Verse 24

But this man, because he continueth ever, has an unchangeable Priesthood.

In opposition to what was observed in the Levitical Priests, the contrary is here affirmed of the Lord Christ. And the design of the Apostle is still the same, namely, to evince by all sorts of instances his preeminence as a Priest above them as such also.

1. The person spoken of is expressed by [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. The exceptive conjunction, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] but, answereth to [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] before used, and introduceth the other member of the antithesis. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; Hic, ille, iste; He of whom we speak, namely, Jesus, the Surety of the New Testament. We render it, this man, not improperly; he was the Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. Nor does the calling of him this man, exclude his divine nature; for he was truly a man, though God and man in one Person. And the things here ascribed to him, were wrought in and by the humane nature, though he that wrought them were God also: But He; or this man, who was represented by Melchisedec, of whom we speak.

2. It is affirmed of this person, that he has an unchangeable Priesthood; the ground and reason whereof is assigned, namely, because he continueth ever, which must be first considered.

The sole reason here insisted on by the Apostle, why the Levitical Priests were many, is because they were forbidden by death to continue. It is sufficient therefore on the contrary, to prove the perpetuity of the Priesthood of Christ, that he abideth for ever. For he does not absolutely hereby prove the perpetuity of the Priesthood, but his perpetual uninterrupted administration of it. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉].

This was the faith of the Jews concerning the Messiah, and his office. We have heard, say they, out of the Law, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (John 12:34), that Christ abideth for ever; whereon they could not understand what he told them about his being lifted up by death. And so the word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] signifieth to abide, to continue in any state or condition (John 21:22, 23). And this was that which principally he was typed in by Melchisedec, concerning whom there is no record, as to the beginning of days or end of life, but as to the Scripture description of him he is said to abide a Priest for ever.

It may be said in opposition hereunto, that the Lord Christ died also, and that no less truly and really than did Aaron or any Priest of his order. Therefore it will not hence follow that he had any more an uninterrupted Priesthood than they had.

Some say the Apostle here considers the Priesthood of Christ only after his Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven, after which he dies no more, death has no more power over him. And if we will believe the Socinians, then he first began to be a Priest. This figment I have fully confuted elsewhere. And there is no ground in the context, on which we may conjecture that the Apostle intends the administration of his Priesthood in Heaven only, although he intend that also. For he speaks of his Priesthood as typed by that of Melchisedec, which as we have proved before, respected the whole of his office.

I say therefore that although Christ died, yet he was not forbid by death to abide in his office as they were. He died as a Priest, they died from being Priests. He died as a Priest, because he was also to be a Sacrifice. But he abode and continued not only vested with his office, but in the execution of it in the state of death. Through the indissolubleness of his Person, his soul and body still subsisting in the Person of the Son of God, he was a capable subject of his office. And his being in the state of the dead belonged to the administration of his office, no less than his death itself. So that from the first moment of his being a Priest he abode so always without interruption or intermission. This is the meaning of [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], He in his own Person abideth. Nor does the Apostle say, that he did not die, but only that he abideth always.

3. It followeth from hence, that he has an unchangeable Priesthood. A Priesthood subject to no change or alteration: that cannot pass away. But [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], is sacerdotium successivum, per successionem ab uno alteri traditum. Such a Priesthood as which when one has attained, it abideth not with him but he delivereth over to another, as Aaron did his to Eleazar his Son, or it falls to another by some right or law of succession: A Priesthood that goes from hand to hand. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is a Priesthood that does not pass from one to another. And this the Apostle seems directly to intend, as is evident from the antithesis. The Priests after the order of Aaron were many, and that by reason of death. Therefore it was necessary that their Priesthood should pass from one to another by succession. So that when one received it, he that went before him ceased to be a Priest. And so it was, either the predecessors were taken off by death, or on any other just occasion as it was in the case of Abiathar, who was put from the Priests office by Solomon (1 Kings 2:27). Howbeit our Apostle mentions their going off by death only; because that was the ordinary way, and which was provided for in the Law. With the Lord Christ it was otherwise. He received his Priesthood from none. Although he had sundry types, yet he had no predecessor. And he has none to succeed him, nor can have any added or joined to him in his office. The whole office of the Priesthood of the Covenant, and the entire administration of it are confined to his Person. There are no more that follow him than went before him.

