Friday, June 16
Leviticus 26: Here at the end of the Code of Holiness come the blessings promised to those who observe these statutes (verses 3-13) and the curses of those who don’t (verses 14-39). The repetition of the hypothetical “if” (’im), found eight times in this chapter, shows that the decision is still in doubt.
The blessings and curses are preceded by an introductory admonition about idolatry and the Sabbath (verses 1-2).
The promised blessings have to do with agriculture, the tilling of the Land of Promise (verses 3-5), peace (verse 6), victory in battle (verses 7-8), offspring and prosperity (verses 9-10), and the continued presence of God in fidelity to His covenant (verses 11-13). These blessings are conditioned on a double “if” (verse 3). This section begins with Israel “walking” in the Lord’s commandments and finishes by the Lord “walking” in the midst of Israel (verses 3,12).
On the other hand, if Israel walks contrary to God, God will walk contrary to Israel (verses 21,23,27,28). The curses, which occupy a list much longer and more detailed, are arranged in an ever more emphatic progression, from sickness, sorrow, and hunger (verse 16), to foreign occupation (verse 17), famine (verse 20), and then all of these plagues together (verses 23-26). Israel will be punished sevenfold for its offenses (verses 18,21,24,28).
The curses begin with Israel not hearkening to God (verses 14,18,21,27) and end with God not hearkening to Israel. Instead of the abundant harvest of the Promised Land, the people will be reduced to such penury that they will resort to cannibalism (verse 29; cf; Deuteronomy 28:53; 2 Kings 6:28-30; Jeremiah 19:9; Ezekiel 5:10).
After this, Israel will be carried away into exile from the Land itself (verse 33). Taking an image from the previous chapter, the Lord threatens to place the whole Promised Land into an indefinite Sabbath (verses 34-35). Instead of eating in the Promised Land, Israel will be consumed in a foreign land (verse 38).
If, finally, Israel repents, the Lord will remember His covenant (verses 40-42), and Israel will be restored (verse 44; Ezekiel 16:53-63).
Saturday, June 17
Mark 1:35-45: The leper’s hypothesis (“If you are willing . . .”) expresses, not a doubt about Jesus’ ability to cleanse him, but about his willingness to do so. Ostracism and other social aspects of the man’s condition have evidently taken their toll, and the plight of this leper is pitiful indeed. The Lord’s response is to reassure the man’s wavering soul (“I am willing”), even as He reaches out to touch his afflicted skin.
The better and more likely manuscript reading of verse 41 ascribes anger to Jesus in this instance. This is not the response we would expect; in truth, if “moved with anger” were not in the original text, it is nearly impossible to imagine how that expression would ever have made its way into the manuscripts which have it. This most improbable response of anger on the part of Jesus is doubtless what caused later copyists to change the reading to “moved with compassion,” the more expected response.
What, then, causes Jesus to be angry here? Surely He is not angry with the poor leper who kneels before Him. More likely He is angry for what the man has suffered, the years of sustained humiliation that have so reduced the man’s spirit that he even doubts Jesus’ willingness to help him.
In reaching out to touch this leper, moreover, Jesus violates the letter of the Law, thereby assuring His own legal contamination. This is a gripping image of Jesus’ assumption of our fallen state.
Leviticus 27: This appendix to the Code of Holiness treats of substitutions and redemptions for offerings vowed to the Lord. Such offerings might include a person’s labor for the service of the sanctuary, to be redeemed for a price commensurate with the age and condition of the person (verses 1-8).
Such offerings also included animals, certainly, greater value attaching to those animals appropriate for sacrifice (verses 9-13). Indeed, these latter could not be redeemed at all.
Property of all kinds could be vowed, particularly real estate. As in the case of an unclean animal, such property could be redeemed at the increase of a double tithe (one-fifth) of its value (verses 14-16,19). Since such an offering of property involved an alienation of it, the actual worth of the offering was affected by the date of the next jubilee year (verses 17,18,21,23,24).
Firstborn animals, belonging to the Lord as a matter of course, could not be redeemed if they were animals fit for sacrifice. In the case of other animals, redemption was based on the same double-tithe we saw in the case of property (verse 27).
Finally, all goods were to be tithed for the sake of the worship, the support of its ministers (verses 31-33; Numbers 18:21,24), and the care of the poor (Deuteronomy 26:12).
