8 And of Levi he said. This qualification, or modification of the harsher sentence of Jacob was introduced not only for the sake of the tribe of Levi, but rather of the whole people. Jacob had said,
“Simeon and Levi are brethren: instruments of cruelty are in their habitations. O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, my tongue, (313) be not thou united,” (Genesis 49:5.)
Assuredly their descendants might have been discouraged, or at least might have been regarded contemptuously, when a patriarch, and the founder of their race, had thus abominated them. God, however, afterwards consecrated this tribe to Himself, so that their sanctity might be communicated to the other tribes; which could not be the case unless their previous opprobrium were removed.
But if any contentious person had objected to this blessing, as if Moses were too much disposed to favor his own tribe, such a suspicion could not justly be harbored against him; first, because he, who now makes such honorable mention of the tribe of Levi, was also the proclaimer of their ignominy; and on many other occasions had not spared his own family, but, whenever it was requisite, had freely inveighed against their vices; and, secondly, he now commends nothing in the Levites except the new dignity, which it had pleased God to confer upon them. On this point, indeed, he ought to have been least of all suspected, inasmuch as he had degraded his own sons, and had exalted the posterity of Aaron alone to the highest place of honor. Now, therefore, he has no other object but that the dignity of the priesthood should not be depreciated on account of the sins of men, and thus their religion itself be despised. For we all know how disposed people are to lay charges against the persons of men which may derogate from the sacredness of their office. Assuredly, if Levi had not been purged from that disgrace which he had incurred, the priesthood would have been altogether deprived of reverence; and thus God’s worship would have been very lightly esteemed. Now, however, when God sanctifies this family to himself, he, as it were, restores it entirely; and hence it is apparent that its punishment was only temporary, since Moses had no intention of retracting what the Spirit had dictated to holy Jacob. Nor does he, indeed, advance anything of himself; but the same Spirit removes the ignominy, which might have disgraced the tribe of Levi, inasmuch as it had only been imposed upon it for a time. We have already seen elsewhere that what Jacob prophesied respecting the dispersion of this family, resulted in its honor; since God posted the Levites in all directions like sentinels, that through their means purity of doctrine might be fostered amongst the whole people. They were, therefore, scattered in such a manner as that their punishment might be productive of benefit. We must, therefore, conclude, that Moses spoke not to gratify his brethren, but made honorable mention of the priesthood, lest those, whom God had chosen as this ministers, should be treated with contempt. And, doubtless, the subsequent grace of their calling should have blotted out the recollection of their previous infamy. Thus Christ, when He would restore Peter to the office of an apostle, cancels his triple denial, by thrice setting him over His sheep. (John 21:17.)
The address, which follows, must be applied to God; for some translate it improperly, “The Urim and Thummim shall be with thee,” as if Moses were addressing the tribe of Levi. In order, therefore, to avoid ambiguity, it will be well to translate it of Levi, rather than to Levi; and ל, lamed, is often used in this sense. Thus, with the purpose of increasing the authenticity of the benediction, Moses addresses God Himself, as if citing Him as a witness, or referring his injunctions to God’s tribunal.
Although in Hebrew the words Urim and Thummim (314) are here used, which were principal parts of the sacred Ephod, I have not hesitated to translate them as common nouns: for it is unquestionable that by these symbols were denoted, the knowledge of the Law which is the only light of our souls, and integrity of life. The sum, however, is that the honor of the priesthood was deposited with Aaron, whom he calls the man of God’s clemency, or, the meek. Jerome, as usual, renders it the holy, but improperly; for (315) חסיד, chasid, signifies mild, or humane; and this epithet is constantly applied to the children of God, in order that we may learn to imitate that Father of mercy, who “maketh his sun to rise upon the evil and the good.”
What follows, viz., that God tried him at Massah, I conceive to be added by way of exception; for I have no doubt but that Moses magnifies God’s mercy by this allusion, in that He had dignified Aaron with so great an honor, notwithstanding his having been overcome by impatience, and having fallen. Still it must be remarked that, in reference to the people, the zeal of Aaron is recorded as praiseworthy; as much as to say, that the sin of Aaron flowed from the fountain of virtue, since it was from holy indignation that he fell into the passion of impatience, when he could not endure that the people should rebel against God. Unless perhaps it be preferred to understand these words by way of apostrophe to the people, “Thou didst try, thou didst provoke him to contention, or didst quarrel with him.” But the context will run better, if we understand that God then had a controversy with Aaron; inasmuch as, although overcome by the trial, he still gave no despicable proof of his piety, and from that time forward did not cease to execute his office with sedulity.
(313) A.V., “Mine honour.” See C. on Genesis 49., C. Soc. Edit., vol. 2, p. 447.
(314) C.’s criticism will be better understood here by giving his version in English:
Deuteronomy 33:8., “But to Levi he said, Thy perfections and splendours were to Thy merciful man, whom Thou didst try in Massah, and madest him to contend at the waters of Meribah.”
(315) A. V. , “Holy one.” It cannot be reasonably said that this word is not used for holy, as well as for merciful. — W.