though it were an holy rite by him ordained to be observed. 2. This ceremony in burning the skin, and dung of the sin offering without the host, was prescribed to be done to this end, ad monstrandam detestationem peccatorum magnorum, &c. to show the detestation of great and enormous sins: and therefore this rite was only observed in the sin offerings for the Priest, and the whole congregation, to show that their sins were greatest: in the sin offerings for the trespasses of others, it was not prescribed, Tostat. quaest. 10.

QUEST. XXI. Why the burnt offering was so called, and how it differed from other sacrifices.

Vers. 18. FOr it is a burnt offering unto the Lord. 1. The name in Greek is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , so called, because it was whole, or all burnt upon the Altar, saving the skin: in other sacrifices, as for sin, and in the peace offerings, certain parts only were burnt, as the fat and the kidneys, with some other parts; but here all was consumed, Tostat. qu. 10. 2. But the word in the original is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , gholah, or as Iun. reads, hholah, Oleaster pronounceth it without an asperation, • lah, which is derived of ghalah, to ascend: so called because it all ascended into vapor and smoke, Oleaster. 3. So this holocaust or burnt offering is commended for three things: 1. Because it was a burnt offering, it was all consumed upon the Altar: 2. In respect of the effect, it was a sweet savor: all here turned into vapor, and so gave a more fragrant smell than the other sacrifices, which did not send up such a cloud of vapor or smoke, because they were not all consumed, as the burnt offering was: 3. It was an offering made by fire: Dic • tur hoc ad differentiam elixorum, which is so said by way of difference from those things which are boiled in water, Cajetan.

QUEST. XXII. Why the burnt offering is called a sweet savor.

Vers. 18. FOr a sweet savor. 1. The word is riach nic • oa • h, a savor of rest, that is, an acceptable savor wherein the Lord delighteth, and being thereby appeased, resteth and ceaseth from his anger, Oleaster. It is a metaphor taken from sweet odors, wherein he which smelleth a sweet savor resteth and contenteth himself: Non parientes aliquid fastidii, &c. such odors as bring no loathsomeness, Cajetan. 2. Which phrase must be figuratively taken; for properly God, nor no other spirit, is said to smell: for savor and smell is the object of the sense of smelling: Spirits then not being endued with the sensitive faculty, are not properly affected with the object of the sense. And though the Lord should be affected with smells, yet the savor that cometh from the burning of flesh of it self, is not so pleasant and savourly, Tostat. qu. 10. 3. Therefore it is said to be an acceptable savor unto God, in regard of their obedience and willing mind: as Augustine, Deum delectat, cùm spiritualiter exhibetur, God is delighted, when it is spiritually presented, &c. that is, with faith and true devotion of the heart. So also Theodoret, Sacrificium quod ex lege fiebat, suavem odorem appellavit, The sacrifice which was done according to the law, he calleth a sweet odor. Therefore where the external act was offered, without the inward devotion and obedience, the Lord was not pleased with such sacrifices, as with Cain's and Saul's, Tostat. qu. 10. 4. But it is called a savor of rest, specially because it was a type and sacrifice of our blessed Savior, who was indeed an offering and a sacrifice of a sweet smelling savor unto God, Ephes. 5.2. Osiander, Gallas. To the same purpose, before them, Procopius. Christ was offered for us all unto his Father, in odorem bonae fragrantia, for a sweet smelling savor.

QUEST. XXIII. Of the mystical sense of the ram of burnt offering.

FOr the mystical sense of this second sacrifice of the first ram, which was a burnt offering: 1. Procopius by cutting the same in pieces, understandeth the divers members of Christ, which make all one body: by the washing of the inward parts, sermonis puritatem, the pureness of speech. 2. Pelargus, by the division of the parts, would have signified the right dividing of the Word: by the washing of the inwards, the purging of our internal parts: by the burnt offering, the consecration both of our bodies and souls unto God. 3. But these figures are more fitly accommodated and applied to Christ. By the killing of the ram, the division of the parts, and the washing of them, is shadowed forth the passion of Christ: and by the burnt offering the ardent love of Christ, quo totus in cruce conflagravit, wherewith he was all as it were set on fire on the cross, Marbach. 4. And as the burnt offering ascended up in the fire, so Christ is ascended into heaven, having obtained eternal redemption for us: and afterward sent the fire of his Spirit upon his Apostles, Simlerus, Borrhaius.

QUEST. XXIV. Of the third ram, why it is called the ram of consecracion.

Vers. 20. ANd take of the blood, and put upon the lap of Aaron's ear, &c. 1. Now followeth the third kind of sacrifice, which was of the kind of Eucharisticall, or peace offerings: and in the consecration of Aaron, and his sons divers sacrifices are used, because this calling, cater as omnes dignitate anteiret, &c. did excel all other in dignity, Gallas. 2. The peace offerings were of two so •• s, either to obtain some blessing, as to entreat for peace and prosperity▪ or to give thanks for some blessing received▪ in both these respects; it was requisite, that Aaron should offer peace offerings in his consecration, both • beg of God, that he might prosper in the execution of his office, as also to show his thankfulness to God, who had advanced him to such an high calling, Tostat. qu. 10. 3. Yet this offering was not properly of the kind of peace offerings, which are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 〈◊〉 pacifica, peace offerings: but this was the ra •• , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , milluim, of filling or perfection, verse. 22. quia illia Sacerdotum consecratio perfic • retur, because thereby the consecration of the Priests was perfected, Gallas.

QUEST. XXV. Why the blood was put upon the right ear, thumb, and toe of Aaron.

Vers. 20. PVt upon the lap of Aaron's ear. 1. Not, in superiore parte auris, in the upper part of Aaron's ear, as the Chaldee, but the nether lap, Ian. Or soft part of the ear, Genevens. 2. The ear, hand and foot, are anointed with the blood, to signify the purging and sanctifying of all their parts, to make them fit for the Priesthood: as Isaiah tongue was touched with a coal from the Altar, and so purified, Isai. 6. Tostat. qu. 10. 3. Though the right ear, right hand and foot are only named, because dexterae partes sunt insigniores, the right parts are more excellent: yet thereby the consecration of the whole man is signified, Simler. 4. The • ongue of the Priest is not here mentioned, but the ear, which is the sense of doctrine, by the which the understanding is informed, and without the which the tongue cannot speak: for as the Wiseman saith, He that heareth, speaketh continually, Prov. 21.28. And beside, the ear is expressed to shadow forth the obedience of Christ, in hearing and obeying his Fathers will, Simler. Calvin also giveth another reason, Hîc non attingi d • cendi munus, sed intercedendi ; That Christ's office of teaching is not here touched, but of mediating.

QUEST. XXVI. How the blood was sprinkled upon the Altar round about.

Vers. 20. ANd shall sprinkle the blood upon the Altar round about. 1. The Latin Translater here readeth, Thou shalt pour the blood upon the Altar: but the word is zarak, to sprinkle. First, the Altar was sprinkled, and then the rest was poured at the foot of the Altar, verse. 12. for if it had been all poured there now, whence should Moses have had the blood, which in the next verse is said to be upon the Altar, that is, in some vessel there standing, wherewith he besprinkled Aaron, and the rest, and their garments? 2. Neither is R. Solomon his conjecture probable, that the blood was laid only upon two corners of the Altar, not on the same side, but one contrary to the other; for this is against the Text, which saith, that he sprinkled upon the Altar round about: then not in two corners only. And beside, if the blood had been put only in two corners of the Altar, it should have been laid, not poured or sprinkled; but the blood was not put upon the horns of the Altar, in any peace offering, as was used to be done in sin offerings, Tostat. quaest. 11. 3. And whereas the Altar is sprinkled round about, we must not understand this to be done at the bottom round about upon the pavement, but above, so that the blood might run down to the bottom.

QUEST. XXVII. How the blood and oil was sprinkled upon their garments, without spotting.

Vers. 21. ANd he shall take of the blood, &c. and of the anointing oil, &c. 1. Some may think that this sprinkling of the blood, and oil, was done severally one after another. But because there is mention made but of one sprinkling, it is more like they were tempered and mingled together, and so sprinkled, Lyranus. 2. R. Solomon thinketh, that the oil was sprinkled in remembrance of Jacob's anointing the stone in Bethel with oil: and the blood, in remembrance of the striking of the blood of the pascal Lamb, upon the door-posts in Egypt. But there was small affinity between those ceremonies, and the consecration of the Priests. Therefore this rather was the reason of it, because almost all things in the Law were purified with blood, that the Priests garments might by this means be purified, and sanctified most of all, which they were to use in the sanctifying of others. 3. And because the sprinkling of blood and oil, might seem to be a blemish to the priestly garments: some think that they were washed afterward. But it is not like, that that was washed off, wherewith the garments were consecrated. Some do bring in here a miracle, in that the garments were kept from spots and blemishes, notwithstanding the sprinkling of blood and oil upon them. But we are not to admit of unnecessary miracles. These spots then were very sma • l, and so made no notable marks in the garment: and if they did, it was magis ad honorem, quam horrorem, &c. more for honor, than horror: seeing thereby the priestly vestures were consecrated, Tostat. qu. 11.

QUEST. XXVIII. The mystical signification of the ram of consecration, with the rites thereof.

THe mystical signification of this ceremony is this: 1. The ram of perfection or consecration, signifieth Christ: Christus omnes in virtutibus perfectos constituit ; Christ maketh us perfect in all virtues: he it is that sanctifieth our ears, hands and feet, and all our parts and members, as here the tip of the ear, the right thumb, and great toe, are touched with blood, Procopius. 2. Hereby also is signified the obedience of Christ, by dipping the ear in blood, who was obedient to his Father, Simler. 3. And hereby also, the high Priest was put in mind of his duty, by the dipping of the ear is signified, that the Priest, primum oracula Divina auscultare, &c. should first give ear to the Divine oracles, and then teach them unto others, Simler. By the dipping of the thumb and toe in blood, omnes actiones vitae, &c. all the actions of the life are expressed, Calvin. By the feet also in Scripture, are signified the affections: this dipping then of the hands and feet, doth signify, Omnem actionum externarum & internarum sanctificationem, the sanctifying of all, both external and internal actions, Simler. 4. And by this sprinkling of the blood, is signified the sprinkling of Christ's blood by faith, upon the hearts of the faithful, hac enim aspergillum illud est, &c. for this is that sprinkle, wherewith our hearts are sprinkled, Marbach. 5. And further, whereas Aaron with the rest of the Priests are thus sprinkled with blood, it is shown, summos Sacerdotes non fuisse ita perfectos, &c. that the high Priests of the Law were not so perfect, that they needed not to be purged, Osiander. But they had need of another high Priest, by whose blood they should be sanctified.

QUEST. XXIX. How these things were put into the Priests hands, and shaken to and fro.

