right have men to rob the poor of that time which God hath given them? or to sentence a man who only goes to get bread for his children, and in so doing transgresses none of God's commandments, to excommunication or flogging, especially to that severe species of flogging here specified?
The flogging here spoken of is called (
Hebrew characters), "the
flogging of rebellion," and is altogether different from that
merciful punishment prescribed in the law. God says, "And
it shall be, if the wicked man be worthy to be beaten, that
the judge shall cause him to lie down, and to be beaten
before his face, according to his fault by a certain number.
Forty stripes he may give him, and not exceed; lest, if he
should exceed, and beat him above these with many stripes,
then thy brother should seem vile to thee." (Deut. xxv. 2, 3.)
Here, as everywhere else, in the midst of judgment, God
remembers mercy. The Rabbies, never satisfied unless they
can add to, or diminish from, God's commandments, have
reduced the number to thirty-nine, lest they should make any
mistake. But to compensate for this diminution, they have
invented "the flogging of rebellion," which is without number
and without mercy, as may be seen from the following explanation
of the Baal Aruch:—
(Hebrew characters)
"Whosoever transgresses an affirmative commandment, for instance, he was commanded to make a tabernacle, or a lulav, and did not, he is to be beaten until his soul go out, without any consideration of his strength, and without dividing the flogging into three. And, in like manner, whosoever transgresses the words of the wise men, he is to be beaten without number, and without consideration. Why is this called the flogging of rebellion? Because he has rebelled against the words of the law and against the words of the Scribes." (Baal Aruch, in voc.) This, then, is the punishment denounced against those who try to get bread for their children on the second holy day; a punishment invented by the Rabbies themselves, not against the immoral or the irreligious, but against the transgressors of their own commandments. What could have been the spirit, the temper, the religious feeling of such men? Had they any perception of the merciful character of the law, or any resemblance to the compassionate nature of the God of Israel? Can you put any confidence in the religious