The expositors of the Roman Church are greatly perplexed in the reconciling of this passage of the Apostle to the present Priesthood of their Church. And they may well be so, seeing they are undoubtedly irreconcileable. Some of them say that Peter succeeded to Christ in his Priesthood, as Eleazar did to Aaron; So Ribera: some of them deny that he has any successor properly so called. Successorem non habet, nec ita quisquam Catholicus loquitur, si bene & circumspecte loqui velit; says Estius. But it is openly evident that some of them are not so circumspect as Estius would have them, but do plainly affirm that Peter was Christ's successor. A Lapide indeed affirms that Peter did not succeed to Christ as Eleazar did to Aaron, because Eleazar had the Priesthood in the same degree and dignity with Aaron, and so had not Peter with Christ. But yet that he had the same Priesthood with him, a Priesthood of the same kind, he does not deny.

That which they generally fix upon is, that their Priests have not another Priesthood or offer another Sacrifice, but are Partakers of his Priesthood and minister under him, and so are not his Successors but his Vicars: which I think is the worst composure of this difficulty they could have thought upon. For,

1. This is directly contrary to the words and design of the Apostle. For the Reason he assigns why the Priesthood of Christ does not passe from him to any other, is because he abides himself for ever to discharge the Office of it. Now this excludes all subordination and conjunction; all Vicars as well as Successors, unless we shall suppose that although he does thus abide, yet is he one way or other disabled to discharge his Office.

2. The Successors of Aaron had no more another Priesthood but what he had, than it is pretended that the Roman Priests have no other Priesthood but what Christ had. Nor did they offer any other Sacrifice than what he offered, as these Priests pretend to offer the same Sacrifice that Christ did. So that still the case is the same between Aaron and his Successors, and Christ and his Substitutes.

3. They say that Christ may have Substitutes in his Office though he abide a Priest still, and although the office still continue the same unchangeable. So God in the Government of the world makes use of Judges and Magistrates, yet is himself the Supreme Rector of all. But this Pretence is vain also. For they do not substitute their Priests to him, in that which he continueth to do himself, but in that which he does not, which he did indeed and as a Priest ought to do, but now ceaseth to do for ever in his own Person. For the principal Act of the Sacerdotal Office of Christ consisted in his Oblation, or his offering himself a Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour to God. This he did once, and ceaseth for ever from doing so any more. But these Priests are assigned to offer him in Sacrifice every day, as partakers of the same Priesthood with him, which is indeed not to be his Substitutes but his Successors; and to take his Office out of his hand, as if he were dead and could henceforth discharge it no more. For they do not appoint Priests to intercede in his room, because they grant he continueth himself so to do; but to offer Sacrifice in his stead, because he does so no more. Therefore if that be an Act of Priesthood, and of their Priesthood, as is pretended, it is unavoidable that his Priesthood is passed from him to them. Now this is a blasphemous Imagination and directly contrary both to the words of the Apostle and the whole Design of his Argument. No, it would lay the advantage on the other side. For the Priests of the Order of Aaron had that Priviledge, that none could take their Office upon them, nor officiate in it while they were alive. But although Christ abideth for ever, yet according to the sense of these men and their practice thereon, he stands in need of others to officiate for him, and that in the principal part of his Duty and Office. For Offer himself in Sacrifice to God he neither now does, nor can, seeing henceforth he dieth no more. This is the work of the Mass-Priests alone, who must therefore be honoured as Christs Successors, or be abhorred as his Murderers, for the Sacrifice of him must be by blood and death.