Vers. 24. THou shalt put all this in the hands of Aaron, and shake them to and fro, &c. 1. The Latin Interpreter here readeth amiss: thou shalt sanctify them: which Tostatus would help out thus: because divers ceremonies were used in the consecration of the Priests, quaelibet earum sanctifica • io vocabatur, everyone of them was called a kind of sanctifying. But the word nuph, signifieth to shake, or move to and fro. 2. Some do translate it, thou shalt lift up. So Pagnin. Oleaster, who referreth it to the ascending and rising up of the vapor or smoke. But this shaking to and fro was done before they were burned upon the Altar, which followeth in the next verse: and there is another word afterward used, to show the lifting up, for the shaking to and fro is called tenupha, and the lifting up terumah, of rum to lift up. 3. R. Solomon saith the manner of putting these things into the Priests hands, and shaking them to and fro, was this: Moses did put them into their hands, and then with his hands underneath theirs, did shake them to and fro, toward the East and West, and then toward the North and South. 4. And by this ceremony of putting those things into the Priests hands: Moses delivered them, jus talia possidendi, right to enjoy such things: they should be afterwards for the Priests use, Lippom.

QUEST. XXX. Whether Moses were indeed a Priest.

Vers. 26. ANd it shall be thy part. 1. The Latin Interpreter readeth here corruptly, erit in partem suam, it shall be for his part, that is, Aaron's: for what Aaron's part should be, is afterward shown, verse. 28. the word is, lecha to thee: as the Septuagint translate, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : it shall be for thy part, that is, Moses should have the Priests part at this time. 2. Lippoman hence would infer, that Moses was the high Priest: both because he did consecrate the high Priest, and he had the breast for his part, which only belonged to the high Priest. 3. I rather think with Osiander, that Moses did at this time, quodam modo fungi officio Sacerdotis, &c. after a sort execute the Priests office. So also Simler. Gallas. He was in the Priests stead in the consecration of Aaron. But if Moses had been actually a Priest, he could not afterward have resigned that office and calling: neither can this be inferred upon that place, Psalm. 99.6. Moses and Aaron among his Priests, that Moses was a Priest: but it showeth that Moses and Aaron were most excellent among the Priests, as Samuel among those that called upon his name, Vatabl. Or Moses was counted among the Priests, because he did extraordinarily execute the Priests office, as in the consecration of Aaron, 4. Tostatus calleth Moses, simplicem Levitam, a simple or plain Levite, quaest. 14, He was indeed of the tribe of Levi, and in that sense Aaron also might be called a Levite: but Moses was more than a Levite, because he both sacrificed, and consecrated the Priests, which the Levites could not do.

QUEST. XXXI. Whether Aaron had the breast and shoulder of the ram of consecration.

Vers. 27. THou shalt sanctify the breast of the shake offering, and the shoulder of the heave offering. 1. Whereas the right shoulder was shaken to and fro before and burnt upon the Altar, this could not be the shoulder of the heave offering here spoken of: for it was burnt already upon the Altar. 2. Some think therefore that it was the left shoulder, which is here called the heave offering, and that Moses had that and the breast for his part at this time, because he was now in the Priests stead, Osiander. Marbach. But this is not understood of Moses, that he should have them; they are for Aaron and his sons, verse. 28. Moses part is set down before, what it should be, verse. 26. namely the breast. And it was the right shoulder, not the left, which was given to the Priest, Levite. 7.32. The left shoulder, and the rest of the peace offering, beside that which was due unto the Priest, belonged unto the offerer. 3. Therefore this Law here set down is not concerning the ram of consecration, out of the which Aaron had not now the Priests part, because he and the other Priest were at that time but as the offerers and presenters: but for the time to come an order is set, what part they should have out of the peace offerings of the children of Israel, namely, the breast, and the right shoulder, Tostat. quaest. 13. Iun. Gallas.

QUEST. XXXII. What difference there was between the shake-offering and heave-offering.

Vers 27. THe shoulder of the heave-offering, &c. 1. Some think, that the breast was only shaken to and fro, and therefore was called tenupha, the shake-offering, and the shoulder was only lifted up, so called also terumah, Vatabl. Which Osiander calleth, the one Movenda, the sacrifice to be moved or shaken, the other Levanda, to be lifted up: and Junius seemeth to be of the same opinion, who readeth distinctly, which was shaken to and fro, that is, the breast, and which was lifted up, that is, the shoulder. But the words following will not bear this sense: which was heaved up of the ram of consecration. Now no mention is made before of the heaving up of the shoulder, but of the shaking of it to and fro, with the other things which were put into Aaron's hands, verse. 24. so that the right shoulder of the consecration ram, was not only lifted up, but it was also shaken to and fro. 2. The general opinion therefore i • , that as well the breast as the shoulder, were first heaved up and down, and then shaken to and fro. So R. Solomon, Lyranus, Simlerus, Gallasius, Tostatus, with others. But if they were both indifferently shaken to and fro, and lifted up alike: why are these special names given unto them, Levite. 7.34. The breast shaken to and fro, and the shoulder lifted up? 3. Therefore I neither think, that the breast was shaken only, nor the shoulder lifted up only, because the shoulder was shaken to and fro, verse. 24. and the breast together with the shoulder are indifferently, verse. 28. called an heave-offering: neither yet is it like, that there was no difference of motion in the shaking of them, and the heaving them up: seeing they have special names given them of their divers motions. But it is most probable, that the breast was more shaken to and fro, than lifted up, and therefore is called tenuphah, of the more principal motion: and the shoulder, though it were moved to and fro, yet was chiefly heaved up, and thereof is called terumah, an heave-offering.

QUEST. XXXIII. What is here understood by the heave-offering.

Vers. 28, FOr it is an heave-offering of the children of Israel. 1. Some by Terumah, which is a special name signifying an heave-offering, do understand in general an oblation, Vatarlus. But the same word being in the next verse before used in a special signification for an heave-offering, must be also so taken here. 2. Some do take it in that special sense, but then they restrain it only to the shoulder before spoken of, which is called the shoulder of the heave-offering, Osiander. But it is evident, in that a perpetual Law is made for Aaron and his sons, what part they should have of the peace-offerings, and they had as well the shaken breast, as the shoulder, that was lifted up, Levite. 27.34. that this clause must be understood of both those parts before spoken of, the breast, and the shoulder. 3. Some by the heaving here understand only the dividing and separating of these parts, which was to be made by the children of Israel, So Oleaster: and in the same sense the Latin Interpreter translateth, primitivae sunt, they are the first things, that is, the principal or best of the offerings of the children of Israel. But the word terumah being before used in that special signification for an heave-offering, should be also so taken here. 4. Therefore this term terumah, heave-offering, is given both to the shaken breast, and heaved shoulder, of the more principal motion: for these gifts were first of all by the Priest lifted up▪ and presented before God in the hands of the Priest, and in that respect were called an heave-offering, Borrh.

QUEST. XXXIV. Of the mystical application of the shaking to and fro, and of the breast and shoulder of the ram given unto the Priests.

FOr the mystical application of these rites and ceremonies: 1. In that part of the sacrifice was shaken to and fro on every side, it signified Deum totius terra esse Dominum, that God is Lord of the whole earth, Oleaster: and beside it betokened, that Christi vera victimae merita & beneficia, &c. that the merits and benefits of Christ, the true sacrifice, should by the preaching of the Gospel be spread abroad into all the world, Borrh. But the Hebrews exposition is fond, who would have hereby signified, that all men from all parts of the world should come to Jerusalem, ibi optimâ aurâ fruituros, there to have their health, and to enjoy an wholesome air, Ex Oleastro. For we see that not by coming to Jerusalem, but in departing from the earthly Jerusalem, with the carnal rites thereof, by preaching of the Gospel the Gentiles have received health and salvation of their souls, which is more precious than the health of the body.

2. In that part of the sacrifice was given unto the offerers to eat; it showeth that Christ did not only deliver himself unto death for us, sed etiam in cibum dare, &c. but also giveth himself to be our meat, nourishing us unto eternal life: as he saith, John. 6.54. My flesh is meat indeed, my blood is drink indeed, &c. Marbach.

3. And in that the breast and shoulder are given unto the Priest, it teacheth, as Gregory well saith: Vt quod de sacrificio praecipitur sumere, hoc de seipso discat authori immolare ; That what he is commanded to take of the sacrifice, he should learn himself to offer unto God; quod toto pectore & oper • , &c. that with all their heart and endeavor, they should watch upon their office, Iun. Vt sint tanquam pectus, & humeri populi, &c. To be as the breast of the people to provide and take care for their souls, and to be as their shoulders, to bear the burden of their vocation, Simler.

QUEST. XXXV. Of the consecrating of Aaron's successor in his garments.

Vers. 29. ANd the holy garments, &c. 1. The Latin Interpreter readeth in the singular, the holy garment: but it is in the plural, bigdee, garments: for there was not one garment, but many, ten in all, which were consecrated for the high Priest. 2. The Priests which succeeded Aaron, were not to use any other garments, but those which Aaron was consecrated in: as Eleazar put on Aaron priestly vesture, when he was consecrated Priest in his fathers place, Numb. 20. Lyranus. 3. And it is added, shall be his sons after him: whereby the use of these garments is not made general to all the Priests, but only unto them which should succeed in the priesthood, Cajetan. 4. And this difference may be observed between the consecration of Aaron, and his successor: that Aaron in his consecration, was both consecrated himself, and his garments with him: but his successor only was to be consecrated in those garments, which needed not to be consecrated again: unless, the old garments being old, new were to be made in their place, and then they were to be consecrated, as Aaron's priestly garments were at the first, Tostat. quaest. 13. 5. These garments the high Priest at the time of his consecration was to wear seven days together: he was not afterward tied necessarily to wear them so long together, but as his ministry and service required, Tostat. qu. 14.

QUEST. XXXVI. By whom the high Priests succeeding Aaron were consecrated.

Vers. 29. TO be consecrate therein. 1. There were two high Priests consecrated extraordinarily: first Aaron, who received his consecration from Moses, who was no Priest, but only for the time executed that office in Aaron's consecration: secondly, Eleazar was consecrated high Priest, his father being yet living: which was not afterward seen in any other succeeding high Priest: for there could not be two high Priests together. But Eleazar was consecrated, his father yet living, because the time of his death was certainly known: as the Lord had shown to Moses: and immediately after Eleazars consecration he died, Numb. 20: but this could not be known in any other high Priest. 2. The rest of the high Priests, which followed after Moses death, were consecrated by the inferior Priests. Tistetus giveth an instance, how the Pope at this day is consecrated by the Bishop of Hastia. But the Gospel acknowledgeth no such high Priesthood, and the Pope doth usurp that place over other Churches: therefore it is nothing to us how an usurper entereth. A better instance may be given, Act. 13.3. where certain that were but Prophets and Doctors of the Church, do yet lay their hands upon the Apostles, Saul and Bernabas, and so they did consecrate them to the work whereunto they were called. Therefore by the like example the inferior Priests might consecrate the high Priest in the Old Testament, there being no other high Priest to do it.

QUEST. XXXVII. Whether Eleazar was consecrated after the manner here prescribed.

Vers. 30. THat son that shall be Priest in his stead, &c. Which is not understood only of the next son of Aaron, which should succeed him, which was Eleazar, but of all the rest of his posterity, which should succeed Aaron in the priesthood: and this order of consecration was rather fulfilled in them, after they came into the land of Canaan, and had a settled State there, than in Eleazar, in whose initiation and entrance into the Priests office, many of these rites and ceremonies were omitted, in respect of the necessity of the time and place: for he is only said to have put on Aaron's priestly clothes: there is no mention made of his washing, anointing, sprinkling.