Sunday, June 18
Numbers 1: Here begins the first census in the Book of Numbers (chapters 1 through 4). These opening verses (1-16) provide the list of leaders, from each tribe, who will supervise the first census.
Like the Bible’s various prophetic books, Numbers begins with a precise chronological reference that contains no fewer than three ordinal references: “Now the Lord spoke to Moses in the Wilderness of Sinai in the tabernacle of testimony, on the first day of the second month in the second year after their departure from the land of Egypt” (verse 1). The book begins, then, with a date, indicating that thirteen months have elapsed since the first Passover.
The second verse, in turn, requires a census, a counting “according to the number of their names” (bemispar shemoth). Verse 3 then specifies the ages by the computation of the years, “from twenty years old and above.” Thus, there are three different uses of numbers in the first three verses of this book, and a sustained interest in calculation sets its tone.
After these introductory verses, the rest of the chapter has three parts: first, a list of the tribal leaders who will conduct the survey of the tribes (verses 5-19; second, the results of the survey itself (verses 20-46); third, an explanation of why the Levites are not included in this census (verses 47-54).
The large and central part of this chapter is the first census, which is a clearly made for military purposes, since it concentrates on the males eligible for warfare. Josephus recognized the military purpose of this survey: “Now when the things pertaining to legislation seemed to [Moses] to be in good order, he undertook a survey of the army, with a view to preparing for battles” (The Antiquities of the Jews 3.12.4, 287).
In addition to the practical function served by this census, it is legitimate to inquire about the theological significance of the book’s beginning with four whole chapters dedicated to this theme. Why does the Word of God go to the trouble of providing a list of the totals of each of Israel’s tribes? If, as the Apostle says, all these things were written for our instruction, what lesson did the Holy Spirit intend when He caused these lists to be recorded three millennia ago?
This opening census confirms a truth about the biblical God—namely, that He accounts for all things. If not a sparrow falls to the ground without His notice, certainly He knows each Israelite that faltered in the wilderness. This census, accordingly, is a record of His judgments, and as such it symbolizes and prefigures the inspection to be made at the end of time, when the thrones are set and the books are opened.
Monday, June 19
Acts 8:26-40: The conversion of the Samaritans, who may be described as half-Jewish, was a step toward the universalizing of the Gospel. Now, however, we come to the case of someone of completely Gentile blood, one of the many Gentiles who maintained some active interest in Judaism without joining it.
It should be noted that this first completely non-Jewish person to become a Christian was from Africa. He was a governmental official of “Candace,” which is not a proper name but, like the word Pharaoh, the title of an office, in this case the queen of Ethiopia (the kntky of Egyptian inscriptions).
This man is obviously reading the Bible out loud (which was the common practice among the rabbis and, with the exception of St. Ambrose, the Fathers of the Church) and is overheard by Philip. The man wants someone to “guide” (hodegein in verse 31) him in understanding Isaiah. Instructed in the Church’s understanding of the Old Testament (cf. Luke 24:27,44-45), Philip interprets the text for him, going on to explain other passages as well.
This exercise terminates in the Sacrament of Baptism. (The Scriptures are intrinsically, and of their very nature, ordered to the Sacraments. All proclamation outside the Church is ordered to Baptism, as in this case. All proclamation within the Church is ordered to the Eucharist; cf. Luke 24:30-35.) Sad as I am to say so (for I love it), verse 37 is a later addition to the text, not found in the older and more reliable manuscripts of the New Testament.
Numbers 2: As the Israelite tribes journeyed through the wilderness, they really marched. Which is to say, they walked in martial ranks, both of these words derived from the name Mars, the Roman god of war. We speak of that era as a period of “wandering” in the desert, but this wandering was marked by an internal structure of great cohesion and purpose. The wandering Israelites were—as God’s people must ever be—a company of warriors.
Consequently, the organization of Israel in the desert was arranged along martial lines, an arrangement that should not surprise us, in light of the military interest of the census in the preceding chapter. As in any military expedition, it was imperative to know just where the various forces were stationed and where it was feasible, if need be, to deploy them. We find this imperative at play in the present chapter.
The military formation was elaborate: The Tabernacle of God’s presence, Israel’s theological hearth, was placed in the center (verse 2), and around it all the tribes were gathered in a sort of square, for its protection (Compare Ezekiel 48:30-35). The priests and Levites, naturally, were positioned nearest to the Tabernacle, the care of the latter being their chief charge.
