|
DA, A Biblical
Defense of Catholicism, pp. 69-70:
The theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews is Christ as
our High Priest. As such, the "priestly" verses are very
numerous (for example, 2:17, 3:1, 4:14-16, 5:1-10, 6:20,
7:1-28, 8:1-6, 9:11-15, 24-28, 10:19-22). The teaching here
acquires much more meaning within Catholic Eucharistic
theology, whereas, in evangelical, non-sacramental Protestant
interpretation, it is necessarily "spiritualized" away. For
nearly all Protestants, Jesus Christ is a Priest only insofar
as He dies sacrificially as the "Lamb" and does away with the
Old Testament notion of animal sacrifice. This is not false
but it is a partial truth. Generally speaking, for the
Catholic, there is much more of a sense of the ever-present
Sacrifice of Calvary, due to the nature of the Mass, rather
than considering the Cross a past even alone.
In light of the repeated references in Hebrews to
Melchizedek as the prototype of Christ's priesthood (5:6,10,
6:20, 7:1-3,17,20), it follows that this priesthood is
perpetual (for ever), not one time only. For no one
would say, for example, that Christ is King (present tense) if
in fact He were only King for a short while in the past. This
(Catholic) interpretation is borne out by explicit evidence in
Hebrews 7:24-25:
He holds his
priesthood permanently, because he continues for ever.
Consequently he is able for all time to save those who
draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make
intercession for them.
If Jesus perpetually intercedes for us, why should He
not also permanently present Himself as Sacrifice to
His Father? The connecting word, consequently, appears
to affirm this scenario. The very notion, fundamental to all
strains of Christian theology, that the Cross and the Blood
are efficacious here and now for the redemption of sinners,
presupposes a dimension of "presentness" to the Atonement.
Granting that premise, it only remains to deny that God
could, would, or should truly and actually re-present
this one Sacrifice in the Mass. God certainly can do
this, since He is omnipotent. He wills to do this
because Jesus commanded the observance of the Lord's Supper
(Luke 22:19). Lastly, one can convincingly contend that He
should do this in order to graphically "bring home" to
Christians His Passion, Crucifixion, and Resurrection, and to
impart grace in a real and profound way in Communion. The One
Propitiatory Atonement of Calvary is a past event, but the
appropriation of its spiritual benefits to Christians is
an ongoing process, in which the Mass plays a central role.
The Sacrifice of the Mass, like the Real Presence in
the Eucharist, is an extension of the Incarnation.
Accordingly, there is no rational a priori objection
(under monotheistic premises) to the concept of God
transcending time and space in order to present Himself to His
disciples. Nor is there any denying that the Sacrifice of
Calvary is always present to God the Father and to Jesus
Christ, God the Son. How then, can anyone deny that God could
make the Cross sacramentally present to us as well?
James White,
introductory exegetical comments prior to deeper exegesis of
Hebrews 8:6ff.
The
immediately preceding argument, leading to the key
presentation of the new covenant in Heb. 8:6-13,
flows from the identification of Christ with the
superior priesthood of Melchizedek (Psalm 110:4,
cited in Heb. 7:17, 21), leading to the
description of Christ as the
e;gguoj
(guarantee/guarantor)
of the new covenant, and also bringing the first
use of
krei,ttonoj diaqh,khj,
better covenant, in 7:22, “so much the more
also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better
covenant.” Heb. 7:23-8:5 comprises a
demonstration of the basis for the apologetic
assertion that the new covenant is, in fact, a
better covenant (part and parcel of the
purpose of the letter), one that flows from the
priestly nature of Christ’s work. 7:23-25 proves
this by the contrast of the mortal priests with
the one priest, Jesus Christ; and 7:26-28 does so
in light of the sinfulness of the many priests and
hence their repeated sacrifices versus the
singular sacrifice of the innocent, undefiled
Christ. 8:1-6, then, provides first a summary
statement of the preceding arguments (i.e., our
one high priest has entered into the heavenlies)
and then provides the thesis statement for the
description of the superiority of the new covenant
from Jeremiah 31 with the assertion that Christ
has obtained “a more excellent ministry” than that
of the old priests, that He is the mediator (in
contrast, in context, to Moses, v. 5, Gal. 3:19,
John 1:17) of a “better covenant” enacted on
“better promises.” Some brief comments should be
offered exegetically on these texts.
