“Called of God dpyiepets.” Verse 6, he renders the Hebrew 13 by iepedg only, “apriest.” And it signifies no more. For where the high priest in a note of distinction is in- tended, they call him 1737 }75, the “great” or “high priest;”
*Apyispeds.
of God.—Conybeare and Howson. Genannt.—De Wette. Craik justly remarks, * The term ought to be distinguished from ~«Aovuevos, verse 4. It literally sig. nifies * addressed,’ and refers to the form of the declaration in Ps. cx.” —Ep,
542 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. V.
LE $3 Ia 66
“sacerdos magnus,” “summus;” “ pontifex,” “pontifex summus.” But the whole nature, right, and privilege of the office, belonged unto any one as apriest. Every high priest was a priest absolutely ; but every priest was not a high priest also. Aaron and his sons were together separated unto the same office of the priesthood, Exod, xxviii. 1; but some duties in the execution of the office were peculiarly reserved unto him who was chief and singular. And because he who was singular had thus sundry pre-eminences above other priests, and also that the discharge of some duties, and offering of some sacrifices, as that of the great atonement, were committed unto him alone, which were peculiarly typical of the sacerdotal actions of Christ; as he is called jepeds, a “priest” absolutely, as being invested in the real office of the priesthood, so is he termed dpysepeds by our apostle, the “ chief” or “high priest,” not because there were any other in or of the same order with himself, but because all the pre-eminences of the priesthood were in him alone, and he really answered what was typed out by the singular actings of the Aaroni- cal high priest.
He was thus “called an high’ priest xar& rjy ré&w Merruoedéxn, —
Ker sy according to the order of Melchisedec.” This is not a réiv Meagi- limitation of his priesthood to a certain order, but a re- osdix. ference unto that priesthood whereby his was most emi- nently prefigured. And there are two things intended herein by the apostle. First, A concession that he was not a high priest according unto the constitution, law, and order of the Aaronical priesthood. And this he doth not only grant here, but elsewhere positively asserts, chap. viii. 4; yea, and proves at large that it was impossible he should be so, and that if he had been so, his priesthood would not have been of advantage unto the church, chap. vii. 11-14, etc. He was neither called as they were, nor came to his office as they did, nor was con- firmed in it by the same means, nor had right unto it by the law, nor was his work the same with theirs. Secondly, That there was a priest- hood antecedent unto and diverse from that of Aaron, appointed of God to represent the way and manner how he would call the Lord Christ unto his office, as also the nature of his person in the discharge thereof, in what is affirmed and what is concealed concerning him who singly and alone was vested with that office; that is, Melchisedec. Look in what manner and by what means he became a priest; by the same, with other peculiar excellencies and pre-eminencies added thereunto, was Christ also called, so as that he may be said, and is termed of God, a priest after his order or manner of appointment. For as he, without ceremony, without sacrifice, without visible consecration, without “the law of a carnal commandment,” was constituted a high priest, so was Christ also, by the immediate word of the Father, saying unto him, “Thou art my Son, a priest for ever,” or “ after
VER, 10.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 543
the power of an endless life.’ And in this sense is he called “a priest after the order of Melchisedec.”
I have elsewhere evinced the corruption of the Targum on Ps.
ex, 4, whence these words are taken; also the malice of some of the late Jewish masters, who would have Melchisedec to be there called #32, a “priest” improperly, as David’s sons were said to be 0'973,— that is, “princes.” So the Targum, “Thou art a great prince.” But the expression here used by the psalmist is taken directly from Gen. xiv. 18, iey ON? j> 837), And he was a priest of” (or “ unto”) “ the most high God.” Here none of the Jews themselves are so profligate as to pretend that a prince is intended,—a prince to the most high God! It is nothing, therefore, but that obstinacy which is the effect of their unbelief, which casts them on the shift of this evasion. Some observations do ensue :— _ Obs. I. God was pleased to put a signal honour upon the person and office of Melchisedec, that in them there should be an early and excellent representation made of the person and priesthood of Jesus Christ.
I am not here to inquire who this Melchisedec was, nor wherein the nature of his priesthood did consist. I shall do it elsewhere. Here he is reflected on as an eminent type of Christ in his office. And in how many particulars the resemblance between them did consist, our apostle doth afterwards declare. In the meantime we may observe, in general, 1. That all the real honour which God did unto any persons under the old testament, it was in order unto the pre- figuring of Christ, “that in allthings he might have the pre-eminence.” Other reason of the great exaltation of Melchisedec in the church, even above Abraham, the father of the faithful, there was none. 2. He was the only type of the person of Christ that ever was in the world. Others were types of the Lord Christ in the execution of his office, but none but he were ever types of his person. For being introduced “ without father, without mother, having neither beginning of days nor end of life,” he was “ made like unto the Son of God,” and represented his person, which none other did. 3. He was the first personal type of Christ in the world, After him there were others; as Isaac and Aaron, Joshua, David, and Solomon; but he was the first, and therefore the most eminent. 4, He was a type of Christ in these two great offices of a king and a priest; which none but he ever was. 5. The circumstances of his name, and the place of his reign, whence he was a “ king of righteousness and peace,” do most gloriously represent the whole effect of the mediation of Christ; all which may be spoken to afterwards. Now the exaltation of any one in the like kind is a mere act of sovereign grace in God. He might so honour whom he pleased. Hence is Melchisedec intro- duced without the consideration of any circumstances of prerogative