First, He unto whom all things whatever properly belonging unto @ priest are ascribed, and to whom belongs the description of.a priest in all things essential unto him, such ascription and accommodation being made by the Holy Ghost himself, or persons divinely inspired by him, he is a high priest properly so called. And that things are so with reference unto the priesthood of Christ will appear in the ensuing instances :—
(1.) As to the name itself, this is so ascribed unto him. No man durst have so called him had he not been first called so by the Holy Ghost. And this he is both in the Old Testament and in the New. He is expressly said to be the 173, iepeds, dpysepeds, “a priest,” “an high priest,” without the least intimation on any occasion of impro- priety or a metaphor in the expression. And as he is thus called frequently, so constantly with respect unto those acts and duties which aré proper unto the office of the priesthood. Now, whatever colour may be given unto the metaphorical use of a word or a name where it is but once or rarely used, and that with respect unto such
142 TRUE NATURE OF THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST | EXERC. XXXI.
things as answer not unto the proper signification, there can be none where it is used frequently, and in the same case invariably, and constantly with respect unto things that suit its proper significa- tion.
(2.) The description of a high priest properly so called is given by our apostle, Heb. v. 1: Mé&s yap dpysepeds && cvdpure AaynCorvojnevos, intp dvpirwy xabioraras ra xpbs roy Ocoy, va rpoopépn Oapd re xal Suvolas itp &mapriav. A high priest is one who is taken from among other men by the call and appointment of God, and is appointed in the stead, or on the behalf of other men, in things pertaining to God; that is, to offer unto him gifts and sacrifices for sins. See this de- scription explained in our exposition of the place. Now this is the description of a priest properly so called; for it is the priesthood of Aaron which the apostle intends to express in the first place, as is evident in verse 4. But Aaron was a priest properly so called,—that is, within his own sphere of typicalness; at least he was not so only metaphorically. ‘To say he was, is to destroy the thing itself of the priesthood, and thereby to destroy the metaphor also; for a meta- phor cannot be of nothing. But now whatever is contained in this description, and whatever in answer unto it was found in Aaron, as belonging to his office, and not adhering unto him individually from the infirmity of his person, is all ascribed by the apostle unto Jesus Christ; as is undeniably evinced in our exposition of the place, whereunto I refer the reader. In brief, he was taken by the call and appointment of God from amongst men, Deut. xviii. 18, Heb. vii. 13, 14. He was appointed for men, or to act in their behalf, 1 John ii. 1, 2; and that rd zpdg riv Ody, “in things pertaining to God,” - Heb. vii. 25, 26, ix. 14, 15, particularly “to offer gifts and sacrifices” for sin, chap. viii. 3. If this were all that was required to constitute Aaron a priest properly so called, then the aseription of these things unto Jesus Christ by the Holy Ghost is sufficient to declare him a priest properly so called. And there is strength added unto this argument from what the apostle discourseth concerning the necessity of a call from God unto this office; for he tells us that “no man taketh this honour to himself,”—that is, to be a priest,—“ but he that is called of God, as was Aaron,” chap. v. 4. And thence he shows and proves that Christ did not take this honour unto himself, but in like manner was called of God, verse 5. Now, if not the honour of a real and proper priesthood with respect unto Christ be intended, but- somewhat else, metaphorically so called, then is the apostle’s way of arguing utterly impertinent, as from an instance of one kind arguing the necessity of a thing of another. And it may be replied unto him, that although a man must be called of God unto a priesthood that is real and proper, such as was that of Aaron, yet it doth not
SECT. 2.] EXPLAINED AND VINDICATED. 143
thence follow that such a call is necessary unto that which is so me- taphorically only; for so all believers are made priests unto God, but yet none of them have any especial call from God thereunto.
(8.) The discourse of our apostle, chap. vii. 11-16, gives further evidence unto the same truth: “If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedee, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning the priesthood. And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,” etc. For we may observe,—