The Priesthood of Christ

The external action must express the true inward feelings of man. If this is not the case the sacrificial action is an empty expression and impotent. It is not possible to go into details concerning the specific origins, rites, motives and meanings of all the categories of sacrifices of Israel. But one needs to be mentioned; the Day of Atonement. The origins of this feast and its provenance are disputed. By the time of Jesus it was of such importance that it was simply described as The Day. The High Priest sacrificed a bull for his own sinfulness and that of his 'house', the line of Aaron.

He carried the blood behind the veil into the Holy of Holies and sprinkled the blood upon the mercy seat. Two goats were brought by the people and lots cast. According to the lots, one goat was sacrificed for the sins of the people. The priest took the blood behind the veil to sprinkle the mercy seat as he had before with the blood of the Bull. Then,in the presence of God, he laid his hands on the other goat to transfer to it the sins of the people. This goat was taken into the desert.

It was God who brought about the transferral of the sins and the expiation of them from the people. Only on this day did anyone go behind the veil into the Holy of Holies. Moreover, it was the exclusive preserve of the High Priest. The thrust of the Letter to the Hebrews is to show that Christ is the supreme High Priest in relation to whom all previous priests and priestly institutions are figures and preparations. The structure of Hebrews shows clearly that it is not a letter, but more likely a lecture or discourse.

At the end, chapter 13, it changes into the style of a letter.

It is conjectured that it is a sermon which has been copied and sent, with a short accompanying note at the end, to the readers. Due to the content of the main body of the work it has been suggested that its readers would be intended to be Jewish Christians but this hypothesis cannot be shown conclusively. Neither can we be certain of the date of its origin. It is before the death of Timothy since he gets a mention 13,23 and it was known by Clement of Rome. It states that the old Covenant is passing away 8,13 but it is not clear whether this means that its rites were still in operation or recently brought to a halt.

Any date between 67AD and 90AD is thought possible. The Central Point of the Discourse [10]. It is in chapters 8 and 9 that we find the high point of the whole discourse. The author writes in 8,1 that the kephalion, the 'head' or 'essence', of the discourse is the type or class of High Priest that we have in Christ. The author then goes on to describe the High Priest's place, his ministry, his sacrifice and the Covenant which results.

These two chapters build on much that has gone before in the letter, so in looking at them in detail it will be necessary to refer back to some previous arguments. The author contrasts what has gone before in the old Covenant and ritual with what is accomplished by Christ by considering in turn:. This is followed by: The level of OT worship. What the author argues here is that the Tent built by Moses, although it was completed according to the pattern and command of God, is necessarily established by man, not God 8,2.

It is, therefore a 'model or reflection' only of the divine realities 8,5a. It is an imperfect copy and on a lower plane [11] which is now surpassed and to be left behind. The author argues to this position by using the texts of the OT itself. By means of an extensive quotation from Jeremiah Jer 31, the author, again using the OT itself, argues that the Old Covenant was defective and is now surpassed. Once again, using descriptions found in the OT, the author argues that it was not only the old Covenant that was defective, but the whole of the ancient cult was ineffective.

He describes the Tent with its two compartments and their furnishings. Then he describes the cultic action which is clearly taken from the liturgy for the Day of Atonement Lev That the outer compartment remains after the sacrifice and that the High Priest can still only enter once a year into the Holy of Holies, according to the text of the OT itself, indicates to the author that even this, the highest instance of the OT cult, does not effect an inner transformation to perfection.

These 'regulations of the flesh' are only until 'the reform is imposed' 9, So the author proceeds to show how Christ brings about a definitive reform of the Tent or Sanctuary and the worship. In so doing, Christ establishes the New Covenant and a level of worship which is in effect the blessing of eternal communion with God. Christ the High Priest has passed through the 'more perfect tent' and entered the 'holy place' carrying with Him 'His own blood' 9, The purpose of the previous 'outer compartment of the tent' was to enable human beings to be prepared and be given a means to enter the divine sanctuary.

The whole organization of priestly worship was based on the idea that it was necessary to be holy in order to approach God. This was understood as passing from the profane level of human life through a transformation which raised the human being to the sacred level, into a relationship with God who is Holy. The OT solution to this problem was to have a series of ritual separations as has been described above.

Christ, to be the perfect High Priest, must be able to mediate between God and humanity.

Priesthood of Melchizedek

This is the concern of the early section of the work: The first part, 1,5 - 2,4 establishes that Christ is the Son of God. The second part, 2, describes how He is brother to mankind. That Christ is 'trustworthy' is explained in 3, It is a greater trustworthiness even than Moses because Christ is trustworthy as a Son. Thus His closeness to God is accepted. That Christ is 'compassionate' is explained in 4,,10 which emphasises that He is one with mankind. Yet this mediation as High Priest is not summed up by having, as it were, a foot in both camps.

