nifies to pass over. It was, as the scripture declares, "the sacrifice of the Lord's passover, who passed . over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, "when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered the "houses" of the Israelites* This victim, "a male "of the first year, without blemish, from the sheep "or from the goats," was to be chosen on the tenth day of the month Abib in every year, to be kept till the fourteenth day of the same month, and then to be slain in the evening. When it is commanded in the law, to "sacrifice the passover, of the flock and of the "herd," this refers, not to the paschal victim properly so called, but to other sacrifices which were to be offered at the same time:|| and these, according Exod. xii. 27. + TR.-As here is an express direction to take either a lamb or a kid, so the word used in this and the two preceding verses embraces both these species: but it is more generally rendered lamb, and it is probable that, for the passover, lambs were generally preferred. Theodoret understands the meaning of the law to have been, that whoever had a lamb, should 'immolate it; but whoever had not a lamb, should sacrifice a kid.' And the same sense is favoured by the version of the passage in the Vulgate. Pooli Synops. in Exod. xii. 3. 5. TR. Thus in the account of a solemn passover in the time of Josiah, we read that "Josiah gave to the people, of the flock, lambs and kids, "all for the passover offerings, for all that were present, to the number of "thirty thousand, and three thousand bullocks: and his princes-gave unto "the priests for the passover offerings two thousand and six hundred small ❝ cattle, and three hundred oxen ;-also, unto the Levites for passover "offerings five thousand small cattle, and five hundred oxen.' Here it seems rather doubtful whether the term passover offerings," literally in Hebrew passovers, should be taken in an enlarged sense, comprehending all the cattle enumerated as allotted for that festival, both of the flock and of the herd; or whether it should be referred exclusively to the small cattle, lambs, and kinds. But in a subsequent part of the same narrative we find a clear distinction made between the passover itself, and the other oblations with which it was accompanied. "They roasted the passover "with fire according to the ordinance: but the other holy offerings sod "they in pots and in caldrons, and in pans, and divided them speedily to the Jews, were burnt offerings of appearance, and festive and rejoicing peace offerings; of both which we have already treated. XI. Nor ought it to be thought strange that we number the paschal victim among the proper sacrifices. For the animal used for this service is expressly called Corban in the scriptures;* and after the departure of the people from Egypt, it was to be slain in the sanctuary, and the blood was to be sprinkled upon the altar by the priests :† circumstances sufficiently characteristic of a sacrifice. If it be inquired to what class of victims it belongs, I think it may properly be placed among the eucharistic. For though the first passover celebrated in Egypt was designed as the means of averting from the families of Israel the pestilence then awaiting the Egyptians, yet every anniversary of this festival had reference to the deliverance vouchsafed to the Israelites, when all the firstborn of the Egyptians, both man and beast, were suddenly destroyed: and hence the paschal ceremonies were always to include a brief commemoration of these events. 6. among all the people." II Chron. xxxv. 7, 8, 9. 13. So at the remarkable passover celebrated by Hezekiah, it is said, “they did eat throughout "the feast seven days, offering peace offerings. II Chron. xxx. 22. Num. ix. 7. 13. + 11 Chron. xxxv. 11. Exod. xii. 13, 14. 25, 26, 27. 164 CHAPTER XIV. The Sacrifices of the Whole Congregation of Israel. OUR attention is next called to the Sacrifices of the Whole Congregation; which are so denominated,—first, because they were enjoined upon the whole nation, as a religious community connected by certain laws;—and secondly, because they were to be procured by persons acting as representatives of the nation, because they were to be offered in the name of the whole congregation of Israel, and because their efficacy, by the appointment of the law itself, extended to all the people. Some of them were offered on particular occasions, and others at stated seasons. On one occasion, they were required to offer a young bullock for a sin offering;* in another case, they were to bring a kid for a sin offering, accompanied by a young bullock as a burnt offering.† And it is said by the Jews, that twelve victims of each of these species were to be sacrificed, whenever the people were drawn into strange worship by the influence or example of the great Sanhedrim; and the like number of bullocks, whenever the people were led by the error of the Sanhedrim to the commission of any sin, which, if perpetrated knowingly and deliberately, was to be punished with excision. The rabbies affirm also, that these kinds of victims were required to be offered, whenever a sin of this description was committed, either by a majority of the tribes, though they might be a minority of the nation; or by a majority of the nation, which might be a minority of the tribes. But if the people sinned of them↑ Num. xv. 24. Levit. iv. 13, 14. selves, and not from the instructions of the Sanhedrim, they maintain that every individual was to offer his sacrifice for himself alone, and no sacrifice was to be offered for the whole congregation; for that nothing extended to the whole congregation but what was done by the appointment of the Sanhedrim. Maimonides says:* If at any time, in reference to those things, which when done in ignorance ought 'to be duly expiated by the definite sin offering, the great Sanhedrim have erred, teaching that to be 'lawful which in reality is unlawful, and the people, 'following their instructions, have committed any 'sin; the Sanhedrim, after they have fully ascertained 'their error, shall offer a sin offering, although they may have done nothing themselves, for the point of 'consideration is not what the Sanhedrim do or leave ' undone, but what they teach; and the rest of the people, though the sin committed was committed 'by them, yet because they relied on the judgment ' of the Sanhedrim, will not be required to bring any piacular sacrifice. But what is the victim ⚫ which the Sanhedrim ought to offer for this crime. If they have erred respecting strange worship, then they are to bring for each tribe one bullock as a 'burnt offering, and one goat as a sin offering. This 'sacrifice is commanded in the law: "If ought be ⚫ committed by the congregation through ignorance;" Num. xv. 24. which it is certain, from the tradition of the elders, relates to strange worship. But if the ⚫ Sanhedrim have erred and taught what is wrong 'concerning other deadly sins, which when com'mitted in ignorance require to be expiated by the definite sin offering; then they are to offer for each * In Shegagoth, c. 12. 'tribe a bullock as a sin offering, according to the law: "If the whole congregation of Israel sin;” Levit. iv. 13.' The same account is given by almost all the Jews except Aben Ezra: but this rabbi,* who generally adopts a more simple mode of interpreting the scriptures, is of opinion, that sins of ignorance, chargeable on the whole congregation in a way of commission, were to be expiated by the bullock directed to be sacrificed as a sin offering; but that the goat appointed for a sin offering, and the bullock which was to be added as a burnt offering, were to expiate all the national sins of this description, both of commission and of omission: and his principal reason for this opinion seems to be, that the law respecting the latter victims mentions, both things done and things omitted. II. If my own opinion be inquired,-I would not be confident on so obscure a subject, but I am inclined to think, that the bullock was to be offered, when the whole congregation of Israel, though in other respects retaining their own rites, and following the worship of the true God, yet led away by one common error, transgressed, without knowing it, some prohibitory precept. This appears to me to be the best interpretation of the following passage of the law: "And if the whole congregation of Israel sin "through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done somewhat "against any of the commandments of the Lord, concerning things which should not be done, and "are guilty when the sin which they have sinned against it is known, then the congregation shall offer a young bullock for the sin." The kid for a sin 66 |