Hebrews 7 — Verse 26

For such an High Priest became us, who is Holy, Harmless, Undefiled, Separate from sinners and made higher than the Heavens.

There is something supposed and included in this Assertion; namely, that if we intend to come to God, we had need of an High Priest to encourage and enable us thereunto. For if in particular we need such an High Priest, it is supposed that without an High Priest in general, we can do nothing in this matter. This therefore is the foundation which in this Argument the Apostle proceedeth on; namely, that sinners, as we are all, can have no access to God, but by an High Priest. And there was no need for him much to labor with those Hebrews in the confirmation hereof. For from the first constitution of their Church, they had no other way of approach to God in and with their sacred services. And God had not only by the institution of that Office among them, declared that this was the way whereby he would be worshipped; but also with legal prohibitions fortified with severe penalties, he had forbidden all men, the highest, the greatest, the best and most holy, to come to him any other way. Hereby were they taught the everlasting necessity of an High Priest, and the discharge of his Office, whatever end or issue their typical Priests came to. And herein lyes a great aggravation of the present misery of the Jews. High Priest of their own they have none, nor have had for many ages. Hereon all their solemn worship of God utterly ceaseth. They are the only persons in the world, who, if all mankind would give them leave and assist them in it, cannot worship God as they judge they ought to do. For if Hierusalem were restored into their possession, and a Temple reedified in it more glorious than that of Solomon, yet could they not offer one Lamb in Sacrifice to God. For they know that this cannot be done without an High Priest, and Priests infallibly deriving their pedigree from Aaron, of whom they have among them not one in all the world. And so must they abide under a sense of being judicially excluded and cast out from all solemn worship of God, until the vail shall be taken from their hearts, and leaving Aaron, they return to him who was typed by Melchisedec, to whom even Abraham their Father acknowledged his subjection.

From where this necessity of an High Priest for sinners arose, I have so largely enquired into, and declared in my Exercitations on the original and causes of the Priesthood of Christ, as that there is no need again to make mention of it. Every one's duty it is to consider it, and rightly improve it for himself: the want of living up to this Truth, evacuates the religion of most men in the world.

Upon this supposition of the necessity of an High Priest in General, the Apostle declares what sort of High Priest was needful for us. And this he shews,

1. In his personal qualifications.

2. In his outward state and condition, ver. 26.

3. In the nature of his Office and the manner of its discharge, ver. 27. And he confirmeth the whole by the consideration of the Person who was this Priest, and of the way and manner how he became so, compared with them, and their consecration to their Office, who were Priests according to the Law, ver. 28.

The two first are contained in this verse; namely (1.) the personal qualifications of him who was meet to be a Priest for us, by whom we might come to God; and (2.) his outward state and condition.

And in the first place the necessity of such an High Priest as is here described, is expressed by [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩]; Became us. Decuit, decebat. It was meet, it was just for us, as the Syriack renders it. And respect may be had therein either to the wisdom of God, or to our state and condition, or to both; such an High Priest it was meet for God to give, and such an High Priest it was needful that we should have. If the condecency of the matter, which lies in a contrivance of proper means to an end, be intended, then it is God who is respected in this word; if the necessity of the kind of relief mentioned be so, then it is we who are respected.

The word is applyed to God in this very case (Chap. 2, ver. 10): It became him for whom are all things, and by whom are all things. Consider God as the Supreme Ruler and Governour of the world, as the first cause and last end of all, and it became, was necessary to his infinite wisdom and holiness that having designed the bringing of many sons to glory, he should make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. So the condecency here intended may respect, (1.) the wisdom, grace and goodness of God. It became him to give us such an High Priest as we stood in need of; namely, one that was able in the discharge of that Office to save all to the uttermost that come to God by him. For to design our salvation by an High Priest, and not to provide such an one, as was every way able to effect it, became not the wisdom and grace of God.

