was a true one, for God had given it ; but it waa not (/le true and therefore not the final one, for its priesthood was im|ierfect. Everything about it was imperfect. The priests themselves were im- perfect. They were mortal men, and could not continup becau.se of deatli. They were sinful men, too, and had to otl'er for their own sins before they could oiler for those of the people. The sanctuary was imperfect, a (£7101' Kodp^iKbv, not the real <lwell- ing-place of God. The sacrifices were imperfect ; tlie blood of buUs and goats and other animals, whatever its virtue, could not make the worshin- pers perfect touching the conscience ; that is, could not bring them to the desired goal of a fearless jieace toward God. The very repetition of the sacrifices showed that the work of removing sin had not really and once for all been achieved. And, finally, the access to God was imperfect. The priests had no access at all into the Holiest Place, and when the high priest did enter on one day in the year it was no abiding entrance ; the communion of the people with God, which his presence there symbol- ized, was lost, it might be said, as soon as won ; he came out from the shrine and the veil closed behind him, ' the Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all had not Vet teen made manifest.' Everything in the old religion had im- perfection written upon it — the imperfection in- volved in the nature of its priests (oiSkv yap ere- Xeiojaev 6 fd^os, He 7'^).
It is in contrast with this that Christ's priest- hood is set forth. Christianity is the perfect and final religion, because Christ is the perfect priest. An OT foundation for this doctrine is found in Ps 110*, where the Messiah is aildressed bv God as ' a priest for ever, after the order of Melchize- dek.' Perhaps one should call it rather a point of attachment than a foundation, for though it probably served the writer's |)urpose in arresting the attention of his readers, the ideas whicJi he connects with the priesthood of Christ are not, strictly sneaking, derived frum it. The order of Melcliizedek is contrasted with that of Aaron : the two orders exclude each otlier. Christ is not a priest after the order of Aaron upon earth, and afterwards, in heaven, a priest after the order of Melchizedek : being what He is, the Son of God, in the sense understood in this Epistle, His priesthood can be of the Melchizedek order alone. In Him and through His ministry a fellowship with God has been realized on the behalf of men which is [lerfect and which abides. The word which is used to express this in the Epistle is a/aVios. Inasmuch as He is the true priest, Christ's blood is the blood of an eternal covenant. He oU'ered Himself through eternal spirit. He has become the autljor of eternal salvation, has ob- tained eternal rodeiuption. and en.ables men to get hold of the eternal inheritance (5" 9''^- '■'• " KS*"). All these are ways of indicating the perfection and finality of His priesthood, i.e. of His function to mediate between the holy God and sinful men, and to realize in Himself, and enable sinful men to realize, a complete and abiding fellowship with God.
Among the aspects or constituents of Christ's priesthood on which the writer lays emphasis .are these. (1) His communion. He 5'. God nmst appoint the priest, for he is to be the minister of His grace. No man can take this honour to him- self. The writer seems to find the Divine commis- sion in the psalms quoted in He 5"- (Ps 2' 110*), but he connects these imniediatel}' in v."- with what seems to be a reference to the agony in (Jethsemane, as though it were there, historically, that Jesus received this hi<;h and hard calling. (2) His preparation. This is a jioint on which great stress is put. To be a merciful and trust- worthy high priest (2"), it is necessary that he
PEIi:ST IN" XT
PRIKST IN NT
99