Homilies on Leviticus — Homily 3 (Lev. 5 — oaths; touching the unclean; the guilt offering)
Latin source: Origen's Greek homilies on Leviticus, surviving only in Rufinus of Aquileia's Latin translation (c. 403–405), from the reading text of W. A. Baehrens (ed.), Origenes Werke VI (GCS 29, Leipzig, 1920), pp. 280–507. This English translation is released into the public domain.On what is written: "But if a soul sins and hears the voice of one swearing an oath, and is himself a witness, or has seen or has been privy to it, if he does not disclose it, he too shall bear his sin. And whatever soul touches any unclean thing, or a carcass, or something caught by a wild beast" and so forth.
1. The discourse concerns the sacrifices which are offered by those who have sinned through ignorance or not by will. Hence also in what went before, when we were speaking of the high priest's sacrifice, we observed that it was not written of him that he had been in ignorance. But if anyone remembers well the things that were said, he can say to us that the sacrifice which we said the high priest offered "for sin" we set down as holding the figure of Christ. And it will not seem fitting that Christ, "who knew no sin", should be said to have offered a sacrifice "for sin", even though the matter is transacted through a mystery and the same one is set down both as high priest and as victim. See, therefore, whether we can meet this too in this way: that Christ indeed "did no sin", yet was made "sin for us"; while he who was in the form of God deigns to be in the form of a servant; while he who is immortal dies, and the impassible suffers, and the invisible is seen; and, because for us all either death or all the rest of frailty was brought upon the flesh from the condition of sin, he too, who "was made in the likeness of men and found in fashion as a man", without doubt "for sin", which he had taken up from us, because "he bore our sins", offered "the spotless bull-calf", that is, the uncontaminated flesh, "as a victim to God". But what do we make of what is joined in the sequel? For where it says: "if indeed the high priest who is anointed sins", there is added: "so that he makes the people to sin, he shall offer for his own sin". How then will it fit that through the flesh which Jesus took up from us, he himself, made sin, "made the people to sin"? Listen concerning this too, whether perchance we can answer with some consistency. The passion of Christ confers life on those who believe, but death on those who do not believe. For although through his cross there is salvation for the Gentiles and justification, yet for the Jews there is destruction and condemnation. For so it is written also in the Gospels: "behold, this one is born for the ruin and the resurrection of many". And in this way, through his own sin, that is, through the flesh driven to the cross, in which he had taken up our sins, he indeed freed us who believe from sin, but "the people who did not believe" he made to sin, for whom to the evil of unbelief there was added also the impiety of sacrilege. And in this way that high priest through his own sin "made the people to sin", while, being set in the flesh, he could both be seized and slain. For let us suppose, for example, that if "the Lord of majesty" had not come in the flesh, he would not have reproved the Jews, he would not have been grievous to them even to look upon, he could by no means have been seized nor delivered to death; without doubt "his blood" would never have come "upon them and their children". But because he came in the flesh and was made "sin for us" and could suffer these things, therefore he himself is said to have "made the people to sin", who made it possible for them to sin against him.
