Leviticus 8

Leviticus 8:2

Augustine of Hippo: When the Scripture spoke before the sacrifices for sins, he said that a bullock had to be offered for the sin of the priest who had caused the people to sin. Later also, when the Scripture describes how the things that the Lord commanded with Aaron and his sons, he says that a bull was offered for sin (Cf Leviticus 8,2). But first he commanded that the horns of the altar of incense should be anointed with the blood of the bullock, that it should be sprinkled with that same blood in the direction of the holy veil, and that the rest of the blood be poured out at the base of the altar of burnt offerings. . But later, when Aaron is consecrated, nothing is said of the sprinkling of the blood in the direction of the veil. Of the horns of the altar it is spoken, but it is not added of the incense. It is said that the blood spills next to the base of the altar (Leviticus 8,15). The text does not say: next to its base, as if it were necessary to think that it was that altar, whose horns had been anointed with blood. Therefore, although the text is expressed ambiguously, however, it is one free to think that it was done as it had been ordered before about the bull for sin. And so we are not forced to think that the horns of that altar were anointed at whose base the blood was spilled, but the horns of the altar of incense were anointed, and the blood was spilled next to the base of the sacrificial altar. Previously, the Scripture ordered that, if the priest sinned, the anointed and consecrated priest himself, who undoubtedly must be understood that he refers to the high priest, offered these sacrifices, because the Scripture then spoke in a general way. Now, when Aaron is consecrated, Moses offers and he himself receives the breast of the imposition, which, as the Scripture said before, had to be given to the priest (Cf Leviticus 8,29). I think it is called the breast of imposition, because he put on his fat, as the Scripture recalled before, when speaking of the sacrifice of salvation (Cf Leviticus 4,10). Well, since it seems that the high priesthood began with Aaron, what do we think Moses was? If he was not a priest, how could he do all those things? If so, how do we claim that the high priesthood began with his brother? Although even that psalm, in which Moses and Aaron are said to be among his priests (Ps. 98,6), remove the doubt that Moses was a priest, yet Aaron and his successors, the high priests, are ordered to accept that priestly garment that It contains a great mystery (Cf Exodus 28,3-39). In the Exodus, before anything was said about the consecration and, in a certain way, the ordination of the priests, when on going up the mountain Moses was told not to raise the priests (Cf Exodus 19,24), which can not be other than the sons of Aaron, not because they already were, but because they were to be, the Scripture already called them then in advance. There are many examples of such expressions, such as, for example, when Ship’s son is called Joshua (Cf Exodus 33,11), when the Scripture says that this name was imposed much later (Cf Numbers 13,17). In conclusion, the two, Moses and Aaron, were then high priests. Or maybe it was Moses, and Aaron was subject to it? Or maybe it was Aaron for the pontifical vesture and Moses for his highest ministry? Why is not Moses told from the beginning: He will be for you in relation to the things that refer to the people, and you will be for him in relation to the things that refer to God? It may also be asked, who, after Moses died, anointed the high priest, since no one could succeed him until he had died? Or because he was already anointed among the priests of the second rank-since the oil with which he anointed himself to the high priest and to the priests of the second rank was the same-did that pontiff only wear the garment that revealed his supreme category? If the reality is this, did he take the garment himself or did someone else give it to him, as, after his death, Moses gave it to his brother’s son as well? If the garment was worn by another, could a priest who was a second-rank priest be the high priest, thinking above all that it was a garment that needed to be put on by someone else? Or did he put on this garment first, how would he wear it afterwards? Effectively. For once he is dressed, it is not that he did not wear it; or once put, do not put it on again. It could happen that the priests of the second rank dressed the first, out of obedience, not to stand out. But by what was demonstrated which of the children should happen to the high priest? The Scripture, in effect, does not say that it must be the firstborn or the eldest. One would think that it would be useful to know oneself by some divine sign manifested through some prophet or in any other way that God usually acts. Although it seems that the matter was the subject of a discussion, so that later there were many high priests precisely because, discussing among themselves the most conspicuous to settle the issue, this honor was given to many. — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 23 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Leviticus 8:3

Cyril of Jerusalem: Well is the church named ecclesia [“assembly”], because it calls forth and assembles all men, as the Lord says in Leviticus: “Then assemble the whole community at the entrance of the meeting tent.” It is worthy of note that this word assemble is used in the Scriptures for the first time in the passage when the Lord established Aaron in the high priesthood. In Deuteronomy God says to Moses, “Assemble the people for me; I will have them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me.” He mentions the name of the church again when he says of the tablets: “And on them were inscribed all the words that the Lord spoke to you on the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly”; as if he would say more plainly, “on the day on which you were called and gathered together.” And the psalmist says, “I will give you thanks in a great church [ecclesia], in the mighty throng I will praise you.” — Catechetical Lecture 18.24

Leviticus 8:12

Cyril of Jerusalem: You must know that this chrism [chrismation] is prefigured in the Old Testament. When Moses, conferring on his brother the divine appointment, was ordering him high priest, he anointed him after he had bathed in water, and thenceforward he was called “christ” [“anointed”], clearly after the figurative Chrism. — Catechetical Lecture 3.6

Leviticus 8:35

Augustine of Hippo: What does Moses say to Aaron and his sons when they are consecrated to the priesthood: Will you sit seven days, day and night, at the entrance to the tabernacle of the testimony so that you do not die? Is it credible that they were commanded to sit in one place in that bodily situation for seven days, day and night, so that they would not move at all from there? It does not follow from this text that we are forced to admit that we have been told something in the allegorical sense, that it should not be done, but that it should be understood. The reality is that it is more about recognizing a way of expressing oneself in the Scriptures, according to which “to sit” means “to live” or “to remain”. Thus, for example, because the Scripture says that Semei was sitting in Jerusalem for three years (Cf 1R 2,38), it is not necessary to think that during all that time he was sitting in a chair without getting up. This is also called seat to the place where the settlers have their residence. This is also called a place of habitation. — QUESTIONS ON LEVITICUS, Q. 24 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)