Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
God commands that 48 cities be given to the Levites for dwelling, with suburbs for feeding their cattle; and that of these, six be designated as refuges for those who commit homicide. Secondly, at verse 16, the case of the homicide is ordered to be tried, so that if it was voluntary, he shall be killed: but if involuntary, he shall remain in the refuge until the death of the high priest.
Vulgate Text: Numbers 35:1-34
1. The Lord also spoke to Moses in the plains of Moab above the Jordan, opposite Jericho: 2. Command the children of Israel to give to the Levites from their possessions, 3. cities to dwell in, and their suburbs round about; that they may live in the towns, and the suburbs may be for their cattle and livestock: 4. which shall extend from the walls of the cities, outward all around, for a distance of one thousand paces: 5. on the east there shall be two thousand cubits, and on the south likewise two thousand: toward the sea also, which faces the west, the measure shall be the same, and the northern side shall end with an equal boundary, and the cities shall be in the middle, and the suburbs outside. 6. Of the towns themselves which you shall give to the Levites, six shall be for the refuge of fugitives, so that he who has shed blood may flee to them: and besides these, forty-two other cities, 7. that is, in all forty-eight with their suburbs. 8. And the cities themselves which shall be given from the possessions of the children of Israel -- from those who have more, more shall be taken; and from those who have less, fewer; each shall give cities to the Levites in proportion to their inheritance. 9. The Lord said to Moses: 10. Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: When you have crossed the Jordan into the land of Canaan, 11. determine which cities should serve as places of protection for fugitives, who have shed blood unintentionally: 12. in which, when the fugitive has taken refuge, the kinsman of the slain shall not be able to kill him, until he stands before the assembly and his case is judged. 13. Of these cities which are set apart as aid for fugitives, 14. three shall be beyond the Jordan, and three in the land of Canaan, 15. for the children of Israel as well as for strangers and sojourners, so that whoever has unintentionally shed blood may flee to them. 16. If anyone strikes with iron, and the one struck dies, he shall be guilty of murder, and he himself shall die. 17. If he throws a stone, and the person struck dies, he shall be punished in like manner. 18. If one struck with wood dies, the blood of the striker shall pay for it. 19. The kinsman of the slain shall kill the murderer: as soon as he apprehends him, he shall kill him. 20. If anyone through hatred pushes a man, or throws anything at him by ambush: 21. or being his enemy, strikes him with his hand, and the man dies, the striker shall be guilty of murder; the kinsman of the slain, as soon as he finds him, shall slay him. 22. But if by chance and without hatred, 23. and without enmity, he does any of these things, 24. and this is proved in the hearing of the people, and the case is examined between the striker and the kinsman of blood: 25. the innocent shall be freed from the hand of the avenger; and he shall be brought back by sentence to the city to which he had fled, and shall remain there until the high priest, who was anointed with holy oil, dies. 26. If the slayer is found outside the boundaries of the cities assigned to exiles, 27. and is struck by the avenger of blood, the one who killed him shall be without guilt; 28. for the fugitive should have remained in the city until the death of the high priest: but after the priest has died, the homicide shall return to his own land. 29. These shall be perpetual and lawful ordinances in all your habitations. 30. The murderer shall be punished by witnesses: at the testimony of one person no one shall be condemned. 31. You shall not accept a price from the one who is guilty of blood; he must immediately die. 32. Exiles and fugitives shall by no means be able to return to their cities before the death of the high priest: 33. lest you pollute the land of your habitation, which is stained by the blood of the innocent: nor can it be expiated otherwise than by the blood of the one who has shed another's blood. 34. And thus shall your possession be cleansed, while I dwell with you. For I am the Lord who dwells among the children of Israel.