2. But let us now see what that soul also does which "hears the voice of one swearing an oath and is a witness", "or" which "sees" something "and is privy to it and does not disclose it", from which it too "has borne his sin" — without doubt his who either did something wickedly or swore. This also, according to the history, builds us up and teaches us never to pollute our consciences in another's sins, nor to lend consent to those who act wickedly. And I call it consent not only to act along with them, but also to keep silent about the things that have been done unlawfully. Do you wish to know that these things agree also with the Gospel precepts? The Lord himself says: "if you see your brother sin, reprove him between yourself and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not hear you, take with you two others or three. But if he does not hear even them, tell the church. But if he does not hear even the church, let him be to you as a heathen and a publican". But the Gospel precept was given more perfectly in this, that it established the manner and discipline of disclosing the sin. For it does not wish you, if perchance you have seen your brother's sin, at once to fly out into public and everywhere to proclaim and divulge another's sins — which would surely be the mark not of one correcting, but rather of one defaming. "Alone", it says, "between yourself and him, rebuke him". For when he who sins sees the mystery kept for him, he too will keep the modesty of amendment; but if he sees himself defamed, he will at once turn to the shamelessness of denial; and you will not only not have amended the sin, but will even have doubled it. Learn, therefore, the order from the Gospels. First, it says, "alone, between yourself and him". Second, "take with you two others or three". Why "two or three"? "For in the mouth", it says, "of two or three witnesses shall every word stand". Since indeed in the third place it commanded the correction to be brought to the church, in the second it wishes "two or three" witnesses to be brought in. In their presence, if the one rebuked will not amend himself, then, when his sin has been brought to the church, he may be confuted by the witnesses previously brought in; for it frequently happens that one wishing to fulfill the Gospel command may seem a slanderer, if he brings a charge to the church and lacks witnesses. Lest, therefore, this happen, for that reason he commanded "two or three" witnesses to be brought in at the second meeting. Since, therefore, such is the command of the Gospel, and the law prescribes that, if one keeps silent, "he shall bear his sin", it is to be known that, if anyone either does not disclose the things which he sees in his neighbor's fault according to the rule given above, or, when called to testimony, does not speak the things that are true, he himself will take upon himself the sin which the one he conceals has committed, and the penalty of the deed will roll back upon the one privy to it. Sufficiently, therefore, in this chapter has the very text of the history built us up. Yet I think that that soul too, which reads what is written in the law of God: "the Lord has sworn and will not repent; you are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek", "hears the voice of one swearing an oath", as do the scribes and Pharisees, always meditating on these things, but they are silent and are unwilling to announce them to the people, lest they testify to the coming of Christ. Therefore for this reason they will bear the sin, in which, not announcing to the people the things that are true, they make Israel to sin.
3. After these things another law is promulgated. "Whatever soul", it says, "touches any unclean thing, or the carcass of unclean beasts, and it is hidden from him, and he is defiled; or if he touches of the uncleanness of a man, of any uncleanness by which he may be defiled", and so forth. These things indeed are observed among the Jews quite unbecomingly and uselessly. For to what end is he held unclean who has touched, for example, a dead animal or the body of a deceased man? What if it be the body of a prophet? What if the body of a patriarch, or even of Abraham himself? What if he has touched even the bones, will he be unclean? What if he touches the bones of Elisha, which raise up the dead? Will he who touches be unclean, and do the bones of the prophet make unclean even that very one whom they raise from the dead? See how unfitting the Jewish understanding is. But let us first see what it is to touch, and what is the touch that makes unclean, and what indeed is the touch that makes clean. The Apostle says: "it is good for a man not to touch a woman". This touch is unclean; for this is that which the Lord said in the Gospel: "if anyone looks upon a woman to lust after her, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart". For the vice of concupiscence touched his heart, and his soul was made unclean. If, therefore, anyone touches something in this way, that is, either through lust for a woman, or through desire for money, or by any other craving of sin whatever, he has touched something unclean and is defiled. It behooves you, therefore, if you have touched anything of this kind, to know how you may offer a sacrifice, according to the things we recalled in what went before, so that you may be made clean. Do you wish me to show you "what" is "the soul which touched the