1. Some think, that those things were done also, though they are not there expressed: as in Scripture many things belonging to the history and narration are omitted. But the ceremonies here prescribed to be done in Aaron's consecration, are not only omitted there in the narration, but they could not be performed in act: for the high Priest was ordinarily to be brought to the door of the Tabernacle, and there to be first washed, and then to put on the priestly garments; but Eleazar was in mount Hor, when he put on Aaron's clothes; where the Tabernacle was not: for this was done in the sight of all the people, who could not see what was done in the Tabernacle. And if Aaron had died in the Tabernacle, it should have been thereby polluted; for the tent wherein any died was unclean, Numb. 19.15. Again, the high Priest, who was anointed in his head and hands, was not to come near any dead body, Levite. 21.10, 11. Eleazar then could not be anointed here in the presence of Aaron, who died there before his face.

2. Some other think therefore that Eleazar only put on Aaron's clothes there; the other ceremonies were performed afterward, when they were come down from the mount: but Eleazar, for the comfort of his father, was there bid to put on his clothes, that he might see his son consecrated in his stead before he died. But this is not like: for the ceremonies could not be kept according to the law of the consecration: seeing the high Priest was first to he washed at the door of the Tabernacle, before he put on the holy garments: he was not by the usual order to put on the Priests apparel first, and then to be washed. Again, seeing Aaron by stripping off his clothes, was together with them deprived of his Priesthood; Eleazar together with the clothes received the full right and authority of the Priesthood: as Vatablus well expoundeth those words of the Lord to Moses, Numb. 20.26. Cause Aaron to put off his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son: that is, constitues pontificem Eleazarum, thou shalt appoint Eleazar Priest for his father.

3. Some further may allege, that seeing Eleazar was consecrated to be a Priest before, there needed now no new consecration, but only the putting on of the priestly garments. But this answer doth not fully satisfy, though Eleazar were now consecrated with his father, and in that respect needed not in all respects to be consecrated, as they which had received no such consecration: for there were certain peculiar things used in the consecration of the high Priest, whose head and hands were anointed with the holy oil, Levite. 21.10. and so were not the inferior Priests.

4. Therefore Tostatus opinion upon the former reasons is most probable, that Eleazar was made high Priest, specially modo, after a special manner, qu. 15.

QUEST. XXXVIII. What services the high Priest was bound to do in the Sanctuary.

Vers. 30. TO minister in the Sanctuary, or, holy place. 1. The holy place or Sanctuary is taken divers ways: 1. For the whole Tabernacle, together with the outward court: in which sense it is said, that Aaron and his sons should bear the iniquity of the Sanctuary, Numb. 8.1. 2. For the Tabernacle it self, without the outwart court: as Exod. 28.35. His sound shall be heard when he goeth into the holy place, that is, when he went into the Tabernacle. 3. It is sometime taken for the outward court: chap. 28.43. when they come to the Altar to minister in the holy place: here it is taken for the Tabernacle. 2. Aaron had four services to do in the Tabernacle: 1. To set the bread in order upon the table, Levite. 24.6. 2. To dress the lamps morning and evening, Levite. 24.3. 3. To burn incense upon the golden Altar, chap. 30.7. 4. To go into the most holy place once in the year to make reconciliation, Levite. 16. But the three first services were common unto the inferior Priests: the last was peculiar to the high Priest, Tostat. qu. 16. 5. Augustine is here deceived, with whom Borrhaius accordeth, that the most holy place is here meant, into the which the high Priest entered only once in the year: for the high Priest did not then put on his glorious apparel, as he did here at his consecration when he went into the most holy place, but the common linen garments, Levite. 16.4.

QUEST. XXXIX. Of other rites belonging to the ram of consecration.

Vers. 31. ANd seeth his flesh in the holy place. Now follow other rites and ceremonies belonging to the ram of consecration: 1. The flesh thereof, that is, the third part remaining, beside that which was offered upon the Altar, and that which was due for this time unto Moses, Osiander. was to be boiled, not upon the Altar, nor yet in any profane place, but in the outward court, here called the holy place. 2. They must eat them at the door of the Tabernacle: after they had boiled them in some place of the court further off, then they shall come nearer to the Tabernacle, and there eat them, Tostat. qu. 16. 3. A stranger shall not eat thereof, not only they which were strangers from Israel, but even the Israelites themselves not of the tribe of Lev • , yea the Levites not of the family of Aaron, could not eat hereof, Tostat. Borrhaius, Osiander: though Simlerus thinketh otherwise, understanding by strangers such as were polluted and unclean, because the lay people might eat of their peace offerings. But though the people might eat of their ordinary peace offerings, yet here because the Priests were the offerers, they only must eat thereof: yea here is no exception of their wives, or children. Lippom. 4. The flesh and bread must be eaten the same day, if any remained till the morning, it should be burnt with fire: this is required, lest by reserving any part thereof, either they might grow into contempt of the holy things, making no difference between them, and their ordinary food, which they might reserve at their pleasure; or lest that which remained might be abused to superstition, Simler. And whereas in ordinary peace offerings they might eat of it the next day, but not upon the third day, Levite. 7.18. but no part of this must be eaten the second day: this was to show that this ram of consecration was a more holy thing, than their ordinary peace offerings, Tostat. quaest. 16.

QUEST. XL. Whether all these rites were of the necessity of the consecration.

Vers. 35 THou shalt do thus unto Aaron, and to his sons, &c. 1. Some are of opinion, that all things here prescribed to be observed and done, were de necessitate consecrationis, of the necessity of the consecration, and if anything were omitted, the consecration was void, R. Solomon, Lyranus. But this is not like, that if anything were neglected in the manner of eating, in respect of the place, persons, or time, that their consecration should thereby have been void: as Levite 10.17. Aaron being in grief for the sudden death of Nadab and Abihu, forgot the sin offering, which they should have eaten, and suffered it to be all burnt: and this was the eighth day after their consecration, Levite. 9.2. when as yet the anointing was fresh upon them, and they did not yet come forth of the doors of the Tabernacle, Levite. 10.7. And yet, notwithstanding this negligence, there was no nullity of Aaron's consecration, Tostat. qu • st. 18.

2. Therefore Tostatus opinion is rather to be received, that some things were of necessity in the consecration, as the washing, anointing of the Priests, the putting on of the priestly apparel, the sprinkling of themselves, and their garments: some things were only de solennitate, belonging to the solemnity of the consecration: as the seething, and eating of it in the holy place, and eating it the same day: it was a sin to omit any of these: but thereby their consecration was not made void.

QUEST. XLI. Why the consecration of the Priests continued seven days.

Vers. 35. SEven days shalt thou consecrate them, &c. 1. This consecration of the Priests was to continue seven days together, that both the Priests hereby might be confirmed in their vocation, and be assured thereof, that they were thereunto appointed of God: and that the people also might thereby take better notice, that they were set apart by the Lord for that holy function, Osiander. 2. And further hereby thus much was signified, that as the Priests seven days together were consecrated, so we, per totum vitae curriculum, throughout the whole course of our life, should be consecrated, and addicted to God's service, Simler. Marbach. 3. Likewise we are hereby admonished, Pontificem continuo proficere, non posse repent summum fieri, &c. that the Priest must daily increase, and go forward, that he cannot be made perfect at once, that many gifts and graces are required in him, Lippoman. 4. It also showeth, that as their consecration was not perfect before the seventh day, so we cannot attain to perfection in this life, Osiander.

QUEST. XLII. Whether all the sacrifices of the first day, were iterated seven days together, or the sacrifice for sin only.

Vers. 36. ANd shalt offer every day a calf. 1. Lyranus thinketh, that not only a calf for a sin offering was sacrificed every day, but two rams also; so that seven calves were offered, and fourteen rams in these seven days: So also Simler. Borrh. Lippom. Pelican. But seeing there is no mention made but only of the sin offering, we have no warrant to imagine any other sacrifice to have been iterated but that, as belonging to their consecration. 2. Josephus thinketh yet more, that all things were iterated every day, which were done upon the first day, as the anointing of them, and the sprinkling of the Priests themselves, and their garments. But this is not like, that their consecration was iterated: it was sufficient for them once to be consecrated: and seeing the ram of consecration was killed only upon the first day, with the blood whereof they were sprinkled; they were so sprinkled but upon the first day. 3. Tostatus his opinion is, that the calf which was the sacrifice for sin, and the consecration ram were offered every day: express mention is made of the one, and the other is implied in these words, seven days shalt thou fill their hands, that is, put into their hands part of the peace offering, to be shaken to & fro before the Lord, as is prescribed, verse. 24. Now the ram of burnt offering needed not to be daily offered during these seven days, because there were every day morning and evening a lamb offered for a burnt sacrifice, Sic Tostat. But this opinion cannot stand: 1. Seeing Moses is bid to take two rams, chap. 24.2. it is like, that either both of them were •• nued every day, or none: 2. And the filling of their hands signifieth nothing else but the consecrating of their Ministry, (as is before shown) whereof the hand was the organe and instrument: it is not literally to be pressed, to signify the putting of the things offered into their hands. 4. Therefore according to the words of the text, of all the sacrifices appointed for the first day, only the calf which is the sin offering, is prescribed to be iterated: and the reason is, because it was to cleanse and purify the Altar, Levite. 8.15. But only in this sacrifice were the horns of the Altar touched with blood, and so sanctified, which was not done in any of the other sacrifices.

QUEST. XLIII. To what end the sin offering was offered every day of the seven.

Vers. 36. THou shalt offer every day a calf, &c. for reconciliation, or to make atonement. 1. This reconciliation was not only made for the sin of the Priests, as thinketh Tostatus: for the horns of the Altar were laid on with this blood, whereby it was purified, Levite. 8.15. 2. Neither yet was this sin offering prescribed only, ad expiandum Altare, to cleanse the Altar, as thinketh Osiander, Calvin. For he had said before, seven days shalt thou consecrate them, that is, the Priests: and then it followeth, and shalt offer every day, &c. so that this daily offering for the space of seven days, belonged unto the consecration of the Priests. 3. Therefore the end of this sacrifice for sin, was both to make atonement for Aaron and his sons, as also to purify and cleanse the Altar, Junius.

QUEST. XLIV. How the Altar was cleansed, and why.

Vers. 36. ANd thou shalt cleanse the Altar. 1. After the consecration of the Priests, is set forth their Ministry and service, both at the Altar of burnt offering, and in the golden altar, in the next Chapter. Here three things are declared, concerning the Altar of burnt offering: 1. How it should be purified: 2. What should be offered thereon: 3. The profit and benefit that should come thereby: the Lord would there come unto them, and speak with them, verse. 42. and dwell among them, verse. 45. Lyranus.

