Commentaria in Leviticum
Chapter 2
The second species of sacrifice is described, namely the mincha, that is, the meal-offering, and that threefold: first, of fine flour, verse 1; second, of loaves, and that again threefold: namely loaves of the oven, of the pan, and of the gridiron, verse 4; third, of ears of corn, verse 14.
1. When any one shall offer an oblation of a sacrifice to the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour, and he shall pour oil upon it, and put frankincense, 2. And shall bring it to the sons of Aaron the priests: of whom one shall take a handful of the flour and oil, and all the frankincense, and shall put it for a memorial upon the altar, for a most sweet savour to the Lord. 3. And the remnant of the sacrifice shall be Aaron’s and his sons’, the holy of holies of the offerings of the Lord. 4. But when thou offerest a sacrifice baked in the oven of flour, to wit, loaves without leaven, tempered with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil: 5. If thy oblation be from the frying-pan, of flour tempered with oil, and without leaven, 6. Thou shalt divide it into little pieces, and shalt pour oil upon it. 7. But if the sacrifice be from the gridiron, in like manner the flour shall be tempered with oil: 8. And when thou offerest it to the Lord, thou shalt deliver it into the hands of the priest. 9. And when he hath offered it, he shall take a memorial out of the sacrifice, and shall burn it upon the altar for a sweet savour to the Lord: 10. And whatsoever is left shall be Aaron’s and his sons’, the holy of holies of the offerings of the Lord. 11. Every oblation that is offered to the Lord shall be made without leaven: neither shall any leaven or honey be burnt in the sacrifice to the Lord. 12. You shall offer only the first-fruits of them and gifts: but they shall not be laid upon the altar for a sweet savour. 13. Whatsoever sacrifice thou offerest, thou shalt season it with salt, neither shalt thou take away the salt of the covenant of thy God from thy sacrifice. In all thy oblations thou shalt offer salt. 14. But if thou offer a gift of the firstfruits of thy corn to the Lord, of the ears yet green, thou shalt dry it at the fire, and break it small like meal, and so thou shalt offer thy firstfruits to the Lord, 15. Pouring oil upon it, and putting frankincense, because it is the oblation of the Lord. 16. Of which the priest shall burn, for a memorial of the gift, part of the broken corn, and of the oil, and all the frankincense.
Verse 1. When any one shall offer an oblation of a sacrifice to the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour.—“Soul,” that is, man, by synecdoche. So “soul” is taken in chapters 4 and 5, and often elsewhere. By a like figure “flesh,” which is the other part of man, often signifies the whole man, as Genesis 6: “All flesh,” that is, man, “had corrupted its way.” John 1:14: “The Word was made flesh,” that is, man. “Grass” [Isaias 40:6: “All flesh is grass”]. Where note that Scripture uses the name “soul” when account is taken of the acts of the soul, or of human dignity; “flesh” when it regards man’s lowliness.
The oblation of the sacrifice.—In Hebrew, “the oblation mincha,” which Aquila, according to Hesychius on chapter 10, renders “a gift of corn”; Vatablus renders “a food-sacrifice”; Andreas Masius on Josue 21:23 renders “an offering of meal.” For mincha among the Hebrews is properly a sacrifice made of meal or fine flour, whether pure fine flour, or baked in the oven, the pan or on the gridiron. And since the other sacrifices have a peculiar name, our interpreter therefore throughout Leviticus calls the sacrifice of fine flour, or mincha, simply “the sacrifice”; which observe carefully.
You will ask: Why did God institute this sacrifice, the mincha, that is, of meal?
I answer, first, for the sake of the poor: for it is not for all to buy and offer animals. So Lycurgus, the lawgiver of the Spartans, being asked why he had instituted such sparing and slender sacrifices, answered: That the worship of the gods may never fail among us; Plutarch is witness in his Lycurgus. Second, that He might provide the priests with bread and food; for a great part of this sacrifice fell to the priests.