unclean thing" and was made unclean, and again touched the clean thing and was made clean? She "who suffered an issue of blood and spent all her substance on physicians and could gain nothing" was brought down to this through the uncleanness of sin. For she had touched sin, and for that reason had received the "scourge" of the flesh. But after, full of faith, "she touched the fringe of Jesus, the flow of her blood stood still", and suddenly she was made clean who before had lived unclean for so long a time. And just as, when she had touched the Lord and Savior, he himself said: "who touched me? For I felt power go out from me" — that power, without doubt, which had healed the woman and made her clean — so it is to be understood that, if anyone touches sin, there goes out from that very sin a certain malignant power, which makes him who has touched it unclean; and this is truly to have touched the unclean thing. By a like reasoning it is to be said also concerning the "carcass" of a man, or the "carcass" of a clean or unclean beast. For he touches the "carcass" of a man who either follows or imitates someone dead in his sins. But if the differences of each are to be examined, let us review them one by one. The carcass of a man, as we said above, we can say to be that which the Apostle says to the Corinthians: "I wrote", he says, "to you in the epistle that you should not mingle with fornicators; not indeed with the fornicators of this world, or the covetous, or the rapacious, or those serving idols; otherwise you would have had to go out of this world. But now I have written to you that you should not mingle, if anyone named a brother is a fornicator, or covetous, or serving idols, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or rapacious — with such a one not even to take food". This, therefore, is to touch the "carcass" of a man: for one to offer himself as a companion, even in food, to one who, having been made a man in Christ, has again died in his sins. For that widow too, of whom the Apostle says, "who, living in delights, is dead while she lives", can be called the "carcass" of a man. But it must also be examined what the carcasses of animals are in the church. If any of the simpler sort, in that they have done nothing of prudence, also wallow in the filth of sins, if anyone follows or touches these with that touch which we expounded above, he has touched the "carcass" of animals. But that the church has animals also, hear how it says in the Psalms: "men and beasts you will save, O Lord". These, therefore, who bear zeal for the word of God and for a rational discipline, are called men; but those who live without such zeal and do not seek out the exercises of knowledge, yet are faithful, are called animals indeed, but clean. For just as there are certain men of God, so there are also certain sheep of God. For it is written that Moses was not a sheep of God, but "a man of God". And Elijah was not a sheep of God, but "a man of God"; for so he himself says: "if I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty". But do you wish to hear of the sheep of God? It is said through the prophet: "my sheep, my sheep are holy, says the Lord". And again the Savior says in the Gospel: "my sheep hear my voice". And I do not think he would have said of men that "men hear my voice". But let him who has "ears to hear" hear these things, how the sheep hear the voice, but the men hear his word. These, therefore, are animals clean indeed on account of Christ, but "carcasses" on account of sin. If anyone "touches" these, that is, if anyone follows another in sin, he will be unclean. And if anyone "touches the carcass" of a man of this kind, that is, of one who, living at first according to reason and exercising himself in the word of God, afterward fell into sin — if anyone follows or imitates him, he touches the "carcass" of a man and will be unclean. But if you touch also "what is caught by a wild beast", you will be unclean. What is the wild beast? Is it a lion or a wolf, which snatches away men or beasts? That, I believe, is the wild beast of which the Apostle Peter says: "your adversary the devil, like a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour. Resist him, strong in faith". And again, of whom does the Apostle Paul say: "for after my departure there will enter in ravening wolves, not sparing the flock". If, therefore, you see one "caught" by these "wild beasts", do not follow him, do not touch him, lest you too be made unclean. There are, besides, also other unclean animals, whose carcass it forbids to be touched. The unclean animals are men who are outside Christ, in whom there is neither reason nor any religion. If, therefore, you see the "carcasses" of all these, that is, their sins, the lawgiver tells you not to touch them, not to defile yourself with them, not to handle them. And these are the uncleannesses which are rightly to be fled. But to shun the touch of a man, or of a dead body, to which rather a religious burial is to be given, these are Jewish and useless fables, "having indeed a form of piety, but denying the power thereof". The first law, therefore, was given concerning uncleannesses, if anyone "was a witness" of some "oath" or fault "and did not disclose it", and through this was himself in a manner made unclean by the fellowship of sin. The second law is that by which it is forbidden to touch "anything unclean and a carcass".
