Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy
The pretended reformers, who blushed not to make this blasphemous assertion, might easily swallow down the other, respecting the defection and fallibility of the whole Church; and might even believe, that the whole world had been drowned in abominable idolatry for eight hundred years and more. (Hom. on the peril of idolat. p. 3.) How much more they do not determine, lest they should be forced to tell when the religion of the Catholics began, and that they will never do without dating from Christ and the apostles, the foundations of the only true Church. (Haydock) --- The Jews had such a respect for the decisions of their Rabbins, in consequence of this command of God, that some hesitate not to assert, that if one of them should declare that the left hand was the right, they would believe him; and they condemn the refractory to most grievous torments in hell. (Buxtorf., Syn. i.) --- We must shew the most profound submission to the decrees of the Church. (Calmet) --- Yet we are not bound to assent to the decisions of every teacher. Only, when the Church speaks, we must not refuse to obey, nor pretend to appoint ourselves judges of what she teaches. A private doctor, however eminent, may fall into some absurdities, but the major part of the pastors of the Church, with the Pope at their head, never can. In vain have the records of nineteen centuries been ransacked, to find a single instance of such a general agreement in error. If the Synagogue passed a wicked sentence upon Jesus Christ, we must reflect that the forms here required (ver. 8,) were neglected; and it was then expiring, and giving place to a better covenant, as the prophets had foretold. Yet even in that sentence, which was so unjust on the part of Caiphas, St. John (xi. 51.) acknowledges the truth of God. And this he spoke not of himself: but being the high priest, that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not only for the nation, but to gather together in one the children of God that were dispersed. The Synagogue could claim submission no longer, after the great prophet had come to abrogate the law of fear, and to substitute that of love. Hence while he was there to teach himself, (Hebrews i. 2,) there was no danger of deception for the people. But the covenant which he has established is to last for ever: no prophet or lawgiver is promised to introduce any change, or greater perfection, so that no one can plead for an excuse of his rebellion, that the Church may deceive and pass an erroneous judgment;
or, if he do, he must be cut off from the society of the faithful, by the spiritual sword; and, dying in that state, without the Church for his mother, he need never expect that God will acknowledge him for his son. See St. Cyprian, Unity of the Catholic Church. If an individual pastor should pass such a perverse sentence, the case would be very different. Yet, even in such trying cases, an humble conduct will be the best security and proof of innocence, and God will reward those who have suffered unjustly. (Haydock)
Ver. 12. And the decree. Some copies read with Sixtus V ex decreto, by &c., "decree," (Haydock) as if a lay-judge stood ready to put the sentence in execution. (Calmet) --- But there was no necessity of any farther judgment after the high priest had spoken, who is here declared the sovereign judge. (St. Cyprian, ep. 55.) Hebrew, "or to the judge." Amama ridicules his friend, Ant. a Dominis, for saying that the Hebrew and Vulgate have et decreto. (Haydock) --- The Rabbins inform us, that if any judge refused to acquiesce in the decision, and endeavoured to draw others into his opinion, in matters of consequence, (as those are where the guilty is ordered to be cut off,) he was to be strangled, on a festival day, at Jerusalem, that all the people hearing it might fear, ver. 13. (Selden, Syned. iii. 3.) (Calmet)
Ver. 13. Pride. Hebrew, "do presumptuously," as the Protestants translate. How will they excuse their leaders, Luther, &c., and themselves, from this grievous charge? If the person, who presumed to assert that the leprosy had not infected some one, whom the priests condemned, (ver. 8,) could not escape death, shall we esteem those innocent whom the whole Church rejects? Hic niger est, hunc tu Romane caveto. (Horace) (Haydock)
Ver. 14. King. The Rabbins observe, that one was to be elected before the place for the temple was fixed upon, that the tribes might not contend about that honour. (Grotius) --- God foresees that the people will insist upon having a king, and gives his consent, reserving to himself the choice, and appointing laws for him, that he may not forget that he is only the lieutenant of the most high. Yet God testified his displeasure, when the Israelites demanded a king, because they did it in a seditious manner, so as to reject the prophet Samuel, whom he had given them for a ruler, in whom they could discover no fault. (Calmet) (1 Kings viii. 7., and x. 19.)
Ver. 15. Choose, as he did Saul, David, and Solomon, who succeeded to the throne of his father, though he was not the eldest son. (Menochius) --- Then the throne began to be hereditary, in virtue of God's promise to David. (Calmet) --- Brother. The Jews neglected this law, when they willingly recognized the authority of Herod, two years after the birth of Christ. See Genesis xlix. 10. (Haydock) --- A stranger might attempt to draw off the people from the service of the true God, and mutual love would not so easily subsist between them. (Menochius)
Ver. 16. Horses. Josue and David rendered the captured horses useless, (Josue xi. 6., and 2 Kings viii. 4,) and the judges rode on asses, Judges x. 4., and xii. 14. Solomon began to keep some, and in his days Egypt was noted for the traffic of horses; though, after Sesostris had intersected the country with canals, they were more neglected. (Marsham, Canon. sæc. xiii., and xiv.) God did not wish his people to engage in the tumults of war, nor would he permit their king to be puffed up with his own strength, Psalm xix. 8., and xxxii. 17. Philo says he would not have them to listen to any who might promise to conduct them to a better country, and thus teach them to lead a wandering life. (Calmet) --- He precludes also the attempt to conquer Egypt. Hebrew, "he shall not make the people return to Egypt, in order that he may multiply horses," by their buying them for him in that country, 3 Kings x. 29. --- Way. When the people proposed returning, God severely punished them, Numbers xiv. 5.
Ver. 17. Mind, and reign in his name. Hebrew, "and his heart turn not away" from the worship of the true God, as it happened to Solomon, and to many other kings, whom Moses seems to have had in view. Too great a number of wives would tend to perplex and enervate the king, and to eat up the treasures of his people. The Jewish lawyers allow the king only 18, and they say David and Roboam had that number. But the latter had moreover 60 concubines, (2 Paralipomenon xi. 21,) and Solomon had many more. In effect, the number seems not to be restricted, and, what is very singular, the Rabbins allow all but the high priest and the king as many as they can keep, though the sages advise people to have no more than four, which seems to be the sentiment of the Mahometans. This liberty was taken by the Jews till the emperors restricted them, A.D. 593. (Selden, Uxor. i. 8, &c.) Plurality of wives was not formerly a sin, though Solomon offended by too great excess. (St. Augustine, q. 27.) (Worthington) --- Gold. Immense riches are seldom possessed even by kings, without the oppression of their subjects, and great danger of falling into extravagance. If David amassed so much gold, it was destined for the building of the temple. But Solomon laying on heavy taxes, alienated the hearts of his people, and gave occasion to the revolt of 10 tribes; and Ezechias brought on a severe chastisement by making a parade of his treasures to the ambassadors of the king of Babylon, 4 Kings xx. 15. (Calmet)