2 measures and weights. They had to collect the contributions volunteered by the Israelites for the necessary repairs, and to superintend the progress of the works. They had to attend the morning and evening services, and to adorn them by vocal and instrumental music, while the priosts gonorally sounded the trumpots. According to tho Chronist, they were, from the time of David, chosen for civil and municipal 4 5 3 officers, for attendants of the kings, and, in common with the priests, for judges, perhaps of the inferior courts, and for teachers of the people; and later still, they had to enforce the sanctity of the sabbath. 18. When thus their authority increased, they were considered too holy for many of the lower services of the Sanctuary; and henco they were assisted by subordinates, exactly as they themselves had before been associated with the priests. These nethinim lived partly in Jerusalem, 10 and partly in the Levitical and other towns; they were probably captives of war made proselytes, 12 as the Book of Joshua exemplifies with regard to the Gibeonites; 13 they were supposed to havo boon given up to the Sanctuary by David, Solomon, and other kings; and seem to have been hold in great contempt. was 19. In the Pentateuch, the Levites are merely subdivided into their principal houses and families; each of the former prosided over by a chief; and the degree of their consanguinity with the holy family of Aaron decided their position and functions. But the Chronist 15 attributes to David a division of the Lovites, whose number he states at 38,000 men above 30 years, into four classes. 1. The servants of the priests or the proper Levites, 24,000 in number; 2. Judges and civil officers, 6,000; 3. Porters, 4,000; and 4. Singers and Musicians, 4,000. 16 This statement of the Chronist must be estimated and judged, in the same manner as the division of the priests mentioned by the same writer, namely, as a much later arrangement unwarrantably ascribed by him to David. 1 2 Chr. XXIV. 12. 2 2 Chr. XXXIV. 12, 13. 3 1 Chr. IX. 29; XV. 16-24; XVI. 4-8; XXIII. 5; XXV. 1—4; 2 Chr. V. 12, 13; VII. 6; VIII. 14, 15; Ezra III. 10; Neh. XII. 27. 4 1 Chr. XXIII. 1; XXVI. 29; 2 Chr. XIX. 11. 51 Chr. XXVI. 30. 01 Chr. XXIII. 4; XXVI. 29; 2 Chr. XIX. 11; XXXIV. 13. 72 Chr. XVII. 7-9; see in general 1 Chr. IX. 14-32; XXIII. 4-32;XXVI. 12-30. 8 Nch. XIII. 22. 91 Chr. IX. 2; Ezr. II. 43; VII. 7; Neh. VII. 46. 10 Neh. III. 26, 31; XI. 21. 11 Ezr. II. 70; Nch. VII. 73; XI. 21. 12 Neh. X. 29. 13 Josh. IX. 21, 23, 27. 14 Ezr. VIII. 20; comp. II. 43-58; Neh. VII. 60; XI. 3. 15 1 Chr. XXIII. 4—32; XXVI. 12—30. 16 Comp. also Ezra II. 40-42, 70; VII. 24; 1 Chr. XXV. 1—31; 2 Chr. XXIII, 2-8. Nch. VII. 43-45. 19 20. This being the character and the office of the Levites, they were, indeed, amply provided for, so as to be able to pursue their peculiar occupations without interruption or harassing care; for though thoy did not obtain the territorial possessions 17 to which they were properly entitled, 18 since their portion and their inheritance wore God or "the offerings of the Lord God of Israel", " they received, according to the most favourable ordinances, in return for their services at the Sanctuary, the tenth part of all produce of the soil and of the annual increase of cattle; of the former, however, they had to give the tenth part to the priests. 20 They were naturally exempt from military service and all taxes, 21 and yet probably received a share of the booty of war. 22 For their abodes were assigned to them 35 cities, 23 whether partially or exclusively, on both sides of the Jordan, within the territories of all tribes, except Judah, Benjamin, and Simeon; which were reserved for the habitations of the priests (see supra); and to each town was attached landed property to the extent of a thousand cubits round the wall, or two thousand from one extreme point to the other, to serve as pasturage for their cattle, 24 an arrangement the purpose and propriety of which will be discussed hereafter. 25 But, in all other respects, they were, by the ordinances of the Pentateuch, marked out not only as strikingly inferior to the priests, but as endowed with a character of no peculiar significance or holinoss. As regards their qualification, physical perfoction was not required as a necessary condition; any member of the families of Lovi, oxcopt that of Aaron, was admitted, and served from the twenty-fifth or thirtieth to the fiftieth year of his life. 26 They were initiated in their office by rites of the simplest description; they were neither clothed nor anointed, but merely "cleansed" by purifying water, "waved" before God, and introduced by a sin-offering and a holocaust. 