Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
The Hebrews are circumcised at Gilgal. Next, in verse 10, they celebrate the Passover; the manna ceases when they ate the fruits of the land. Finally, in verse 13, an armed Angel appearing to Joshua encourages him, and commands him to remove his sandals, because he stands on holy ground.
Vulgate Text: Joshua 5:1-16
1. After therefore all the kings of the Amorites, who dwelt beyond the Jordan on the western side, and all the kings of Canaan, who possessed the places near the great sea, heard that the Lord had dried up the streams of the Jordan before the children of Israel until they crossed, their heart dissolved and there remained no spirit in them, fearing the entrance of the children of Israel. 2. At that time the Lord said to Joshua: Make for yourself stone knives, and circumcise the children of Israel a second time. 3. He did what the Lord had commanded, and circumcised the children of Israel on the Hill of Foreskins. 4. Now this is the reason for the second circumcision: All the people of the male sex who came out of Egypt, all the warrior men, died in the desert through the very long circuits of the journey, 5. all of whom had been circumcised. But the people who were born in the desert, 6. during the forty years of journeying through the vast wilderness, were uncircumcised; until those who had not heeded the voice of the Lord were consumed, and to whom He had sworn that He would not show them the Land flowing with milk and honey. 7. Their sons took the place of their fathers, and were circumcised by Joshua: for as they had been born, they were in their foreskin, and no one had circumcised them on the way. 8. But after all had been circumcised, they remained in the same place of the camp until they were healed. 9. And the Lord said to Joshua: Today I have removed the reproach of Egypt from you. And the name of that place was called Gilgal, to this present day. 10. And the children of Israel remained at Gilgal, and celebrated the Passover on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, in the plains of Jericho; 11. and they ate of the fruits of the land on the following day, unleavened bread and parched grain of that same year. 12. And the manna ceased after they ate of the fruits of the land, and the children of Israel no longer used that food: but they ate of the fruits of the present year's produce of the land of Canaan. 13. And when Joshua was in the field of the city of Jericho, he lifted his eyes and saw a man standing before him, holding an unsheathed sword, and he went to him and said: Are you one of ours, or of our adversaries? 14. He answered: Neither, but I am the prince of the army of the Lord, and now I have come. 15. Joshua fell prostrate on the ground, and worshipping said: What does my Lord say to His servant? 16. Remove, he said, your sandal from your feet: for the place on which you stand is holy. And Joshua did as he had been commanded.
Verse 1: The kings of the Amorites heard
1. The kings of the Amorites, etc., and the kings of Canaan. — The Septuagint has: and the kings of Phoenicia. Under these two peoples all seven nations inhabiting the promised land are understood by synecdoche, namely the Hivites, Jebusites, Hittites, Perizzites, and Girgashites, Deuteronomy 7:1. The Amorites were those who dwelt toward the Jordan; the Canaanites, those who dwelt toward the Mediterranean Sea, whom the Septuagint here calls Phoenicians; elsewhere they are commonly called Palestinians or Philistines; indeed sometimes not only the Philistines, such as the Gazites, Azotians, and Ekronites, but also all the Jews and Edomites are called Phoenicians, as Masius teaches from Dionysius the African and Strabo, Book 16. Hence the woman who is called a Canaanite by Matthew 15:22 is called a Syro-Phoenician by Mark. And indeed all agree that Tyre and Sidon, which were the chief cities of Phoenicia, formerly belonged to Canaan, or to the land promised by God to the Jews, although the Hebrews through their laziness never gained possession of them. Masius and Arias here, and Pererius on Exodus, page 186, at the end, beautifully and extensively confirm this point.
Their heart dissolved, and there remained no spirit in them. — This is a hyperbole, meaning: So struck with terror were the Canaanites and the rest, on account of the Hebrews' crossing the Jordan on dry foot, as if life and spirit had left them lifeless. The Septuagint: their minds melted, and they were dismayed, and there was in them no prudence suggesting any plan suitable for resisting the Hebrews.