(2.) Respect may be had herein to our state and condition. Such this was as none but such an High Priest could relieve us in or save us from. For we stand in need of such an one as our Apostle declares, as (1.) could make atonement for our sins, or perfectly expiate them. (2.) Purge our consciences from dead works, that we might serve the living God; or sanctify us throughout by his Blood. (3.) Procure acceptance with God for us, or purchase eternal redemption. (4.) Administer supplies of the spirit of grace to us to enable us to live to God in all duties of faith, worship, and obedience. (5.) Give us assistance and consolation in our trials, temptations and sufferings, with pity and compassion. (6.) Preserve us by power from all ruining sins and dangers. (7.) Be in a continual readiness to receive us in all our addresses to him. (8.) To bestow upon us the reward of eternal life. Unless we have an High Priest that can do all these things for us, we cannot be saved to the uttermost. Such an High Priest we stood in need of, and such an one it became the wisdom and grace of God to give to us. And

God in infinite wisdom, love and grace, gave us such an High Priest, as in the qualifications of his Person, the glory of his condition, and the discharge of his Office, was every way suited to deliver us from the state of apostacy, sin and misery, and to bring us to himself through a perfect salvation. This the ensuing particulars will fully manifest.

The qualifications of this High Priest are expressed first indefinitely in the word [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩]. A difference from other High Priests is included herein. He must not be one of an ordinary sort, but one so singularly qualified to his work, so exalted after his work, and so discharging his work to such ends. In all these things we stood in need of such an High Priest, as was quite of another sort, order and kind, than any the Church had enjoyed under the Law, as the Apostle expressly concludes, ver. 28.

His personal inherent qualifications are first expressed; and we shall consider first some things in general that are common to them all, and then declare the especial intendment of every one of them in particular.

Such an High Priest became us, as is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.

1. There is some allusion in all these things to what was typically represented in the institution of the office of the priesthood under the Law. For the High Priest was to be a person without blemish, not maimed in any part of his body. He was not to marry any one that was defiled, nor to defile himself among the people. On his forehead in his ministrations he ware a plate of gold with that inscription, Holiness to the Lord. And no doubt but personal holiness was required of him in an especial manner; for want whereof, God cast out the posterity of Eli from the priesthood.

But all those things were only outward representations of what was really required to such an High Priest as the Church stood in need of. For they were mostly external, giving a denomination to the subject, but working no real change in it. And where they were internal, they were encompassed with such a mixture of sins, weaknesses, infirmities, and the intercision of death, as that they had no glory in comparison of what was required. All these things the Apostle observes, reducing them to two heads, namely, that they were obnoxious to sin and death; and therefore as they died, so they offered sacrifices for their own sins. But the Church was taught by them from the beginning, that it stood in need of an High Priest whose real qualifications should answer all these types and representations of them.

2. It is possible that our Apostle in this description of our High Priest, designed to obviate the prejudicate opinion of some of the Hebrews concerning their Messiah. For generally they looked on him as one that was to be a great earthly prince and warrior, that should conquer many nations, and subdue all their enemies with the sword, shedding the blood of men in abundance. In opposition to this vain and pernicious imagination, our Savior testifies to them, that he came not to kill, but to save and keep alive. And our Apostle here gives such a description of him in these holy gracious qualifications, as might attest his person and work to be quite of another nature than what they desired and expected; and their frustration herein was the principal occasion of their unbelief. See Malachi 3:1, 2, 3.

3. I am sorry that it has fallen from the pen of an able expositor of our own on this place; that the time when the Lord Christ was thus made an High Priest for ever, and that by an oath, was after he had offered one sacrifice, not many; for the people, not for himself; once, not often; of everlasting virtue, and not effectual for some petty expiations for a time; and after he was risen, ascended and set at the right hand of God.

If by being made an High Priest, only a solemn declaration of being made so, is intended, these things may pass well enough. For we allow that in the Scripture, then a thing is oft-times said to be, when it is first manifested or declared. So was the Lord Christ determined to be the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead. But if it be intended, as the words will scarce admit of any other interpretation, that then the Lord Christ was first made an High Priest after all this was performed, the whole real priesthood of Christ, and his proper sacrifice is overthrown. For it is said he was not made an High Priest until after that he had offered his one sacrifice. And if it were so, then he was not a Priest, when he so offered himself. But this implies a contradiction, for there can be no sacrifice, where there is no Priest. And therefore the Socinians who make the consecration of the Lord Christ to his sacerdotal office to be by his entrance into Heaven, do utterly deny his death to have been a sacrifice, but only a preparation for it, as they fancy the killing of the beast to have been of old. And the truth is, either the Lord Christ was a Priest before and in the oblation of himself on the Cross, or he was never any, nor needed so to be, nor could he so be; for after he was freed from death, he had nothing to offer. And it is a strange order of things, that the Lord Christ should first offer his only sacrifice, and after that be made a Priest. But the order, time, and manner of the call and consecration of the Lord Christ to his priesthood I have elsewhere declared.

