If brethren dwell together, and one of them dies, and has no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry outside unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him as wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her.
All Commentaries on Deuteronomy 25:5 Go To Deuteronomy 25
George Leo Haydock
AD 1849
Together, as the sons of Juda did: (Genesis xxxviii. 8,) though custom (Calmet) and analogy extend this to other brothers, at least to those who live in the promised land, and have the inheritance in common, as appears from the history of Ruth, Ruth i. 13 Noemi supposes that all the sons whom she might have had, would have been under the same obligation towards her daughter-in-law. The Rabbins restrain this law as much as they can, asserting that if the deceased left an adopted or natural child, the brother need not marry his widow, nor was any obliged but the next in age, and not married. St. Justin (q. 132,) teaches the reverse. (Calmet)
Half-brothers were included, (Menochius) and indeed every relation, in order, who, upon the refusal of the next heir, wished to take possession of the deceased person's land, Ruth iv. (Haydock)
The Jews no longer observe this law, as they have not possession of Chanaan. (Cuneus i. 7.)
Fagius asserts that it was neglected after the captivity of Babylon, because the inheritances were confounded. (Calmet)
This, however, does not seem to have been the opinion of those who have undertaken to reconcile the genealogy of our Saviour, given by Sts. Matthew and Luke, by supposing that St. Joseph was the son of Jacob by birth, and of Heli according to the law. (St. Hilary) Africanus says, (Ep. to Aristides) that "Heli dying without issue, Jacob was obliged to marry his widow, by whom he had Joseph, a descendant of Solomon by Jacob, and of Nathan by Heli "as their common mother, Esta, had married successively Mathan and Mel chi, (or rather Mathat) who sprung from those two branches of David's family. (Dupin) (Haydock)
The Athenians followed a similar regulation with respect to orphan young women, whom the next of kin were bound to marry and to endow. The Tartars assert their right to marry the widows of their brethren. The Egyptians did not consider the marriage as real, nor any relationship contracted, in case the woman had no issue, on which principle there was no impediment to prevent the brother from marrying the widow of his brother. On other occasions such contracts were declared illegal, Leviticus xviii. 16. (Calmet)
This was a positive law, (Worthington; Genesis xxxviii.) which admitted of an exception.