Now, the "heart" designates that part of the soul in which fortitude and constancy reside; and "spirit" that power of the soul by which we are wise, and discern and deliberate what must be done: for when the heart melts and gives way, that is, when fortitude weakens through fear, the faculty of wisdom must likewise be disturbed and collapse.
Verse 2: Make stone knives and circumcise
2. At that time the Lord said to Joshua: Make for yourself stone knives, and circumcise the children of Israel a second time. — "Stone," the Septuagint has: of rock; Masius: of stone; in Hebrew it is tsurim, which the Chaldean, Cajetan, Arias, Pagninus, and Vatablus translate as "sharp"; others, "sharpened on a whetstone." Better, our translator, the Septuagint, St. Augustine, Theodoret, Origen, Rupertus, Masius, and others translate it as "stone." For the Hebrew tsur everywhere signifies rock, stone, and boulder. Hence also Tsor (and from it Tor and Tyre) was the name of that powerful city of Phoenicia, because it was built on a rock of the sea, and therefore impregnable. So also Zipporah, Moses' wife, circumcised her sons with a stone knife, Exodus 4. And many hold that Christ was circumcised with a stone knife.
One may ask why Joshua ordered the Hebrews to be circumcised with a stone knife. I answer: the literal reason was, as Theodoret gives it, that there was an abundance of rocks in that place, but a shortage of iron and steel. For the Hebrews were in the region around Arabia, which was called Petrea ("Rocky") from its abundance of rocks, where they sharpen rocks like iron and make from them very sharp knives. So also elsewhere in ancient times iron was rare, and therefore expensive and of great value. Hence Lycurgus ordered coins to be struck from iron among the Spartans, so that its weight and heaviness would prevent theft, as Plutarch attests in his Life. And Catullus writes that Attis was castrated with flint: "He tore away the weights from himself with a sharp flint," he says. Indeed, Julianus, Book 6 of his Epigrams, writes that the Greeks once sharpened their pens with flint: "The stone," he says, "which sharpens the blunted cheek of the pen."
The allegorical reason was that these stone knives were a type and figure of Christ, who is the spiritual Rock, and by spiritual circumcision cuts away not flesh from the foreskin, but the mind from vices, and will cut the body from diseases and death on the Hill of Foreskins, that is, in the resurrection of the dead, says Rupertus here, chapter 16; so also Theodoret, Question 1, Origen, Procopius, and others.
Furthermore, St. Augustine, Sermon 141 On Time; St. Bernard, Sermon 1 On the Circumcision, and the Master of the Sentences in Book 4, treating of circumcision, hold that the circumcision had to be done with a stone knife, because God commands the same here: but this command was given to Joshua alone, not to others. Hence in Genesis 17:10, where the institution and precept of circumcision is established by God, no mention is made of a stone knife. Therefore even now the Jews circumcise themselves and their children with an iron knife, not a stone one. So Abulensis, Hugo of St. Victor, St. Thomas, Lyranus, and expressly St. Justin (who was a Jew, namely a Samaritan) in his Dialogue Against Trypho: "That first circumcision of yours," he says, "was formerly done with iron, and is still so done, and therefore hardness of heart remains in you; but ours, which is the second, is done with sharp stones, namely through Christ and the Apostles, who circumcise the vices of the heart."
Circumcise the children of Israel a second time. — Why "a second time"? Are those once circumcised, whose foreskin grew back or was drawn forward (as Symmachus, the translator of Holy Scripture, and others who defected from the Jews to the Samaritans once did, as I showed in 1 Corinthians 7:18), being commanded to circumcise it a second time? By no means.
First, therefore, Theodoret, Question 3, and Masius think that this circumcision is called second in relation to the first, which was done by Abraham, who by God's command first circumcised himself and his whole household, Genesis 17. But in relation to Abraham's this was not the second, but more than the tenth, indeed the hundredth circumcision; for after Abraham for 400 years until Moses, all his descendants were circumcised.
Second, Vatablus holds that it is called the second in relation to the first, which was done by Moses, who circumcised the people brought out of Egypt at Sinai. But of this circumcision of Moses neither Scripture, nor Philo, nor Josephus, nor anyone else makes mention.