4. Now a third law of this kind is promulgated: "and the soul", it says, "which swears, pronouncing with its lips to do evil or to do good, according to all things whatsoever he shall utter to a man with an oath, and it is hidden from him, and afterward he knows it, and has sinned in some one of these — let him pronounce the sin which he has sinned, and he shall bring for the things in which he has offended, to the Lord, for the sin by which he has sinned, a female of the sheep" and so forth. How indeed, "if I pronounce with my lips or swear to do good" and do not do it, I am guilty of sin, there is no difficulty in showing; but how, "if I swear or pronounce to do evil" and do not do it, I have sinned, it is difficult to assign in word. For it seems absurd, for example, that if in anger I say I am going to kill a man and do not do it, I should, lest I seem to perjure myself or to deceive, be compelled to fulfill the deed which I rashly and unlawfully promised. Let us seek, therefore, what the matter is in which, if we promise to do evil and do not do it, we sin; but if we do it, we are excused from sin, so that the truth of the precept may reasonably stand. As far as it seems to be understood in this place, to do evil is to oppose someone and not to indulge him, that he may do what he wishes. And so we too, when we come to God and vow to serve him in chastity, "pronounce with our lips" and "swear" that we "will chastise our flesh", or do evil to it, "and reduce it into servitude", that we may be able to save the spirit. For so also did he say that he had sworn, who says: "I have sworn, and have determined to keep all your precepts". Since, therefore, it is the voice of the flesh which says: "for I do not do what I will, but what I hate, that I do", without doubt it has been afflicted by the spirit and constrained; "for it resists and fights against the spirit", and, unless evil is done to it, that it may be afflicted and weakened, the spirit cannot say: "when I am weak, then am I strong". If anyone, therefore, "has sworn and pronounced to do evil" to this "flesh which resists and fights against the spirit", and to afflict and mortify it, and has not done it, he is guilty of sin, in that he swore to torment his flesh and to subject it to servitude, and did not do it. But by the same oath he also determines to do good to the spirit. For in that he does evil to the flesh, he does good to the spirit. If anyone, therefore, has sworn this and has not done it, he is made guilty of sin. But do you wish to know that good cannot be done to one of these, unless you do evil to the other? Hear also the Lord himself saying: "I will kill and I will make to live". What does God kill? The flesh, surely. And what does he make to live? The spirit, without doubt. And again in the sequel he says: "I will strike, and I will heal". What does he strike? The flesh. What does he heal? The spirit. To what do these things avail? That he may make you "mortified in the flesh, made alive in the spirit"; lest perchance you too "serve the law of God with the mind, but with the flesh", if it be not mortified, "the law of sin". If, therefore, you have promised this order and have not been able to keep it, hear what the order of the law prescribes: "if he has sinned", it says, "in some one of these, let him pronounce the sin which he has sinned". There is in this something a marvelous secret, that it orders one to "pronounce the sin". For indeed all the things we do are to be pronounced in every manner and brought forth into public. If "we do anything in secret", if we have committed anything in speech alone or even within the secrets of our thoughts, all must needs be published, all brought forth; and brought forth by him who is both the accuser and the instigator of sin. For he himself now instigates us to sin, he himself also, when we have sinned, accuses. If, therefore, in this life we forestall him and are our own accusers, we escape the malice of the devil, our enemy and accuser. For so also elsewhere the prophet says: "do you", he says, "tell your iniquities first, that you may be justified". Does he not evidently show the mystery of which we treat, when he says: "do you tell them first?" — that he may show you that you ought to forestall him who is ready to accuse. "Do you", therefore, he says, "tell them first", lest he forestall you; for if you tell them "first" and offer the sacrifice of repentance according to the things which we said above are to be offered, and hand over your flesh to destruction, "that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord", it will be said to you also that "you have received your evils in your life, but now rest here". But David too speaks in the same spirit in the Psalms and says: "I made known my iniquity, and I did not cover my sin. I said: I will pronounce against myself my injustice, and you forgave the impiety of my heart". You see, therefore, that "to pronounce the sin" merits the remission of sin. For the devil, forestalled in the accusation, will not be able to accuse us further, and, if we are our own accusers, it profits us unto salvation; but if we wait to be accused by the devil, that accusation turns to our punishment; for he will have companions in gehenna, whom he has convicted as companions of his crimes.