The mediation is dynamic and established through the offering by Christ of His very self in the passion and resurrection. Christ becomes the High Priest through the priestly action of offering sacrifice and the acceptance by God of the sacrifice. This is described in 5, Christ is humble towards priesthood and is declared High Priest by God. There is a parallel here with Phil 2, The 'emptying' is present and the subsequent 'raising high', though in this case it is to the High Priestly office.

The key is that the office is a consequence of Christ not glorifying himself through personal ambition, but suffering. This is clear from the verses which immediately follow. Christ offers prayer and entreaty. The word used to express offering is one which is used in contexts of sacrifice, prosenegkas.

The references to loud cries, tears and death evoke the passion. It is as if we are hearing a commentary on the agony in the garden and the cross. In the same verse we read that His prayer is heard.

The offering as sacrifice is given a holy quality by the attitude which accompanies its giving. We read that it is on account of His reverence and holy piety eulabeia 5. For this reason His offering is accepted. Evidently this does not mean that He was preserved from the agony of the passion and the death on the cross. If the offering refers to the passion, endured with holypiety, then the hearing can only refer to the acceptance which was expressed in the resurrection.

This presumes that the offering is acceptable and accepted.

Bible Search

We read that, although being Son, He learnt obedience through suffering. It is not that the Son at some time or other did not obey and had to learn the lesson. The author of the Hebrews has already emphasised that our High Priest is without sin 4, Yet the nature that Christ shares with us 2,11 is wracked by disobedience and in His suffering, human nature learns obedience and in turn is perfected.

These verses confirm that the offering is accepted.

He is made perfect. This is how Christ becomes the source of eternal life and is acclaimed as High Priest of the order of Melchizedek. The key term is teleiotheis. The word, strictly translated, means to make perfect. In the Septuagint this term is used almost exclusively in Exodus and Leviticus and refers to the consecration or 'sacrifice of investiture of a priest'.

The sacrifice described in 5, is accepted as a sacrifice of priestly investiture. Christ, having given Himself in sacrifice, is consecrated through being heard and accepted. We notice a radical change from the OT priesthood. In the OT priesthood the sacrifices are made because of the weakness of the priests and their need to be raised towards God. With Christ, acceptance of the weakness and the closest possible association with humanity is itself the sacrifice.

He is now the source of salvation 'for all who obey Him'. This is in accord with that aspect of priesthood in which the priest is the mediator of the word of God through oracle and teaching the Torah. The people of the old Covenant required the mediation of the priest to communicate God's judgement and will to them. That role now belongs to Christ. He is proclaimed as High Priest of the order of Melchizedek.

As we read in chapter 7, the particular reference here is to the prophecy of Ps ,4 which is seen to be fulfilled in Christ. His priesthood does not depend on human genealogy like that of the members of the tribe of Levi. Melchizedek, who is without ancestry, is presented as a figure of Christ. But here the emphasis is not on the eternal pre-existence of the Son.

Melchizedek and the Priesthood of Christ | Xenos Christian Fellowship

It is the result of sacrifice that the priesthood of Christ is established. As Son and as risen humanity He is priest for ever. His sacrifice is sufficient for ever. As mediator, it is not only that He is truly Son of God and truly incarnate. His humanity has been internally transformed through the sacrifice, so that it was perfected, and through this consecration He has become a High Priest without peer. Since there is a new priesthood established in Christ so there is a new Covenant.

The new priesthood is established by His sacrifice.

Don Stewart :: How Is Jesus' Priesthood Better than That of the Earthly Priests?

In 9,12 this is described as Christ entering the sanctuary carrying His own blood. The only other place in the NT where we find the terms blood and covenant linked together is in the accounts of the institution of the Eucharist. It is here that the references to Christ as 'sacrifice', 'passover' and 'lamb' find their place. A covenant between God and the people is inevitably unequal. It was always initiated through God's free gift and intervention.

It also required blood for two reasons. Blood was seen as necessary for purification, [13] without which man could not approach God. Also, to enter into a covenant at God's invitation required an irreversible event from the side of the people. This could only be through death and the shedding of blood.

Christ's death is seen to link these three elements. It is an expiation for the purification of sins, it establishes the new covenant and it inaugurates a new inheritance. This one act of Christ abolishes the obstacle of sin which prevented the establishment of a genuine covenant. It introduces humanity into a definitive communion with God through perfect mediation. It furthermore reveals the original plan of God for mankind as an inheritance promised but only now fulfilled.