Third, Rabbi David Kimchi and Cajetan interpret "a second time" as "in turns" or "by alternation," meaning: Do not circumcise all at once, lest all being circumcised be weakened and unable to resist the Canaanites, but circumcise them in two turns, so that while these are being circumcised, others still uncircumcised may be fit to fight the Canaanites. But this is far-fetched and irrelevant.
I say therefore with St. Augustine here, Question 6, and Abulensis, that the same individual man is not commanded here to be circumcised a second time, but the same people, which had first been circumcised in its ancestors in Egypt, and this at the bidding and encouragement of Moses, as Tertullian holds, in his book Against the Jews, Rabbi Levi, and others. But the same people is commanded to be circumcised a second time in its children, who had remained uncircumcised for the 40 years they had wandered in the desert; these therefore resumed in Canaan the circumcision that had been interrupted for so many years. That this is the genuine meaning is clear from what follows, especially verses 3, 5, and 6. For the same people was here that had been led out of Egypt by Moses and led into the promised land by Joshua; which was first circumcised in Egypt at the time of Moses, indeed all who were not yet circumcised were circumcised shortly before the departure from Egypt. For at the departure they celebrated the Passover and ate the Paschal lamb; for no one could eat it unless circumcised, Exodus 12. Then the circumcision of the people ceased because of the wandering in the desert for forty years: but when this wandering was finished, and Israel had now entered Canaan, all who had been uncircumcised until then were circumcised by Joshua, and therefore this is called the second circumcision of the people. So Masius, Lyranus, Pererius, Serarius, and others.
Tropologically, our Jacobus Alvarez, in his treatise On Mortification, says: The first circumcision done in Egypt designates external mortification; but the second, accomplished at the crossing of the Jordan, signifies internal mortification, which is rightly done on the Hill of Foreskins: for he who dares to mortify his interior life has already ascended the hill, that is, a certain degree of perfection. The first, exterior mortification, if taken alone without regard for the second, is of little importance, since it leaves the soul uncircumcised and subject to vices.
Verse 3: The Hill of Foreskins
3. He circumcised them on the Hill of Foreskins — that is, in a place and hill so called from the circumcision of the foreskins performed there by Joshua, just as the same place was for the same reason called Gilgal, verse 9.
Verse 5: All who came out of Egypt had been circumcised
5. All of whom had been circumcised. — Hence it is probably from the contrary some infer that of the others, who were not circumcised and had not been rebellious to God by murmuring, no one died in the desert; and the Psalmist implies this, Psalm 105:37, and Moses, Deuteronomy 29:5.
Verse 6: Why circumcision was omitted in the desert
6. But the people who were born in the desert during the forty years of journeying through the vast wilderness were uncircumcised. — The question is asked: for what reason was circumcision omitted in the desert, when it had been commanded by God, Genesis 17?
First, the Talmudists, in the treatise On Levitical Law, and following them Rabbi David here, assert that during the forty years the Hebrews wandered in the desert, the north wind or Boreas, an enemy of clouds, did not blow, lest it disperse the pillar of cloud that guided the march. And for this reason the Hebrews abstained from circumcision, because they considered that wind essential for healing wounds. But these are the inventions of those storytellers, indeed mere trifles and nonsense.
Second, Theodoret here, Question 2; St. Jerome, Book 1 on the Epistle to the Galatians; Damascene, Book 4 On the Faith, chapter 27, and others give this reason, that in the desert the people of Israel were sufficiently distinct and separated from other nations by themselves and by the nature of the place, and therefore there was no need to circumcise them. For circumcision was instituted for the purpose of distinguishing Israel from the rest. This reason is fitting, but insufficient. For even in Judea the Jews were separated from other nations, and yet they had to be circumcised for other more important purposes, namely because of God's command, and so that by this means they would enroll in the Synagogue and become children of Abraham and the people of God, just as now happens through baptism.
Third, St. Augustine here, Question 6, holds that circumcision was omitted through the people's disobedience: therefore they sinned by omitting it; but Moses and Scripture would have rebuked the people for this sin, which however they nowhere do.