27 They had no distinguishing garments, in which important point, therefore, they did not differ from the common Israelitos. 28 17 Num. XVIII. 20, 23, 24; XXVI. 62; Deut. X. 9; XII. 12; XIV. 27, 29; XVIII. 1. 18 Num. XXXV. 2. 19 Num. XVIII. 20; Deut. X. 9; XVIII. 2; Josh. XIII. 14, 33; XIV. 3; XVIII. 7; Ezck. XLIV. 28; Sir. XLV. 27; comp. also Ps. XVI. 5; Lam. III. 24. 20 Num. XVIII. 21-32; comp. Nch. X. 36-40; XII. 44; XIII. 12; 2 Chr. XXXI. 4-8; scc, however, infra, Sect. III. 6-8. 21 Comp. Ezra VII. 24. 22 Num. XXXI. 26-47; sce infra. 23 To the Kohathites 10, the Gershonites 13, and the Merarites 12 (Josh. XXI. 4-7; 1 Chr. VI. 46-18). 24 Num. XXXV. 4, 5. 25 See infra, Sect. III. 4. 26 Num. IV. 3, 23, 30, 39, 43, 47; comp. 1 Chr. XXIII. 3; and Num. VIII. 23-26; scc infra Sect. III. 5. 27 Num. VIII. 5-22. 28 The musicians, however, are in 2 Chr. V. 12 stated to have been "arrayed in white linen" (comp. 1 Chr. XV. 27). After this sketch in which we have endeavoured to admit no foaturos oxcopt those warranted by the Pentateuch, while scrupulously excluding or separating from them all elements derived from other sources, we may be prepared to furnish II. AN ESTIMATE OF THE LEGISLATIVE VALUE OF 1 2 3 1. It is true, that the priests of the Hebrews were not, like those of other nations, the supposed depositaries of secret or exclusive wisdom and learning; they simply expounded and diffused the teaching of that Book which was the common heirloom of the whole community; for all had entered the covenant with God on the basis of that Law which Moses handed over not to the priests alone, but also to the elders of the people, of which the kings wore ordered to have a copy prepared for themselves to study in it constantly, and which was to bo road, at regular intervals, to the assembled people. Justly, therefore, might Josophus write, "Thoro wore in the Templo not any mystorios that may not bo spoken of... for what I havo now said is publicly known, and supported by the testimony of the whole people, and the oporations of the priests are entirely manifest." Nor doos that Book contain any doctrines that were not within the capacity of the humblest Israelite, for it disclosed no cosmic mysteries or intricate problems of naturo, but narrated, in simple language, the origin and early history of the Hobrow race, and enforced moral and roligious laws, which were either traced to incidents of that history or are derived from our common humanity. Yot, why were the priests appointed the special, if not the exclusive guardians, of the Law? The reply is, because they were supposed, by their anointment, to have been endowed with the holy spirit which enabled them to penetrate more infallibly into the depths of the revealed word. Thus a supernatural element of the most dangerous kind was introduced. It cannot be called otherwise than hierarchical. The foundation of the system seemed to be a common equality of all Israelites; but the very first layer above it was an exceptional qualification of the priests of so extraordinary a nature, that, in reality, not only all parity between priosts and Israelites was destroyed, but almost all spiritual community between them became impossible. Hence the priesthood annulled, in a great measure, the benefits which the 1 Deut. XXXI. 9. 2 Deut. XVII. 18, 19. 3 Deut. XXXI. 10-13; see p. 350; comp. also XXX. 11-14, "this law is not hidden from thee nor is it far off.... but the word is very nigh to thee, in thy mouth and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it". diffusion of a moral code like that of the Pentateuch was calculated to produce; for it engendored, in the minds of the people, mistrust in their own ability of fathoming the whole truth of the Law, and thus caused a doplorable fooling of spiritual dopondency; and since the priests wore supposed to understand the precepts more profoundly than the Israelites, that unfortunate mode of Biblical interpretation was encouraged, which discovers extraordinary and hidden meanings in the plainest texts, and which degenerated into mysticism or pharasaical playfulness." For the history of all religious and philosophical systems proves that similar aberrations are unavoidable from the moment that the simple and intelligible words of the masters or founders are made the subject of speculative enquiry by a separate class of men. 2. It will, therefore, be easy to judge of the value of the declaration that the Hebrews were to form "a