The new level of Worship. The result of this sacrifice, offered and accepted, is a new 'Tent' or Sanctuary. It is not one which is man-made or only modelled on the real one 9,24 , as in the past.

Hebrews 4:14-5:10; 7:1-28

This is the definitive Sanctuary of God. We recall that in the description of the OT sanctuary there are two compartments. The first was a place of preparation and the second was the Holy of Holies. Both of these sections were mere figures which had to disappear. With the coming of Christ and His perfect sacrifice they are abolished. Here we see a direct link with a tradition also in the Gospels. The resurrection is connected with the destruction and the raising up of the Temple. In Jn 2 it is made explicit Jn 2,21 In Mt and Mk the destruction is connected to the glorification of Christ who is set at God's right hand Mt 26, After the death and resurrection of Christ there is no longer need for the 'Tent' or sanctuary because Christ's risen body has taken its place.

He has entered into the very presence of God in eternal and definitive communion. It is through His dead and resurrected human body that the faithful can now enter. Jean Galot develops this interestingly to argue that the erection of this new temple implies a new priesthood. The Letter to the Hebrews goes on to emphasise in the following chapters that the sacrifice of Christ is superior to all the previous sacrifices and surpasses them. This is not intended to be a symbolic or poetic development but one which understands its real effects in the very being of man through its transforming power.

His viewpoint is exactly the opposite: The early Christians did not identify Christ with the priests or high priests of their time. Christ's priesthood has moved into a radically new sphere. It leaves behind the juridical power of the high priestly families in the humility of Christ. Peter in his second Epistle i, 4: In the passage just quoted, St. Thomas also refers to the Epistle to the Colossians i, Therefore Christ as man is priest and mediator and in this respect inferior to God; but it should be borne in mind that even as man he is by no means inferior to the angels, not because of his nature but because of the hypostatic union and his fulness of grace and glory.

Thomas gives three reasons Ilia, q. First, because of his everlasting consecration through the hypostatic union, from which results a completeness of grace and glory that could never be lost. Secondly, because his priesthood has never been superseded by any other, since he intercedes unceasingly on our behalf. Thirdly, because of the consummation of his sacrifice—namely, the unending union of redeemed man with God in the Beatific Vision. This is the eternal treasure conferred on man by the Saviour's sacrifice—everlasting life—and that is why Christ is said to have taken his place "as our high priest, to win us blessings that still lie in the future" Heb.

But Christ is not only a priest: This is of faith, as is evident both from Scripture— "He gave himself up on our behalf, a sacrifice breathing out fragrance as he offered it to God" Ephes. What constitutes the nature of Christ's priesthood? The grace of the hypostatic union according to the opinion of an increasing number of theologians, and this for three reasons. In the first place, it was in virtue of the hypostatic union that Christ was able to offer a sacrifice of infinite worth, which would make satisfaction for sin and merit for us grace and everlasting life.

Secondly, Christ as man is a priest in virtue of his anointing by God, and his original anointing came from the grace of union. Thirdly, it is the same grace in Christ which is responsible for his own sanctification and for the sanctification of others. But the grace which is primarily responsible for Christ's sanctification is the grace of union. Therefore it is the grace of union which is primarily responsible for Christ's sanctification of others. It is important to insist on the fact that Christ was and remains for ever both priest and victim, for it gives us a clear and practical expression of the dignity of his priesthood.

Paul writes in his Epistle to the Ephesians v, 2: Simply because there was no other victim befitting his priesthood. He was the most perfect victim possible, possessing an infinite value, just as the offering of the sacrifice of the cross also possessed an infinite value because of the person of the Word. He was a victim in three different ways: The texts which St. Thomas quotes from the Epistle to the Hebrews are explicit on all these points Ilia, q. Christ certainly did not put himself to death but willingly submitted to the blows of his executioners, although he could have rendered them impotent as he had done previously in the Garden of Gethsemane, when his enemies fell to the ground.

On an earlier occasion he had said John x, The fire which consumed the victim was, according to St. Thomas, the fire of infinite love coming down from heaven. The visible sign of the Father's acceptance of the victim which had been offered to him was the glorious Resurrection and Ascension of Christ.

Notice how the voluntary death of Christ differs from the death of a martyr, since it was a sacrifice in the strict sense of the word. The martyrs submitted to their death willingly, but once the death-blow had been delivered it was no longer within their power to lay down their life or take it up again. Christ on the other hand could have miraculously prevented his death occurring under the fatal blows of his executioners, and this he could have desired if his Father had not given him a command to die on our behalf.

Furthermore not all the martyrs were priests, so the sacrifice they made of their life was not a sacrifice in the strict sense of the word since it was not offered by a priest. Therefore Christ the high priest offered himself as a victim, first of all without the shedding of blood at the Last Supper under the appearances of bread and wine, and then by pouring out his blood on the cross.

