Circumcision of flesh everlasting covenant?

[po18guy]

Things are not always what they seem. Here (in two posts, due to forum limitations) is the commentary from the Rev. George Leo Haydock, the standard, classic Catholic commentary on the scriptures:

Ver. 7. Perpetual; that shall last as long as they remain obedient. M. v. 9.
Ver. 11. You shall, either by yourselves, or by the ministry of others, with respect to infants. That part of the body was chosen, because the effects of sin first appeared there; and because a part of the Hebrews’ creed was, that Christ should be born of the family of Abraham. — A sign that Abraham had agreed to the covenant with God, and to be a memorial of his faith and justice, Rom. iv. 2.; to distinguish also the faithful from infidels; to purge away original sin in male children, eight days old; and to be a figure of baptism. M. T. — God always appoints some sign of his covenants, as Jesus Christ instituted the holy sacrament of his body and blood, under exterior appearances, to assure us of his new alliance with Christians. C. — The sacraments of the old law caused grace, only by means of faith in the Redeemer, of which they were signs. S. Aug. de Nupt. ii. c. ult. In this sense, the holy fathers assert, that circumcision remitted original sin to those who could receive it; though some think, it was only a bare sign or distinctive mark of the Jews. C. — It is far beneath our baptism, which is more easy, general and efficacious; as the Christian sacraments are not like those of Moses, weak and needy elements. Gal. iv. 9. S. Aug. ep. 158, ad Jan. Ps. 73, &c. W.
Ver. 12. Days, when he will be able to bear the pain without danger. This might be deferred for a just reason, as it was in the desert. Jos. v. 6. In this case people might be saved, as younger children and all females might, by the application of the remedies used in the law of nature, sacrifice, the faith of parents, &c. M. — Of your stock, and, being arrived at years of discretion, is desirous of enjoying your privileges. Some think, that slaves had no choice left; but servants, and people who had a mind to live in the country, were not bound to submit to this rite against their will. It is even more probable, that none were under this obligation, except Abraham and his posterity by Isaac. His other children adopted it in part, but not with the exactitude of the Jews. C.
(cont.)

 

[po18guy]

(cont. from first post)

Ver. 14. Circumcised. Sept. adds, “on the eighth day,” with the Sam. and many Latin copies. C. — Destroyed, &c. lose the privileges of the Hebrews, or be put to death, when he grows up and does not supply this defect. S. Aug. reading on the eighth day, concluded that as a child of that age, could not, with reason, be put to death for an offense, in which he could have no share, the destruction here threatened is that of the soul, for transgression, in Adam, the original covenant, and dying in that state unclean, must be excluded from heaven, as people are now who die unbaptized. This difficult passage may, however, be explained as if the threat regarded the negligent parents. “He who shall not circumcise…shall be destroyed.” Syr. or, as the Heb. may be rendered, “the male that doth not,” &c.; in which case, he becomes guilty of a transgression, when he is arrived at the years sufficient to understand his duty, and does not fulfil it. W.

 

[SPBlitz]

Unintentional humor?
Dominus vobiscum

I wish I was clever enough to say that was intentional, haha.

 

[Dovekin]

Genesis 17:9-14 talks about circumcision of the flesh being “an everlasting covenant” “throughout” all of Abraham’s descendants, and while the Christian argument is about Jesus fulfilling it, it’s verse 14 that I find to be tricky:

"Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.” [RSVCE]

This is the issue under discussion, circumcision being an everlasting covenant. St Paul is discussing this eternal covenant with his imagery of the olive tree and its branches. The natural branches are marked by the sign of circumcision, while the wild branches are marked by baptism. But what we are discussing is the eternal covenants.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I’m not sure, but I think he was making a pun. Circumcision and περιτομη peritome mean ‘to cut around or about an object’.

Oooh…okay that’s clever. I didn’t quite get it, apologies

 

[Agnus-Dei]

That part of the body was chosen, because the effects of sin first appeared there;

To what is he referring here? What effect of sin?
Dominus vobiscum

 

[filiusromae]

Circumcision is not only a Jewish thing, Muslims also practice circumcision. The majority of European and Asian men are not circumcised.

 

[po18guy]

Circumcision. It was the genitive organ which passed original sin on.

 

[meltzerboy2]

The “Old Covenant” is often called “everlasting” throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. It is not only applicable to circumcision. If you are Christian, however, you believe that the “New Covenant” supersedes the Old because Jesus has fulfilled the ritual, ceremonial laws of the “Old Covenant” through His sacrifice and death. The moral laws still apply. This is the Christian argument, I believe.