First, Christ’s role as singular
and never dying high priest, and the resulting
assurance of the perfection of His work, is seen by the
writer as part of the demonstration of why the covenant of
which He is the guarantee is “better” (7:23-25). While our
English translations normally say something like, “The
former priests existed in greater numbers” at 7:23, the
literal reading is simply, “the priests,” contrasting
the plural with the singular “he”
(oi`
vs.
o`)
in v. 24. The work of the many priests is, of necessity,
imperfect, for they are “prevented by death” from “continuing”
or “abiding.” But, in contrast, He “abides forever,” He is no
longer subject to death. Hence, He, unlike the old priests
under the old covenant, holds His priesthood (which has been
shown to be superior in the preceding arguments)
avpara,baton,
permanently, or, in some sources, without successor.
Both translations fit the context, for He never lays aside
this priesthood, hence, it is “permanent” in contrast to the
former priests. But likewise He has no successor in His
office. The entire concept is meant to be in contrast to the
old priests and their inherently temporary nature. As a
result of the permanence of His priestly position,
Christ has an ability the old priests did not possess. He is
able to save. The profundity of the words may deflect
proper attention. The permanence of His life and position as
high priest grants to Him the ability to save. He is active
in saving, and He is capable of so doing. As noted above, the
soteriological content of the superiority of Christ’s work as
high priest and of the new covenant cannot be dismissed
or overlooked. The extent of His salvific work is
noted by the phrase
eivj to. pantele.j,
which can be
translated “forever” in the sense of permanence, or “to
the uttermost” in the sense of completely, similar, in
fact, to avpara,baton
above. Owen
noted the propriety of seeing both senses in the text:
Take the word in the first sense, and the
meaning is, that he will not effect or work out this or that
part of our salvation, do one thing or another that belongs
unto it, and leave what remains unto ourselves or others; but
“he is our Rock, and his work is perfect.” Whatever belongs
unto our entire, complete salvation, he is able to effect it.
The general notion of the most that are called Christians lies
directly against this truth….That this salvation is durable,
perpetual, eternal… and there is nothing hinders but that we
may take the words in such a comprehensive sense as to include
the meaning of both these interpretations. He is able to save
completely as to all parts, fully as to all causes, and for
ever in duration.
Just as the
Father’s will for the Son revealed in John 6:38-39 demands
perfection in His role as Savior, so too here the very
same soteriological perfection and completion is central to
the work of the eternal high priest. This is brought out with
strong force in the rest of the verse, for the author
indicates both the object of the salvific work and the
basis thereof, and both are intensely “priestly”
statements. The singular priest saves “those who draw near to
God through Him.” This clearly harkens back to the people who
drew near in worship to God in the temple, and their
representative, the high priest on the day of atonement.
There is specificity to the salvific work of the
priest. He does not make a general plan of salvation
available, He saves a specific people (cf. Matt.
1:21). And secondly, “He always lives to make intercession
for them” points to the same perfection of the high priest.
His indestructible life means He never lays aside His priestly
role, hence, since the high priest interceded
(evntugca,nein,
Rom 8:34)
for those for whom He offered sacrifice, Christ ever lives to
make intercession for those who draw near to God through Him,
resulting in the perfection of their salvation. The work
of intercession guarantees the salvation of a specific people
in this passage. This is vital to remember as we look at the
key text in Hebrews 8.
Similar
themes appear in 7:26-28, including the perfect character of
the high priest (v. 26), which establishes another element of
His supremacy over the old priests, for He does not have to
offer sacrifice for His own sins, and then the sins of the
people. But here also appears a concept that will be expanded
upon greatly at a later point, for the author says, “because
this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.”
Self-offering is yet another aspect of what sets the
priesthood of Christ apart, for obvious reasons, from the
priesthood of old. The high priest presents the offering in
His own body, a concept expanded upon in chapter nine. But He
did so “once for all.” The sacrifice is a singularity in
time, for the author uses the temporal adverb,
evfa,pax,
to strongly
emphasize this concept. The old priests sacrificed often for
themselves, while Christ offered one sacrifice (Himself) for
the people.
|