4. We may observe that all these qualifications of our High Priest were peculiarly necessary on the account of the sacrifice which he had to offer. They were not only necessary for him, as he was to be the sacrificer, but also as he was to be the sacrifice; not only as he was to be the Priest, but as he was to be the Lamb. For the sacrifices were to be without blemish, as well as the sacrificers. So were we redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot (1 Peter 1:19). But however the sacrifices were chosen under the Law without blemish, yet were they still in their own nature, but calves, and goats, and lambs. And therefore priests who had weaknesses and infirmities and sins of their own, might be meet enough to offer them. But here both Priest and sacrifice were to be equally pure and holy.

5. We must not pass by the wresting of this text by the Socinians; nor omit its due vindication. For they contend that this whole description of our High Priest does not respect his internal qualifications in this world before and in the offering of himself by his blood; but his glorious state and condition in Heaven. For they fear (as well they may) that if the qualifications of a Priest were necessary to him, and required in him while he was in this world, that then he was so indeed. He who says such an High Priest became us as is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, does affirm that when he was so, he was our High Priest. In that state wherein these things were necessary to him, he was a Priest. To avoid this ruin to their pretensions, they offer violence to the text, and the signification of every word in it, and dangerously insinuate a negation of the things intended, to be in Christ in this world. So speaks Schlictingius on the place. Unde apparet sequentibus verbis, seu Epithetis Christo tributis, non mores ipsius seu vitam ab omni peccati labe puram, sed felicem ac beatum statum describi ac designari, ob quem fiat ut in aeternum vivens, nostri quoque perpetuam gerat curam. Licet enim omnia ista ratione vitae & morum de Christo intellecta verissima sint, tamen nihil ad praesens Authoris institutum faciunt. So also argues Smalcius de Reg. Christi, Cap. 23. whom we have elsewhere refuted.

The paraphrase of one of our own seems to comply herewith; which is as followeth. And this was a sort of High Priests which we sinful weak creatures had need of, (which by the way I do not understand, for we stood not in need of a new sort of High Priests, but of one single individual High Priest,) one that being mercifully disposed, is also incapable of suffering any hurt, of being defiled or corrupted, and consequently of dying, and to that end is exalted to a pitch above our sinful corruptible condition here. So [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] and [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] are rendered in the margin, free from evil, and undefileable. The sense is plainly the same with that of Schlictingius, though there be some variety in the expressions of the one and the other. And therefore is Christ said to be exalted that he might be such as he is here described, as though he was not so before in the sense here intended by the Apostle, however the words here in another sense might be applied to him.

Three things seem to be aimed at in this exposition.

1. To make way for another corrupt notion on the next verse, wherein these men with Grotius would have Christ in some sense offer for his own sins also; which there can be no pretence for, if these things be ascribed to him, as he was a Priest in this world.

2. To take care that the innocency, holiness and absolute purity of our High Priest be not supposed to be necessary to our justification, neither as the material, nor formal cause of it. For if the Lord Christ in the sacrifice of himself died for our justification, and that he might do so, it was necessary that he should antecedently be holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners; then was his being so necessary to our justification, as a cause thereof.

3. To obviate an apprehension of his being an High Priest before his death, and to have offered his one sacrifice therein. For if he had not the qualifications necessary to an High Priest, before his ascension into Heaven, he could not be so before. But these things are none of them compliant with the truth. And,

1. This exposition is contrary to the concurrent sense of all sober, ancient and modern expositors. And which is more, it is contrary to the common sense of all Christians. Not one of them who knows ought of these things, unless their minds are perverted with these men's glosses, and that merely to comply with other opinions wherein the text is no way concerned, but that in their first and last consideration of these words, they respect Jesus Christ as to his personal holiness in this world. And that exposition had need be well confirmed, which is not only contrary to the judgment of all learned men, but also destructive of the common faith of Christians. But as yet we have nothing beyond crude assertions offered in the proof of it.

