[There] are two opinions. To some [it] seems [that] the direct dominion (as the Jurisconsults speak) of the Levitic cities remained always in the power of either the tribes or the tribesmen who had given them; but [that] only the use and habitation of them was granted to the Levites. Others say [that] the Levites were absolute Owners. By applying one distinction, the dispute seems able to be settled. In the cities, besides the houses and their habitation, [there] are certain public and private conveniences
(col. 1245)
[…continued from col. 1244.] For [there] are Magistracies, dignities, honors. [There] are sometimes tolls, taxes, [and] some profitable transactions which the opportunity of the place supplies — by reason of fields, vineyards, olive-groves, rivers, metals [mines], and other such [things]. The Levites, therefore: First: as to the houses, and their use and fruit, [they] were absolute owners in every way — because, like the rest of the Jews, [they] could sell these; and yet, before those [others], [they could], whenever [it] pleased, redeem them, by God’s privilege (Lev. 25:32): “The houses of the Levites, which are in the cities, can always be redeemed, because the houses of the Levites are, among the children of Israel, for [as] possessions.” Secondly: of the suburbs too the Levites were absolute Owners, if [compared] in relation to men — because in them [they] depended on no [human] man; but if [the matter] be referred to God, [they] were forbidden to sell those [suburbs] (Lev. 25:33): “Let the suburbs of the Levites not be sold, because [it] is an everlasting possession.” Thirdly: the administration of the Magistracies, and the public honors and dignities of the same [cities], belonged, in those cities, to the Levites. This is understood from the life [work] of the historian Josephus, and from reason. For [it] was not fitting that, in these sacred cities — which were [those] of the Priests and of God’s ministers — the Commonwealth [government] should be in the power of any others, and [that] the members indeed be sacred, but the head profane. Fourthly: concerning the other conveniences which — [being] joined with the nature and opportunity of the place — cultivation, labor, and industry could bring forth and supply, Tostatus [speaks] thus briefly (Num. 35, q. 2): “When some city was given to the Levites, the fields and country[-lands] of that city were not given, because the cities were given for dwelling only, and not simply [absolutely]. But [it] is said, that if in those cities [there] were any revenues — such as of tolls, or of other kinds — [they] did not pertain to the Levites, but to the tribe which had given such a city; even if within the city [there] were any stone-quarries, or gold-mines, or mines of other metals, or the like — those did not pertain to the Levites, but to those who had given the city. Also the whole territory of each city — of vineyards, fields, and vine-plots — did not pertain to the Levites, but to those giving the city, except the 1000 paces around the city on each side.” Thus he [Tostatus]. And in that way Caleb — concerning whom here (v. 11 & 12) — gave to the Levites Hebron, which he had received into his [own] dominion (above, ch. 14), as to the city, and the suburbs adjacent to it; and Joshua approved and confirmed that donation by his [own] judgment, [and that] of the dividers; whence [Caleb] is also said to have “donated” that [Hebron]. But the fields, and the villages or hamlets, and the villages which pertained to Hebron, the same Caleb retained for himself, by the law of this donation. And because Joshua, with the whole Sanhedrin of the dividers, likewise approved and confirmed this very [thing], [Joshua] is said to have given these fields and villages to Caleb (v. 12). Yet [it] could be asked: “whether the Levites could in no way possess immovable goods [real estate]?” That [they] could not, St. Cyril thinks (bk. 13 On Adoration). But [that they] could, Abulensis proves (Lev. 27, q. 67), and I indicated [it] (ch. 5 of The Joshuan Priests, num. 60) — where the example of Josephus could have been added, who, although he was a Priest, nevertheless writes in [his] Life [that] he had fields in the Jerusalem countryside, and received others afterward from Titus in the great plain (bk. 5 of the Jewish War, ch. 15).