Commentaria in IV Regum
Chapter 16. Synopsis of the Chapter
Achaz the son of Joatham reigns; the kings of Syria and Israel conspire against him. He calls on Theglathphalasar and sends him a vast weight of gold and silver: who, being called, lays waste Syria and Israel. Meanwhile Achaz worships idols and profanes the temple.
1. In the seventeenth year of Phacee the son of Romelias, Achaz the son of Joatham king of Juda reigned. 2. Achaz was twenty years old when he began to reign; and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem: he did not that which was pleasing in the sight of the Lord his God, as David his father. 3. But he walked in the way of the kings of Israel: moreover he consecrated also his son, making him pass through the fire, according to the idols of the nations, which the Lord destroyed from before the children of Israel. 4. He sacrificed also, and burnt incense in the high places, and on the hills, and under every shady tree. 5. Then Rasin king of Syria, and Phacee the son of Romelias king of Israel, came up to Jerusalem to fight: and they besieged Achaz, but could not overcome him. 6. At that time Rasin king of Syria restored Aila to Syria, and drove the Jews out of Aila; and the Edomites came into Aila, and dwelt there unto this day. 7. And Achaz sent messengers to Theglathphalasar king of the Assyrians, saying: I am thy servant and thy son: come up and save me out of the hand of the king of Syria, and out of the hand of the king of Israel, who are risen up against me. 8. And when he had gathered together the silver and gold that could be found in the house of the Lord, and in the king’s treasures, he sent it for a present to the king of the Assyrians. 9. And he consented to his desire: for the king of the Assyrians went up against Damascus, and laid it waste, and carried the inhabitants of it away to Cyrene, but Rasin he slew. 10. And king Achaz went to Damascus to meet Theglathphalasar king of the Assyrians: and when he had seen the altar of Damascus, king Achaz sent to Urias the priest a pattern of it, and a likeness according to all the work thereof. 11. And Urias the priest built an altar: according to all that king Achaz had commanded from Damascus, so did Urias the priest, till king Achaz came from Damascus. 12. And when the king was come from Damascus, he saw the altar, and worshipped it: and went up and offered holocausts, and his own sacrifice; 13. And offered libations, and poured the blood of the peace offerings which he had offered upon the altar. 14. But the altar of brass, which was before the Lord, he removed from the face of the temple, and from the place of the altar, and from the place of the temple of the Lord: and set it at the side of the altar toward the north. 15. And king Achaz commanded Urias the priest, saying: Upon the great altar offer the morning holocaust, and the evening sacrifice, and the king’s holocaust, and his sacrifice, and the holocaust of all the people of the land, and their sacrifices, and their libations: and all the blood of the holocaust, and all the blood of the victim thou shalt pour out upon it: but the altar of brass shall be ready at my pleasure. 16. And Urias the priest did according to all that king Achaz had commanded. 17. And king Achaz took away the graven bases, and the laver that was upon them; and he took down the sea from the brazen oxen that held it up, and put it upon a pavement of stone. 18. The Musach also for the sabbath, which he had built in the temple, and the king’s entry from without, he turned into the temple of the Lord, because of the king of the Assyrians. 19. Now the rest of the acts of Achaz which he did, are they not written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Juda? 20. And Achaz slept with his fathers, and was buried with them in the city of David, and Ezechias his son reigned in his stead.
3. HE CONSECRATED HIS SON (to the idol Moloch), MAKING HIM PASS THROUGH THE FIRE.—Note that it was done in two ways: the Ammonites and Hebrews consecrated their sons to the idol Moloch, first by burning them in the fire: the rite and manner I related on Leviticus 18:21; second, by leading them through the fire, both to purify them by fire from sins and uncleanness, and by this rite to initiate and dedicate them to the idol Moloch. Theodoret describes the rite: “I have seen,” he says, “in some cities, once a year pyres are lit, and some leap across them, not only boys but also men; but infants are carried through the flame by their mothers. This seemed to be a kind of expiation and purification. I think this too was the sin of Achaz.” Wherefore Theodoret, and from him Salianus, think that Achaz did not burn his son, but only led him through the fire, and so purified him and dedicated him to the idol. Hence in 2 Paralipomenon 28:3 it is said: “And he purified his sons in the fire.” From which place it is clear that Achaz did this not to one, but to several, and perhaps to all his sons; nor is it likely that he burned several or all; for his son Ezechias succeeded him in the kingdom.
Josephus, however, and from him Abulensis and Adrichomius, think that he sacrificed and burned his son to the idol Moloch. Lyranus thinks he did both, namely burned one of his sons, and purified the others by leading them through the fire. Further, there is no doubt that many Jews, moved by this example of their king Achaz, consecrated their sons to Moloch.