Verse 1: In the Plains of Moab by the Jordan
1. THE LORD ALSO SPOKE THESE THINGS, etc., BY THE JORDAN -- that is, near, beside the Jordan.
Verses 2-3: Cities Given to the Levites
2 and 3. COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL TO GIVE TO THE LEVITES FROM THEIR POSSESSIONS, CITIES TO DWELL IN. -- "To the Levites," that is, both to priests and to Levites properly so called. For "Levite" here signifies all those of the tribe of Levi; for to all of these no inheritance indeed was to be given, but a habitation nevertheless. Hence various cities were assigned to them, in which they would dwell in common and promiscuously. These were 48 in number, as is evident from Joshua 21 and from verse 7 here. And in one of these there was usually the tabernacle, to which each would go when their turns of ministry came around, and having completed their turns, they would return home to their cities. Lyra thinks these cities belonged to the priests only as to use; for the ownership of them was in the hands of others, and he proves this from Hebron, which was given to the priests, Joshua 21, yet its lord was Caleb of the tribe of Judah, Joshua 14:3. But Lyra is mistaken. For in Leviticus 25:32 and following, it is stated that the cities and suburbs of the Levites are their perpetual possession, and that they can sell and redeem their houses in them; and finally that those cities in the jubilee year must return to them as absolute owners, just as the houses of laymen. As for Hebron, only the fields and vineyards that were in the territory of Hebron belonged to Caleb; but the city itself and the suburbs belonged to the priests, as is stated in Joshua 21:11.
Again, in Leviticus, the last chapter, 21, it is ordained that if anyone vows a field to the Lord, the priests shall possess it. Thus in III Kings 2, Solomon says to Abiathar the priest: "Go to your field." Likewise Jeremiah was a priest, and yet in chapter 32, he himself writes that he bought and possessed a field. Finally in Acts chapter 4, it is said that Barnabas the Levite, a Cypriot by birth, sold a field which he had.
From all this it is clear that the Levites could not only buy fields and suburbs in Judea, but also fields and vineyards elsewhere, partly by purchase, partly from the offerings and vows of the people. Outside of Judea they could inherit, buy, and possess estates just as others could. For only in the division of the Holy Land made by Joshua did the Levites not receive their lot with the other tribes. Hence Barnabas in Cyprus, and other Levites elsewhere, had their own possessions.
Verses 3-4: The Suburbs and Their Measurement
3 and 4. "And the suburbs shall be for cattle and beasts, WHICH FROM THE WALLS OF THE CITIES OUTWARD, ROUND ABOUT, SHALL EXTEND FOR A SPACE OF A THOUSAND PACES." -- The suburbs are here given to the Levites for a thousand paces all around their cities, and that for the pasture of their cattle. This verse, in the Hebrew, the Septuagint, and others, seems to be entirely contrary to the following one: for here only a thousand ammas, that is cubits, are given to the Levites; but in the following verse two thousand ammas, that is cubits, are given, and that on each side of the world.
First, Rabbi Solomon, Lyra, and Vatablus respond that a thousand cubits were given to the Levites, but that in the first thousand they were not permitted to plow and sow, while in the latter they were permitted to do so. But this response seems to be fabricated from thin air; for Scripture implies nothing of the sort.
Second, Burgensis, whom Arias Montanus follows in Joshua 14, responds that around each city of the Levites, with its suburbs, a square was described, so that its semi-diameter from the walls of the city to the edge of the suburbs contained a thousand cubits; but each side of the square itself contained two thousand cubits. But it is well known that cities are generally not square but round, and therefore the suburbs around them, at a thousand cubits, should have been described not in a square but in a circle.
Third, Masius responds in Joshua 14, and Serarius in Joshua 21, that these suburbs had only a thousand cubits on each side; but they are said to be two thousand, because if a straight line of a thousand cubits toward the east, for example, is extended to the opposite side, which is toward the west, which is also a thousand cubits, there will be two thousand cubits. But this seems to be contrary to the words of the text, which compute these two thousand cubits not from one opposite side to the other, but from one and the same side and direction; for they say: "Toward the east there shall be two thousand cubits, and toward the south likewise two thousand," and the same number toward the north and the west.
