sition of a conniving at imperfection, or a simple pardon of still-existing sin; incompatible too with mere acquittal, in whatever form expressed. It demands nothing less than the 'doing away of sin.’ This is something more than moral, and yet this Rom. vi. 6. alone is final good, in any sense worthy of God, or Heb. i. 14. consistent with the well-being of His new creation.

ἀθέτησις, Heb. ix.

26.

καταργηθῇ,

καταργήσῃ,

The Aaronic ministry

had not touched the evil,

Now the twofold work, both the Divine and the moral, the abolition of sin as an objective evil and the cleansing of the conscience of the sinner, and so reaching Perfection, was the aim no doubt of previous ministries of religion. But the best of those ministries, that of Aaron, had failed to touch the real evil; and this is what the Hebrew converts had now to consider.

Whatever might have been the origin of the old religious rite of Sacrifice, so closely allied with all man's memories of sin and death and suffering, it is stated by the Apostle as a truth which no conscience could dispute, that the blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin h. It seems inconceivable to reason, that those sacrifices, in any form, could tend to man's perfection. The death of a victim and the moral nature of the offerer belong to distinct spheres, the physical and the moral, which have here no natural point of union.

h On the other hand, however, it could not be said that suffering has no moral action on the sufferer; for it has, in some cases at all events. There are those who are elevated by involuntary suffering; and, to a great extent, self-sacrifice elevates also. But then this is the elevation of the victim; and so gives no explanation at all of the old law of sacrifice, either in respect of him who offers, or of the evil to be deprecated.

VII] VIZ. ITS SACRIFICES AND PRIESTHOOD.

man to

233

The Apostle therefore urges in every way on nor led his Jewish converts, that the Aaronic rite had perfection. done and could do nothing for a guilty conscience. 'Perfection by the Levitical priesthood,' he points out, was impossible. The constant repetition of the sacrifices, and the proved uselessness and the real incapacity of the priesthood for its own preservation from sin or from death, were also further conclusive against both the priesthood and sacrifices as permanent institutes for man, or instruments of perfection.

παραβολή.

It does not follow from this (he says) that the old sacrifices and the Levitical or the Patriarchal priesthood had been in every respect useless. They were at least a continued 'parable,' showing the ex- Heb. ix. 9. istence of the moral difficulty. Probably they could never have existed, unless they had corresponded with the need of human nature, thus imperfectly expressing itself. It would seem that every priest- The old priesthood hood known among men has borne witness to the testified to fact, that man desires a perfection which he has need. not naturally reached; though priesthoods which he creates for himself could render him no real help; and even in the Levitical priesthood the Apostle says, 'the Holy Ghost signifies this.'

a human

Paul means

hood.'

We come then to the question, What Diviner as- What S. sistance for destroying sin and gaining perfection by Priestdoes the Gospel bring? what kind of Priesthood does S. Paul teach? For he does not conclude from the fact, that the Levitical law 'made nothing perfect,' since by the priesthood of that law 'there was

χρεία. Heb. vii.

II.

Heb. vii. 7.

Heb. v. 1.

He challenges

attention

to it.

no perfection' for man, that therefore all priesthood is abolished; but just the reverse. He implies a real necessity that another priest should arise,' distinct from the order of Aaron.' If we are to have moral perfection, the Apostle affirms that we must have a real and effectual priesthood for man.

He declines at present to dwell much on the details of the worship carried on by priests; for it is the principle he is concerned with; his object being ethical. His chief points as to priesthood are set forth in the following passages, and they are such as touch the entire doctrine :

First, 'Without contradiction, the less is blessed by the greater' (or better).

Secondly, 'Every high priest is taken from among men, and appointed in behalf of men, in sacred things.' Thirdly, 'No man taketh this honour to himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.'

This is the foundation of all the Apostle's teaching here, and he begs us to attend to it closely, calling on us to 'consider it' with care, both as to the moral object of it, and the first example which he alleges. He will not have it assumed lightly; again and Heb. vii. 4. again he asks us to pause. Consider how great this man was,'-(viz. Melchisedec, to whom he began to refer as 'priest of God;')-'consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus Christ;' Heb. iii. 1. 'looking unto Jesus, the Leader and Perfecter of our faith,.. now seated at the right hand of God, . . consider HIM.'

πηλίκος.

Heb. xii.

3.

Let us attempt thus to consider,' for S. Paul is

founda

235

I; XV. I.

writing as if surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses, Its ethical and with the eyes of all moral agents on him. He tions. had previously dwelt on the vital truth that our probation here proceeds not solitarily, but in communion with others; and that notwithstanding its solemn individuality it exists under a law of mutual influencei. That influence ought of course to be for good. The Rom. xiv. strong should bless the weak'-'the less be blessed of the better.' It is elsewhere compared, in some respects, to the help rendered by 'different members of one body.' This sacred 'influence for good' is ex- Rom. xii. erted, he shows, in many ways, and by some members 1 Cor. xii. more than others; and wherever it exists there is 14-30. the essence of what he calls 'priesthood'-that iepa- Heb. vii. 5. Tela which has power or gifts to bless men who are within its reach.

It is obvious that this is denied by no observer

4-8;

men.

of human nature; and it is also without contra- Its need diction,' that man's social nature is such that this felt by all natural priesthood, this influence for good, is a need. Even so cold a speculator as M. Comte is unable to dispense with his 'priesthood of Humanity,' the examples of which he enrols in his calendar of human greatnessk; and sects the most removed from the Church's teaching, the followers of Fox and Barclay, acknowledge, (with a recent and kindred writer), what they not unfitly call an enthusiasm of Humanity,' which is 'priesthood' under another name'.

It will be replied, however, that this generic

i Lect. IV. p. 121, &c.

k See the Positivist Calendar.

1 See Note H.

Its founda

tions equally broad in

in the

spiritual Israel.

priesthood is far less than would be required by the Apostle's meaning, or by the usual sense of the terms. This is true; but it was necessary to show the natural and moral grounds of priesthood in our social nature; for otherwise we might seem to introduce priesthood as a kind of personal class, as it was in false religions. Indeed even the Divinely sanctioned priesthood of the Jewish people rises on this broad basis, the whole Israelitish nation being addressed as a priesthood-then 'shall ye be to Me a kingdom of priests'—as if with functions of 'Blessing to all nations of the earthm'

In correspondence with this, S. Peter, at the close of his career, speaks of the spiritual Israel as a Israel and royal priesthood,' iepárevua. No doubt under the old covenant the Levitical priesthood was of a specific character; yet it assumed this general truth; for the tribe of Levi was appointed as a substitute for the firstborn of the families of the holy nation, as the firstborn had been for the whole people, who themselves also had been called 'God's son, His firstborn' among all the tribes of the earth. The priesthood of the eldest-born even in the patriarchal times contained a natural recognition of the duty and the power of blessing others, transmitted in the social nature of our race. And it obviates many previous objections, if attention be thus directed to the historical and natural facts of the case. This sacredness of our human nature is not denied, but asserted, by the special priesthood of some; for some, in truth, are ever greater than the rest.

m Lect. V. p. 161, &c.