7. AND ACHAZ SENT MESSENGERS TO THEGLATHPHALASAR,—to help him against Rasin king of Syria and Phacee king of Israel, and therefore sent all the gold and silver both of the temple and of his own palace. Achaz sinned in this, in that God through Isaias, chapter 7, v. 4, had promised him help against Rasin and Phacee; but he, distrusting God, trusted in king Theglathphalasar, and was therefore plundered and oppressed by him. Hear 2 Paralipomenon 28:19: “For the Lord had humbled Juda because of Achaz king of Juda, because he had stripped it of help and had despised the Lord. And he brought against him Theglathphalasar king of the Assyrians, who also afflicted him, and laid waste his land, no one resisting. So Achaz, having plundered the house of the Lord and the house of the kings and princes, gave presents to the king of the Assyrians, and yet it profited him nothing. Moreover, in the time of his distress he increased his contempt against the Lord, king Achaz himself, and sacrificed to the gods of Damascus, his conquerors, and said: The gods of the kings of Syria help them, to whom I will sacrifice, and they will help me, whereas they were rather the ruin of him and of all Israel.”
9. HE CARRIED THE INHABITANTS OF IT (of Damascus) AWAY TO CYRENE,—not that which is in Ethiopia, nor that which is in Africa, but to the Cyrene which is in Media. Whence Josephus says that the Damascenes were transferred into Media.
10. AND WHEN HE HAD SEEN THE ALTAR OF DAMASCUS,—wrought with excellent form, material and art, it pleased him; hence he ordered Urias the high priest to have one made like it, after its pattern, at Jerusalem in the temple, in place of the altar made by Solomon. Whether Achaz erected this altar for idols (like the Damascenes) and sacrificed on it to them, or to the true God, Scripture does not express; it is likely, however, that he erected it for idols; because he himself worshipped them just as the Damascenes did, and ordered altars to be raised to them everywhere, to gain the favour of Theglathphalasar and bind him to himself by worshipping his gods and idols. But in vain: for he was therefore plundered and subdued by him, as I said. So Abulensis and others.
11. AND URIAS THE PRIEST BUILT AN ALTAR.—Urias the high priest sinned in erecting this impious altar, preferring to please king Achaz rather than God: St. Ambrose did otherwise; for, as he himself relates in book 5, epistle 39: “When an order was imposed that we should now hand over the vessels of the Church to the Emperor, I made this reply: that if anything of mine were demanded, whether land, or house, or gold, or silver, whatever was my own right, I would gladly offer it, but that I could take nothing from the temple of God, nor hand over what I had received to guard, not to hand over. Moreover that I was also consulting the safety of the Emperor, because it was neither expedient for me to hand it over nor for him to receive it. Let him accept the voice of a free priest, if he wishes to be well advised; let him withdraw from injury to Christ, and far be it from me to hand over the inheritance of Christ, and the inheritance of Dionysius, who died in exile for the faith, the inheritance of Eustorgius the confessor, the inheritance of Mirocles and of all the faithful bishops before.”
14. BUT THE ALTAR OF BRASS (made by Solomon) WHICH WAS BEFORE THE LORD (that is, before the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, in which God dwelt, giving oracles) HE REMOVED—in contempt, as is said in 2 Paralipomenon 28:24 and 22; because Achaz was most impious, and therefore a despiser of God and of his altar and temple. For this reason he moved the altar of God from its place and put his Damascene altar in its stead, and set the altar of God at the side of his own altar, as a substitute and a favour, in a corner.
15. UPON THE GREAT ALTAR (which I, having removed the Solomonic one, have caused to be built after the likeness of the Damascene altar) OFFER THE HOLOCAUST.
17. AND PUT IT UPON A PAVEMENT.—Achaz did all this in contempt, as I said, of the altar (for the lavers and the brazen sea served it), and to make it useless for his purposes, namely for sacrifices; so that the Jews would be compelled to sacrifice not on it, to the true God, but to idols.
18. THE MUSACH ALSO FOR THE SABBATH, WHICH HE HAD BUILT IN THE TEMPLE.—Supply “he took away” from the preceding verse; and as to what “Musach” is, opinions vary; but two are the more probable. The first: Musach in Hebrew is the same as a covering or roof; it signifies therefore either a covered throne, on which the kings sat on the sabbath and other feast days, to be present at the sacrifices and hear the law of God; whence in chapter 21, v. 3, it is called a “step,” as Rabbi Solomon would have it. Hence the Septuagint render it “the foundation of the seat of the sabbaths,” by which they seem to understand the base on which the king’s seat was placed when he came to the temple on the sabbath to pray and hear the law, Ezechiel 46:2. “Musach of the sabbath,” therefore, in Hebrew signifies the sabbath tent covered with a splendid canopy, which was near the court of the priests, but outside it, in which the king sat on the sabbath and feasts watching the sacrifices. And this is the tribunal in which Joas sat when he was made king by Joiada the high priest, 4 Kings chapter 11, v. 14; or certainly “Musach” signifies a pulpit, as Vatablus renders it, or a covered and roofed platform, on which the Levites and priests sat while they interpreted the law and the prophets to the people, as Villalpandus will have it, as Esdras did, Nehemias chapter 8, v. 4. The second opinion is that “Musach” was a covering, namely a veil or a boarded structure prepared for the Levites and other keepers of the temple, who in turn each sabbath performed the sacred duties in the temple, says Vatablus. Or “Musach” was a covered place in the court of the people, so that under it those who flocked to the temple to pray or hear the law might remain safe from heat, rain and wind. Hence Marinus in his Lexicon renders “Musach” a portico. All these senses are probable; for the impious Achaz seems to have removed these things. Hence in 2 Paralipomenon 28:24 it is said that he shut up the temple of the Lord. But because “Musach of the sabbath” seems to pertain to the going out “of the king,” which is contained in this same verse, another sense, which I shall presently subjoin, seems more probable.