2. It is contrary to, or inconsistent with the sense and use of the words in all good authors, sacred and profane; and contrary to the application of them to the Lord Christ in other places of the Scripture, as we shall see immediately.

3. It is contrary to the order of the Apostle's words; for he places all these properties as qualifications of this person antecedently to his exaltation. He was first holy, harmless, undefiled, and then made higher than the Heavens. But according to this exposition his being made higher than the Heavens, is the antecedent cause of his being made holy, &c.

4. It is highly false that the blessed state pretended to be here set forth, was antecedently to his being a Priest, and the sacrifice which he offered; yes, such an estate was inconsistent with the oblation of himself. For he offered himself to God in his blood (Hebrews 9:14), and that with strong cries and tears (chapter 5, verse 7), which were inconsistent with such a state; for it is so described on purpose to be exclusive of every thing required thereunto.

Schlictingius pleads that although all these things were true with respect to the life and manners of Christ, yet it was no way to the purpose of the Apostle to mention them to the end designed. But, (1) If that be the sense of the words which he contends for, not one of them is true with respect to the life and manners of Christ in this world, for they all belong to his blessed estate in the other. (2) We shall see on the next verse, how far he will allow them to be true of the life and manners of Christ in any sense, seeing in some sense he affirms him to have offered sacrifice for his own sins. And this he does with an express contradiction to his own main hypothesis. For by sins he understands weakness and infirmities; and whereas he will not allow Christ to have offered himself before his entrance into the Holy place, and makes it necessary that he should be antecedently freed from all weaknesses and infirmities, it is the highest contradiction to affirm that he offered for them: seeing he could not offer himself until he was delivered from them. (2.) We have only his bare word for it, that the ascription of those things to our High Priest as inherent qualifications, was not to the purpose of the Apostle. And his assertion is built on a false supposition, namely, that the Lord Christ was not an High Priest on the Earth, nor did offer himself to God in his Death, which overthrows the foundation of the Gospel.

The vanity and falsehood of this novel exposition, will yet farther and fully be evinced, in an enquiry into the proper signification of these words as here used by the Apostle; every one whereof is wrested to give countenance to it.

He is, or was to be, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], Sanctus, Holy, that is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. For, (Acts 2:22) [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is rendered [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], your Holy one: from Psalm 16:10. And the Lord Christ is there said to be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] antecedently to his Resurrection: which must be with respect to his internal holiness, You shall not suffer your Holy One to see Corruption. And in the New Testament the word is every where used for him, that is internally holy (1 Timothy 2:8; Titus 1:8). The Syriac renders it in this place by [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] pure; which is an inherent qualification; as it does (1 Timothy 2:8 and Titus 1:8) by [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Pious, Holy, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], says Hesychius: [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; Pure, Righteous, Godly, Peaceable, Chaste. So [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is used only for Holily (1 Thessalonians 2:10), and [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is internal holiness (Luke 1:75; Ephesians 4:24). No where is it used for a merciful disposition, much less for venerable and sacred upon the account of an immortal nature, or any other privilege, as it is pretended. Neither is the word used in any other good author to signify any one but him that is holy and righteous, or free from all sin and wickedness.

It is therefore the holy purity of the nature of Christ that is intended in this expression. His life and actions are expressed in the ensuing epithets. His nature was pure and holy, absolutely free from any spot or taint of our original defilement. Hence as he was conceived in the womb, and as he came from the womb, he was that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], holy thing of God (Luke 1:35). All others since the fall have a polluted nature and are originally unholy. But his conception being miraculous, by the immediate operation of the Holy Ghost, and his nature not derived to him by natural generation, the only means of the propagation of original defilement, and in the first instant of its being, filled with all habitual seeds of grace; He was [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], Holy. And such an High Priest became us, as was so. Had he had a nature touched with sin, he had not been meet either to be a Priest or Sacrifice. This holiness of nature was needful to him, who was to answer for the unholiness of our nature, and to take it away. Unholy sinners do stand in need of an holy Priest and an holy Sacrifice. What we have not in ourselves we must have in him, or we shall not be accepted with the holy God, who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.