kingdom of priests". Great importance has boon attached to this term, and lofty theories have been built upon it. But was the institution of the priesthood designed to make it a reality? The family of Aaron was represented as specially elected by God for a particular and holy mission. Thus it was severed from the rest of the people, and raised above it to an unapproachable distance. It monopolised all the sacred functions which, in any way, tonded to connect the Israelite with his God. But this was not sufficient; the common Hobrew was not only dobarrod from the moro significant ritos of public or privato worship; ho was to be absolutely excluded from all participation in sacred things. Not even the menial and most subordinato labours of the Sanctuary was he permitted to perform. For this purpose, another body of men, the Levites, was interposed between him and the priests. If he dared to appropriate to himself even any of these low offices, it was a crime of death. In a word, he was, by the precepts of the Pentateuch, utterly deprived of the natural privileges which he enjoyed in a simple state of society. The Hebrews were, by the Law, not made "a nation of priests", but they ceased to be one. A hierarchy was organised. We find, in the Hebrew writings, a strong and marked contrast between priests and people. The apparent parallels in the designation of the one and the other (p. 344) were no more than a theory without a practical embodiment. The protence that the Hebrews themselves renounced their priestly privileges (p. 345), is illusory; for even if it be taken as historically true, it would altor nothing in our estimate of the priestly institutions. For while the resignation of the Hebrows could only have been temporary, the priestly institutions were meant to be unchangeable for all future times: if an untutored people 4 Sec pp. 101-103. 5 Comp. Isai. XXIV. 2; IIos. IV. 9; Jer. I. 18, 3 2 just loosed from oppressive fettors, was disqualified for sacerdotal dignities, it need and ought not to have remained so after centuries of training through the Law. How different was the voice of enlightened prophets who fervidly longed for the time when the Lord would pour out His spirit over "the house of Israel",' nay over "all flesh", a sontiment attributed in the Pentateuch to Moses also in the memorable words, "Would God that all the Lord's people were prophets, and that the Lord would put His spirit upon them". - The expression "kingdom of priests" remained a phrase which, so far from being realised, was rendered impossible by the leading principles of the Pentateuch; it had no influence upon the development of the nation; it was a fino but flooting idea of a gifted mind; and the ouly notion, vague as it is, that can, from the system of the Pentateuch, be attached to it, is that the Hebrews should one day become the links between God and the heathens, just as the priests are the links between God and the Israelitos; though it is very doubtful, whether this moaning was intended by the words, "You shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation." 3. The chasm between the priests and the people was perpetuated and widened by the principle of hereditary right, according to which the priesthood was for ever restricted to one family. It may be that this principle facilitated the traditionary preservation of the ritual ordinancos, and that it favoured a higher degree of culture within the priestly order; but it completed the seclusion so effectually that it is idle to deny a caste of priests among the Hebrows, no less distinct and exclusive than that of the Hindoos or Egyptians. 4. Irrespective of the separation itself between priests and people, it is necessary to refer to the manner in which the Pentateuch describes that separation to have been effected. It was God who singled out the family of Aaron as His ministers, His representatives, and the teachers of His Law; and it was He who confirmed this election by miraculous interference, the budding staff of Aaron and the fearful destruction of Aaron's opponents, of Korah and his associates. What is the true scope and import of these statements? They imply the artful fiction of an author or of authors, who attempted to promulgate their own devices as Divine or supernatural arrangements, and thus to awe an impressionable nation into their acceptance and reverential observance. If the laws of priesthood had been represented as the work of a human legis 1 Ezek. XXXIX. 29. 2 Joel III. 1, 2; comp. Isai. XI. 9; LIV. 13; Jer. XXXI. 34; etc, 3 Num. XI. 9. 4 Comp. Isai. LXI. 6. |