Fourth, Gabriel Vasquez in Part 3, disputation 164, chapter 2, suspects that these children remained uncircumcised in the desert because of the sin and murmuring of their parents; for on this account God punished the parents themselves with death, and their children with uncircumcision. Masius and Pererius in their commentary on Genesis 17 suspect the same. But Scripture implies nothing of the sort; indeed it suggests the contrary, namely that God replaced the rebellious fathers with their children, struck a new covenant with them (whose symbol was circumcision), and led them into the promised land from which He had excluded the parents because of their rebellion.
I say therefore: The true reason for the omission of circumcision in the desert was that the Hebrews were excused from it by their continual wandering, because in it they had no stable and certain rest: but whenever the pillar of cloud, the guide of their march, moved, the Hebrews had to follow it and move camp. But they could not have done this if they had been circumcised on that day or shortly before. For circumcision inflicted a serious wound on the body and sharp pain, so that one could neither fight nor walk, as is clear in the case of the Shechemites, who were for this reason slain by Simeon and Levi to avenge the violation of Dinah, Genesis 34. Therefore on account of the frequent and uncertain moving of the camp, the Hebrews were excused from circumcision, lest through it they incur danger to their lives. So Abulensis, Lyranus, Masius, Serarius, and St. Thomas, Part 3, Question 70, article 4.
But in Canaan, where they were to establish their home, they were circumcised immediately upon entering it, namely at Gilgal; and this first, because the law was the condition of the covenant between God and Abraham and his descendants regarding the giving of Canaan to them: and the beginning and, as it were, gateway of the law was circumcision, just as baptism is of Christianity: therefore it was fitting that through circumcision they should take possession of the promised land; second, because shortly after, namely on the 14th day of the month at evening, by God's command the Paschal lamb was to be eaten, verse 10; but it was lawful for no one to eat it unless first circumcised, and thereby enrolled in the family of Abraham and the Synagogue of Israel; third, because on the very threshold of Canaan, the Hebrew commonwealth, both civil and sacred, was immediately to be established, and consequently all the laws of God, even the ceremonial ones (of which the first was circumcision) and the judicial ones, were to be observed by the Hebrews. Hence they immediately celebrated the Passover, so as to inaugurate their possession of the promised land in a holy and devout manner. On the tenth day therefore of the first month Nisan they crossed the Jordan and fixed their camp at Gilgal, and the following day, the eleventh, having been circumcised there, they rested for three days because of the wound's pain, and finally on the fourth day, which was the 14th of Nisan, at evening they celebrated the Passover.
Morally, let the founders and governors of commonwealths learn here to begin their government from God, and from His law and worship, as Joshua begins here; for God, being propitiated, will prosper it. And let every faithful person learn to begin his duties and actions with God and from God, according to the saying: "Begin with God."
Furthermore, erroneously here and in Numbers 14:33, the Septuagint has forty-two years for the forty years of the desert wandering. For it is established that there were precisely only forty.
Finally, this circumcision of the people could be performed in one day, namely the eleventh of Nisan, because any circumcised man could circumcise, even if he was not a priest or Levite, but a layman: and one person could circumcise many in a day. Those who were then circumcised and still living were those who had left Egypt already circumcised before reaching their twentieth year: for all who had reached it died in the desert because of their murmuring. Again, those who were first circumcised here on the eleventh day could soon afterward circumcise many others.
That He would show them the Land flowing with milk and honey. — Correct with the Roman edition, the Hebrew, and the Septuagint to read: that He would not show them. For God had sworn that He would kill all the murmurers in the desert, Numbers 13.