It is important to remember, however, that even if the Last Supper had never taken place, Christ's voluntary death on the cross would have been a complete sacrifice and not merely a part of a sacrifice—although Fr. For at the time of the crucifixion there was not only a bloody immolation but also an offering, an offering which was not entirely internal but also externally expressed in the words: The effect of the sacrifice was atonement for sin: Augustine De Trinitate bk.

Albert the Great De Eucharistia dist. The proof of this assertion rests on the definition of priesthood —together with the fact that although Christ's habitual grace could be increased die grace of union could not. The argument can be put briefly as follows—. The degree of excellence belonging to any priesthood depends on the intimacy of union, first between the priest and God; secondly, between the priest and the victim possessing the greater purity and value and which is more completely destroyed; and thirdly, between the priest and the people on whose behalf the sacrifice is offered.

This principle follows naturally from the definition of a priest—the mediator between God and man for the offering of sacrifice. In the first place, a priest must be closely united to God by holiness of life in order to make up for shortcomings in the worship, petition, reparation, and thanksgiving of the faithful.

Secondly, a priesthood possesses a greater degree of excellence if the victim offered in sacrifice possesses greater purity and value in order to express the sinlessness of a contrite heart, and if the victim is more completely destroyed in order to express the total consecration of oneself to God. In the words of Psalm L, Thirdly, the excellence of a priesthood depends on the intimacy of union between priest and people, and also on the number of people with whom the priest is closely united, because the priest in his capacity as man's mediator for offering sacrifice to God has to unite together all die worship, petition, reparation, and thanksgiving of the people into a single raising of his mind to God; that is, so to speak, the soul of the people's prayer.

Consequently a priest in closer union with a greater number of people is a sign of a more perfect priesthood, since the sacrifice he offers gives increased honour to God and its effect is more widespread. John Vianney celebrating Mass for his own people and for the large number of pilgrims. This principle can easily be applied to Christ's priesthood, revealing at once that its splendour could not possibly be surpassed by any other. In the first place, Christ as priest is not only more holy than all other priests but he is holiness itself, since he is the incarnate Word of God.

Also, his holiness as man springs from the uncreated grace of union with the Word, which sanctifies his humanity. In this respect Christ's formal and fundamental holiness is not acquired but innate, is not accidental but substantial, is not created but uncreated. His human priestly actions are theandric since they are the actions of the divine person of the Word, and so possess of their very nature an infinite value—originally for obtaining merit and making satisfaction on our behalf, now for giving adoration and thanks.

Note that the grace which belongs to him as head of the Church is not sufficient for giving his actions that infinite value, since it is created habitual grace. Moreover, Christ is holy by reason of the abundance of his habitual grace and created charity, although it must always be remembered that by the absolute power of God this created habitual grace and charity in Christ could have been increased, whereas the grace of the hypostatic union was as perfect as it could be.

Incidentally, this confirms what has been said already, that it is the grace of union which constitutes the nature of Christ's priesthood. Christ also possessed the chief ministerial power potestas excellentiae of instituting the sacraments and a priesthood which would endure for all time. Therefore, because of his holiness or permanent union with God, Christ's priesthood could not be surpassed, since it would be impossible to create any greater grace than the grace of union—although it is within God's absolute power to create a greater habitual grace and charity than that present in the most holy soul of Christ.

In the second place, Christ's priesthood excels all others by reason of his union with the perfect victim which he offered. We have already stated that Christ is both priest and victim; other victim would have been worthy of his priesthood. And it was not merely his body which was offered as the victim but also his soul which was ready to die with sorrow. The correspondence between the external and internal sacrifice could not have been more perfect, neither would it have been possible for the victim to possess greater purity or value or to undergo greater destruction.

So it was that the sacrifice of Calvary was a perfect holocaust, verifying the words of St. And finally, Christ's priesthood is the most perfect possible because of his union with all Christians—in fact, with men of all generations and of all races who have belonged and must belong to his mystical body, since he died for all men without exception.

The sacrifice of the cross was universal both in time and in place, and from Christ's side the union between himself and the people could not have been more intimate. Paul's teaching on the mystical body of Christ, 1 Cor. The moral influence which Christ exercised over his mystical body by merit and satisfaction while he was here on earth is now continued in heaven by his prayer of intercession: Moreover he is the physical instrumental cause of all the grace we receive Ilia, q.

Therefore, from whatever aspect we view Christ's priesthood —the union between Christ and God, or between Christ and the victim, or between Christ and the people for whom the sacrifice was offered—its supreme perfection is evident.