Tuesday, June 20
Acts 9.31-43: Given the grievous animosity that had long estranged mutually the Jews and the Samaritans, it is no small grace to read in verse 31 that “the Church throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria had peace.” This initial reconciliation now accomplished, Luke will direct our attention more emphatically to the conversion of the Gentiles, initiated by Philip’s baptism of the Ethiopian and to be extended by Peter over the next two chapters.
Prior to Peter’s baptism of Cornelius, however, Luke describes the apostle’s new travels outside of Jerusalem, to which he had returned in 8:25. Two more miracles of Peter are narrated in this section, the healing of Aeneas and the raising of Tabitha. The first occurred at Lydda, some 28 miles northwest of Jerusalem, and the cured paralytic was Aeneas, named for the fabled leader of those Trojans who laid the ancient foundations of the Roman Empire. Since Virgil’s account of that adventure, the Aeneid, published in the previous century under Augustus, enjoyed a quasi-official status in Roman culture, it is unthinkable that the cultured and cosmopolitan Luke would have been ignorant of it or have missed the spiritual significance of Peter’s healing a man bearing that name. Joppa, where Tabitha was raised from the dead, was another twelve miles further northwest, on the Mediterranean coast and thirty miles south of Caesarea Maritima (“Caesarea on the Sea,” as distinct from Caesarea Philippi).
Numbers 3: This chapter speaks of Aaron’s sons (verses 1-4), a discourse that must include, and even start with, the tragedy attendant on the unfaithful ministry of the two oldest of those sons, Nadab and Abihu (verse 4), whose sin is recounted in Leviticus 10:1-2 and Numbers 26:61. This tragedy was a very sobering experience for Israel and served to brace the spirits of the remaining priests. For instance, when we consider the later zeal of Phineas, the nephew of Nadab and Abihu, it is reasonable to think that zeal to come, in part at least, from his fearful reaction to the tragedy of his uncles. In any case, Nadab and Abihu died without offspring, leaving only Eleazar and Ithamar to carry on the Aaronic line.
We recall that Nadab and Abihu perished for their failure to observe the correct ritual. They had done a thing “unauthorized” (zara). Their punishment stands as a perpetual warning with respect to the Lord’s views on private liturgical innovation. The Levites’ custody of the instruments of worship (verse 10) was intended to guarantee that that sort of thing did not happen again.
An important aspect of this ministry is that of custodianship (shamar mishmeret, “guard duty”) over the precincts of the sanctuary. Indeed, this component of the ordained ministry remains perpetually valid for the People of God, those charged to stand guard over the gifts of God. These gifts include, first of all, the Gospel itself, which must be protected against heresy, but also included the Sacraments and the actual texts of Holy Scripture. During times of persecution the Christian Church sees a special malice in the sin of the traditores, those who hand over the Sacred Scriptures, the liturgical books, or the sacred vessels of the altar to the enemies of God.
Just as the first fruits of all products pertained by right to the service of God, the sons of Levi were thought of as being the first born sons of Israel and therefore pertained entirely to God’s service (verses 11-12,41,45-46). This analogy indicates that there was a sacrificial quality to the lives of those who served in the sanctuary, which was the place of sacrifice.
The Levites, the non-Aaronic members of the Levitical tribe, were “given” to assist Aaron and his sons in the ministry. This term “given,” netunim, became the name of certain ministers within the Levitical order at the time of the restoration of the Temple after the Babylonian Captivity (Ezra 2:43,58,70; 7:7,24; 8:17,20; Nehemiah 3:26,31; 7:46,60,73; 10:28; 11:3,21), but here the term appears to refer to all the Levites, who are also said to be “given” to the Lord (8:16).
Wednesday, June 21
Mark 2.23-28: The fourth conflict story in Mark is joined to the second and third by the theme of eating. Walking with Jesus through a field of standing grain on a Sabbath day, the disciples reach out and pick ripe kernels from the stalks that have grown up to about the level of their hands. They rub the kernels between their fingers to remove the residual chaff and begin eating them. What could be more natural and spontaneous.