Verse 9: Today I have removed the reproach of Egypt
9. Today I have removed the reproach of Egypt from you (because today I have transferred you from the life and customs of the uncircumcised, through circumcision, into My nation, My Synagogue, My law, and My holy religion. Therefore) the name of that place was called Gilgal — that is, "removal," namely of the foreskin, and consequently of the reproach of the Egyptians: for galal means to roll, to roll away, to remove, to take away; from galal, with the first syllable doubled, comes gilgal and galgala. Hence this place was called Gilgal, Galgal, Galgala, and by St. Jerome Golgal, which was formerly a famous city on the direct road from the Jordan to Jericho: distant fifty stadia from the Jordan, ten from Jericho. At Gilgal, Saul was anointed by Samuel as the first king, 1 Kings [1 Samuel] 7:10. There the twelve stones were fixed, witnesses to the Hebrews' crossing through the divided Jordan. Elisha the prophet also stayed at Gilgal, 4 Kings [2 Kings] 4:38. Again, St. Jerome, Bede, and Lyranus translate Galgala as "wheel," "revolution," "circulation." Hence from galal and gilgal was formed gulgolet, and in Chaldean gulgolta, and from that Golgotha, meaning Calvary or skull, so called from rolling, because it is round. Hence Mount Calvary, so called from the skulls of criminals executed there, on which Christ was crucified. Therefore Josephus, interpreting Galgala as "liberty," wished to consult the honor of the Hebrews in his manner, and to flatter, if not to adulate, the ears of Vespasian and the Romans.
Tropologically, Origen, Homily 5, says: "If, after the remission (as it were circumcision) of sins, you sin no more, the reproach of Egypt has truly been taken from you. But if you sin again, the old reproaches are rolled back upon you, and all the more so because it is a far greater crime to trample upon the Son of God and to treat the blood of the covenant as defiled than to neglect the law of Moses." For the Egyptians in Joshua's time were uncircumcised; they were Gentiles, addicted to idols and vices. Later, however, they accepted circumcision, as Jeremiah 9, last verse, teaches. See what was said there. Some hold that they accepted it in the time of Solomon, when he married the daughter of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, 3 Kings [1 Kings] 10.
Again, our Alvarez, in his treatise On Mortification, takes "reproach" in the active sense, namely the reproach with which the Egyptians taunted the Hebrews leaving Egypt, saying that they were going to their hunger and death, meaning: You have surely seen that when the Jordan was dried up you crossed into this region, and you have occupied the land promised to you, and in it as in a land of peace you have been circumcised, and for three days without any fear until you were healed, you rested: therefore I did not lead you out of Egypt to your death, as your oppressors say, but that you might live free and secure. So also from us who practice spiritual circumcision, that is, mortification, the world's reproach will be removed; because worldly people will see that through our self-denial we have in no way lost life, but have exchanged a carnal life displeasing to God for a spiritual life pleasing to God.
Verse 10: They celebrated the Passover
10. And they celebrated the Passover on the fourteenth day of the month (of the first month, Nisan) at evening — for the reasons given in verse 6. This was the third Passover of the Hebrews. For the first they celebrated on the eve of their departure from Egypt, Exodus 12; the second the following year, after receiving the law and erecting the tabernacle at Sinai, Numbers 9:2; the third here. Allegorically, Joshua here celebrating the new and first Passover in the holy land represents Jesus Christ instituting the new Passover, that is, the Eucharist at the Last Supper.
Verse 11: They ate of the fruits of the land
11. And they ate of the fruits (of the wheat) of the land on the following day, unleavened bread and parched grain of the same year — "of the fruits," either of the previous year, as Rabbi David and Vatablus hold, which the Hebrew word abur suggests, from the root abar, meaning "it passed, it went by"; or rather of the new crops of the present year, as the Septuagint express it. The Hebrew abur and the Chaldean ibbura signify any fruits of the year, whether present or past. So Masius.
On the following day. — In Hebrew: on the morrow of the Passover, that is, the day after the first day of unleavened bread, namely the second day of unleavened bread, or the sixteenth day of the month Nisan; for on that day they first had to offer to God a sheaf of grain before eating the fruits of the present year, according to the law of Leviticus 23:14. But Rabbi David takes "the morrow of the Passover" as the first day of unleavened bread, or the fifteenth of Nisan. For on the eve of that, namely on the fourteenth at evening, they ate the Paschal lamb. For he, as I said, takes the fruits as last year's, that is, of the previous year, which they were allowed to eat before offering the sheaf of grain on the second day of unleavened bread; for this was offered as the firstfruits of the new produce of the present year, not the previous one.