He was to be [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], that is, says Schlictingius, omnis mali expers, nullis amplius miseriis obnoxius; incapable of suffering any hurt, says another to the same purpose. The word is but once more used in the New Testament, and that in a sense remote enough from, one not exposed to misery, or incapable of suffering (Romans 16:18): [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], men simple and harmless, who for the most part are exposed to most evils and troubles in the world. (2.) It is never used in any good author in such a sense, nor can any instance be produced to that purpose: but it constantly signifies one innocent, harmless, free from malice, who does no evil. Nor did any one before these interpreters dream of a passive interpretation of this word. It is he who does no evil; not he who can suffer no evil. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is malus, or qui dolo malo utitur; an evil malicious person. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is vitiositas in the judgement of Cicero. Virtutis, says he, contraria est vitiositas, sic enim malo quam malitiam appellare, quam Graeci [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] appellant; nam Malitia certi cujusdam vitii nomen est, vitiositas omnium. We render it sometimes naughtiness (James 1:22), sometimes, malice or maliciousness (1 Peter 1:16), all manner of evil with deceitful guile. Therefore [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] is he that is free from all evil, fraud or sin; the same absolutely with that of the Apostle Peter (1 Peter 2:22), Who did no sin, neither was there guile found in his mouth.

[〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], Holy is his epithet with respect to his nature; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], Harmless respects his life. The first includes all positive holiness; the other an abnegation of all unholiness. As he was [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] he had not [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], sin present, as we have with us (Romans 7:18, 21), or [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], sin easily besetting (Hebrews 12:1). As he was [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], he was free from every effect of such a principle.

And we had need of such an High Priest. Had he not been innocent and every way blameless himself, he would have had other work to do, than always to take care of our salvation, as the Apostle observes in the next verse. He must first have offered for his own sins, as the High Priest did of old, before he had offered for us or ours. And this added to the merit of his obedience. For whereas he was absolutely innocent, harmless, and free from all evil and guile, he was reproached and charged with every thing that is evil; a seducer, a blasphemer, a seditious person, the worst of malefactors. For herein also, as to the suffering part, he was made sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might become the righteousness of God in him. And a great encouragement this is to those who suffer in the like kind according to their measure.

3. He was to be [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩], cujus felicitas & beatitas nulla vel minima adversitate quasi labe pollui inficique possit, says Schlictingius; than which a more vain imagination, or more absurd expression can be hardly thought on. But it is not for us to charge the Apostle with such obscurity and expressing of his mind in such uncouth terms, never used by any others, nor by himself in any other place in such a sense or signification; unpolluted, undefiled, that is, every way happy and blessed, not touched with the defilement of any adversity. But the use of adversity, is to purge and purify. And as that word does properly signify, undefiled, unpolluted, that is, morally with any sin or evil, so it is not used in the New Testament in any other sense. See Hebrews 13:4, James 1:27, 1 Peter 1:4. The enquiry therefore is how this differs from [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩], which contains a negation of all moral evil. Answ. The one is, he did no evil in himself; the other, that he contracted none from any thing else, nor from any persons with whom he conversed. This may fall out sometimes. Hence the Prophet in his consternation at the appearance of the glory of God to him, cried out he was undone, not only because of his own sinful defilements, but because of the uncleanness of the people among whom he dwelt (Isaiah 6:5). And on this ground there was an atonement of old to be made for the holy place and tabernacle. Not that they had any uncleanness of their own, but because of the uncleanness of the people, and their remaining among them in the midst of their uncleannesses (Leviticus 16:16).

And besides, many things might befall the High Priests of old, whereby they might be legally defiled, and so rendered uncapable for the discharge of the office. And for this cause, they always had a second priest in readiness, at the great solemn festivals, especially at the anniversary expiation, that in case any such pollution should befall the High Priest, the other might for that time take his place, and discharge his office. So it was with them principally with respect to ceremonials, though immoralities might also defile them, and incapacitate them for their duty. But no such thing was our High Priest liable to, either from himself or from converse with others. As he was unconcerned in ceremonials, so in all moral obedience, nothing could affix on him either spot or blemish. And such an High Priest became us. For whereas it was his design and work to sanctify and cleanse his Church, until it have neither spot nor wrinkle, but be holy and without blemish, as it was (Ephesians 5:25, 26): how had he been meet to attempt or effect this work, had not he himself been every way undefiled?

