not different to Aaron, but better; he was all that Aaron was, but he was more. We may learn from this ancient king-priest in what this "more" con8isted. 1. Christ's priesthood is universal. Aaron's was for a limited circle-the seed of Abraham • btit Melchizedek represented e. priesthood which had a world-wide aspect existin"' two thousand years before Aaron. Abel, Noah, Job, were priests of that order: So Christ is for all who will. His gospel is glad tidings, not for a few, nor for a. section of tho Church, nor for certain types of Christian character, but for all people. 2. Christ' 8 priesthood is continuous. It is not meant that Melchizedek had no end of days but that is true of him as far as the history is concerned. We do not read that he di;d or that his priesthood terminated; nnd this serves to show the contrast between a. c~n- tinuous priesthood and one which, like the Aaronic, was continually chan"'in" • not begun till thirty years of age, nor continued after fifty, and only exercisell at p~;ts of the year. From the first, Jesus made intercession for the transgressors (" the Lamb slain before," etc.), and ever liveth for this. We are always sure of him. He never sleeps, nor forgets, nor is weary, nor gives place to another. 3. Christ's priesthood is royal. Aaron was only priest; Levi was king. Melchizedek was both. So Jesus, even 011 the cross most truly fulfilling his priestly work, was "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews," a Priest upon his throne. A priest or a king could never satisfy us. We need both-priestly sympathy and the resources of royalty; the law of the king proceeding from the love of the priest. Christ fulfils his priesthood royally ; he is no vain friend to sinful man. Ch-rist fulfils his l,ingship mediatorially, holding all his power on behalf of his redemptive work. JU. OBSERVE SOME OF THE INCIDE:!ITAL LESSONS WHICH A COMPARISON OP CIIRIST'S PRIESTHOOD WITH THAT OF MELOHIZEDEK SUGGESTS. 1. That righteousness and peace are the rBSults of his priestly work. "Melchizedek "-king of righteousness; "King of Salem "-king of peace. Highteousness and peace are the end of the atoning, interced- ing work of the Son of God. 2. That he has a right to the priest's portion from his Church. 'l'he Jewish priesthood had a right to tithes from (not those who dissented from them, not idolaters, but) the sacred nation, but there was no such enactment bind- ing on Abraham; his was a free~will offering. Christ has a. right to our offerings-and "how much owest thou? "-but he only accepts the free offerings of a. ~atcfol heart. 3. That Christ's priestly benediction is granted to his weary people. The great Prie:;t not simply goes to God for us in intercession, but come8 forth from Goe.I to us iu benediction. Christ is ever doing for us what Melchizedek did for Abraham when he c:ame forth to greet him in his weariness with bread and wine.-C. N.
Vers. 11-25.-.Viirther proofs of the superiority of Christ's priesthood involved in the symbol of Melchizedek. Note: 'l'he word "Law" in vers. 11, 12, 19 must not be understood to refer to the Jewish 8ystem, but simply to the code of regulations by which the priesthood was appointed. The apostle is thinking throughout the chapter, not of the Jewish dispensation, but of the priesthood. The expression," weak and unprofitable," does not imply that there was failure in God's former method. The regulations about the Jewish priesthood were intende1l to be" weak and unprofitable;" that was their benefit. Only thus could they lead on to tho heavenly things they foreshadowed. J. CoNSIDEB THE PROOFS IN THIS PASSAGE OF THE SUPERIORITY OF CHRIST'S PRIEST- HOOD, They are all based on Ps. ex. 4. 1. The Divine appointment of a second priest- hood by a different mode proves its superiority to the forn;er. (Vers. 11-18.) Their Scriptures declared that the Messia.h did come from a different tribe to .Aaron, and wa.s appointed Priest on a. different principle; not by a. mere physical arraogemcnt-sonsliip to another, a "carni\l commandment," or regulation1 but by his own inherent life. Since God could not remo\'e what was perfect, or supersede a good a~raogeme_nt by_ a worse, that which nppenrcd to tnke the place of the old was necessarily supenur to it. 2. The greater solemnity of the appointment of this second priesthood _proves -its superiority to the former. , (Vers. 20-22.) Aaron and his sons were nppomt~d by a. simple revelation of the Divine will (Exod. x.xviii. 1). The terms of the nppomtmeut of Jesus are-" 'l'he Lord aware, and will not repent." When God purposeJ what was not to change he confirmed it by an oath, and probably th! Jews understood that well. God is" never repreHented in Scripture as swearing to anything but what is fixed auJ ms THE EPISTLE 'l'O 'l'HE HEBREWS.