5. It will now be a great task to pursue the diversities of victims and the rites and varieties of sacrifices, and one belonging to a work far other than that discourse which the common crowd receives in the general assembly. But that we may seem to touch upon some things in passing: almost every victim, indeed, which is offered has something of the form and image of Christ. For every victim is recapitulated in him, so much so that, after "he himself was offered", all the victims ceased which had preceded him in type and "shadow"; concerning which, as far as we could, we showed in what went before how the bull-calf offered by the high priest, whether as an offering or "for sin", held his form. But the "fat", which is offered in the offering, "covering the inward parts" and clinging to the kidneys, can be understood as that holy soul of his which veiled the "inward parts", that is, the secrets of his divinity, but clung to the "kidneys", that is, to the corporeal matter which had been chastely taken up from us; and, set in the middle between the flesh and God, to be sanctified upon the sacred altars and to be made bright by the divine fires, it imposes the nature of the flesh, to be preserved with itself unto the heavens. But that the little kidneys are delivered to the fires — who would doubt that they indicate that there were no motions of the generative parts in Christ? But that "of the blood of the victim the priest" is recorded "to sprinkle seven times before the Lord", evidently the power of the Holy Spirit, of sevenfold grace, is designated under a mystery. The four "horns of the altar", which are anointed "with blood", indicate that the passion of Christ is reported by the four Gospels. As for the caul of the liver which is offered — in the liver anger is slaughtered, in the caul the swift and impetuous force of fury is shown. But the rest of the blood, which "is poured out at the base of the altar", I think designates the form of that grace by which "in the last days", after "the fullness of the Gentiles has entered in", "all Israel" that is left, placed at the last as it were "at the base of the altar", will itself also receive the outpouring of the blood of Christ. But concerning the lambs and the kids, the turtledoves and the doves, and also the "fine flour sprinkled with oil" or baked "in unleavened loaves", as far as the matter could bear, it has been said above.
6. Let us now see what law is set forth in offering victims "for sin". "And the Lord spoke", it says, "to Moses, saying: if any soul is hidden and sins unwillingly against the holy things of the Lord, he shall offer for his offense to the Lord a spotless ram of the sheep, at the price of a silver shekel of the sanctuary, for that in which he offended. And what he has sinned against the holy things, he shall restore, and shall add a fifth to it, and shall give it to the priest; and the priest shall make entreaty for him with the ram of the offense, and it shall be forgiven him". In the foregoing laws, which were reported concerning the sacrifices for uncleanness, wherever it said something was to be offered — for example, a sheep or a kid — it added: "but if his hand does not suffice for a kid or a lamb, let him offer a pair of turtledoves or two young doves", and again: "but if it does not suffice even for this, let him offer fine flour". But in this law, where it discourses of the sin which is committed against "the holy things", it substituted no substitution of a lesser victim, a second or a third, but appointed only a "ram" to be offered; nor did it show that the sin which is committed against "the holy things" can be loosed otherwise than if one slaughters a "ram"; and not simply a ram, but a "ram" bought "at a price" and at a fixed "price": "at a shekel", it says, "of the sanctuary". What then? If someone is poor and does not have "a shekel of the sanctuary" wherewith he might purchase a "ram", will his sin not be loosed? Riches, therefore, must be sought by each one, that his sin may be able to be absolved. But if the Lord deigns either to open our eyes to see or the ears of your heart to hear, let us seek out what the meaning of the lawgiver, veiled in mysteries, intends. And first indeed let us see of what sort this very thing is that has been recited, according to the letter. It seems to speak of those in whose hands "holy things" have been committed, that is, the things which have been offered among the Lord's gifts — for example, vows and offerings which are offered in the churches of God for the use of the saints and the ministry of the priests, or which, for the need of the poor, are offered by devout and religious minds. If anyone withdraws any of these by any presumption whatever, the law decrees that, if he is reminded that he has sinned and of his own accord receives compunction of heart — for concerning him who is not compunct of his own accord, but is convicted by another's reproving, the remedy is more difficult — this one, therefore, who has of his own accord remembered his sin, "shall restore", it says, that very thing which he had withdrawn, "and shall add to it a fifth, and shall offer a ram for sin" bought "at the price of a shekel of the sanctuary". As for what it says: "he shall add to it a fifth", the simpler sort suppose it was said thus: that, for example, if five coins were withdrawn, one is added, so that for five he is seen to restore six. But those who have skill in the discipline of numbers reckon the number of this word far otherwise. For in the Greek it does not have that which simply makes "a fifth", but has that which we can indeed say "above a fifth", unless it were said that this is the term for a certain special number among them, by which it is indicated that for five, five others are to be given and one over; so that, for example, it is understood that one who has stolen five coins both restores those very five and five others, with one added over. Yet these things are not straightway to be understood of thefts or frauds, but that also, if anyone has taken money from the holy things for his own necessary uses and has brought delays in restoring it, he is bound by a law of this kind. And this law ought to build up the hearers even according to the letter. For the observance is very useful and necessary, especially to those who preside over ecclesiastical dispensations, that they may know that they must observe more cautiously and diligently with regard to the things offered for the use of the saints.
