(c) Epistle to the Hebreivs. — Unlike St. Paul the writer to the Hebrews presents his doctrine of salva- tion wholly in terms of sacrifice, and thus provides the classical treatment of the significance of sacrifice for apostolic thought. His argument is developed in a running comparison between the sacrifices of the Levitical ritual and the perfect offering pre- sented by Christ in the sacrifice of Himself. The sacrificial institutions associated with the Old Covenant are set forth as types and shadows of the heavenly and eternal reality in which the New Covenant is established in the blood of Christ. The key-word of the Epistle and of the comparison it elaborates is ' better.' The Son whose humanity is perfect, the Mediator of the new and better covenant, is the true High Priest (see art. Priest) (cf. 8"-'' 9""'-)- His constitutive function is to oiler sacrilice (8^). Christ ofl'ers Himself; the nature and effect of this perfect sacrifice are con- trasted with the sacrifices of the Law (8-10'*) ; the contrast culminates in the parallel between the action of the high priest in the Holy of Holies on
SACRIFICE
SACRIFICE
435
the Day of Atonement (Ex '24*''') ami Clirist enter- ing t lie lieavenly places ' tlirouj;li liis own blood' (O""-). The superiority of Christ's sacrilioe is everywhere impressively developed. It was also an oU'erini; in dose (lepenilence upon the love of God : by the ^race of tiod Christ tasted death for every man ('2'') ; it was never spoken of as ' recon- cilini; God.'
Three main truths emerge from the comparison, (i.) The Levitical sncrijices cannot talcr. away sin ; they serve rather to bring to mind the sin they cannot expiate (UP). At its best the Levitical system contemplated the removal of ceremonial faults only, sins of ignorance and inhrmity ( lO'*' ") ; it efi'ected a purilication of the body only. The pathetic failure of the whole sacriticial system touches all the writer's tliouj;ht ; it was morally inefl'ective because it belonged to the lower, sensible world (9" 11^), 'the visible order' of I'hilo and the Alexandrian thinkers. The absoluteness and Knality of Christ's sacrilioe is demonstrated by relating it to the heavenly and eternal realm of reality (S"- 9'-=' 10')— the realm which Philo, in the spirit of Plato's doctrine of archetypal ideas, calls ' tlie intelligible world.' Christ lias entered with His sacrilice into heaven itsidf (9-''') and obtained eternal salvation for us (7'-' 9'-- '* 10'°), having ' through the eternal Spirit ofi'ered himself without blemish unto God' (9'''). It was an otter- ing, on our behalf and as our representative, of a pure and spotless life. The solidarity of Christ with mankind is confidently stated : ' Both he that sanctilieth and they that are sanctified are all of one ; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren ' (2"). The Levitical sacrilices were perpetually repeated, just because they had no real efficacy either objective or subjective (9" lO^'-) ; Christ's sacrifice is made once for all, ' perfecting for ever them that are sanctihed' (?-' 912. 25t. ;8 10'" '^). Christ's sacrifice purged the conscience to serve the living God (9''' 10--), thus dealing with sin ethically and in its deepest seat instead of with its accidental expressions which marked the limits of efficacy in ceremonial sacrihces (9* 10^). The saqrifices of the Law opened no way of spiritual access to the holy presence of God (9') ; by the blood of Jesus a new and living way was dedicated by which men could draw near to Him with spiritual confidence (10""-). Everywhere the writer insists upon the truth that only by better sacrilices than those of the Levitical sj'stem could the heavenly places and the spiritual realities be cleansed and consecrated (T'" O'"- -'"^) ; insuffi- ciency marks all material elements and outward aspects of sacrilice ; indeed, the whole point of the exposition turns upon contrast, not upon congruity. The interpretation of the Epistle which is fre- quently met with, that because its author expounds the Christian salvation in the terminology of sacri- fice its meaning is therefore to be determined throughout by reading it in the light of the Levitical sj'stem, misses entirely the main motive of the writer, which is to mark' the radical differ- ence between the Christian and the Levitical con- ception of sacrifice. The most important fact to be observed is that the author, constrained by the estimate of the Christian values of sacrifice, ethicizes the whole meaning of sacrilice, and ascribes to Christ's ottering of Himself a wholly different nature from that which belongs to the Levitical oblations.
This is specially seen in the way in which the writer deals with (ii. ) the value of the material of Christ's saerifice — His blood. In tlie Levitical system the manipulation of the blood was of supreme importance. Nothing was cleansed with- out its use (9'-"-). The vital moment in the cul- mination of the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement
was the entering of the Holy of Holies by the high priest, bearing with him sacriliiial blood (9"). Christ's sacrificial act was accomplished al.so when He entered into the heavenly place ' through his own blood' (9""') 'to make propitiation lor the sins of the people ' (•!") ; ' he ollered a sacrilice for sins once for all, when he ollereil up himself (7'"; cf. 9»"-^). It is clear that the writer makes distinct use of the conception of substitution. IJut it is important to notice the evidence that some- thing deeper than the literal substitution and the idea of legal transfer of sin which ha<l gained currency in the later Jewish period was in the writer's mind. The value of Clirist's ottering is ethical ; it resides in His will; His blood is pre- sented not simply as the evidence of His death, but as the ottering of His life. It is life, not death, which is the essence of all true sacrifice. Even in the Levitical system the blood constitutes the sacrihce, because 'the blood is the life'(Lv 17"). Christ's offering of Himself includes more than His dying; it is the willing ottering of His life in the perfection of ceaseless filial obedience to the will of God. The writer of this Ejiistle emphasizes this: 'Sacrifices and ott'erings and whole burnt ott'erings and sacrifices for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst [ileasure therein (the which are ofiered according to the law), then hath he said, Lo, I am come to do thy will. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. liy wliich will we have been .sanctified through the ottering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all' (lO""-). This ottering witli wbic-h (iod was well pleased brought hnmanity into a new relation to God. It was a positive ethical and religious valuation of Christ's sacrilice that went beyond its value as merely legal substitution.