2. Two things are required to the purifying of the Altar: it must first be cleansed, not that it was polluted of it self; but to show, that in respect of man, omnia corruptione naturae profana ob peccatum, &c. that all things by the corruption of our nature are profane, because of sin, Gallas. Marbach. As also it was not only cleansed, but sanctified, and set apart for holy uses: that it should not be lawful to offer their sacrifices elsewhere, but upon that Altar, Osiander.

3. To the cleansing of the Altar, two things only were required: the blood of the sacrifice was laid upon the horns of the Altar, and it was anointed with oil, Borrh. Tostatus beside saith, that the blood which was poured upon the Altar was rubbed and scraped off, and it was cleansed from the ashes. But neither of these were now needful to be done: for the Altar yet neither had much blood poured into it, nor was full of ashes, this being the first time of hallowing and consecrating it. And though the Latin text so read, Numb. 4.13. mundabis ill • d cinere, thou shalt cleanse it from the ashes, the word is dishun, they shall take the ashes from it, when they were to remove the Altar: but the ashes did not de • ile the Altar.

QUEST. XLV. How the Altar sanctified whatsoever touched it.

Vers. 37. SO the Altar shall be most holy. 1. This name kodesh kadashim, holy of holies, that is, most holy, was peculiar unto that place of the Tabernacle where the Ark was: but here it is used in another sense, Lyranus. And thereby is signified, that it should be most holy in respect of the use, because it should sanctify whatsoever touched it, as it followeth in the next words, Oleaster.

2. Whatsoever toucheth it shall be holy. Which Tostatus expoundeth thus: that everyone which cometh to the Altar, must be sanctified before, and so he referreth it to the persons. So also Vatabl. Osiander. But the text showeth that by touching of the Altar, the thing should thereby be sanctified, and made holy. Rab. Solomon expoundeth it thus, that if anything to be offered upon the Altar, should chance to gather any pollution, it was mundified and cleansed by the Altar. But the meaning rather is, that such things as were offered upon the Altar, were thereby sanctified, that is, consecrated to an holy use, and were no more to return to any profane use: and the things offered therein, were only to be eaten by the Priests, Lippoman. And this interpretation is confirmed by the words of our blessed Savior, Matth. 23.19. Ye fools and blind, whether is greater, the offering, or the Altar, which sanctifieth the offering? Junius, Gallas.

QUEST. XLVI. Of the daily sacrifice, with the rites thereof.

Vers. 38. TWo lambes of a year old. 1. These lambes were to be offered daily beside all their other extraordinary sacrifices, as burnt-offerings, peace-offerings, and whatsoever else, Tostat. 2. For the age of them, Lyranus thinketh, that if they were under a year old, from eight days old and upward they might be offered. But that is not like; a lamb of a month old cannot be said to be a year old: this then is required, that it should be a perfect beast, and of sufficient growth, Simler. 3. There are four things required for the daily sacrifice; a lamb, fine flower, oil, and wine: whereby all the fruits of the earth, and the kinds thereof are signified, Cajetan. God will have nothing lacking to the daily sacrifice: as he would have flesh offered, so likewise bread and wine, Tostat. qu. 20. 4. This sacrifice was to be done continually, to make a difference between this and other sacrifices, which were not to be offered continually, but as they had occasion, Tostat. 5. And this daily sacrifice was of the kind of burnt-offerings, it was to be wholly burnt upon the Altar, together with the wine and oil, which should be poured upon it: as it is called a burnt offering, verse. 41. 6. But this daily sacrifice could not be offered continually, while they were in the desert: it was to be put in practice when they came into the land of Canaan: as is evident by the like Laws concerning other sacrifices and offerings, Numb. 15.2. When ye are come into the land of your habitation, and will make an offering, &c. for many things were neglected in the wilderness by reason of their continual travel, and want of necessary things: and therefore the Lord saith, when they are come into the land of Canaan, Ye shall not do after all these things, which ye die here this day, Deut. 12.8. Tostat. qu. 20. 7. The time of the offering these two lambes, was in the morning, and between the two evenings: which was not after the Sun set, as Oleaster ; who noteth the word ghereb, evening, to be taken either for the twilight after Sun set, or for the night it self: but the time was rather, inter occasum solis, & solemn propinquum occasni, between the setting of the Sun, and the declining of the Sun, Cajetan: which might be from the ninth hour: for from thence began the time of the evening sacrifice: as Josephus. See more hereof, chap. 16. qu. 10. 8. So this continual and daily sacrifice is commanded and set forth in these six things: 1. It was a burnt offering, that is, wholly consumed upon the Altar. 2. It was acceptable, of a sweet savor. 3. It was continual. 4. In respect of the place, it must be offered at the door of the Tabernacle. 5. And for the fruit thereof, there the Lord will appoint to speak with them, Cajetan. 6. And beside, this sacrifice had both fine slower, wine, and oil to attend upon it.

QUEST. XLVII. How much the Hin contained.

Vers. 40. A Tenth part of fine flower, and the fourth part of an Hin of oil. The tenth part of an Epha is meant, as it is expounded, Numb. 28.5. which was a Ghomer, chap. 16.36. containing about three pints, so much as 42. egs can receive: of this measure see before, chap. 16. quest. 24. Now it is to be shown how much this measure of the Hin contained, which was a measure of liquid things, as the Ghomer and Epha were of dry: 1. Some think that it cannot now be certainly known how much the Hebrew measures contained, Lyranus. Tostat. Cajetan. and so they leave it as uncertain.

2. Lyranus allegeth out of Papia • , that there were two kind of measures called the Hin, the greater, which held four quarts of Paris measure, and the less, two quarts. But it is evident, that the measure of the Hin was but one, and that of a certain quaintity, which was well known: as mention thereof is made, Numb. 15.4, 5.7.10. and in divers other places. And it neither was so little to contain two quarts, nor so large to hold four.

3. Pelargus thinketh the Hin contained two Sextaries and an half: the Sextarius being a measure, according to Glarean, of four inches long, three inches deep, and as many broad, is about our pint and half: so that in this account, the Hin should not receive four pints in all.

4. Some think it held four Sextarii, which make six pints, Borrh. and this account agreeth with the computation of the Hebrews: who do generally hold, that the Hin contained twelve of the measure called Log: and a Log held six egs: so that the Hin was of the capacity of 72. egs: and the fourth part thereof then must be of the content of 18. egs. Sic. Iun. Lippoman. Simler. Gallas. which is a pint and quarter of ale measure: for there go unto a pint of our English measure, as much as fourteen eg-shells do contain.

QUEST. XLVIII. Of the spiritual application of the Altar, and daily sacrifice.

THe spiritual signification of these things is this: 1. Christ is our Altar, whereby we are sanctified; he is, & ara & victima both our Altar, and the sacrifice: of this Altar the Apostle speaketh, Heb. 13.10. We have an Altar, whereof they have no authority, which serve in the Tabernacle, Gallasius.

2. By the daily sacrifice of the lambes Christ also is signified, who is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world, Simler.

3. By the bread and wine which was offered, Lippoman would have represented the Eucharist, which is ministered with bread and wine. Rather it signifieth, Christum pro nobis oblatum cibum esse & potum, that Christ offered for us, is both our meat and drink to be received by faith, Osiander.

4. The offering of the one in the morning, the other at evening, Cyprian thus applieth: Vt hora sacrificii, ostender • t vesp • ram & oscasum mundi ; That the hour of the sacrifice should signify the evening and Sun set of the world, when Christ should be offered. Bernard understandeth two oblations of Christ; one when he was offered and presented by his parents in the Temple; the other when he was offered upon the cross: at the first oblation he was received, inter brachia Simeonis, between the arms of Simeon: in the second, inter brachia crucis, between the arms of the cross. Lippoman thus: Ag • us vesper • inus Deminum morie • tem praefigurat, &c. The evening lamb did prefigure Christ dying, the morning lamb Christ rising again from the dead. But rather hereby is signified that Christ from the morning to the even, from the beginning of the world unto the end, is the Savior of all them that trust in him: he is the Lamb which was slain from the beginning of the world, Osiander. And by this daily offering and that twice done, is shown, that we have daily need of reconciliation: that Christ's blood should continually be applied unto us by faith, Simler. And by this daily sacrifice twice offered, the Israelites were admonished, ut à principio ad finem d •• i, ad Dei misericordiam confugerent ; that from the beginning to the end of the day, they should flee unto God's mercy. And that this continual sacrifice was an evident figure of Christ, is evident, because it is prophesied to cease at the coming of the Messiah, Dan. 9.27. for the shadow must give place to the body, Calvin.

QUEST. XLIX. How the Lord appointed with the children of Israel.

Vers. 43. THere I will appoint, or meet with the children of Israel, &c. 1. Here the reason is given from the notation of the word, why it was called before, ohel maghed, the Tabernacle of appointment or meeting, because the Lord would meet with them there: it is derived rather of i • ghad, which signifieth to meet, or appoint a time; than of ghadah to testify, Calvin. 2. Here the Lord will appoint with Israel; not by speaking himself unto them: for after the Lord had spoken unto them out of mount Sinai, when he delivered the Law, and the people were afraid of God's voice, and desired that Moses might speak unto them; the Lord after that did not speak himself, but declared his will by Moses, Tostat. qu. 21. 3. Where it is said in the former verse, where I will make appointment with you, to speak unto thee there; Caietanes note is somewhat curious: that God in respect of the Levites, promittit se dunta • a • paratum, promiseth only to be ready: but with Moses he promiseth to speak: for by with you the Lord meaneth the Israelites, with whom he will speak by Moses, as it followeth verse. 43.

QUEST. L. What the Lord promiseth to sanctify.

Vers. 43. IT shall be sanctified by my glory. 1. Junius referreth this to the Israelites, that everyone of them should be sanctified by the Lord. But that were too general: it is evident by the next verse, where the Lord speaketh of sanctifying the Tabernacle, the Altar, and the Priests, that he meaneth a special sanctification, and consecration to holy uses. 2. The most do supply place, and understand it of the Tabernacle: but that is expressed afterward, I will sanctify the Tabernacle. 3. Therefore the speech is more general; that he will sanctify by his presence: and what things he will sanctify, is expressed in the next verse in particular, the Tabernacle, the Altar, Aaron and his sons.

QUEST. LI. What is meant here by God's glory.

BY my glory. 1. Some interpret it, To my glory, because that was the end wherefore the Lord appointed all those things. 2. Some do understand it of Christ, who is the glory of God, without whom nothing is sanctified in the Church: this glory Moses desired to see, chap. 33. 3. Lyranus and Lippoman refer it to the coming down of fire upon Aaron's sacrifice, Levite. 9. 4. Tostatus to that example of God's power in destroying Nadab and Abihu with fire, for offering strange fire: and thereupon the Lord saith, I will be sanctified in them that come near me, and before all the people will I be glorified. But this promise of God is not so to be restrained, to one or two of God's glorious works. 5. Therefore by glory the Lord understandeth gloriosam praesentiam, his glorious presence, Vatablus: as Exodus 40.34. Then the cloud covered the Tabernacle, &c. and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle, Oleaster.

QUEST. LII. How the Lord is said here to sanctify Aaron.