According to Genesis, agriculture was man’s first form of labor; “Now the Lord God took the man and placed him in the garden of Eden to work it and to guard it.” After the Fall—and because of it—man’s care and cultivation of the soil became exceedingly onerous: “Cursed be the ground (’arurah ha’adamah) because of you . . . You shall eat bread in the sweat of your face until you return to the ground (’el-ha’adamah).” Henceforth, an ongoing struggle with weeds was added to the daily burden, until man himself, at the end of his labors, would return to the soil.
The punitive aspect of man’s work adds a further significance to the Sabbath rest; the latter expresses a weekly reprieve from the sentence imposed at the Fall.
Rabbinic commentary on the Sabbath rule was very detailed in every aspect of food production; no part of farming was exempt. On this special day, there was to be neither sowing nor reaping, neither harrowing nor threshing, nor anything else involved in getting the food out of the ground and on to the table. All these activities were covered, each by its own specific prohibition. Moreover, in case the question should arise, on the Sabbath there was to be no preparing the food for the meal.
By rabbinic reckoning, therefore, Jesus’ disciples, as they walked through the field and picked the few grains, were guilty of at least two violations of the Sabbath rest: First, they were harvesting the grain by picking it. Second, by rubbing it in their hands to remove the chaff, they were threshing the grain. Indeed, it wasn’t much of a stretch to accuse them of preparing a meal. Clearly these apostolic offenders had . . . well, bitten off more than they could chew.
The irony in this account is immense; the disciples’ harmless plucking of a few grains is perversely equated with strenuous farm labor. Whereas the Almighty’s intent in the Sabbath precept was, clearly, to provide a weekly relief to his servants from their regular burden of labor, the rabbinical interpretation of the precept renders the Sabbath itself just a further burden.
As in the previous story Jesus assessed the value of fasting solely in terms of His own identity (“Bridegroom”), in the present account He does the same with respect to the Sabbath (“Lord of the Sabbath”). In both cases He is once again teaching “as one having authority” (1:22).
Each of these five conflict stories is reducible to a Christological content; each serves to illustrate some property or aspect of Jesus’ identity. Through them all the animosity of the Lord’s enemies is mounting, as the self-assured claims of Jesus progressively challenge the religious hold of His opponents. They feel threatened for much the same reasons that the demons feel threatened. Furthermore, it may even appear that the Lord is “rubbing it in”; a distinct measure of sarcasm attends His question to the scribal authorities, “Have you never read . . .?” (verse 25; cf. 12:10,24-26) In all His dealings with these men, we never find Jesus conciliatory or even subtle; He is invariably blunt and uncompromising. After all, He reads their hearts (2:8; 3:5).
Thursday, June 22
Numbers 5: The present chapter has three parts: First, statutes about exclusion (verses 1-4); second, rules for confession and restitution (verses 5-10); third, provisions for trial by ordeal (verses 11-31).
First, then, there are statutes about exclusion. In accordance with this book’s concern with proportion and due order, this section begins with the “cleanliness” of the camp, the marked term referring to both hygienic and religious considerations (verses 2-4). These prescribed expulsions from the camp did not involve a removal of citizenship; those affected by the statutes did not cease to be members of the congregation. Their condition, nonetheless, and a solicitude for the welfare of the congregation, required that they should be treated in a special way that involved a measure of exclusion.
The holiness and wellbeing of God’s People in this world have ever required exclusionary canons of this sort, analogous to the laws of quarantine by which other societies are protected from harm. The notion of “infection” covers a wide application of pathologies, whether moral, psychological, intellectual, or physical (Cf. 1 Corinthians 5:7-13; 2 Corinthians 6:16-18; Revelation 21:27). As long as we are in this world, healthy societies will necessarily resort to censure and exclusion from time to time.
Much as there are isolation units in hospitals, the Church has canons and pastoral provisions to safeguard Her general membership from the toxic influences of those who violate charity, truth, justice, and good order. Pastors should take these provisions very seriously. I confess to having seen a number of examples of both parishes and monasteries where life became nearly unbearable by reason of the pastor’s failure to impose the discipline necessary to curtail such abuses.
A pastor’s first responsibility is discernment, and the most elementary form of pastoral discernment is the ability to distinguish between a sheep and a wolf. It is sad to say—but also honest—that many a pastor, who went out to retrieve what he understood to be a lost sheep, returns to the flock carrying a wolf on his shoulders.
