John Calvin Commentary Deuteronomy 22
John Calvin Commentary
Deuteronomy 22
John Calvin Commentary
Deuteronomy 22
"A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman`s garment; for whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto Jehovah thy God." — Deuteronomy 22:5 (ASV)
This decree also commends modesty in general. In it, God anticipates the danger, so that women do not harden themselves into forgetfulness of modesty, or men degenerate into effeminacy unworthy of their nature.
Garments are not in themselves of such great importance. However, because it is disgraceful for men to become effeminate, and also for women to affect manliness in their dress and gestures, propriety and modesty are prescribed, not only for decency's sake, but also so that one kind of liberty does not eventually lead to something worse. The words of the pagan poet are very true:97
“What shame can she, who wears a helmet, show,
Her sex deserting?”
Therefore, decency in the style of clothing is an excellent means of preserving modesty.
97 The quotation is from Juvenal, Sat. 6:252:
"If a bird`s nest chance to be before thee in the way, in any tree or on the ground, with young ones or eggs, and the dam sitting upon the young, or upon the eggs, thou shalt not take the dam with the young:" — Deuteronomy 22:6 (ASV)
Since by this precept God instructed His people in the law of kindness, it is a supplement to the Sixth Commandment.
Indeed, regard was given to the preservation of the breed; but, additionally, when birds are nesting, since they are very lean, it is certain that they are not wholesome food. Still, there is no question that it was God’s intention to accustom His people to cultivate humaneness.
For, if there is even one drop of compassion in us, it will never enter our minds to kill a poor little bird that burns so intensely—either with the desire for offspring or with love for its young—that it becomes heedless of its own life and prefers to endanger itself rather than desert its eggs or its brood.
Therefore, there is no doubt that in this elementary lesson, God prohibited His people from savagery and cruelty.
"When thou buildest a new house, then thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof, that thou bring not blood upon thy house, if any man fall from thence." — Deuteronomy 22:8 (ASV)
This precept also relates to the preservation of human life. We know that the roofs of Jewish houses were flat, so that people could freely walk on them. If there were no railings around them, a fall would have been fatal, and every house would often have become a house of mourning.
God, therefore, commands that the edge be fortified with battlements, railings, or other enclosure, and accompanies this injunction with a severe denunciation. For He declares that the houses would be defiled with blood if anyone should fall from an unenclosed roof.
Now, if guilt were thus contracted by mere incautiousness, it therefore shows how greatly He abominates deliberate cruelty. And, if it was necessary for everyone to be so concerned for the lives of their neighbors, it reveals how criminal it is to injure them intentionally and with hostility.
"Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with two kinds of seed, lest the whole fruit be forfeited, the seed which thou hast sown, and the increase of the vineyard." — Deuteronomy 22:9 (ASV)
You shall not sow your vineyard. These four precepts, which all condemn strange mixtures, I do not doubt are supplements to the First Commandment. The reason, which is added in Deuteronomy, supports this understanding, as God declares there that the produce of the seed and of the vineyard is polluted if there are diverse mixtures. From this it appears that nothing else is demanded of them but that they cultivate purity.
Indeed, the word Moses uses means “sanctify” (the Hebrew term is קדש kadesh); but by antiphrasis, it is taken to mean “contaminate.” What follows is to the same effect: they should not plow with an ox and an ass together. This diversity is forbidden for no other reason than that people contract some defilement as soon as they depart from simplicity.
Yet, if anyone thinks otherwise, I will not strongly argue with them. It might indeed be objected that when God forbids animals of different kinds to be used indiscriminately or mixed together, He is concerned with chastity,30 and that by forbidding fields to be sown with different seeds and garments to be woven with different materials, He intended to prevent fraud.
But the simpler explanation is that the people were thus kept in purity, to prevent them from accustoming themselves to corrupt habits, bringing in strange rites from various sources, or seeking, with depraved curiosity, mixtures that might eventually invade the worship of God.
For if animals of different species are joined together, the integrity of nature is corrupted, and a corrupted offspring is produced, which degenerates from God’s established order. However, if various kinds of seed were mixed, or if a garment were woven of linen and wool, there would be no danger of deception or fraud in such an obvious matter.
It is probable, therefore, that the purpose God intended, as I have said, was that by cultivating natural and simple habits throughout their lives, they should keep themselves pure and uncorrupted from every foreign vice.
For this reason, Scripture compares strange doctrines to leaven, since by their additions or omissions they corrupt the pure word of God (Matthew 16:11). This was by no means a useless discipline; for in trivial matters, and things of almost no consequence, they were restrained so that they would not deviate from purity in the slightest degree.
It was a small matter to interweave a thin thread with a thicker one, and perhaps such a process would have been beneficial for their general advantage. In some fields, too, a better crop is grown if the seed is a compound of pure wheat and some other sort of grain (siligine). Similarly, the union of the horse and ass has been approved of, since mules are produced this way.
But God would not allow these things among His ancient people, to prevent them from gradually sinking into greater license, where they might eventually adopt the practices and customs of the pagans.
He therefore uses this preface: “You shall keep my statutes” (Leviticus 19:19), from which we gather that the people were surrounded with fixed barriers. This was so they would not defile themselves with foreign vices and imitate the nations from which they had been separated. Therefore, the essence of the matter is that they should abide in God’s statutes.
30 “Au septieme commandement de la Loy, qui est d’observer chastet;” to the Seventh Commandment of the Law, which is to observe chastity. — ;” to the Seventh Commandment of the Law, which is to observe chastity. — Fr..
"Thou shalt make thee fringes upon the four borders of thy vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself." — Deuteronomy 22:12 (ASV)
This was also an aspect of chastity: to have regard for modesty in dress. Because the thighs were then uncovered, a door was thus opened to many improprieties if the upper garments were not kept closed. Many people, as if by accident, would have misused this situation, if it had been permitted, as an encouragement to licentiousness. For we see that many rush into such excesses of lewdness as to boast in their shame.
God, therefore, willed that the flaps of their gowns be drawn together with ties or fastenings, so that not even by chance could those parts be uncovered which cannot be looked upon decently or modestly.
But if divine provisions were made even concerning their garments, so that the chosen people should cultivate decency and diligently guard against everything immodest, it is abundantly clear that not only were adulteries condemned, but also whatever is contrary to purity and chastity.
This passage is incorrectly applied to the fringes that were sewn onto their garments to renew the remembrance of the Law, since decency and modesty are the sole considerations here.
Jump to: