|
LESSON 73. THE MOSAIC STATUTES AND WOMEN.
(Concluded.)
581. We must not thoughtlessly throw the coloring of our
modern customs about the incidents of the far past, but must
weight their sense by their own surroundings. In the case of
the injured wife, treated of in our last, it may be natural
to assume that the husband is allowed to exact a penalty of
the injurer of his wife, as regarding it an injury to his
own property (Exodus 21:22). But the context does not
support this view. The husband testifies, as the principal
witness, as to how his wife was injured, and to what extent.
This part naturally follows, because, it being a strife
between himself and another man which led to the hurt, he
was sure to have seen it, and, most likely, was the only
witness besides the accused. He brings a suit, naming the
amount upon which the conviction should be secured, while
the accused "shall pay as the judges determine.”
Nothing is said as to money being paid to the husband,¾similar
to the expressions in verses 32 and 34 of this chapter.
582. So again in the case of a seduced girl. At the
present time, the father is considered the injured party,
before the law, because of her temporary disablement, if she
becomes a mother. The Mosaic legislation bears an external
resemblance to this, but on close examination, proves to be
far more radical. The unmarried man who committed an open
breach of the 7th commandment, whether issue followed or
not, was compelled to marry the young woman without the
right of subsequent divorce,¾unless
the father of the girl thought the man unsuitable for her
husband, in which case he was obliged to pay a heavy dowry.
Deuteronomy 22:29 shows that the money was given the father,
but even so, this was no compensation to the father because
of the loss of his daughter's services (as with our law),
but it was paid on behalf of the girl; and she may not have
suffered in the least as to interruption of service, since
motherhood did not enter into the case as a factor, Exodus
22: 16,17.
583. Furthermore, if a man enticed a young woman
betrothed to another, the offense ranked as adultery (in our
sense of the word), and both were stoned, if there was
ground to think her guilty as well as the man (Deuteronomy
22:23-24). Scarcely any room was left, under the Mosaic
statutes, for the problem of illegitimacy to arise at all.
We must note here the difference made in the case of these
offenses, whether committed by young men or young women. No
punishment for the offense followed in her case, unless it
was an instance in which the evidence was strong that she
was wilfully implicated in the offense, and was at
the same time betrothed to another. In his case, marriage
was compulsory, whether there was issue or not, or, if not
marriage because the father rejected him, then a heavy fine.
Moses was no sentimentalist, to listen to pleas on the man’s
part, that he was an “innocent victim” of seduction. He was
more scientific than in our day, when the fact is so
frequently overlooked that the male offender cannot be an
offender excepting wilfully; whereas there is often room for
doubt as to the wilfulness of the young woman, when, at the
same time she has no means of establishing her innocence.
584. Deuteronomy 22:13-21 has given rise to much
perplexity among women, and if the 'tokens' were really such
as they are generally thought to be,¾natural
tokens,¾then
the statute must be cruel, since no proof, either of
innocence or guilt, can be established on such evidence [I
speak now confidently, from the standpoint of a member of
the medical profession]. Whiston's note on this passage, in
his translation of Josephus (Antiquities, Book IV:
CH. VIII), is illuminating, and we will quote it in part:
"These tokens . . . seem to be very different from what our
later interpreters suppose. They appear to have been such
close linen garments as were never put off virgins, after a
certain age, till they were married, but before witnesses (2
Samuel 13:18)."
585. But there are certain statutes of Moses, which show
that the "cart" had made slow progress up the hill, judging
by the spot at which the "brake" was placed. One of these is
the Trial of Jealousy, in the 5th chapter of Numbers. We are
better able to comprehend the reason for this jealous
espionage of their wives by husbands, from our knowledge of
the tyrannical means by which the matriarchy had been
supplanted by a later patriarchy, which prevailed in Moses'
time. Moses' age was much closer to that transition period
between matriarchy and patriarchy than our own, for we have
frequent signs, in the Bible, not only of the matriarchal
period but of the transition stage. Here is a remnant of
that transition stage. Moses was compelled to recognize this
jealousy, for men considered it right, even when there was
no evidence upon which it was based.
586. Perhaps it is not in place to say that there could
be no result from drinking "holy water" mixed with dust of
the Tabernacle floor. But this much we can confidently say:
No woman could be punished by this method short of a
divine miracle of judgment. The procedure was
calculated, (1) To extort, by fright, a confession of guilt,
if the woman were really guilty. (2) To frighten women from
the offense of committing adultery. (3) To compel a husband
to cease his cruel jealousy; for if the wife passed
successfully through the ordeal, humiliation would be his
part, and odium would fall upon him if he continued to be
jealous; whereas, if no means had been provided for
terminating his suspicions, his wife might have suffered for
an indefinite period of time. Vastly superior to this was
the decree of Jesus Christ, which declared that the man must
first be able to declare his own innocence before proceeding
to condemn a woman for the sin of unchastity (John 8:7). And
Moses' Trial of Jealousy, as we have shown (Lesson 68,
Additional Note), was vastly superior to Hammurabi's Law.
587. Another statute has mournful interest to women.
The first wars were waged for the capture of women.
Sociologists so declare, and the fourth and sixth chapters
of Genesis are calculated to confirm this view. In entering
the Promised Land, the Children of Israel were positively
forbidden to intermarry with certain tribes, Deuteronomy
7:3. But there was an exception: in other cases the warrior
could make a wife of a female captive (Deuteronomy
21:10-14). But the historical setting will enable us to
understand that Moses might not have been able to put the
ideal any higher than this, without the revolt of his
warriors, because men warriors, from early times, had been
accustomed to reckon women as booty (Judges 5:30). Moses
softens the lot of the captive woman as much as he can. She
shall have a month, before marriage, "to bewail her
father and her mother," well provided for, under the
roof of her captor. And afterwards, if he divorces her, he
shall emancipate her, as well; he may not reduce her to
slavery. The picture is dark enough, at best.
588. The scribes and Pharisees, of Christ's time
congratulated themselves if they lived up to the precepts of
Moses. Is it any wonder Christ said: "Except your
righteousness exceed the righteousness of the scribes and
Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of
heaven" (Matthew 5:20)? Their school of ethics allowed
one a diploma of graduation at the point at which Pharisees
ought only to have allowed one to matriculate. Let us take
this warning to ourselves. Old Testament morality will not
meet the requirements of Jesus Christ for our day. |