Parched grain. — In Hebrew kalvi, that is, roasted grain. See Leviticus 2:14.
Verse 12: The manna ceased
12. The manna ceased — namely, to rain or snow from heaven. For God, who had bestowed manna upon the Hebrews because of their lack of food, withdrew the manna when an abundance of other food was offered: just as birds bring food to their chicks in the nest while they are young, but when they grow stronger and can provide for themselves, they leave them to find their own provisions. For just as God does not fail in necessities, so He does not abound in superfluities.
A splendid example is found in Theodoret in his Philotheus, chapter 10. Abbot Theodosius, he says, praying like Moses and striking a rock with a staff, drew from it a perennial spring of water to irrigate the monastery he had built in an arid place. This spring dried up when a bath was later built in the monastery, but when that was destroyed, it began to flow again, as if coming to the aid of necessity and ceasing when it ceased.
Tropologically, those who pursue and taste the pleasures of earth are deprived of heavenly ones: for God grants the spirit of prayer and contemplation to those who remain in the desert, that is, to those who abandon the pleasures of the flesh and the ambition of the world; and from those who in heart return to the world, He hides it. These gradually become carnal instead of spiritual, and cease to taste the sweetness of this manna; but those others daily become purer and more spiritual: for when the spirit is tasted, all flesh becomes tasteless. And conversely, to whom the flesh is savory, to him the spirit is tasteless. Hear St. Bernard, Letter 3 to Fulco: "Just as fire and water cannot exist together, so spiritual and carnal delights do not tolerate each other in the same person. Where Christ senses the belching of a glutton among his cups, He does not deign to offer His wines, sweeter than honey and the honeycomb, to the mind. Where curious variety of foods and the multicolored array of rich furnishings feed the eyes equally with the belly, the heavenly bread abandons the fasting mind." The same, Sermon 6 On the Ascension: "He is entirely wrong who thinks that heavenly sweetness can be mixed with this ash, that divine balsam can be mixed with this poison, that the gifts of the Spirit can be mingled with enticements of this sort." Hear also St. Jerome, Letter 4 to Julian: "It is difficult, indeed impossible, for anyone to enjoy both present and future goods, to fill his belly here and his mind there, to pass from delights to delights, to be first in both worlds, to appear glorious in heaven and on earth."
Anagogically, Rupertus here, chapter 17, says: Earthly manna, that is, the Eucharist, will cease when Christ presents us with the solid fruits of heaven. For there He Himself will feed us with Himself, as the bread of life, and will inebriate us with divine wine, according to the text: "They shall be inebriated with the richness of Your house, and You shall give them to drink of the torrent of Your pleasure," Psalm 35:9.
Hear Rupertus: "We are fed in mind by reading or hearing the word of God, and we are fed also by mouth, eating from the table of the Lord the bread of eternal life and drinking the cup of perpetual salvation. But when we come to that land of the living, to that blessed Sion, where the God of gods will be seen in His own form, we will need neither the word of doctrine, nor these species of bread and wine, but in His own substance, seeing Him, we will eat the bread of Angels. Therefore after they ate the fruits of the land, the manna ceased, because when that which is perfect has come, that which is in part will be done away with."
Allegorically, the manna ceased, that is, the goods of the old law ceased when Jesus substituted the Eucharist for them, which is truly the bread of Angels and the manna of heaven. So Gregory of Nyssa in his Life of Moses.
Verse 13: A man with a drawn sword
13. When Joshua was in the field of the city of Jericho. — In Hebrew: when he was in Jericho, that is, in the territory or field of the city of Jericho, unless you prefer to take the preposition "in" as meaning "near," by the enallage customary among the Hebrews. A similar case is chapter 10, verse 19.
Whether therefore Joshua moved camp from Gilgal into the field of Jericho, or while the camp remained at Gilgal (for Gilgal was only ten stadia from Jericho, that is, scarcely half a league), Joshua the vigilant commander, anxious about destroying Jericho, the first obstacle in his path, and turning over in his mind plans about the method and manner of its destruction, and praying to God, went out into the field of Jericho, or even went to scout a location suitable for attacking the city: there this vision was presented to him, which would give him courage for accomplishing the task. Thus when we contrive great and holy things in our minds, God inserts Himself into our plans and shows us the strength and the means to carry them out.
