nature, have ever taught them the necessity of the expiation of guilt Dy a satisfaction of divine justice, and their own inability and unworthmess to make any adequate atonement, or to secure by their own elforts the favour of God. They have, therefore, ever sought for some one or some class of men to act in their behalf; to do for them what they knew must be done, and that which they were convinced they could not do for themselves. Hence the appoint- ment of priests, who were always regarded as men whose business it was to propitiate God by expiatory sacrifices, by oblations, and by prayers. To say that a priest is merely a teacher of religion is to contradict the universal testimony of history.
2. The sense in which Christ is a priest must be determined by the use of the word and by the nature of the office under the old dispensation. In the Old Testament a priest was a man selected from the people, appointed to act as their mediator, drawing nigh to God in their behalf, whose business it was to offer expiatory sac- rifices, and to make intercession for offenders. The people were not allowed to draw near to God. The High Priest alone could enter within the veil ; and he only with blood which he offered for himself and for the sins of the people. All this was both symbolical and typical. What the Aaronic priests were symbolically, Christ was really. What they in their office and services typified was fulfilled in Him. They were the shadow. He the substance. They taught how sin was to be taken away. He actually removed it. It would be to set the Scriptures at naught, or to adopt prin- ciples of interpretation which would invalidate all their teaching, to deny that Christ is a priest in the Old Testament sense of the term.
3. We have in the New Testament an authoritative definition of the word, and an exhibition of the nature of the office. In He- brews V. 1, it is said, " Every high priest .... is ordained for men (xnrep av6puiTr(ov, for their benefit and in their place), in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins." Here all the ideas above insisted upon are distinctly rec- ognized. A priest is a man appointed for others, to draw near to God, and to offer sacrifices. Such a priest Christ is declared to have been.
4. Christ is not only called a priest in Hebrews, but the Apostle throughout that Epistle proves, (a.) That He had all the qualifica- tions for the office. (6.) That He was appointed by God. (<?.) That He was a priest of a higher order than Aaron, (tf.) That his priesthood superseded all others, (e.) That He performed all the functions of the office, — mediation, sacrifice, and intercession.
Toi.. n. ao
466 PART m. ch. VI.— priestly office.
(/.) That such was the efficacy of his sacrifice that it needs not to be repeated. By the one offering of Himself He hath obtained eternal redemption for us.
5. The effects or benefits secured by the work of Christ are those which flow from the exercise of the priestly office in our behalf. Those benefits are, (a.) Expiation of our guilt ; (5.) The propitia- tion of God ; and (c.) Our consequent reconciliation with Him, whence flow all the subjective blessings of spiritual and eternal life. These are benefits which are not secured by teaching, by moral in- fluence, by example, or by any inward change wrought in us. Christ, therefore, is truly a priest in the full Scriptural sense of the term.
§ 2. Christ our only Priest.
This follows from the nature and design of the office. (1.) No man, save the Lord Jesus Christ, has liberty of access unto God. All other men, being sinners, need some one to approach God on their behalf. (2.) No other sacrifice than his could take away sin. (3.) It is only thi'ough Him that God is propitious to sinful men ; and (4.) It is only through Him that the benefits which flow from the favour of God are conveyed to his people.
The priests of the Old Testament were, as before remarked, only symbols and types of the true priesthood of Christ. Their sacrifices could not purify the conscience from the sense of sin They availed only to the purifying of the flesh. They secured reconciliation with God only so far as they were regarded as repre- senting the real sacrifice of Christ as the object of faith and ground of confidence. Hence, as the Apostle teaches, they were offered continually, because, being ineffectual in themselves, the people needed to be constantly reminded of their guilt and of their need of the more effectual sacrifice predicted in their Scriptures.
If the Old Testament priests were not really priests, except typically, much less are ministers of the gospel. When among Protestants any class of ministers are called priests, the word is the substitute for presbyter, for which it is constantly interchanged. It stands for Trpco-^urcpos and not for Upevs. (It is defined, Greek, -Trpicrfivrepo';, elder ; Latin, presbyter ; Spanish, presbitero ; French, pretre ; Anglo Saxon, preost ; Dutch and German, priester ; Dan- ish, praest.) Among Romanists it is not so. With them the min- ister is really a priest. (1.) Because he mediates between God and the people. (2.) Because he assumes to offer propitiatory sacrifices. (3.) Because in absolution he effectually and authori- tatively intercedes, rendering the sacrifice for sin effectual in its