Scripture Daily

Context No. 157 of 4322 · Leviticus

Context · Reflection

Leviticus 21:13-24: in context

13“‘He shall take a wife in her virginity. 14He shall not marry a widow, or one divorced, or a woman who has been defiled, or a prostitute. He shall take a virgin of his own people as a wife. 15He shall not profane his offspring among his people, for I am the LORD who sanctifies him.’” 16The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 17“Say to Aaron, ‘None of your offspring throughout their generations who has a defect may approach to offer the bread of his God. 18For whatever man he is that has a defect, he shall not draw near: a blind man, or a lame, or he who has a flat nose, or any deformity, 19or a man who has an injured foot, or an injured hand, 20or hunchbacked, or a dwarf, or one who has a defect in his eye, or an itching disease, or scabs, or who has damaged testicles. 21No man of the offspring of Aaron the priest who has a defect shall come near to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire. Since he has a defect, he shall not come near to offer the bread of his God. 22He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy. 23He shall not come near to the veil, nor come near to the altar, because he has a defect; that he may not profane my sanctuaries, for I am the LORD who sanctifies them.’” 24So Moses spoke to Aaron, and to his sons, and to all the children of Israel.

Leviticus 21 sets the rules for priests, and this passage is its hardest section. It restricts whom the high priest may marry, and then lists physical conditions that bar a descendant of Aaron from offering sacrifice: blindness, lameness, a disfigured face, a limb too long, a broken foot or hand, a hunched back, dwarfism, an eye defect, a skin condition, damaged testicles.

The reasoning is stated in terms of blemish. The offerings brought to the altar had to be without defect, and the same standard is applied to the man who brings them. Whatever else that reflects, it is a rule about ritual symmetry rather than a judgment on the man's worth, and the text is careful to say so in the next lines.

Because it does not cut him off. He may eat the bread of his God, both the most holy and the holy things. He keeps his priestly status, his share of the offerings, and his place in his family. What he cannot do is approach the veil or the altar. He is inside the priesthood and barred from one function within it. It is a real exclusion, stated plainly, alongside a real provision, stated just as plainly. When someone cannot do the visible part of a thing, do I still make sure they eat?

Sources