Reconciliation of One Thousand and Two Thousand Cubits
Fourth, Abulensis thinks that here one should follow not the Hebrew text, but our Translator: for these suburbs contained a thousand paces, and a thousand paces make two thousand cubits. For although a pace is larger than a cubit and contains five feet when we measure a fixed pace, namely both feet of the measurer, and three feet intercepted between his two feet in the pace, nevertheless if you measure and take a moving pace that is continuously advancing, you will find that it contains only four feet. For the first foot is only counted in the first pace, so that this first pace has five feet; but in the following paces only the remaining four feet, continuously succeeding one another, are counted, as is clear from experience; and four feet make two cubits, and a little more. Therefore these thousand paces are the same as two thousand cubits, which are mentioned in the following verse. Vilalpandus adds, Part I, On the City and Temple, book 2, chapter 2, that the common cubit is a foot and a half, but the sacred cubit is two and a half feet, so that two sacred cubits make a pace, that is five feet.
You will say: In the Hebrew, in both this verse and the following one, there is the same word amma, which signifies a cubit: how then does our Translator render it here as a pace, and in the following verse as a cubit? One could respond that amma signifies not only a cubit, but also a pace: for not only does our Translator teach this, but also Eugubinus; and that the Translator renders the same word amma first as a pace, then immediately as a cubit, is not surprising, because he himself saw that the circumstances of the passage required this; otherwise there would be a manifest contradiction here.
Fifth, because the Hebrew consistently has amma, with aleph, not with ain, which in Scripture always signifies a cubit, never a pace, and so the Chaldean, the Septuagint, and all other translators render it here, I would rather say that our Translator takes pace here not in the larger or geometric sense, which encompasses five feet, but in the smaller or common sense, so that it is the same as a cubit. For in walking, the common pace, such as that of those walking slowly and moderately, is equal to a cubit, if you subtract from it the first foot, namely the one on which you stand, and only count the space between the two feet and the foot itself which you extend and advance in this pace. For thus this smaller pace contains about a foot and a half; and a cubit contains the same.
You will say: How then are the suburbs reckoned in this verse at a thousand paces or cubits, and in the following verse at two thousand cubits? I assume that both the cities and these suburbs were of a circular or oval shape. Now I say: This contradiction can be resolved and reconciled in two ways: first, if with Cajetan we say that these suburbs were of a thousand cubits, but that their circle or circumference was about eight thousand cubits; so that this circumference, from each quarter of the world, that is, from each direction, had two thousand cubits.
For which note: In a circle the circumference has a triple proportion to the diameter, and a little more, so that if the diameter is two thousand cubits, the circumference is six thousand cubits. But here the semi-diameter of the suburbs was a thousand cubits: to these add the diameter of the city itself, which was about six hundred cubits, so that the diameter of both the city and the suburbs was 2,600 cubits; from which it necessarily follows that the circumference of both the city and these suburbs was about eight thousand cubits; for three times 2,600 makes eight thousand, minus two hundred, which must be added here because the circumference is a little more than triple the diameter: now divide eight thousand by the four directions of the world, and you will find that the quarter of the circumference of the suburbs facing each direction was about two thousand cubits. And this is what is said in the following verse, that on each side there were two thousand cubits.
"Moses, says Cajetan, established the circumference of the suburbs at eight thousand cubits, whether the city be large or small, so that there would be one common law for the space of the suburbs. For he judged it fair that the interior diameter of each city be reckoned at six hundred cubits; for although one city might be larger than another, by balancing the larger with the smaller, and vice versa, he established equal suburbs; for with a diameter of 2,600 cubits, according to geometric proportions, the circumference is likewise determined to be eight thousand cubits, according to the triple proportion, and a little more."
But because the corner (as it is in the Hebrew) of each direction, in the following verse, is commanded to be extended to two thousand cubits, and because corner properly signifies not the circumference of a circle, but a corner or triangle, and because precisely here God commands a thousand paces, that is cubits, to be measured outside each city; but some cities were large and others small: hence, secondly, more fittingly you should take these two thousand cubits not in the circumference, but in the edges or lines drawn from the center, namely from the walls of the city, to the circumference of the suburbs; for these lines, since there are two for each direction of the world, so as to encompass and comprehend the whole between them, make one angle at the center where they meet, and two angles at the circumference where they terminate, and thus they make a triangle. Hence you would translate the Hebrew thus literally: you shall measure at the corner of the east two thousand cubits: and the same at the corner of the south, west, and north.