He saw a man standing before him. — In Hebrew benegdo, that is, in front of him, opposite and facing him. This was an Angel in the appearance of a man (gebir). Hence some think he was Gabriel.
Holding an unsheathed sword — like one ready for battle; and therefore also girded with a helmet, breastplate, and belt, as Serarius suggests. God or an Angel customarily assumes a form, appearance, and dress appropriate to the person and the matter at hand and the reason for appearing. Therefore the drawn and flashing sword in the hand of a strong man represents God's power and vengeance attending Joshua as His soldier and commander, showing him that He is present and ready to wage the bloody war against Jericho. So Rupertus. Thus Christ appeared to Magdalene in the garden as a gardener, to the two disciples traveling as a fellow traveler, and to Stephen standing and contending, He appeared standing, Acts 7:55.
And he went to him. — The Septuagint: he confronted him. Note here the fearless courage of Joshua, who alone meets the armed figure alone, and greets him with words that clearly determine either a duel or friendship.
And he said to him: Are you one of ours, or of our adversaries? — Some think that Joshua supposed this man to be a human being, not an Angel, and said to him: Are you one of us, or of the Canaanites? Hence the Angel replies:
Verse 14: I am the prince of the army of the Lord
14. Neither. — I am not one of yours nor come from your camp, nor from the adversaries', but I am an Angel of God. So Abulensis, Serarius, and others.
On the other hand, it seems that Joshua recognized from so majestic an appearance of the man, or at least suspected, that he was a guardian Angel either of the Hebrews or of the Canaanites, and therefore asked: "Are you one of ours, or of our adversaries?" So Origen here, Homily 4, who says Joshua was uncertain whether this Angel was good or evil. So also St. Gregory, Arias Montanus, and others. The Chaldean favors this, translating: Have you come to help us, or our enemies?
Furthermore, that the Angel was indeed recognized by Joshua, and that he wished to discern whether he was the guardian of friends or of enemies, Jobius the Monk, in Photius's Library, writes with many others in essentially the following manner. For many things taught Joshua that this was no one from the enemy army, and also not from his own army — since he had appeared suddenly, since none of the adversaries would dare to pass through the midst of the enemy forces or to come before the eyes of their commander; and also because, although showing such boldness, he had done nothing at all hostile; besides, it was not characteristic of a most wise commander to be ignorant of the dress and equipment of his own tribesmen, or likewise of foreigners. But Joshua indeed knew that this vision was one of the intelligent spirits; but he desired to know whether the one who had appeared was from the enemies, or from that army which protected Israel.
Tropologically, in a similar way we must deal with the instincts and impulses of the soul, and we must ask: "Are you ours, or our adversaries'?" so that if they are sent by a good Angel, they may be accepted; if by an evil one, repelled.
Hence also St. Gregory, Book 33 of the Moralia, chapter 22, says that Joshua here feared a deception of the devil: for "Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light," 2 Corinthians 11. "Joshua feared this transformation," he says, "when seeing the Angel, he asked whose side he was on, saying: Are you ours, or our adversaries'? so that if he were of an adverse power, by the very fact of knowing himself suspected, he would withdraw from the deception."
Blessed Peter Damian says the same, Book 2, Letter 7, which in order is 28.
Morally, St. Antony, as recorded by St. Athanasius, taught from this word and deed of Joshua that we must do the same in any fear, temptation, or horror, especially when specters or phantasms terrify us: boldly confront them and ask who they are and where they come from. For by this boldness we will dispel all fear and the deceits of the devil. Hear St. Antony: "When some vision presents itself to you, boldly inquire who he is and where he has come from; and without delay, if it is a revelation of the saints, by Angelic consolation fear will turn to joy. But if it is a temptation of the devil, it vanishes when confronted with confidence: for the greatest sign of security is to ask who it is and where from. So also the son of Nun by questioning recognized his helper, and the enemy could not remain hidden when Daniel questioned him."