4. He was [⟨ in non-Latin alphabet ⟩]: that is, says Schlictingius, Loco & conditione, ut statim additur, excelsior caelis factus. He is at the bottom of his notions and end off his invention, so that he can find out no sense for this expression, but puts us of to the next words, which are quite of another signification, or express a thing of another nature, and are distinguished from this expression by the conjunction, And separate from sinners; that is, says he, made higher than the heavens. We must therefore enquire after another sense of these words, which readily offers itself to us.

Separate from sinners: From sins, says the Syriac. But that was sufficiently secured before; from sinners as sinners, and in their sins. He was like to us in all things, sin only excepted. We must therefore consider wherein he was, and wherein he was not separate from sinners.

1. He was not separate from them as to community of nature. For God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh (Romans 8:3). He sent him in the flesh, for he sent him made of a woman, made under the Law (Galatians 4:4), wherein the Word was made flesh (John 1:14); but he sent him only in the likeness of sinful flesh. And that because he made him sin, who knew no sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). He took our flesh, that is, our nature upon him without sin, yet so as that by reason of the charge of sin with the consequences thereof that was upon him, he was in the likeness of sinful flesh. He was not therefore really separate from sinners as they were flesh, but as they were sinful flesh. He took upon him the seed of Abraham, and because the children were partakers of flesh and blood he himself partook also of the same. Without this relation to us, and union with us, in one common nature, whereby he that sanctifies and they that are sanctified, are of one, he could not have been an High Priest or sacrifice for us. He was not therefore thus separated from sinners, as to be of another nature from them. He took not on him the nature of Angels, nor was a mere spirit but had flesh and bones, as he declared to his Disciples. And the same nature he has still with him in Heaven, and in the same will appear at judgment. It is equally destructive to our faith and comforts, to suppose our High Priest not separate from us in point of sin: and to be separate from us as to his nature.

2. He was not separated from sinners as to the duties of outward conversation. He lived not in a wilderness, nor said to the children of men, stand off, I am holier than you. He conversed freely with all sorts of persons, even Publicans and Harlots, for which he was reproached by the proud hypocritical Pharisees. His work was to call sinners to repentance, and to set before their eyes an example of holiness. This he could not have done, had he withdrawn himself from all communication with them. Yes, he condescended to them beyond the legal austerities of the Baptist (Matthew 11:18, 19). Hence those who of old pretending more than ordinary holiness and devotion did withdraw themselves into wildernesses from the converse of men, did quite forget the example and work of their Master. Yes, they did avowedly prefer the example of the Baptist as they supposed, before that of our Savior, which sufficiently reflects on his wisdom and holiness. Nor indeed did they in the least express the pattern which they proposed to themselves for imitation. For although John lived in the wilderness of Judaea for the most part, yet was he the voice of one crying in the wilderness. He lived there where it was most convenient for him to discharge his ministry, and preach the word of God. And his austerities in food and raiment, were but to express outwardly the doctrine of repentance enforced by threats which he preached. But as these persons forsook the example of Christ and the Gospel to go back to John and his ministry, so they utterly mistook their pattern, and instead of making their retirement a means and help to discharge the ministry in calling others to faith and repentance, they made it a covert for their own ignorance and superstition. And for those votaries of the Roman Church who pretend in the foolish imitation of them to fancy a wilderness in the midst of populous cities, there can be no course of life invented, more alien from the conduct of natural light, more useless to the glory of God and the good of the community of mankind, nor more contrary to the example and commands of our Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles.

3. He is not said to be separate from sinners, so in state and condition, as kings and potentates are from persons poor and mean: and who therefore out of a sense of their own meanness, and the others state and greatness of mind, dare not approach to them. No, but as he was meek and lowly, and took up his whole converse with the lower sort of the people, the poor of this world; so he did by all ways and means, invite and encourage all sorts of sinners to come to him.