For God seems here to describe a circle of the city with its suburbs, so that the center is the city, and the circumference terminates at a thousand cubits all around outside the city walls. And He divides this circle, in four directions, into four quasi-triangles, each of which is isosceles, that is, the two sides drawn from the center to the circumference are equal. Therefore God here commands that the suburbs should extend in every direction, toward the four directions of the world, for a thousand cubits, and that the eastern side should be described by two lines drawn from the city to the circumference of the suburbs, which two lines encompass the eastern side in the form of a triangle. In the same way, He commands a second triangle to be described by two lines, toward the western side, and in the same way, a third triangle toward the south, and a fourth toward the north; so that each side is described by a triangle, with two lines drawn from the city to the circumference already mentioned, each of which contains a thousand cubits, so that the two lines drawn to the circumference on each side, which are the two equal sides of this triangle, together contain two thousand cubits.
Thus therefore we easily reconcile this contradiction; for we say that the suburbs extended only a thousand cubits all around, but each side was described as if by a triangle, so that it had two sides, each of which was a thousand cubits, and consequently both sides taken together were two thousand cubits.
Verse 6: The Six Cities of Refuge
6. OF THOSE VERY TOWNS WHICH YOU SHALL GIVE TO THE LEVITES, SIX SHALL BE SET APART AS AIDS FOR FUGITIVES, SO THAT HE WHO HAS SHED BLOOD MAY FLEE TO THEM -- that is, he who has killed someone, understand unwillingly or unknowingly, as is stated in verse 11 and Joshua 20:3; for these city sanctuaries were established for the protection of the innocent: hence the homicide was required to demonstrate his innocence before being admitted to these sanctuaries. "He shall stand, says Joshua 20:4, before the gate of the city, and shall speak to the elders of that city those things which prove him innocent, and so they shall receive him and give him a place to dwell."
For under the old law, because of the hardness of that people, it was permitted for relatives to kill the slayer of their kinsman, without any other condemnation by a judge, wherever they found him, as is clear from verses 19 and 27. Therefore God commanded these cities of refuge to be established, to which those who had committed homicide might retreat, so that they would be safe there until their case was examined, and this either at the gate of the city to which they had fled, or at the place where the homicide had been committed, as I shall explain at verse 25. Hence they were led there, and the relatives of the slain person would bring charges against them, and if they were found innocent -- that is, to have committed the killing not deliberately, but unknowingly, by accident, or in self-defense -- they were sent back to the place of refuge, as stated in verse 25; but if they were found guilty -- that is, to have killed knowingly and deliberately -- they too were put to death.
On this side of the Jordan, Moses designated three cities of refuge, namely Bosor, Ramoth, and Golan. But he commands here in verse 11 that after the Hebrews had crossed the Jordan, in the promised land, they should designate three others besides; which was in fact done in Joshua chapter 20, verse 7. The cities of refuge in total, therefore, were six, to which God commanded three more to be added, Deuteronomy 19:9, namely at the time when the borders of the Hebrews would be further expanded.
Moreover, all the cities of refuge were inhabited by Levites, precisely so that by the dignity of the priesthood, unjust violence might more easily be prevented, and so that capital judgments of this kind might be more rightly and more holily judged by men skilled in human and divine law, namely by Levites and priests.
You may ask whether the city in which the tabernacle stood, or the tabernacle itself, was a sanctuary. Tostatus denies it, Question 11; Covarruvias affirms it, chapter 20, conclusion 2. But I say that the altar and the tabernacle were a sanctuary; but not the city itself in which they were located. This is clear from the fact that Joab fled from the city to the tabernacle and altar, as to a sanctuary: for this is a place sacred in itself. The same is gathered from Exodus 21:14. So Serarius in Joshua 20, Question 7, where he confirms this at greater length.
Mystical Explanation of the Six Cities of Refuge
St. Ambrose provides a mystical explanation of the six cities of refuge in his book On Flight from the World, chapter 11; and from him Serarius in Joshua 20, Question 12; and Magalianus in the same place, verse 9, annotation 4, where he teaches that for penitents the mystical sanctuaries are contrition, prayer, God's grace, the Sacraments, and entrance into religious life. "The law teaches, says St. Ambrose, that the world must be fled, and God must be followed. Now there are six refuges of cities, so that the first city is the knowledge of the Word, and the form of living according to His image. The second is the consideration of the divine work by which the world was created. The third is the contemplation of royal power and eternal majesty. The fourth is the gaze upon divine propitiation. The fifth is the contemplation of the divine law, which prescribes what must be done. The sixth is the portion of the law which prescribes what must not be done." Thus St. Romuald, fleeing from a killing at which he had been present to a monastery, exchanged the literal sanctuary for a mystical one, and having become a monk, founded the Camaldolese Order; in which he lived with wondrous sanctity for a hundred years, and died at the age of 120.