Vers. 44. I Will sanctify also Aaron, &c. 1. Lyranus understandeth this of their consecration: which although it were described already, non adhuc tamen erat in executione posita: yet it was not hitherto put in execution: but the Lord speaketh not here of that sanctification which consisted in the outward ceremonies: for they were not God's glory, whereby he saith he will sanctify them. 2. Tostatus referreth it to that miraculous approbation of Aaron, and his two sons Eleazar and Ithamar, by showing his fierce wrath in the sudden destruction of his other two sons Nadab and Abihu. But as Aaron and his sons are promised to be sanctified, so the Altar also shall be sanctified: but the Altar was not sanctified by that example of judgment. 3. Therefore the meaning is this, that as God had prescribed the external rites of their consecration, so he promiseth, se in his efficacem fore, that he will be effectual in them, Simler. Divina actio sanctificans aderit, &c. The divine sanctifying action shall be present, Caietane : lest they might think, that their sanctification depended upon the outward ceremonies of their consecration. For those external things were used only, ut verae sanctificationis symbola, as signs or symbols of the true sanctification.

QUEST. LIII. How the Lord is said to dwell among them.

Vers. 45. ANd I will dwell among the children of Israel. 1. We must make a difference between God's general presence everywhere, and his gracious presence in his Church: his presence of power is in all places, but his presence of grace is only among his own servants, Simler. So God is said sometime to be with his children, when he blesseth and prospereth them: as Potiphar saw that God was with Joseph, Gen. 39. and he is said not to be among them, when he withdraweth his favor and assistance: as Moses saith unto the people, Numb. 14.42. The Lord is not among you, and therefore they were in that place overthrown of their enemies. Thus also Thomas distinguisheth of God's presence: Est communis modus, &c. There is a common manner of God's being everywhere and in all things, per essentiam, potentiam, pr • sentiam, by his essence, power, and presence: est alius modus specialis, and there is another special way of God's being present: sicut amatum in amant • ; as that which is loved is present in him that loveth: as our Savior saith, If any man love me, &c, my father will love him, and we will come unto him, and we will dwell with him, John. 14.23. And so the Lord is said to dwell here among his people. 2. And here also there is special relation to the situation of the Tabernacle, which was set up in the midst of the tribes: three of them pitching before, three behind, and three of each side; and in that respect God also is said to dwell in the midst of them, because his Tabernacle, which the Lord made his habitation, was in the midst of the host, Tostat. qu. 21. 3. But this must be understood conditionally, that the Lord would dwell among them, so long as they worshipped him aright, as he commanded them, Osiander. 4▪ And so he will not only dwell among them, but work such wonders among them, that they shall by experience know, that God only, and none other, delivered them out of Egypt to serve him, Tostat. ibid.

1. Doct. No perfection in the Priesthood of the law.

Vers. 1. TAke a young bullock, &c. This first sacrifice being offered for the sin of the Priests that were to be consecrated, ought to put them in mind, that they themselves were sinners, and had need of sacrifice, Oleaster. Which evidently proclaimed, that there was no perfection in their Ministry, but that they were to look for an high Priest so perfect, that needed not first to offer sacrifice for his own sins, as the Priests of the law did, Hebr. 7.27.

2. Doct. Of dividing the Word aright.

Vers. 17. THou shalt cut the ram in pieces. To this usage of the law, the holy Apostle seemeth to allude, exhorting Timothy to divide the Word aright, 2 Tim. 2.15. that as the Priest divided the sacrifice, and laid every part in order, and as he in other sacrifices gave the Lord his part, and took the Priests part, and delivered the rest to the people: so the Minister of God should: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , divide the Word aright, deliver the true sense thereof; not wrest or deprave it with false glosses, or feigned allusions, as the Valentinians abused the Scripture: and Origen is found herein to have been in great fault, Simlerus.

3. Doct. Of the imposition of hands.

Vers. 21. THou shalt sprinkle it upon Aaron, &c. These ceremonies of washing, anointing, sprinkling, which were used in the consecration of the Priests of the Old Testament, are not requisite now. The Apostles in the New Testament used imposition of hands: as the Deacons are ordained by imposition of hands, Act. 7.8. So thy prayed and laid their hands upon Saul and Barnabas, and sent them forth for the work of the Ministry, Act. 13.4. which external observation is yet retained in the Church of God: whereby, 1. They which are ordained, are confirmed in their calling: 2. They are admonished, that their ability and sufficiency for that calling, is not of themselves, but from him, in whose name, hands are imposed upon them. 3. It is a sign of God's protection and assistance, if they be diligent in their calling, that his hand shall protect them. 4. And if they be unfaithful, that his hand shall be upon them to judge them: in this sense the Prophet David saith, Thine hand is heavy upon me day and night, Psal. 32.4. Marbach.

1. Cont. Against the anointing of Priests with oil in their consecration.

Vers. 7. THou shall take the anointing oil. This oil was a sign of the graces of the Spirit, which should be poured abundantly upon Christ the true high Priest, as the Prophet David saith, Psal. 45.7. Thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. This ceremony then of anointing being fulfilled in Christ, it savoreth of Judaism to revive this ceremony now, as the Romanists do in the consecration of their Bishops and Priests. This were to be wiser than Christ, who commanded no such thing to be done, and than his Apostles, who used no such ceremony in the ordaining of Ministers, Gallas.

2. Cont. Against the anointing of the fingers.

Vers. 20. ANd upon the thumb of the right hand. The Romanists retain the like ceremony in ordaining of their Priests: for they anoint their thumbs, and forefingers with oil, as Aaron's thumb was with blood, that those fingers may be consecrated to handle the bread in the Eucharist, which they call the Lord's body. But we read not, that either Christ himself, or his Apostles anointed their fingers for the consecrating of the Sacrament: these then the Apostle calleth the commandments of man, touch not, taste not, handle not, Colos. 2.21. Gallas.

3. Cont. That the ram signified not Peter.

Vers, 19. ANd thou shalt take the other ram. These two rams some would have signify Peter and Paul ; the ram of burnt offering, which was wholly consumed, they say, signifieth Paul, amore Christi totum incensum, that was wholly set on fire with the love of Christ: the other ram, wherewith they anointed the ear, thumb and toe of the Priests, did prefigure Peter; Nam Ecclesiā Romanae obedie • dum est in his▪ quae sunt fidei ; For the Church of Rome must be obeyed in those things which belong unto faith, which cometh by hearing: and this is signified by touching the ear: likewise in those things which concern manners, which is understood by anointing the hands and feet, which are instruments of all actions, Gloss. ordinar. Moraliter.

Contra. 1. And was not Peter wholly ravished, and set on fire also with the love of Christ, as well as Paul? If not, why do you prefer him before Paul? 2. If faith come by hearing, how should the Pope be obeyed in doctrine, seeing he useth not to preach, to be heard? 3. In matters of faith, not only the Roman Church, but any other is to be heard and followed: but seeing the Roman Church teacheth doctrines contrary to faith, there it may worthily be left. 4. And will they have us to follow them in manners also? The Pope and his Cardinals, (no marvel) give such good example of life, that it is pity that they are not imitated. They that know Rome, and the general profaneness, and licentious living there, though never so much addicted to the Popish religion, I think would be ashamed to follow their conversation. 5. This ram signifieth Christ, by whose blood only we are purged, our ears, hands, and all other parts sanctified: of whom the Prophet speaketh, Isai. 50.4. He will waken mine ear, as the learned: it is blaspemie therefore to apply it to Peter : he sanctifieth not the ear, Christ indeed healed the ear which Peter cut off. I hope they will not say, that Peters blood doth sanctify them. 6. Oleaster giveth a better sense of this place, Nihil aliud hujusmodi sanguinis respersione adumbrari video, quam Sacerdotum punitionem, &c. I see nothing else shadowed forth by this sprinkling of blood, than the punishment of the Priests, Si negligentiores in audiendis ejus mandatis, &c. If they should be negligent in hearing God's Commandments, and in the executing of their ministry, &c. Let the Pope and popelings therefore look unto it, that they smart not for it one day, in neglecting God's Commandments in respect of their own traditions.

4. Controv. Of the elevation of the host, and of the sign of the cross, Sa.

Vers. 24. THou shalt shake them to and fro. The Latin text readeth, Thou shalt sanctify them, elevating, or lifting them up. Whereupon Sa in his annotations would ground the elevation of the host in the Sacrament: and Lyranus and Tostatus observe, that the Priest shaking them to and fro, and lifting them up and down, in this motion, made as it were a sign of the cross in the air.

Contra. 1. Who taught them to borrow their ceremonies from the figures and types of the Law? If such rites as shadowed forth Christ, be still to be used, to what end died Christ? The Jews, that think Christ not yet to be come, have some color in retaining their legal ceremonies: but seeing Christians do believe that Christ the body and substance of the Law is come; in him all those shadows are determined. 2. Neither was it yet revealed unto them how Christ should suffer, and whereon he should be offered, therefore it is not like, that the moving of those things up and down, and to and fro, had any such signification. 3. Neither was the cross of Christ of that fashion, that as much should be left above the crossing in the head, as under it in the feet, so that the upright piece should be crossed in the midst: after which similitude this motion of the Priests hands seemed to be, up and down, and then sidewayes to and fro.

5. Controv. Against the burying of Bishops in their Pontificials.

Vers. 29. ANd the holy garments, which are Aaron's, shall be his sons after him. It was not the fashion then among the Hebrews, as it is now among the Romanists, for their high Priest to be buried in his priestly robes: as now their Bishops are intombed in their pontificials. Lippoman, one of their own Writers, giveth this note hereupon: Lest any should say Aaron shall use the pontifical vestures all his life time, and when he dieth, ipse eisdem indutus tumulabitur, he shall be buried in them, &c. He seemeth closely to glance at that superstitious use practiced among them▪ Simlerus ghesseth well at the cause of this ridiculous usage: I cannot tell (saith he) why they should do so; nisi forte ut mortui fungantur munere suo, quod vivi nunquam fecêre; unless it be, that they might exercise their function when they are dead, which they never did being alive.

6. Controv. Of the lawfulness of Ministers marriage, and the legitimation of their children.

Vers. 29. SHall be his sons after him, &c. Tostatus here thus noteth; that because in the Old Testament the Priests had wives, the sons succeeded their fathers, as others did in civil principalities: but now in the New Testament, sacerdotes non habent uxores ▪ the Priests have no wives, and therefore their sons succeed them not, because they have no sons: and if they have sometime sons, illegitimi sunt, they are illegitimate, &c. Tostat. qu. 16.