7. But let us too, to whom these things perhaps do not happen, see in what part the discourse of the law may build us up. And I today, though I am a sinner, yet because the dispensation of the Lord's word has been entrusted to me, seem to have the holy things of God committed to me. Nor now for the first time, but often already and long since, do we use this dispensation toward you. If, therefore, anyone of you has received from me the Lord's money and, as is wont to happen, having gone out of the church and been snatched away by the various occupations of the world, has given to oblivion the things he had heard, and has fulfilled no work from the word which he received, this is he who has not restored the money received from the holy things. Wherefore, even at hearing these things, let him call to memory that he has neglected the things which had lately been committed to him in the word of God. Let him, therefore, restore both this which he received and add to it a fifth in that manner which we said before, that is, so that there be twice five and one added over. Let us see, therefore, how these five are restored. The number five is frequently — indeed almost always — taken for the five senses. We ought, therefore, to know that these five can be restored to the holy things in this way: that, if perchance we have presumed to abuse them in secular acts and have expended their use in the things which we have done not according to God, we now restore these very five to holy acts and religious ministries, and add to them five others, which are the senses of the inner man; through which we either, made "clean of heart", "see God", or "have ears to hear" the things which Jesus teaches, or take in that "odor" of which the Apostle says: "for we are the good odor of Christ", or take also that taste of which the prophet says: "taste and see, for the Lord is sweet", or that touch of which John says, that "we have beheld with our eyes and our hands have handled of the word of life". But to all these we add one over, that we may refer all these things to the one God. And let these things be said concerning the restoring of those things which had been taken away from the holy things by any fault whatever.
8. But what shall we say concerning the sacrifice of the "ram" bought "at a price" and "at the price of a shekel of the sanctuary", which is commanded to be offered for the expiation of sin? He is going to be rich who can purge his offenses "at the price of a ram". What these riches are, let us seek. The most wise Solomon teaches us, saying: "the redemption of a man's soul is his own proper riches". Do you hear the words of wisdom, how with necessary properties it declares the force of each word? He speaks of riches suited to "the redemption of the soul", and riches not another's nor common, but "proper riches". By which he shows that there are certain "proper riches" and certain riches not proper. But this the Lord more evidently declared in the Gospels, when he says: "but if you have not been faithful in what is another's, who will give you what is your own?", showing that the riches of the present age are not our own proper, but another's. For they pass away and "pass by like a shadow". But those are the "proper riches" of which the prophet says: "and to you I will gather the riches of the nations". From these riches perhaps also "Abraham was made very rich in gold and silver and cattle" and all furnishings. Do you wish me to show you from what treasuries these riches come down? Hear the Apostle Paul saying of the Lord Jesus Christ: "in whom", he says, "are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden". But in the Gospels too the Lord says that: "the rich scribe brings forth from his treasures new things and old". Of these the Apostle Paul too says that: "in all things you have been made rich in him, in all speech and in all knowledge". From these riches, therefore, which are brought forth from "the treasures of wisdom and knowledge", this "ram" is to be bought by us, which ought to be offered for sins — those, namely, which are committed against the holy things — and it is to be bought at the reckoning of a "shekel of the sanctuary". We already said above that every victim bears a type and image of Christ, much more the ram, which was once substituted by God to be sacrificed in place of Isaac. "At a shekel of the sanctuary", therefore, Christ is to be procured by us, who may dissolve our sins. "The shekel of the sanctuary" holds the form of our faith. For if you offer faith as a price, from Christ, as from a spotless ram given as a victim, you will receive the remission of sins. I feel that in explaining, the greatness of the mysteries surpasses our strength. But although we are not able to discourse of all things, yet we feel that all things are filled with mysteries. And therefore let it suffice to have