Verse 15: Proselytes and the Right of Sanctuary
15. BOTH FOR THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL AND FOR STRANGERS AND SOJOURNERS -- namely those converted to Judaism, that is, proselytes. For these are called strangers and sojourners: namely, a stranger, or as it is in Hebrew, ger, is one who has now for the first time, or certainly not long ago, arrived and come to Judaism. But a sojourner, or as it is in Hebrew, toscab, is one who came long ago and has dwelt for a long time among the Israelites. So Serarius in Joshua 20, Question 6. Proselytes therefore enjoyed the right of sanctuary, but not Gentiles remaining in paganism. So Abulensis and Serarius; although Masius and Magalinus consider that the right of sanctuary was granted even to those Gentiles here, which opinion is not improbable.
Note: Jews by birth had three privileges which proselytes lacked: first, a slave, if he was a Jew, was set free in the seventh year and the fiftieth; but not if he was a proselyte, Leviticus 25:40 and 43. Second, Jews enjoyed the privilege of remission of debts in the seventh year, but not proselytes, Deuteronomy 15:3. Third, Jews could not lend at interest to Jews, but could to proselytes, Deuteronomy 23:19. In all other matters, the laws were equal for both. So Abulensis.
SO THAT HE WHO UNWILLINGLY (involuntarily; in Hebrew, in ignorance) HAS SHED BLOOD MAY FLEE TO THEM. -- Note: Properly speaking, these cities of refuge were established only for homicides, and not for those who had merely injured another. If, however, such persons had fled to them, they enjoyed the common right of sanctuary. Again, voluntary homicides did not have the right of sanctuary. But what if someone had killed another voluntarily, yet while defending himself and repelling force with force? I respond: He had the right of sanctuary; indeed, once this innocence of his was proven, he was sent home free from the sanctuary, because he was not a murderer and guilty, but plainly innocent. So Abulensis, Question 5, in chapter 20 of Joshua, and in the same place Serarius and Magalianus. But if someone had committed a killing in the sanctuary itself, namely in the cities of refuge, he did not enjoy the right of sanctuary. So Abulensis, in the same place, Question 19.
The reason for sanctuaries was reverence for temples and sacred places, and for God Himself. For when the houses of God are held sacred and as sanctuaries, His glory and majesty are celebrated. Second, His mercy and kindness are commended when He receives wretched fugitives fleeing to Him under His protection. Thus the pagan Greeks established an altar of mercy, as Pausanias attests in book 1 of his Attica. Thus Romulus established a sanctuary at Rome, as St. Augustine attests in book 1 of the City of God, chapter 34, but for all, even the most wicked men. Thus Alaric and the Goths, when Rome was captured, spared the Romans who fled to the churches; indeed, when a certain Goth discovered sacred vessels in the possession of a consecrated virgin, and she said to him: "These vessels have been entrusted to me from the shrine of Blessed Peter; touch them if you dare; I do not dare to give sacred things to you" -- the Goth, terrified at the name of the Apostle, reported this to the king; he immediately arranged for everything to be returned to the shrine of St. Peter, saying that "he was waging war with the Romans, not with the Apostles of Jesus Christ." So Roderic of Toledo, book 2 of the History of Spain, chapter 5.
Memorable was Agesilaus, who forbade the violation of the Athenians defeated in battle who had fled to the temple of Minerva; even though in that battle he himself had received several wounds, and seemed very angry at them. But religion had more power with him than anger. He did the same among the barbarians, saying that there was no right of war in temples; and he added that he was amazed that those who would harm suppliants there, who were imploring by the gods, were not considered sacrilegious, and that heavier penalties were not imposed on those who diminished religion than on those who plundered temples. Rightly judging that the safety of men was dearer to the gods than the mute ornaments of temples. So Aemilius Probus.
