Circumcision, then, as practised by the Gentiles, was simply an expedient to promote health, facilita^ ting cleanliness, and preventing certain painful afflic- tions, such as that of the gonorrkaa $puria (from phy^ monsy or stricture), and especially the dvOpa^, or "carbuncle," to which, in hot climates, men are sub- ject (Josephus, cont, Apion, ii, 13 ; Niebuhr, De VAra- hvty ch. xix), or an unusual prolongation of the part in question (Thevenot, i, 68 ; Haquet, in Yoigt's Mogaoi, furPhy$, vi, 443 ; but see Danz, in Baldinger's Magaz, /Ur Aerzte, xiv, 416 sq.). In so far as it served this end, the Irsaelites had, of course, the benefit of it; but that this formed the reason and design of its appoint- ment by God, though asserted by some men of learn- ing and ability, seems utterly untenable ; for, in the first place, this opinion is without the slightest support frrom Scripture; often as the subject is referred to there, we find no hint as to this being the purpose of the observance; 2dly, This hypothesis is quite op- posed to the account given by Moses of the introduo- tion of the rite among the Israelites ; Sdly, It is absurd to suppose that a mere prophylactic usage should by God be elevated to the solemnity of a religious ordi- nance ; 4thly, Whatever advantages in a hygienic re- spect might accrue'frt>m the practice, these were con- fined to individuals ; circumcision is not necessary for health to men generally in hot climates (Niebuhr, loc. cit.) ; and therefore to oblige the whole male commu- nity to undergo this process in infancy for purposes of health would have been to act as unwise a part as if it had been enjoined that every one should lose a limb, because it was possible that some one might contract severe disease in that limb if allowed to remain ; and, 6thly, If circumcision was a mere hygienic precau- tion, why should it have been abolished by Christian- ity? why should the apostles have held it to be so hostile to Christianity ? and why should the difficulty of becoming a Christian have been increased by the prohibition to those who embraced Christianity of a necessary condition of their chUdren's health ? See Philo, De Circtmcis, in 0pp. ii, 210 sq. ; Ackermann, m Welse's MatenaKenfar GoUeagdartheU (Gera, 1784), i, 60 sq. ; Schulz, Exercitatt. i, ii; Michaelis, OrietU, BiN. xxii, 8 sq. ; Rust, Bandb. d, Ckirurgie, v, 30; Hoffmann, De cctiua fascunditcUis gentis circumcisa (Lips. 1739); Wolfsheimer, De causis fctcunditatis He- brteor, (Hal. 1742) ; Vogel, Dtibia de usu ctrcumcisioms medico (Gott. 1763); Meiners, De circumcie. origine et ccauis (in the CommefU. Soc. Gott, xiv, 207 sq. ; and his Krit, Getch, d. Belig, ii, 473 sq.). On the supposed tendency of the custom to prevent excessive venery (Michadis in Bertholdt's Jotim, iv, 366), especially onanism (Buxtorf, Lex. Chald. col. 112 sq.), see Schnei- der in Henke's Zeitschrift f. StacUtanneUcY, iv, 228. For other reasons, see Photius, ^. 206.
When first appointed by God, cireumcision was ex- pressly set forth as a token of the covenant which God had made with Abraham ; and the apostle tells us that Abraham received '^the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness of that faith which he had, being yet uncircumcised** (Rom. iv, 11); so that to Abra- ham it was not only a sign or token of Qod's covenant, but also an obsignation or certificate that he was in a state of acceptance before he was circumcised. As a Mosaic institution, it was also the sign of the covenant which God made with Israel, which is hence 'called the " covenant of circumcision" (Acts vii, 8). In con- sequence of this, it became the medium of access to the privileges of the covenant, and entailed on all who re- ceived it an obligation to ftilfil the duties which tiie covenant unposed (Rom. Ii, 26 ; iii, 1 ; Gal. v, 8). In a word, it was the token which assured to Abraham
CIRCUMCIBION
852
CIRCUMCISION
and his deseendants the promise of the Messiah (Gen. xvii). It was tbos made a necessary condition of Jewish nationality. Circomcision served also to sep- arate the people of the Jews from tlie rest of tlie na- tions, as a people set apart to God. These were its utes. As respects its meamngy that was symbolical, and the things which it symbolized were two : 1. Con- secration to God ; and, 2. Mental and spiritual purifi- cation (Exod. vi, 12 ; Ley. xix, 25 ; Dent, x, 16 ; xxx, 6; Isa. Hi, 1; Jer. iv, 4; vi, 10; Rom. ii, 26-29; Col. ii, 11, etc Compare Philo, De Circwncinonef Jones^ FigurcUke Language of Scripture^ Lecture v, p. 186). " There was thus involved the concept of oofwecnilioii, and along with this that of reconciliation, in circum- cision ; and it was thereby, as Ewald rightly remarks {AUerih. p. 96), an offering of the body to Jehovah, which, accordbig to the true meaning of all the ofier- ings, as fully developed and raised to their true eleva- tion by the prophets, had to be presented to him as an offering of the soul. Only as this inner offering was perfectly presented could Uie obligation to be a priest- ly kingdom and a holy people be fulfilled'* (Vaihinger in Herzog's Beal-Encyld, ii, 110).— Kitto, s. v.