Contra. 1. If the Priests of the Law had their wives, of whom was exacted a greater legal purity, in outward observations, than now: why should the Ministers of the New Testament be restrained in the times of the Gospel, which hath given us liberty that were in bondage under the Law? 2. Then the sons succeeded the fathers in the priesthood, both because the tribes were distinguished, and their families and kindreds divided, that Christ's line of Judah might be continued, and then the service of the Tabernacle, consisting chiefly in external observations, required no such exactness, but that the son might be fit to succeed his father in the priesthood; especially God giving an extraordinary blessing unto that lineal succession: but now it is not fit that children should always succeed their fathers, because the Gospel requireth a greater sufficiency: and the child is not always heir of his fathers gifts: but where the son is endued with sufficient parts, to take upon him his fathers charge, there is no reason why he should be barred. We see in these days that divers learned men, Ministers and Professors under the Gospel, have left behind them their sons men of worthy parts: as Josiah Simlerus had a son of the same name, who writ the Dedicatory Epistle to his fathers learned Commentaries upon Exodus; David Pareus that learned man, hath likewise his son Philip Pareus, who hath written of Logike: Kicherman the Author of his Logike, and politic Systemata, succeeded his father, in Gymnasio patrio, in his fathers school. And divers such beside might be named. 3. And doth he think indeed, that the sons of Priests are illegitimate, and unfit to succeed their fathers? What thinketh he of divers Popes, that were Priest sons? as Boniface the first, Felix the third, Agapetus the first, Sylvester, Theodorus, Hadrianus, Benedict the 8. John the 12. all which were the sons of Priests: and Gratian addeth further; Quàm plures etiam alii inveniuntur de sacerdotibus nati; and divers beside are found to have been borne of Priests. 4. Indeed they which have sons, and are not married, which is no rare thing in the Popish Clergy, do leave an illegitimate seed behind them: but such as are borne in lawful matrimony, are an holy seed, of what calling soever their parents be: for both, marriage among all men is honorable, Hebr. 13.4. and so consequently among Ministers: and their children are holy, 1 Cor. 7.14. They therefore that condemn their marriage, and make their children illegitimate, and so unholy, do contradict the holy Apostle, and in a manner give him the lie. See more Synops. C • ntur. 1. •• r. 77.

7. Controv. That the wicked do not eat the body of Christ.

Vers. 33. A Stranger shall not eat thereof. Like as none which were not of Aaron's family were admitted to the eating of this holy meat: so none but those which are of Christ's family indeed, and do believe in him, can be partakers of his body and blood: for whosoever eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood (saith our blessed Savior) hath everlasting life, John. 6.54. They therefore are grossly deceived, who think that the wicked and unbelievers do eat the very flesh, and drink the very blood of Christ in the Eucharist, Simler, for then it would follow upon our blessed Savior's words, that they should have everlasting life also. See more, Synops. C • nt. 3. • rr. 27.

8. Controv. Against the reservation of the Sacrament.

Vers. 34. IF ought of the flesh, &c. or of the bread remain unto the morning, thou shalt burn it with fire. This was commanded, lest that which remained of the holy flesh and bread might either be profaned, or might be superstitiously abused. It therefore may seem strange, that the Romanists, which are in other things so superstitiously addicted to the rites and usages of the Law, do not also follow the same herein; but rather have taken up a contrary use, in reserving the consecrate host, hanging of it up in a pix, and adoring it: for this is a true position; sacramenti rati • non dura • extra usum, that set apart the use, and the sacramental respect ceaseth, Simler. For as the water used in Baptism, is no more a sacrament, extra usum, out of the use, but is as other common water; so neither are the bread and wine in the Eucharist. For the more full handling of this point I likewise refer the Reader to Synops. Cent. 3. err. 19.

9. Controv. Against the continual sacrifice of the Mass.

Vers. 38. THis is that which thou shalt present upon the Altar, &c. two lambes, &c. day by day continually. To this daily and continual sacrifice, the Romanists resemble and compare their continual sacrifice of the Mass: and they hold them as Antichrists, that do abolish it, as Antiochus abolished the daily sacrifice, Ex Simlero. 1. There is no external sacrifice now remaining under the Gospel daily to be iterated: for Christ was once offered to take away the sins of many, Heb. 9.28. he is not then to be often sacrificed. 2. Antiochus was the forerunner of Antichrist, because he abolished the daily sacrifice before the time, which was to continue until the Messiah came: but Christ himself by the one oblation of himself once offered, was at his coming to abolish the daily sacrifice, as it is prophesied, Dan. 9.27. He shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease : not only for that he took away from the incredulous Jews their City, Temple, and sacrifice: but because he was the body and substance of those sacrifices which are not now to be iterated and repeated; seeing (as the Apostle saith) With one offering he hath consecrated forever, them that are sanctified, Heb. 10.14. which sacrifice of Christ is often to be celebrated by way of thankful commemoration, not to be iterated by any external oblation.

10. Controv. That, do this, in the institution of the Eucharist signifieth not, to sacrifice this.

Vers. 39. THou shalt present or make ready one lamb in the morning. The word in the original is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ghashah, thou shalt make: that is, sacrifice or offer. The Romanists would take advantage by this word, because to make here signifieth to sacrifice, that it should be so taken, when Christ said, in the institution of the Sacrament, hoc facite, do this, as if he should say, sacrificate, sacrifice ye this. Gallasius here maketh mention, how a certain Sorbonist, then a Popish Bishop, but illius harae por • us, a swine out of the same sty, to use his own words, in a certain book written against the Protestants, did make this word a chief foundation of the Missal sacrifice.

Contra. 1. But this will afford them small help: for this word ghashah, to do, is of a general signification, and is applied to divers senses, according to the circumstance of the place: as Genes. 11.4. faciamus nobis nomen, let us make, (that is) get us a name: Gen. 18.7. fecit vitulum, he made the calf (that is) killed it, or made it ready. Likewise, 2 Sam. 13.6. Faciat mihi cibum, let her make me meat, (that is) prepare it: it doth not therefore always signify to sacrifice. And our Savior, when he saith, this do, &c. hath relation to the former words, take eat, as S. Paul showeth, 1 Cor. 11.24.

2. The sacrifices of the Law were types and figures of Christ's sacrifice, the shadow of the body, they did not prefigure aliud umbratile sacrificium, another shadowing sacrifice, such as is the imaginary sacrifice of the Mass.

3. And there remaineth now no external ceremonial sacrifice, but only spiritual, by us to be offered unto God, as S. Peter showeth: Ye are an holy Priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. 2.5. Marbach. See further of this controversy, Synops. Cent. 3. err. 31.

Vers. 44. I will sanctify also Aaron, &c. Cajetan out of this place would prove the Sacrament of Orders in the New Testament, calling them Heretics that deny it: thus inferring, Si specialis divina actio sanctificans Aaron, &c. If there were present a divine action sanctifying Aaron, to execute his office; much more in the time of grace, specialis divina actio concurrit ad sanctificandum aliquos, &c. a special divine action concurreth to sanctify some, ut sacerdotio fungantur, to execute the Priesthood.

11. Controv. That there is no Sacrament of Orders.

COntra. 1. Cajetanes argument is not good, that where there is a grace conferred by an outward sign, there necessarily should be a Sacrament: for presently upon David's anointing by Samuel, the Spirit of the Lord came upon him, 1 Sam. 16.13. yet I think he will not make it a Sacrament to be anointed King. 2. It is likewise false, that always the inward grace concurreth with the outward sign; for this were to tie God's grace and Spirit to the element. Nadab and Abihu were consecrated as well as the rest of Aaron's sons, but they were not sanctified: the very next day after their consecration ended, which was the eighth day, they were destroyed for abusing their office, in offering strange fire, Levite. 10.1. 3. Neither is there now any external Priesthood in the New Testament, to be exercised in the Church: but the Priesthood of the New Testament resteth in the person of Christ, Thou art a Priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek, Hebr. 7.21. See further, Syn. C • ntur. 3. • ror. 107.

Controv. 12. Against Pythagoras, concerning the lawfulness of the legal sacrifices.

NOw in the last place, in that the Lord himself gave direction unto his people, concerning divers kinds of sacrifices of beasts: the opinion of Pythagoras appeareth to be ridiculous and foolish, who condemned all such sacrificing of beasts, as the Poet describeth it in this manner:

1. Observ. A Bishop must be gentle and full of clemency.

Vers. 7. ANd anoint him. Disce Sacerdos Dei esse misericors ; Learn thou which are God's Priest and Minister, to be merciful and given to pity, for the which cause the Priests of the old Law were anointed, Oleaster. Which property of gentleness Saint Paul requireth in his Bishop, No striker, not given to filthy lucre, but gentle, no fighter. It is more seemly for a Christian Bishop to win by clemency, than to force by rigor and severity.

2. Observ. Ministers must both teach and live well.

Vers. 20. ANd put it upon the lap of Aaron's ear, &c. The laying the blood on the right ear of Aaron, signifieth the right hearing of the Word: on the right thumb, that they should not be hearers of the Word only, but doers: on the right toe, that their conversation should be aright, B. Bab. as S. Paul would have his Bishop unreprovable, 1. Tim. 3.2.

3. Observ. No delays to be used in God's service.

Vers. 34. IF ought remain till the morning, &c. As the holy flesh was to be eaten the same day, so hereby the Lord would show, sibi alacriter esse inserviendum, that we must serve him cheerfully, not to use any delays or procrastinations in his service, Simler. As the Prophet David saith, I made haste, and delayed not to keep thy Commandments, Psal. 119.60.

QUEST. I. Why the narration of the making of the golden Altar is transposed.

Vers. 1. THou shalt make an Altar, &c. 1. The Hebrews well observe, that in the sacred histories, we should not always look to have things set down in that order of time, wherein they were done: as the altar of incense was made before the priestly apparel, as is evident, chap. • 7. • 5. and chap. 28. yet it is prescribed to be made after. 2. Junius giveth this reason, why the same order is not observed in the prescription, which was in the making, & preparing of these things: because first the things are described, wherein the service and ministry of the Priests consisted: and then the common instruments, and sacred things belonging to their service, as the perfume, and perfume altar, money, and the holy ointment: and so though the order of time he not kept, yet the order of nature seemeth to be observed. But then it is like, if the things are set down in the narration, as the nature of them required, that the same course should have been much more kept, in the framing and making of them. 3. Tostatus thinketh rather, that the order of nature is not here followed: which is, cum sic res narrantur, ut geruntur, when things are so rehearsed, as they were done. But Moses useth an artificial method, in setting down those things together, qua maxim coh • rent, which most agree in argument, for better understanding: As having made mention of the brazen altar, wherein chiefly consisted the ministry of the Priests, then he cometh to set forth the priestly apparel, and their manner of consecration: first making an end with those things which were of most frequent and necessary use: and then he cometh to describe those things which by reason of the connection of argument were omitted before, Tostat. qu. 1. But as I refuse not this reason, so I incline rather to the first opinion, ordinis non inquirendam esse nationem, that always a reason must not be inquired of the order of things in Scripture, Pelican.

QUEST. II. Wherefore the altar of incense had horns coming out of it.