Verse 17: Death from a Stone
17. IF HE CAST A STONE AND THE ONE STRUCK SHALL DIE, HE SHALL BE PUNISHED IN LIKE MANNER -- that is, if the one struck by the stone died immediately; for if he had risen from the blow or walked, the striker, or rather the thrower, was not killed, but only paid the expenses of treatment to the injured party, as is clear from Exodus 21:19.
Verse 19: The Kinsman Avenger
19. THE KINSMAN OF THE SLAIN SHALL KILL THE HOMICIDE -- that is, shall be able to kill him. For this is not a command, but merely a permission granted to hard-hearted men, and that for the purpose of restraining killings, since everyone knew that they would be promptly avenged in a bitter spirit by so many kinsmen. Yet those who killed the homicide sinned, if they did so out of hatred and anger, as usually happens. Hence in Leviticus 19:17, in the forum of the soul and conscience, God commands the Hebrews to forget injuries. The vengeance, therefore, that is permitted here did not remove guilt, but only granted impunity for the deed, or for the guilt, in the external forum. This is further clear from the fact that these kinsmen of the slain often killed an innocent and entirely involuntary homicide -- even one acquitted by the judge -- if they found him anywhere outside the city of sanctuary, as is clear from verse 27: but this could not happen without sin. Third, the same is clear from the fact that these precepts are judicial, which establish a right to be observed, and according to which judgment is to be made in the external forum. So Abulensis and Cajetan.
Permission is therefore given here to the relatives of the slain to kill the homicide wherever they find him outside the cities of sanctuary. For in the sanctuary they could not touch the homicide: for there the judges were required to guarantee his safety until his case was examined; and if he were condemned in it, the relatives could kill him, and, as is implied here, the homicide was handed over by the judge to the kinsmen and relatives of the slain, to be slaughtered by them, and this to satisfy their anger and sense of offense: but if he were declared innocent, he was safely returned to the sanctuary, and there he had to remain until the death of the high priest. So Abulensis.
Verse 20: Pushing and Ambush
20. IF HE SHALL PUSH HIM -- understand, into fire, water, a pit, etc.
"But if by chance." -- In Hebrew, bepeta, that is suddenly, unexpectedly, which means by chance.
Verse 25: Return to the City of Refuge
25. HE SHALL BE BROUGHT BACK (the homicide who killed another by chance, and has already been declared innocent by the judge) BY SENTENCE TO THE CITY TO WHICH HE HAD FLED. -- "He shall be brought back," that is, the judge by his sentence shall order him to be brought back, either from the city and place in which the homicide was committed; for his case seems to have been examined there, because witnesses and other greater indications of the truth were available there, as Abulensis holds, and the word "he shall be brought back" implies this; or certainly from the very gate of the city of refuge, the judge shall order him to be brought back into the city itself. For in this gate, namely among the Levites, where religion and justice were holier, this judgment about the nature of the homicide is considered to have been held, as Masius and Serarius think in Joshua 20, and others. Both opinions and explanations are probable.
The Death of the High Priest and Its Reasons
AND HE SHALL REMAIN THERE UNTIL THE HIGH PRIEST (pontiff) DIES. -- You may ask why? The Rabbis give various reasons, which Serarius reviews in chapter 20 of Joshua, Question 5; setting these aside I say: The first reason was that in the meantime, with the length of time, the anger and bitterness of the relatives might be softened, lest when they see him they kill him; but with the pontiff now dead, they might consider that anger too ought to die and be extinguished, because the high priest has died, the chief of sacred rites and expiations, during whose lifetime the offense was committed; and therefore in his death and mourning all private wrongs and injuries should be buried. So Theodoret, Question 51. Second, because the pontiff was like the father of the nation, so that while he lived the republic flourished, and when he died an end seemed to be imposed even on that age or era. So Magalianus on Joshua chapter 20. Third, because the pontiff represented the person of God, against whom the homicide had sinned, and therefore the homicide redounded to the injury of the pontiff, so that rightly while he was alive the homicide ought to be confined, lest he freely hold up his head among men while he lives who is considered the interpreter of God on earth and who as it were shadows forth the divine majesty, gazing, namely, from the summit of priestly dignity upon what is done piously or impiously. And this is implied by the words who was anointed with the holy oil, as if to say: Let the homicide be hidden while the pontiff lives, in whom God's majesty was violated on account of such a crime, which was committed while he was exercising the priesthood on behalf of the most high God. So Magalianus above, and Masius on Joshua chapter 20.