AND THE KING’S ENTRY FROM WITHOUT HE TURNED INTO THE TEMPLE OF THE LORD, BECAUSE OF THE KING OF THE ASSYRIANS.—First, some explain it thus: Achaz profaned the temple when he made it as it were the vestibule of his royal palace, so that access to it should not be open except through the temple, that he himself might be safer from the king of the Assyrians, who would first have had to storm the temple before proceeding to storm the palace. But on another side, which did not adjoin the temple, the palace could be attacked, and taken more easily than the temple.
Second, Theodoret and Lyranus think that Achaz blocked the way by which one went from the palace to the temple, to this end, that the king of the Assyrians might understand that he had plainly abandoned the true God and the worship of God, to follow and worship his gods. The Chaldee favours this, which for “turned” has “turned away” (for to turn is to turn elsewhere or in the opposite direction). In Hebrew it is heseb, that is, he made it go round, so that if anyone wished to go from the palace to the temple, he would be forced by a great circuit to descend from Mount Sion and cross the whole of Ophel, to come to the foot of Mount Moria, and from there ascend to the temple by 900 steps, so that this annoyance of so long a circuit and so troublesome an ascent might call back those of the king’s household from visiting the temple, says Salianus. But “turned into the temple” signifies not to turn away, but to turn into the temple. Hence, third, some explain more plainly thus: Achaz added to the temple the vestibule of his palace, through which one went into the temple, and which was outside the temple, and made what was before outside the temple to be now within the temple, so as to imitate the king of the Assyrians, who had a palace so joined to the temple that it seemed to be a part of the temple; which was a kind of degradation and profanation of the temple. For thus it came about that no one could enter the palace except through the temple. So Vatablus. Finally, this seems the most obvious and fitting sense of this whole verse, that by “Musach of the sabbath” we understand the tent and canopy in which the king sat on sabbaths and feasts in the court of the laymen, but in the first place, very near the court of the priests, so that he might watch the sacrifices from nearest and hear the hymns which the priests and Levites sang in their court, as is plain from Ezechiel 46:1. For it was not lawful for any layman, not even a king, to enter the court of the priests, but only for the priests and Levites. But Achaz, to please the king of the Assyrians, who thought it base and unseemly to stand outside with the common people, “turned this Musach,” or tent, “into the temple of the Lord,” that is, the intermediate wall being pulled down, joined it to the court of the priests, so that it might be next to the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, that now the king might stand or sit not among the laity and common people but among the priests, as though separated from the crowd and reckoned with the priests, so as to see and hear very closely all the sacred rites which the priests performed both in the court and in the Holy Place. Further, because access to this “Musach” of the king, or tent and tribunal, lay open from the royal house itself through the intermediate courts, Achaz joined to the temple this entry also, which was part of his royal house, by which the king descended from the palace to the “Musach,” and which is therefore here called “the king’s entry”; so that what was formerly as it were a lay house outside the court of the priests, the intermediate fence being thrown down, was now enclosed within the very court of the priests, and in it reached as far as the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies. This sense is demanded by “turned into the temple of the Lord,” which pertains as much to the king’s entry as to the Musach of the sabbath. So Gaspar Sanchez from Rabbi Solomon, Lyranus and others; Abulensis does not reject it, but adds another exposition, saying that there were two ways from the palace to the temple, one open and public, by which the king went to the temple in the sight of the people, the other hidden and closed, by which the king went secretly to the temple when he did not wish to be seen: Achaz closed the public way, that he might seem to the king of the Assyrians (whose favour he courted) a deserter of his country’s religion and a worshipper of his idols; but he kept the hidden one, that by it he might secretly enter the temple, and not offend the king of the Assyrians, who was ignorant of it, and that therefore it is said of him here that “he turned the king’s entry from without into the temple of the Lord because of the king of the Assyrians.” So Abulensis. But there is an objection that this entry to the temple already existed before; wherefore it cannot be said that Achaz turned it into the temple of the Lord. Less truly also the Gloss, which Dionysius and Hugh follow, thinks that “Musach of the sabbath” was a building in the vestibule of the temple, into which the kings coming to the temple on sabbaths cast alms: “Musach,” therefore, was the treasury of the kings, as the “Corbona” was the treasury of the laity.