The second part of this chapter (verses 5-10) provides the rules for repentance and restoration that follow those of exclusion (verses 5-10). We observe that such repentance and restoration also involve an open, audible confession of the offense (verse 7), a confession explicit enough to determine the size of the restitution and nature of the sacrifice offered for its atonement. This confession is official, in the sense that it is received by the established priesthood. Even in the Old Testament, therefore, the priest served as a Father Confessor.
Reconciliation with the Church—whether in the Old Testament or the New—is an integral part of one’s reconciliation with God. Indeed, our Lord told us not to bring our offerings to Him until we are reconciled to one another. No one can bypass the Church in order to “go directly to God,” because God did not set it up that way; He conferred on the Church, and more specifically the pastoral ministry of the Church, the authority to bind and loose.
Third, and perhaps most bewildering to the modern mind, there is a provision for trial by ordeal (verses 11-31). A certain affinity of symbolism may be the connecting line between the foregoing rules of restitution and these ensuing regulations for trial by ordeal.
Once again the nature of the alleged offense is made known to the priest (verse 15). Indeed, the ritual itself required the use of “holy water” (mayim qedoshim—verse 17), which was mixed with the very dust from the floor of the sanctuary. The sanctuary, as is clear, sanctified everything that it contained, including the dust.
In context, it seems, God Himself was thought to punish the woman who failed this test, evidently by the curse of barrenness (verses 27-28). There is no indication that she was stoned to death, the usual punishment for adultery proven in court (Leviticus 20:10).
This biblical story expressed a persuasion of the validity of trial by ordeal. Attested as early as Hammurabi’s Code and the Code of Ur-Nummu, this kind of trial—at least implicitly—invoked divine intervention to establish someone’s guilt or innocence. Apart from the explicit warrant conveyed in the present biblical text, such a trial could easily become a tempting of God (cf. Matthew 4:6-7).
For this reason we find efforts to resist it at various times in Christian history. For instance, among the Franks it was abolished by Louis the Pious in 829. Two forms of it—trials by fire and water—were prohibited by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. Nonetheless, we still find instances of its application as recently as the early 18th century. Modern readers are familiar with this practice through popular novels, like Jo Beverley’s Lord of Midnight.
Friday, June 23
Mark 3.13-19: The “authority” (exsousia) that Jesus has manifested in teaching (1:22) and in driving out demons (1:27) is now shared with the Twelve (3:14-15), who are promptly named. Accounts of these Twelve are found here and in 6:7-13, and in both instances these accounts appear in proximity to stories of Jesus’ blood relatives (3:21 and 6:1-6), as though to suggest that this group of disciples are to be His new family.
The selection of these Twelve may profitably be compared to Numbers 1:1-15. For example, Peter’s name, “Rock,” finds a correspondence in the names of two of Moses’ companions: Eliesur (“God is my rock”) and Surisadai (“the Almighty is my rock”). Similarly, like James and John, two of Moses companions are blood brothers. Moreover, as in the Book of Numbers, Jesus chooses these Twelve on the mountain (verse 13). We should also note that this list of the Twelve ends on the theme of the Lord’s Passion: “and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Him” (verse 19).
Acts 10.34-48: Peter’s sermon covers the established time frame of the apostolic witness, “all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John to that day, when He was taken up from us” (1:22). This was the time frame for which the apostles were eyewitnesses (10:39-41). Some years later the Gospel of Mark, which all early Christians believed to embody the preaching of Peter, would cover that exact time frame. The apostle Paul, in his sermon at Pisidia, would also stick to that identical time frame (13:23-37).
Peter finishes his sermon by referring to the fulfillment of prophecy by Jesus (verse 43), a theme that Luke has been emphasizing since the day of the Lord’s resurrection (cf. Luke 24:27,45).
Peter had planned to preach at greater length — indeed, he felt he had barely begun his sermon (11:15) — but the Holy Spirit had something else in mind. While the apostle is yet speaking, there is a sudden renewal of the same charismatic outpouring narrated in 2:4. Indeed, that first outpouring, by introducing the diverse languages of the various nations, had foreshadowed this one, in which “the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also” (verse 45), who are promptly baptized.
Normally, of course, the pouring out of the Holy Spirit is associated with the sacramental experience of baptism and the laying on of hands (as we saw in 8:12-17). Still, the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit, ever blowing where He wills, sovereign even over the order of the sacraments, and subject to no human confinement. In the present instance, the Holy Spirit seems to be in a hurry and eager to remove every doubt.