Fourth, this was granted as a grace of the new pontiff who succeeded the deceased, so that just as a new one approaches to propitiate God for men, so also he might bestow a new benefit and salvation on the wretched defendants who seem more worthy of it. Fifth, "God wished to show, says Oleaster, how much a priest ought to abhor homicides, even involuntary ones." Again, the pontiff was the vicar of God and acted the part of divine justice, by which God exacts vengeance from men; and when he died, the adverse party who sought vengeance for God seemed to be extinguished, and therefore then the defendant was wholly acquitted.
The sixth and most important reason was to signify the true liberty which was won for homicides, that is for all sinners, through the death of Christ the high priest. So Serarius. Hence: Allegorically, Cyril, book 8 of On Adoration, p. 465: "The human race, he says, consisted of homicides, and men were sinners before the coming of Christ, who by their sins had killed their own souls, not willingly, but enticed and driven by concupiscence. These penitents fled and hid themselves in the cities of refuge, that is, in the limbo of the fathers, until the death of the high priest, that is of Christ, who loosened their chains and led them out of limbo and hell." So also St. Gregory, homily 6 on Ezekiel.
Verse 27: The Avenger of Blood
27. THE AVENGER OF BLOOD -- that is, the blood relative to whom vengeance belongs.
HE SHALL BE WITHOUT GUILT -- he shall not be punished. In Hebrew: no blood shall be reckoned to him, that is, it shall not be imputed to him, so that he would have to pay with his own for it.
Verse 30: Witnesses Required
30. He shall be punished on the testimony of witnesses (in Hebrew, at the mouth of witnesses, namely of several, not of one).
Verse 33: Do Not Pollute the Land
33. DO NOT POLLUTE THE LAND -- by homicide. Of homicide, because of its enormity, it is said that it pollutes the land, which received the innocent blood that was shed, as if that blood sprinkles a moral stain and blemish upon the earth, especially if the land is holy, or God manifests Himself in it in a special way, as He did in the land of the children of Israel; and that this stain is removed by just vengeance and the death of the homicide. Thus of certain other sins, such as sodomy, defrauding workers of their wages, oppression of the poor and orphans, Scripture says that they cry out to heaven, because by their enormity they as it were demand vengeance from God.
Moral Lesson: The Inviolability of Church Sanctuary
Learn morally from this chapter how the right of sanctuary and the sanctuary of the church must be preserved inviolate: hence those who violated it were severely punished by God.
First, Heliodorus, wishing to claim for himself the gold deposited in the temple, was scourged by an angel, and was scarcely freed by the prayers of Onias, 2 Maccabees 3.
Second, Nicanor, 2 Maccabees 14, scorning God and swearing that he would dedicate the temple of the Lord to Bacchus unless Judas who was there was handed over, was killed.
Third, St. Augustine, letter 6 in the Appendix, severely rebukes Boniface the Count, who was dealing with the Goths in Africa as commander of the army, because he had ordered a man who fled to the church to be dragged away from it. "I am amazed, he says, how the battering ram of the enemy has so suddenly broken through the wall of faith; for I know with what reverence you have always venerated the Church of God. At whose urging, brother, did you seize a man from the church? If a fugitive were to presume upon your friendship, he could doubtless obtain pardon on account of his intercessor; so if a friend is offended, why is God offended? But if it is a matter of power, consider King Nebuchadnezzar, who because of pride was changed from a man into an ox. I write this not to confound you, but to admonish you as my dearest son. Therefore bring back unharmed to the church the one whom you most irreligiously seized." Then he inflicts a penalty on him, saying: "I have ordered that the offering of your household not be accepted by the clergy; and I forbid you communion until, having completed the penance prescribed by me for your presumption or error, you offer a worthy sacrifice to God with a contrite and humbled heart for this deed."