Vers. 2. THe horns thereof shall be of the same, &c. 1. This altar had four ends at the corners coming forth, called horns, like as the other brazen altar had, and of the same fashion, which were not only as certain pomels, as Lyranus: or certain little pillars standing upright▪ but come out somewhat sloping, because they are likened to horns. 2. They were made out of the same matter and wood▪ not graffed in: so that it seemeth there were four quarters at each corner, which came out above like horns, and at the nether end were as feet unto the altar, Cajetan▪ Simler. 3. But Lyranus upon good reason misliketh their opinion, who think that this altar had likewise craticulam, a certain grate or net, which did hang above upon the four horns: for so the golden altar would have been annoyed with the ashes that might fall thorough the grate: and beside, this altar was covered above as a table, which was laid over with plates of gold: whereas the other brazen altar was hollow, and open above, and the grate of brass was made unto it instead of an hearth, whereon the fire should be made, and the sacrifice laid. 4. Yet Tostatus reason is not good, why nothing hanged upon the horns of the altar of incense, because it is most like that the vessels which were used in the service of that altar, should have there hanged, if anything did: but only one vessel was needful for the ministration of that altar, namely, a censer to receive the coals, upon the which the incense burned, which he saith was kept upon the brazen altar without in the Court, with other instruments thereto belonging. But that cannot be, for all the instruments of the brazen altar were of brass, which were no • used within the Tabernacle, where all the vessels and instruments were made of gold. It is more like▪ that if any vessels were used about the golden altar, that they were the incense cups, which were made for the golden table, chap. 25.29. But there is no such necessity to make any such supply: for the coals were laid upon the very hearth of the golden altar, and the incense thereupon, as shall be shown afterward.

QUEST. III. Wherein this Altar of incense differed from the other.

Vers. 3. ANd thou shalt over-lay it with fine gold. This Altar differed much from the brazen Altar: 1. In the bigness of it: this was but a cubit square, and two cubits high; the other was five cubits square, and three cubits high: because the sacrifices were to be burned upon it, and therefore it required a greater space for the fire to be made, and the wood couched thereon, and upon that the sacrifice. 2. This was covered with plates of gold, the other of brass; for the brazen Altar was imbrued with the blood of sacrifices, but this was only for incense, and therefore was made of pure metal. 3. The brazen Altar was made open above, and had a grate in the midst for the ashes to fall thorough: but this was covered above. Jerome thinketh it had craticulam, a grate above for the ashes to fall thorough: but the word is gag, which signifieth tectum, the top or roof, which was overlaid with gold; it was not then like unto a grate. 4. But Cajetan is deceived, who thinketh that this was another difference, that the brazen Altar had, neque parietes, neque tectum ; neither walls, nor cover above; but this had both: for the brazen Altar though it had no cover, yet it had sides made of boards, which were covered with brass, as is evident, chap. 27.8. Thou shalt make it hollow of boards. 5. It differed in respect of the place; this being placed within the Tabernacle, the other in the outward Court: the use also was divers, this only for incense, the other for sacrifices.

QUEST. IV. How the incense was burned upon the golden Altar.

Vers. 3. ANd the top thereof. This was the upper part of the Altar, which Cajetan calleth mensam, the table; Junius, aream, the plain above; Josephus, foculum, the hearth, where the incense was burned. 1. Some think that a censer stood upon this golden Altar, which was filled with coals, and the incense was laid upon them: So Genevens. in their description. But if there had been any such golden censer belonging to this Altar, it is like, it being so necessary an instrument for the service of that Altar, that it should not have been omitted; as all the instruments belonging to the golden Table, and to the golden Candlestick, and to the brazen Altar, were described together with the things themselves.

2. Tostatus thinketh, that the vessel wherein they brought coals from the other Altar, and put incense therein, which he calleth, vas receptorium carbonam & thymiamatis, the vessel which received the coals and incense, was kept among other vessels belonging to the brazen Altar, because by this means there should not be tanta circulatio, such going to and fro, as if the censer were still upon the golden Altar: for then the Priest should first go in and fetch it, and then put in coals from the Altar, and carry it in again; whereas if the censer were without, he need but take it from thence at the first, and so carry it in, Tostat. qu. 3. But it is shown before, quest. 2. that this vessel which served for the golden Altar, was by all likelihood of gold, and therefore was not kept among the brazen vessels, which belonged to the burnt offering Altar: neither need it to be imagined, if there were any such censer upon the incense Altar, that the Priest went first in to fetch it; he might at once with some instrument of the brazen altar, carry coals in thither.

3. Wherefore it is more probable, that there was no censer standing upon the golden Altar, to burn incense in: but that the coals were laid upon the hearth, and the incense thereon, and so burned: the reasons are these. 1. Because no mention is made of any such censer, which should not be omitted, Ribera lib. 2. cap. 8. 2. Josephus saith there was upon it, foculus corona cinctus, a little hearth compassed with a crown: so it seemeth by the description of the Altar, that the crown above served to that end, as an edge to keep in the coals, that they should not fall down. 3. The Apostle speaking of this golden Altar, calleth it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a golden censer, Heb. 9.3. So also Josephus giveth it the same name: the Altar it self was but as a great censer, whereon the incense and perfume was burned. 4. And to what end should it have been made as an Altar for incense, if any other instrument were set upon it to receive the coals and incense? any other thing would have served as well as an altar to that end, to be as a seat or place for the censer to stand upon.

QUEST. V. Of the placing of the bars, and how the Altar was carried.

Vers. 4. THou shalt make rings on either side, &c. 1. The Latin Translator readeth per singula latera, on every side; which Tostatus would help by this exposition, understanding every opposite side; that two rings should be placed on one side, and two more on the other side against it: but two sides were not every side, for there were four sides. Some say that by every side are meant every corner: but that cannot be, for there were two rings on a side: there were not two in a corner, for then there should be eight rings in all: the Hebrew word then is shene • , which signifieth two, not every: this error then ariseth by the mistaking of the word.

2. Cajetan therefore well observeth these three circumstances concerning the placing of these bars. 1. They were not per singula latera, on every side, but only on two sides. 2. In angulis, and in the corners. 3. Et in superiori parte, and in the upper part under the crown.

3. Now whereas this Altar was one cubit broad, yet was it carried upon two bars, and by four men, two at each end: this then taketh away the like scruple and doubt moved by Tostatus before, about the manner of bearing the table of show bread, which he thinketh was carried broad-ways; because otherwise if it had been borne in the length, it being but one cubit in breadth, there should not have been space enough between the bars for two to carry it, qu. 27. in cap. 25, for here we see, that this Altar being but one cubit square, on which side soever the bars were placed, there should be but the space of a cubit between bar and bar to carry it by.

QUEST. VI. Where the Altar of incense was placed.

Vers. 6. THou shalt set before the veil. 1. Augustine is of opinion, that the golden Altar was in the most holy place; because the Apostle there placeth the golden censer, which Augustine understandeth to be the Altar: for these are the Apostles words; After the second veil was the Tabernacle, which is called the holiest of all, which had the golden censer, and the Ark of the Testament, &c. Heb. 9.4. But that the Apostle is not so to be understood, that the golden censer or altar was within the veil, shall be shown in the next question. Arias Montanus seemeth to be of the same opinion, that, Altare incensierat intra adytum ante arcam ipsam ; The Altar of incense was within the oracle before the Ark. So also Origen hom. 9. in Levite.

2. But that the golden Altar was without the second veil, and not in the most holy place, it is evident by these reasons. 1. It is apparent, Exod. 40.26. that after Moses had hung up the veil, within the which the Ark was, then he set without before the veil the golden Altar. 2. Likewise, Levite. 16.12. the high Priest taketh the censer full of burning coals from the Altar, which was before the Lord, and so shall bring it within the veil: this Altar before the Lord was the Altar of incense, not of burnt offering, as Tostatus understandeth it, as appeareth verse. 18. it was that Altar whereupon reconciliation was made. If then the Priest went from the Altar, and so entered within the veil, then was not the Altar within the veil, Ribera. 3. The high Priest only was to enter into the most holy place, as it followeth, verse. 10. but the other Priests did offer incense upon the Altar, as Nadab and Abihu offered incense before the Lord, Levite. 10. and Zechariah John Baptists father burned incense, who was not the high Priest: for then he should not by lot or by course have burned incense, as he did, Luk. 16. 4. The incense was to be renewed every day twice, morning and evening: but the high Priest entered once only in the year into the most holy place. Augustine answereth, that the high Priest did, semel in anno intrare cum sanguine, once in the year enter with blood to make reconciliation, but with incense he entered often. But the contrary appeareth, Lev. 16.2. where it is said, that the high Priest should not come at all times within the holy place: but if he had come twice every day, he had entered almost at all times. Beside, the Apostle saith, The Priests went always into the first Tabernacle, and accomplished the service; but into the second went the high Priest alone, once every year, not without blood, &c. Now if twice every day the high Priest entered in to burn incense, he had gone as often as he did into the first Tabernacle.

QUEST. VII. What the Apostle meaneth by the golden censer, which the most holy place is said to have.

BUt a great doubt here is moved, how Moses that placeth the golden Altar before the second veil in the first Tabernacle, and the Apostle who saith that the second Tabernacle, which was the most holy place, had the golden censer, and the Ark of the Testament, Heb. 9 4. should be reconciled. 1. Augustine upon this place thinketh that the golden Altar was indeed within the veil, before the Ark: but that is shown to be otherwise in the former question. And so Josephus, who was an eye-witness of those things, saith; Candelabrum aureum, mensa •• , & altar • aureum statuerunt in Templo ante adytum; The golden candlestick, the table, and the candlestick they placed in the Temple before the oracle, Lib. 8· Antiquit. cap. 2. The same is the opinion of Theophylact. in Hebr. 9. Beda lib. de Templ. cap. 12. Thom. 1.2. qu. 102. ar. 4. ad. 6. Comestor histor. Exod. cap. 67. Lyranus. Exod. 3. Cajetan. Lippoman. Exod. 30.

2. Paul. Burgens. thinketh it is said to be in the most holy place, quoad dignitatis gradum, in respect of the excellency and dignity thereof, because once a year reconciliation was made upon the horns of this Altar, not in respect of the place: therefore it is said, verse 10. this is most holy unto the Lord. But Matthias Thoring replieth, that here Moses speaketh not of the Altar, but de exercitio summi Sacerdotis in altari, of the Ministry of the high Priest upon that Altar which is called most holy. And again, if in this respect it was said to be in the most holy place: by the same reason the brazen Altar should be said to be there, for that is also called most holy, chap. 29.37.

3. Some think that aureum thuribulum, the golden censer, which the Apostle speaketh of, was not the golden Altar, but a golden censer, which was kept in the most holy place, wherein the high Priest offered incense, when he went into the holy place once in the year. Of this opinion is Thomas, and Lyranus in 9. Hebr. and before them Jerome. But this cannot be so for these reasons. 1. Because in Moses description of the Tabernacle, and all things thereto belonging, there is no mention made of any such golden censer in the most holy place. 2. If the Apostle did not thereby mean the golden Altar, then had he omitted one of the principal things in the Sanctuary, which he would not do. 3. Again, the high Priest is first bidden to take a censer full of burning coals of the Altar before the Lord, and so bring it within the veil, Levite. 16.12. He then had not the censer within the veil, but without, Tostat. qu. 6. Riber. lib. 2. cap. 8. 4. And Josephus also calleth the Altar of incense without the veil, thuribulum, the censer ; and the Syriac Interpreter, domum aromatum, the house of perfume.

4. Ribera thinketh therefore, that the most holy place is said to have the golden Altar, quia ad ejus ministerium deputatum est, not because it was in it, but because it belonged to the service thereof; for thence the high Priest took the burning coals and incense, when he went to make reconciliation once in the year in the most holy place.

