John Calvin Commentary Leviticus 12:2

"Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman conceive seed, and bear a man-child, then she shall be unclean seven days; as in the days of the impurity of her sickness shall she be unclean." — Leviticus 12:2 (ASV)

If a woman have conceived seed. This ceremony related to two points:

1. The Jews were reminded by it of the common corruption of our nature.
2. Secondly, the remedy of the evil was set before them.

There is little difficulty in understanding why a woman who has conceived and given birth to a child should be pronounced unclean; namely, because the whole race of Adam is polluted and defiled. Consequently, the woman already contracts uncleanness from the offspring she bears in the womb and is further contaminated by giving it birth.

From this, it appears how foul and disgusting our condition is in God’s sight, since at our birth, and even before it, we infect our mothers.

It has been almost universally, though very absurdly, considered that nothing is condemned here except libidinous intercourse between male and female. However, the purification is not required unless there is offspring. The word תזריע, thazriang, refers to this, which can only be properly translated as insemination. Therefore, it must be carefully observed that impurity in intercourse is not generally condemned here, but impurity in generation.

For the cohabitation of man and woman in itself, without reference to offspring, is a matter of shame and indecency. But here, the procreation of children, which should remove this indecency, is considered the cause of pollution because the whole race of Adam is full of contagion.

Therefore, the error of Pelagius³⁴¹ is clearly refuted. He denied that the sin of Adam was propagated among his descendants and claimed that we contracted sin from our parents not by origin, but by imitation. For the mother would not be unclean if the children were pure and free from all defilement.

Therefore, God intended by this rite to teach His ancient people that all humans are born accursed and bring into the world with them an hereditary corruption that pollutes their very mothers.

If anyone objects that holy matrimony is thus brought into disgrace and disrepute, the reply is easy: if the marriage couch is free from stain, it is due to the indulgence of God.

Therefore, when a husband and wife procreate children in lawful wedlock, it is not to be considered simply permitted—as if the generation were altogether without impurity—but rather by special privilege and indulgence. This is because the sanctity of marriage covers what otherwise might be blamed and purifies the very defilements of our guilty nature.

From this, it is plain that marriage, through which the procreation of children becomes lawful, has nothing disgraceful about it. Yet it does not follow that the children who are thus conceived are holy and free from stain. For those who are born to unbelievers remain under the guilt of the curse, and those who owe their birth to believers are delivered from the common perdition by supernatural grace and special adoption.

And God desired to testify to this openly and distinctly by requiring a sacrifice for their purification. For although Moses seems only to speak of the mother, St. Luke,³⁴² his faithful interpreter, also includes the infant.

If it is asked whether circumcision would not be sufficient to remove the stain of corrupt nature, I reply that from this it more clearly appears how great our impurity is. God was not content with one symbol for its cleansing, but, so that He might train His people in continual meditation upon it, He added another subsidiary sign. He did this especially because He knew how profound human hypocrisy is, with what self-complacency people flatter themselves in vice, how difficult it is to humble their pride, and, when they are forced to acknowledge their miseries, how easily forgetfulness creeps over them.

Therefore, when circumcision is expressly mentioned here, I presume it is by anticipation, so that the Israelites would not object that circumcision was given to them for the very purpose of altogether removing the curse. And therefore, God signifies that, although circumcision should precede it, the purification He here commands would still not be superfluous.

The foolish comments of the Rabbis on this passage regarding seed are both ridiculous in themselves and unsuited by their filthiness for modest ears. For, as we have said, the simple intention of Moses was that the woman should undergo purification if offspring resulted from her intercourse.

Now, since the Son of God—although He was not only pure, but purity itself—still was the representative of the human race, He subjected Himself to the Law. As Paul teaches, He submitted Himself to the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law (Galatians 3:13; Galatians 4:5).

And, by this His voluntary submission to it, He abrogated the old rite, so that it is not now necessary to bring infants to the visible tabernacle with sacrifices, but all purity is to be sought in Him.

³⁴¹ Une heretique ancien nomme Pelage. — Fr.

³⁴² The allusion is, I suppose, to Luke 2:23..