Fourth, in the year of the Lord 606, and the fourth year of the reign of Phocas, Scholasticus, a religious man, a eunuch of the palace, taking with him the Lady Constantina, formerly Empress, wife of the Emperor Maurice, with her three daughters, fled to the great church. But the tyrant hastened to the church to drag the women away. Patriarch Cyriacus then resisted the tyrant, in no way allowing the women to be tyrannically taken from the temple. But when Phocas gave certain oaths that he would not harm them, they were led out of the temple and enclosed in a monastery. So from Theophanes and Cedrenus, Baronius at the year of Christ 606.
Fifth, Aspar and Ardaburius, demanding the return of a certain John who had fled to the monastery of St. Marcellus, sent soldiers to extract him by force; but at the prayer of St. Marcellus, lightning bolts sent against the soldiers repelled them, so that the cruel Ardaburius spared John and changed his ways. So the Life of St. Marcellus relates. Baronius thinks that on the occasion of this miracle, Emperor Leo promulgated an excellent decree on the immunity of those who flee to churches in that very year, writing thus to Erythraeus, the prefect of the praetorium: "By the present law we decree, to be valid throughout all places, that you shall not allow any persons whatsoever, of whatever condition they may be, to be expelled from, or surrendered from, or dragged from the sacrosanct churches of the orthodox faith."
Sixth, around the year of the Lord 1000, Vermudo XI, king of Leon and Asturias, deceived by a whisperer, ordered the arrest of Gudesteus, Bishop of Oviedo; but lest so great a crime go unpunished, a great drought occurred in the land, so that the entire people was afflicted by a shortage of food: and when it had been revealed by the Lord to certain persons that the famine had come because of the injury to the Bishop, and the revelation was communicated to the king, he immediately released the Bishop, and through Semenus, Bishop of Astorga, he had Gudesteus restored; and at once the Lord sent down a generous rain, and the earth brought forth its fruits.
Seventh, concerning Sancho the Great, king of Navarre and Castile, almost all the writers of Spanish history report that, when one day while hunting he was pursuing a boar, the exhausted animal took refuge within some walls that remained as a memorial of St. Antoninus the Martyr, standing by the sacred altar that had been left there, as if at a safe sanctuary accustomed to be surrounded by the guardianship of angels, according to that oracle: "You will save men and beasts, O Lord." When the king thrust at it with his hunting spear, he immediately felt his raised arm, ready to strike, rendered useless by a numbness; but recognizing his guilt, he prayed to the Martyr and felt his arm divinely restored to its former use, and he learned at his own cost how great an immunity was owed to sacred places, even if they seemed to have fallen into ruin, so that it was not even permitted to harm a beast that had fled there, says Roderic and Vasaeus, and from them Baronius, at the year of the Lord 1032.
Eighth, Eutropius, the eunuch of Arcadius, infamous for a cesspool of crimes, having extorted from the Emperor a law by which all immunity would be abolished, and it would be permitted to drag away even those who fled to the altars; he himself, afterwards declining the Emperor's wrath, was dragged from the altar to which he had fled, sent into exile, and recalled from there and beheaded, as Suidas attests in his entry on Eutropius, and Chrysostom in his oration on Eutropius, and with Chrysostom's efforts the unjust law was abrogated.
Ninth, of St. Basil, Nazianzen writes in his oration about him that he protected a widow who had embraced the altar from the injury of the Governor.
Tenth, of St. Ambrose, Paulinus writes that he defended Cresconius, so that he would not be seized there by the lictors; and when he did not prevail, those who dragged him away were torn apart in the theater by wild beasts that had been let loose upon the one who was dragged out.
Eleventh, Orosius, book 7, chapter 36, records the punishment of Mascezel the general, who violated the right of sanctuary.
Finally, what is more remarkable, St. Justus, having left the episcopate of Lyon, withdrew into the desert of Egypt, and hid there for a long time, doing penance because he had turned away a man who had fled to the church, in order to calm the fury of the people, having first received an assurance from the magistrate that no danger would be intended for that man. So his Life relates, in Surius, volume 5.