set down indications for the studious, by which, stirred up, they may arrive at things higher and deeper than these, and understand from which flocks the "bull-calf" is to be sought for a victim, from which sheep the "ram" is to be provided. "For I have", says Jesus, "also other sheep, which are not of this fold; and those too I must bring, that there may be one flock and one shepherd". Let them know also where the turtledoves, where the doves are to be sought. "Your eyes", it says, "are like doves upon the fullness of the waters" (to the "fullness of the waters", therefore, we must hasten, for in these the beauty of the bride is described), "and your neck", it says, "like a turtledove's". In the doves the eyes are praised. For as to what it said: "doves upon the fullness of the waters" — they report that this kind of bird, when it comes to the waters, because there it is wont to suffer the ambushes of the hawk, catches sight of the enemy coming from above, the shadow of the flying one seen in the waters, and by the sharpness of its eyes evades the treachery of the imminent danger. If you too can thus foresee the ambushes of the devil and beware of them, you have offered "doves" as a sacrifice to God. But let those to whom such things are a care seek out also this: from which fields "fine flour" ought to be offered. I judge that it is from the crops of that land which "makes one a hundredfold, another sixtyfold, another thirtyfold fruit". Let them seek out also — unless it seem more curious than it ought — by which grinders this fine flour is prepared for the sacrifices. And let it not escape them that there are "two who grind", of whom "one shall be taken and the other left". From that mill, therefore, which is to be taken, it will behoove one to offer "fine flour". But the "shekel of the sanctuary" too, which is said to be necessary for the price of the ram — see whence and how it is to be sought out. "Shekel" is the name of the Lord's money, and in many places of the Scriptures the Lord's money is mentioned by various names of appellation. But a certain kind is called "approved", and a certain kind "reprobate". Approved was that money which the householder, "about to go abroad, having called his servants, gave to each according to his own ability". Approved too was that money which is called a "denarius", which was agreed upon with the laborers and given "from the last even to the first". You ought, therefore, to know that there is also other money, reprobate. Hear the prophet saying: "your silver is reprobate". Since, therefore, there is a certain "approved" kind, and a certain "reprobate", therefore the Apostle says, as to "approved money-changers": "proving", he says, "all things, holding fast that which is good". For our Lord Jesus Christ alone is he who can teach you an art of this kind, through which you may know how to discern which money it is that holds the image of the true king, and which is counterfeit and, as is commonly said, struck outside the mint, which has indeed the name of the king, but does not hold the truth of the royal figure. For there are many who have the name of Christ, but do not have the truth of Christ. And on account of this the Apostle says: "for there must be heresies also, that the approved may be made manifest among you". Therefore for that reason also in the present reading the lawgiver, looking wholly to the mystical and spiritual sense, added that this "ram", which is procured for this, that it may be able to absolve sin, is to be procured not with any shekel whatever, that is, not with any money whatever, but with a "shekel of the sanctuary". But if he was not looking to a mystery, what reason did there seem to be that a bought ram should be offered as a victim, and at a fixed price? And it does not suffice to have named the money by "shekel", but he added also "of the holy shekel"? What if someone had in his flocks the best rams and worthy of divine sacrifices? Or what if someone were so poor that he could not have "a shekel of the sanctuary"? Is this the moderation of the lawgiver, that, unless one has a fixed sum of money, his sin cannot be absolved? Which openly, according to the letter indeed, seems absurd, but according to the spiritual understanding it is certain that no one receives the remission of sins unless he has brought whole, approved, and holy faith, through which he may be able to buy the "ram"; whose nature is such that it wipes away the sins of the believer. And this is the "shekel of the sanctuary", an approved, as we said, and sincere faith, that is, where no deceit of perfidy, no perversity of heretical cunning is mixed in, so that we, offering sincere faith, may be washed "by the precious blood of Christ, as of a spotless victim"; through whom is to God the Father almighty, with the Holy Spirit, "glory and dominion unto the ages of ages. Amen!"