Third, that, as the Hebrews worshipped God with animals and gave Him thanks, so they might worship Him with the fruits of the earth, and learn in all want and nourishment to look to God. Fourth, because the sacrifice was as it were a banquet, in which God feasted with men, and the victims were as it were the food of God; but bread, whose matter is meal or fine flour, is the necessary food of men. Hence God likewise required fine flour or bread in His sacrifice. That this is so is plain, first, from the fact that the victim is called the bread, that is, the food, of God, Leviticus 21:21 and chapter 22, verse 25. Second, from the fact that the altar is called the table of God, Malachias 1:7 and 12. For God, whose delights are to be with the children of men, willed in this way to show His condescension towards men, by showing Himself so familiar to them that He has the same table and meal with them. Hence among the Roman Gentiles at the banquet of Jove, which the septemviri of the Epulones celebrated in the Capitol, Jupiter was invited to the couch, Juno and Minerva to chairs, to the supper: from which Valerius Maximus gathers that men of old reclined only on couches, but women sat on chairs. Third, from the fact that the Septuagint everywhere call the sacrifice karpos or karpoma, that is, fruit, whereof God as it were eats and enjoys. Hence they call the holocaust holokarpoma, because the whole yields to the fruit and eating of God. Fourth, because for this reason God commanded to be offered, in every sacrifice of an animal, fine flour and wine, as is plain from Numbers 15:4, 7 and 10, and likewise salt, as is plain from this chapter, verse 13, so that God’s banquet might be full and perfect: for in every banquet are required flesh and bread for food, wine for drink, salt for seasoning.
The Gentiles imitated the same in their sacrifices, who sprinkled the head of the victim with ground spelt (which they therefore called “salted meal”), toasted and sprinkled with salt; from which meal and rite the verb immolo, that is, I sacrifice, is derived; witness of this meal is Lucan, book 1:
Now he had begun to pour the wine, and with the slanting knife to lay on the meal, and Virgil, Eclogue 8: “Scatter the meal”; and Horace, book 2 of the Satires, satire 3:
When you, for the heifer, set the sweet daughter born at Aulis before the altars, and sprinkle her head, wicked man, with salted meal.
And Plautus, Amphitryon: “Either with salted meal today, or with incense it was fit to pray.” This from of old. For Numa Pompilius, who succeeded Romulus in the Roman kingdom, ordained that “no favourable omen is to be sought without flour,” and added a symbolic reason, that, as he says, by this symbol he might signify “that not the least part of piety lies in taming the manners and composing them to gentleness.” For flour, being soft and tractable, is a symbol of gentleness. So Plutarch in his Numa. More may be seen in Pliny, book 12, chapter 18, and Cicero, book 2 On Divination. From this rite is derived the verb mactare, that is, to increase more; and victima macta, that is, a victim further increased. For as often as flour, wine or incense was poured upon the victim, they said: “The bull is mactus with incense or wine,” that is, the victim is heaped and further increased with incense or wine. So Isidore, book 10, and Giraldus, Syntagma 17.
The allegorical reason of this meal sacrifice was that it might be signified that the flesh and sacrifice of Christ also had and has the nature of bread and wine in the Eucharist. Hence the flesh of Christ is called bread. For this is the sacrifice mincha, which Malachias, chapter 1, verse 11, foretold would be offered by the Gentiles, the Christians, in every place and throughout the whole world. For as the victims of slain animals signified the sacrifice of Christ slain on the cross, so the sacrifice mincha signified the sacrifice of Christ in the Eucharist, under the species of bread and wine.
Hence it follows that this oblation, the mincha, or of bread or fine flour, was a true and properly so-called sacrifice; which, though Abulensis denies it, the word mincha, which Malachias, the Septuagint and our interpreter all render “sacrifice,” proves. And it is plain from the rite of the mincha, in which the bread or fine flour was burnt, or otherwise altered to the honour of God; for this plainly argues that the mincha was a true sacrifice, not merely a simple oblation: for in the latter the thing was not destroyed or consumed, but offered whole, for example whole fruits, apples, nuts, loaves [...] You will say: The mincha was not a holocaust, nor a peace sacrifice, nor a sacrifice for sin; therefore it was not a sacrifice. So Abulensis.