The Argument of the Apostle as it is exclusive of this Imagination, so it is cogent to his purpose. For so he proceedeth. That Priesthood which changeth not, but is alwaies vested in the same Person and in him alone, is more excellent than that which was subject to change continually from one hand to another. For that Transmission of it from one to another was an effect of weakness and Imperfection. And the Jews grant that the frequency of their change under the second Temple was a Token of Gods displeasure. But thus it was with the Priesthood of Christ which never changeth, and that of Aaron which was alwaies in a transient Succession. And the Reasons he gives of this contrary state of these two Priesthoods do greatly enforce the Argument. For the first Priesthood was so Successive, because the Priests themselves were obnoxious to death the sum and issue of all weaknesses and infirmities. But as to the Lord Christ, his Priesthood is perpetual and unchangeable, because he abideth personally for ever, being made a Priest according to the Power of an endless Life, which is the sum of all Perfections, that our nature is capable of. And we may observe,

1. The perpetuity of the Priesthood of Christ depends on his own perpetual Life. He did not undertake any Office for the Church to lay it aside while he lives, until the whole Design and work of it be accomplished. And therefore he tells his Disciples, that because he liveth they shall live also (John 14:19). For while he lives, he will take care of them. But this must be spoken to on the next verse.

2. The perpetuity of the Priesthood of Christ, as unchangeably exercised in his own Person, is a principal part of the glory of that Office. His discharge of this Office for the Church in his own Person throughout all generations is the glory of it. (1.) Hereon depends the Church's preservation and stability. There is neither a ceasing nor any the least intermission of that care and providence, of such interposition with God on its behalf which are required thereunto. Our High Priest is continually ready to appear and put in for us on all occasions. And his abiding for ever, manifests the continuance of the same care and love for us, that he ever had. The same love wherewith as our High Priest he laid down his life for us, does still continue in him. And every one may with the same confidence go to him with all their concerns, as poor diseased and distempered persons went to him when he was upon earth; when he never showed greater displeasure than to those who forbad any to come to him whatever their pretences were. (2.) Hereon depends the union and communion of the Church with itself in all successive generations. For whereas he who is their Head and High Priest, in whom they all center as to their union and communion, and who has all their graces and duties in his hand to present them to God, they have a relation to each other and a concernment in one another. We that are alive in this generation have communion with all those that died in the faith before us, as shall be declared, if God will, on chapter 12, verses 22, 23, 24. And they were concerned in us, as we are also in the generations that are to come. For all the prayers of the Church from first to last are lodged in the hand of the same High Priest who abides for ever. And he returns the prayers of one generation to another. We enjoy the fruits of the prayers, obedience, and blood of those that went before us; and if we are faithful in our generation, serving the will of God, those shall enjoy the fruits of ours, who shall come after us. Our joint interest in this our abiding Priest gives a line of communication to all believers in all generations. And, (3.) the consolation of the Church also depends hereon. Do we meet with troubles, trials, difficulties, temptations and distresses; has not the Church done so in former ages? What do we think of those days wherein prisons, tortures, swords and flames were the portion of the Church all the world over? But did any of them miscarry? Was any one true believer lost for ever? And did not the whole Church prove victorious in the end? Did not Satan rage and the world gnash their teeth to see themselves conquered and their power broken, by the faith, patience, and suffering of them whom they hated and despised? And was it from their own wisdom and courage that they were so preserved? Did they overcome merely by their own blood? Or were delivered by their own power? No, but all their preservation and success, their deliverance and eternal salvation depended merely on the care and power of their merciful High Priest. It was through his blood, the blood of the Lamb, or the efficacy of his sacrifice, that they overcame their adversaries (Revelation 12:11). By the same blood were their robes washed and made white (chapter 7:14). From there had they their righteousness in all their sufferings. And by him had the Church its triumphant issue out of all its trials. Now is he not the same that he ever was, vested with the same Office, and has he not the same qualifications of love, compassion, care and power for the discharge of it, as he always had? From where then can any just cause of despondence in any trials or temptations arise? We have the same High Priest to take care of us, to assist and help us, as they had, who were all of them finally victorious. (4.) This gives perpetual efficacy to his sacrifices, &c.

3. The addition of sacrificing priests as vicars of, or substitutes to Christ in the discharge of his Office, destroys his Priesthood as to the principal eminency of it above that of the Levitical Priesthood.