He answered: Neither (am I of the adversaries), but I am the prince of the army of the Lord — both of the heavenly army (meaning: I am the prince of all the Angels) and of the earthly, namely of the faithful people or the Israelites, that is: I am Michael, who presides over both the Angelic Church triumphant in heaven and yours here in Canaan militant. So Theodoret, Lyranus, Abulensis, who adds that this Angel was the same one who went before the Hebrew camp in the pillar of cloud as guide of the way, and many others. For Michael, in Daniel 10, is called the prince of the Jewish nation, and he fights with the Angel of the Persians to free the faithful Jews from the Babylonian captivity. See what was said there. Hear our Francisco Suarez, treatise On the Angels, Book 6, chapter 19, number 22: Hence some think that Angel was Michael, who is called the prince of the people of Israel in Daniel 10. But Abulensis, Question 71, believes it was Gabriel, who also had charge of the Jewish people, as is clear from Daniel 8, 9, and 10: and perhaps Michael had the higher charge, and Gabriel the particular charge of the whole army of warriors. In which sense it is also proved that guardian Angels are given to armies, especially of the faithful, and those who fight God's cause. This can also be confirmed from Psalm 33: "The Angel of the Lord shall encamp around those who fear Him, and shall deliver them." The Fathers also commonly use this testimony for this purpose. So far Suarez.
Michael therefore was formerly the patron of the Synagogue of the Jews, just as he is now the patron of the Christian Church, and as such is invoked by her to protect and defend her against demons, against infidels, and against all the impious. So every kingdom and province has its own guardian Angel, as also does every army of the faithful, just as Judas Maccabeus had an Angel horseman in a white garment brandishing a golden spear, who went before the camp, 2 Maccabees 11:8; and King Hezekiah, whose Angel killed in one night 185,000 Assyrians. This is what the Psalmist sings, Psalm 33:8: "The Angel of the Lord shall encamp (Hebrew: chone, that is, shall pitch camp) around those who fear Him." Therefore let the commander and soldiers in battle constantly invoke this Angel of theirs, and pray with Judas Maccabeus: "Ruler of the heavens, send Your good Angel before us, in fear and trembling of the greatness of Your arm, that those who come with blasphemy against Your holy people may tremble," 2 Maccabees 15:23. For this purpose the Virtues, Powers, Principalities, and Dominations serve God in war. So the Angel in the pillar of cloud went before the camp of the Hebrews in the desert for forty years, and gave them very many victories against Amalek, Og, Sihon, etc.
And now I have come — that by my special, invisible presence I may assist you, and overthrow for you the walls of Jericho, and thus bring you into the city, and from there subdue the rest of the Canaanites, and hand over their cities and fortresses to you.
Verse 15: Joshua fell prostrate and worshipped
15. And worshipping — not with latria as God, but with dulia as the presiding Angel. For adoration, or as the Hebrew histachave means, to bow down and bowing, is given in Scripture not to God alone, but also to Angels and to men, just as the Japanese, Chinese, and other Eastern peoples bow down and strike the ground with their foreheads to adore, that is, venerate their kings. And this is what the Greek proskunein signifies.
Morally, note here Joshua's prompt and humble religion and devotion toward the Angel.
Verse 16: Remove your sandal, for this place is holy
16. Remove your sandal — meaning: Remember that you stand before God, whose place I hold and whom I represent as His ambassador, and that by what you see and will hereafter hear, the will and counsel of the Supreme Deity are being declared to you; to whom therefore it is fitting to show reverence by removing your sandals; for this place is holy and sacred by the presence of God appearing through me. The same command was given and the same words were spoken by the Angel appearing to Moses in the burning bush, and perhaps it was the same Angel in both cases. See what was said on Exodus 3:5. Furthermore, the Angel said more here to Joshua about the manner of conquering Jericho, which we shall hear in the following chapter, verse 2.
Learn here with what religion and reverence one must conduct oneself in churches, so that you devote yourself not to idle talk but to prayer, and how much God requires not only interior but also exterior worship and ceremony. Hence for "the place on which you stand is holy," the Hebrew has "is holiness," that is, it is most holy because of God's presence.