5. But I rather take Tostatus solution here, because the golden Altar, aliquem modum fitus speciale • habebat respectu veli, had a special kind of situation in respect of the veil, which was before the Ark, being had before it, as it is said to be set lippens before the veil: and therefore the holy place behind the second veil may be said to have it, in respect of the near situation to the veil. So 1 King. 6.22. it is said, asher ladebir, the altar, which was to the oracle, or, by the oracle. And Levite. 16.18. it is called the Altar, which was befo •• 〈…〉 was next unto the veil before the Mercy seat, where God's presence was, Ribera 〈…〉

QUEST. 〈…〉 commanded to be burned morning and evening.

Vers. 7. ANd Aaron shall 〈…〉 sweet incense, &c. 1. Thomas thinketh that the 〈…〉 pointed to be 〈◊〉 upon the golden Altar to this end, to qualify the 〈…〉 which did arise from the sacrifices of flesh, which were offered 〈…〉 and therefore every morning and evening the incense was burned about 〈…〉 sacrifice was offered. But Tostatus thus confuteth the opinion of Thom •• 〈…〉 not burned just at the same time, but somewhat before the morning sacrific • 〈…〉 after the evening sacrifice: for the incense in the evening was offered, when the 〈…〉 it began to be dark, but the evening sacrifice was not deferred so long, but was prepar • 〈…〉 hour, which Act. 3.1. is called the ninth hour of prayer. 2. Though it had concurred with the morning and evening sacrifice, yet there were other extraordinary sacrifices, which were offered at other times, when the incense burned not. 3. And though it might serve to mitigate the savor of one lamb offered morning and evening, yet it could not help this inconvenience, when many sacrifices were offered, yea thousands, as at the dedication of Solomon's Temple. 4. And if the incense had been to this end, it should rather have been appointed to be burned in the same place where the smell of the sacrifices was, in the outward Court, than within in the Tabernacle. 5. It is very like that God so provided, as that the smell of the burnt sacrifices was not grievous and irksome, or offensive; but that rather was by some supernatural work, than by natural means.

2. Therefore this was rather the end why incense was offered, ad majorem reverentiam cultus, for more reverence of God's worship. As among men it is counted an honor, to entertain great persons with sweet odors, and the Gentiles did honor their gods with incense: so the Lord would hereby adorn the service of the Tabernacle, Tostat. qu. 4. And beside, the Lord would hereby have shadowed forth the spiritual incense of his people, which are their prayers, as the Prophet David faith, Let my prayer be directed in thy sight as incense, Psal. 141.2. Borrh. And the golden Altar was a lively type of Christ, by whom the spiritual incense of our prayers is acceptable unto God, Apoc. 8.3.

QUEST. IX. Whether any of the lamps burned by day.

Vers. 7. WHen he dresseth the lamps thereof. 1. Tostatus following Josephus, thinketh that all the seven lamps of the golden candlestick burned and gave light in the night, but three of them only in the day, and that in the morning the Priest did put out four of them, and at night again he did set them up. So also Lyranus.

2. But I rather herein suscribe to the opinion of Vatablus and Oleaster, with others, that the lamps, mane mundabantur, vespere accendebantur, were cleansed only in the morning, and lighted in the evening, &c. And so much may be gathered here by the diversity of the phrase here used: in the morning it is said, behetibo, in making of them good, that is, cleansing of them; in the evening, behaghaloth, in causing them to ascend, that is, kindling of them, Iun. or setting of them up, Vatab. Likewise, chap. 27.21. they are said to be dressed from the evening to the morning, that is, to burn so long. See more hereof upon the question upon that place handled before.

QUEST. X. What things were inhibited to be offered upon the golden Altar.

Vers. 9. YEE shall offer no strange incense. 1. Four things are forbidden to be offered upon this golden Altar: strange incense, that is, made after another composition than the holy perfume afterward in this chapter prescribed to be made: burnt sacrifices of beasts, oblations, which were ex aridi • , of dry things, and drink offerings, of liquid things, Lyranus. 2. The reasons hereof were these: that if any other kind of incense should be used, redundaret in quandam irreverentiam, it would tend to a certain irreverence in God's service: and it was not fit to offer any sacrifices or oblations upon that Altar. 1. Because the fire ascending upon the Altar, might have put the Tabernacle in danger, which was covered with curtains, or with the smoke it would have defaced the beauty, and abated the color of them. 2. Beside, the sacrifices with blood would have imbrued the Altar, and so annoyed the Sanctuary. 3. The Altar in respect of the smallness, being but a cubit square, was not fit for that service. 4. Neither was it convenient in regard of the form and fashion, it was made plain above: whereas the brazen Altar was made hollow above, the grate or hearth being about the midst thereof, where the fire was made, and the sacrifice burned, Tostat. qu. 7, 8. 3. Beside, two other things concerning this Altar are, though not directly, yet by necessary consequence inhibited: First, that they should make no other Altar of incense in any other place, and therefore they sinned, which offered incense in the high places: Secondly, none but Aaron and the Priests were to burn incense: therefore Core, Dathan, and their company displeased God for offering incense, being not thereunto called: and Vzzia King of Judah was stricken with leprosy, for usurping the Priests office in burning of incense, 2 Chron. 26. Lippom.

QUEST. XI. Whether the high Priest entered more than once in a year upon any occasion into the most holy place.

Vers. 10. AAron shall make reconciliation upon the horns of it once a year with the blood, &c. 1. Augustine, whose opinion is briefly touched before, quest. 6. thinketh, Sacerdotem quotidie intrare solere sine sanguine, that the Priest used to enter into the most holy place every day without blood, to lay incense upon the Altar: but only once a year with blood.

2. But it shall now be made manifest, that he entered only once in the year at all: 1. None but the high Priest were admitted to enter into the most holy place; for none were suffered to be in the Tabernacle, when he entered in, Levite. 16.17. And so the Apostle saith, that the high Priest entered alone into the most holy place, Heb. 9.7. but it was lawful for the inferior Priests to burn incense, as is shown before in Zechariah John Baptists father, who was not the high Priest: so it would follow that they also might go into the most holy place to burn incense. 2. It was not lawful for the high Priest to go at all times into the holy place within the veil, Levite. 16.2. but if he went in every day twice, then there should no time be exempted. 3. The high Priest was not to enter into the most holy place, without a young bullock for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering, Levite. 16.3. but these were not offered every day: the daily sacrifice morning and evening was only of two lambs: therefore every day the high Priest went not into the most holy place. 4. Further, when the high Priest went within the veil, he put not on his glorious apparel, but only the common linen garments of other Priests, Levite. 16.4. but in his daily ministry and service, when he went into the Tabernacle, he put on his priestly robe, whereon hung the bells, that his sound might be heard going in and out, chap. 28.35. 5. The Apostle also saith directly, that the high Priest went into the second Tabernacle alone once every year, Heb. 9.7. Likewise verse. 25. he saith, he entered every year into the most holy place: he saith not every day, or every month: and this was upon the tenth day of the seventh month, Levite. 16.29. And herein consent Beda, Lippoman, Vatab. Iun. Oleaster, Osiander, Lyranus, with many other, that the high Priest entered into the most holy place but once every year.

QUEST. XII. How Aaron made reconciliation upon the horns of the altar.

Vers. 10. ANd Aaron shall make reconciliation, &c. 1. He meaneth not Aaron only in respect of his person, but of his place and office: Aaron for the time present, and his successors afterward, Tostat. 2. Whereas the Latin Translator readeth, deprecabitur super cornua alteris, he shall pray upon the horns of the Altar; Lyranus thinketh that the Priest did extend and spread himself upon the horns of the altar, and so prayed. But this had been an unseemly gesture, as Tostatus noteth, and it would have shown presumption rather than humility, to have come so near that holy Altar. And beside, this could not have been conveniently done, the incense burning upon the coals upon the Altar. This error then ariseth upon the false translation of the word, vechipher, which signifieth & expiabit, and he shall make reconciliation, or expiation upon the horns of the Altar, which was by putting of the blood of the sin offering upon the horns of the Altar, as is declared, Levite. 16.18. 3. And the reason why he made reconciliation upon the horns of the Altar is there also shown, to hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel: quia ex irreverentia filiorum Israel peccantiam in circuitu Sanctuarii videbatur esse pollutum Sanctuarium: because by the irreverent behavior of the children of Israel sinning round about the Sanctuary, the Sanctuary it self seemed to be defiled, Tostat. qu. 8.

QUEST. XIII. The spiritual sense of the Altar of incense.

COncerning the mystical application of this golden Altar, with the rites thereof, I will omit the curious observations of Beda, who by the Altar of incense understandeth those which are perfect, and give themselves unto contemplation, in offering continual prayers unto God; by the gold, charity; by the squarenesse of it, patience and constancy; by the four horns thereof, the four moral virtues. So also Ribera following Beda. But it is more fitly applied thus: 1. The Altar of incense signifieth Christ, by whom we do offer up the incense of our prayers, Apoc. 8.2. This Altar was within of wood, without of gold, to signify both the humanity and divinity of Christ. 2. The incense betokeneth the prayers of the Saints, Psal. 141.2. Let my prayer, &c. be as incense. 3. The squarenesse of this Altar signifieth the firmness of it; the crown, the regal dignity of Christ; the horns, his power, which showeth it self in all the world. 4. As no incense must be offered but upon this Altar, so no prayers are accepted which are not offered in Christ, & proceed of faith: and therefore the Prophets reproved the Israelites, for offering of their incense without faith in God, He which remembered incense, after a carnal manner, was, as if he blessed an idol, Isai. 66.3. Simler. 5. The incense must be burned when the lamps were lighted▪ so our prayers are then accepted, cum fidei lumen pracedi • , when the light of faith goeth before. 6. Everie day morning and evening the incense must be offered, to show that we must pray continually, Pelarg. 7. No other incense must be offered, but the holy perfume appointed by God; and our prayers must be directed according to God's will, as we have a rule prescribed in the Lord's prayer. 8. The horns of this Altar must be laid on with blood, so our prayers are available against sin and Satan, si Christi sanguine tincta fuerint, if they be dipped and died in Christ's blood, Marbach. Borrh.

QUEST. XIV. How this Altar of incense differed from Solomon's.

BUt before I proceed to the questions remaining to be handled in this Chapter, somewhat would be briefly touched concerning the difference between this golden Altar, which Moses made, and that which Solomon erected.

1. Some think that Solomon made a new Altar of incense, as Comestor. Tostat. qu. 16. in cap. 6. 1. Reg. because this was made of Shittim wood, but Solomon's of Cedar. But Ribera answereth, that it is not said, that Solomon made the golden Altar of Cedar, but only covered it with Cedar, 1 King. 6.22. that is, enlarged it, lib. 2. cap. 8. de Templ.

2. But Beda and Lyranus are far wide, who think that Solomon made the Altar of incense of stone, which was covered over with Cedar, Osiander. The text before alleged is evident, that it was of Cedar; there is no mention made of stone.

3. Junius