Commentaria in Numeros
Note: The mode and rite of the libation was this, as Abulensis rightly noted: the layman offering a victim and libations, poured, at his own house, oil on the flour prescribed for his victim, and that in the measure which is here commanded, namely, for one tenth, or one gomor of fine flour, he poured the fourth part of the measure hin; for two tenths he poured the third part of a hin; for three, half a hin. The hin was a measure containing twelve Hebrew sextarii, or cups, of thirteen ounces each of water or wine, as I shall show at the end of the work. This flour, to be offered to God, could not be mixed with water: for so it would have been held unclean and unfit for sacrifice, as Abulensis teaches on Numbers xxviii, Question XXIII, but had to be mixed with oil. Then the offerer brought the flour so mixed to the Sanctuary, together with the measure of wine here prescribed, and gave them to the priest, who, receiving them, poured out a part of the wine upon the victim to be burned, as is gathered from verse 5 and chap. xxviii, verse 14; and took from the flour a handful, which he burned upon the altar; but the remaining flour and the wine he kept for his own uses. For the libations always went in greatest part to the priest, even in holocausts.
The rite of sacrificing and libating, therefore, was this: the priest laid the flesh of the victim, or the fat, if that alone was to be burned, upon the altar; then from the fine flour, which was mixed and seasoned with salt and a fixed measure of oil, he took a handful, and laid it on the victim to be burned; and at the same time he poured out the portion of wine here prescribed, not only upon the flour, but upon the victim itself; finally he laid frankincense on the victim, and presently, wood being placed beneath, kindled a fire, and with it burned and consumed the victim with its libations to God.
“For every lamb.” These words are to be referred to what precedes, with the Royal Bibles (Hebrew, Chaldee and Septuagint), not to what follows. For with a lamb one tenth of fine flour, with a ram two tenths of fine flour were to be offered, as follows.
Where note: The greater the beast or victim, the greater the libation to be given. For with a lamb (under which understand also the kid) that had not yet passed its year, a tenth of fine flour was to be given, and the fourth part of a hin of oil as well as of wine; for a ram, or a he-goat, two tenths of fine flour were to be given, with the third part of a hin of oil and of wine; finally, for a calf or ox, three tenths of fine flour were to be given, with half a hin of oil and of wine.
That this is so is plain from the Hebrew, Chaldee and Septuagint. So Vatablus and the Hebrews.
Anagogically, Cyril, book XVI On Adoration in Spirit and in Truth, p. 397:
Wine, he says, signifies joy, oil gladness, which in the future glory will be measured out unequally to the Saints, according to the different measure of the good works offered to God.
In like manner, tropologically, to a greater pious work more oil and wine, that is, more cheerfulness and devotion, is to be given than to a lesser.
Verse 13. “Strangers,” that is, newcomers, namely proselytes converted to Judaism. For this is called in Hebrew ger, which our Interpreter now renders stranger, now newcomer, as is plain from verses 13, 14, 26, and elsewhere.
Verse 15. “There shall be one precept and judgment (that is, statute, or law; for this is the Hebrew mishpat) as well for you as for the newcomers (proselytes) of the land.”
Verse 19. “You shall separate firstfruits to the Lord of your meats” (that is, of your breads), as went before. This will be clearer at verse 20.
Verses 20 and 21. “As you separate firstfruits of the floors: so also you shall give firstfruits of your dough to the Lord.” Under floors understand also winepresses. For as from the floor the firstfruits of the harvest, so from the vineyard or winepress they had to offer to God the firstfruits of the vintage and of the grapes at the end of the year, namely at the feast of Tabernacles. Again, firstfruits were to be given “of the dishes,” that is, of the breads. So the Hebrew, Chaldee and Septuagint. Breads are here called “dishes” (pulmenta, porridges) because the ancients, both Romans and Hebrews, used pottage in place of bread; whence also they were called Pultiphagi. For to give firstfruits to God daily of all other foods would have been almost impossible. Only, therefore, when the Hebrews baked bread, did they give some loaf of firstfruits to the priests or Levites who were in their city, or who had been appointed by the pontiff and priests to receive the firstfruits.
To this day the Jewish women, as often as they bake, separate challah, that is, a cake or tart, from the rest of the dough, and as it were consecrate it to the Lord. But because they no longer have a temple, nor priests to whom it was given, they throw it into the oven and burn it: for they say that it is not lawful to eat it; better, surely, would they give it to the poor. Moreover, the form of blessing which the woman uses in consecrating this cake is this: “Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, king of the world, who hast sanctified us by thy precepts, and hast commanded us to separate the cake from the dough,” etc. Of these firstfruits I shall say more on chap. xviii, verse 12.
Piously, therefore, and according to the counsel, nay the law of God, do Christian mothers of families act, who as often as they bake bread, so often set aside one loaf as firstfruits for God and the poor.
The former words of verse 15 are to be rendered from the Hebrew thus: as to the whole assembly, there is one and the same ordinance for all. Others, not badly, take the word for a vocative, “O assembly.” Others render: such number as thou shalt make in these, such number also thou shalt make in those; as if to say: So many cakes and libations shall you bring as you shall sacrifice beasts, so that no sacrifice be made without a cake and libation.
Verses 22, 23 and 24. “And if through ignorance you shall omit any of these things... and the multitude shall forget to do it: they shall offer a calf out of the herd, a holocaust, etc., and a buck goat for sin.” You will object: In Leviticus iv, 13, it is commanded that if the whole multitude of the children of Israel sin, they offer a calf for sin, to be burned outside the camp: how then does the law here command a calf not for sin but for a holocaust, and a goat to be offered for sin?
Cajetan answers that Leviticus speaks of sins committed against the natural divine law, but this law speaks of sins committed against the positive law of God, and therefore a different victim is prescribed for the expiation here from that there. But this does not seem true: for that law of Leviticus, in the same chap. iv, speaking of the victims and sins both of the prince and of each private person, speaks of any whatever of their sins: therefore, likewise, when it speaks of the victims and sins of the whole people, it speaks of any whatever of its sins.
I say, therefore, that this law is different from that of Leviticus: and consequently that, besides the calf for sin commanded in Leviticus iv, the sinning people is here commanded to offer in addition another calf for a holocaust, and a goat for sin. So Abulensis.