4. He is not said to be separate from sinners, as though he had been ever in any communion with them, in any thing wherein he was afterwards separated from them. The participle [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩] has the sense of an adjective, declaring what is, and not how he came so to be. He was always in such a state and condition, so holy, so harmless, and undefiled, as never to have a concern in any thing, from which he was to be separated.

It appears hence plainly wherein it was that he was separate from sinners; namely, in sin, in its nature, causes and effects. Whatever of that sort he underwent was upon our account and not his own. He was every way, in the perfect holiness of his nature and his life, distinguished from all sinners; not only from the greatest, but from those who ever had the least taint of sin, and who otherwise were most holy. And so it became us that he should be. He that was to be a middle person between God and sinners, was to be separate from those sinners, in that thing, on the account whereof he undertook to stand in their stead.

And these are the properties of the humane nature of our High Priest, and which were necessary antecedently to the discharge of any part or duty of his office.

His present state and condition is in the next place expressed; and made higher than the Heavens.

[⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩]. Made higher. God is called [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], the most high God; God above. And glory is to be ascribed to him [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], in the highest (Luke 2:14). And the Lord Christ in his exaltation is said to sit down at the right hand of the Majesty [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩] (chapter 1:3), on high.

He was for a season made lower than the Angels, made on the Earth, and descended into the lower parts of the Earth; and that for the discharge of the principal part of his priestly office, namely, the offering of himself for a sacrifice to God. But he abode not in that state nor could he discharge his whole office and all the duties of it therein; and therefore was made higher than the Heavens. He was not made higher than the Heavens that he might be a Priest: but being our High Priest and as our High Priest, he was so made, for the discharge of that part of his office which yet remained to be performed; for he was to live for ever to make intercession for us.

[⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], as may be seen in the foregoing instances, has a double signification; (1) of place. (2) Of state and condition.

1. If it be place that is meant, then by the Heavens which he is made above, those aspectable Heavens with all their glory are intended. He is no longer on the Earth, but exalted into a throne of majesty above these Heavens. So it is said that he passed through these Heavens when he went into the presence of God (chapter 4:14, 15). And there he abides. For although the Heaven of Heavens cannot contain him as to the immensity of his divine nature; yet as to his humane nature here spoken of, the Heavens must receive him, until the time of the restitution of all things (Acts 3:21). He is in this sense no more on the Earth, nor subject to any of those inconveniences, which his abode here below must be exposed to. Yes, had he always continued here, he could not have been such an High Priest as became us, as our Apostle declares (chapter 8:4).

2. [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩] may respect state and condition; or the glorious state on the right hand of the Majesty on high which he is exalted to. And in this sense by the heavens, than which Christ is made higher, exalted above, the angels the sacred inhabitants of those heavenly places are intended. And this our Apostle in other places often insists upon, as a great manifestation of the glory of Christ: See (Ephesians 1:21, 22; Philippians 2:10, 11; Hebrews 1:4; chap. 2:7, 8). I see no reason but that both these may be included in this expression. He was so exalted as to the place of his residence from the earth, above those aspectable heavens, as withal to be placed in honor, dignity and power above all the inhabitants of heaven, he only excepted who puts all things under him.

And so we have finished the exposition of these words, with the vindication of the proper meaning of them.

Two ends there are why the Apostle gives us such a description of the High Priest that became us, or which we stood in need of.

1. To manifest that the Levitical priests were no way qualified for this office, no way meet or able to bring us to God. Something they did represent, but nothing of themselves they did effect. They all of them came short in every qualification which was necessary to this end. They were all sinners, and living and dying on the earth, they never attained to that condition of glory and dignity which were necessary to the full and final discharge of that office. So he declares his mind to have been expressly in the next verses.

2. To encourage the faith of believers, by evidencing to them, that whatever was needful in a High Priest, to bring them to God, and to save them to the utmost, was found in all perfection in Christ Jesus. And we may observe, that,

1. Although these properties of our High Priest are principally to be considered as rendering him meet to be our High Priest, yet are they also to be considered as an exemplar and idea of that holiness and innocency which we ought to be conformable to. If we will give up ourselves to the conduct of this High Priest, if by him alone we design to approach to God; conformity to him in holiness of nature and life according to our measure is indispensably required of us. None can more dishonor the Lord Christ, nor more perniciously deceive and betray their own souls, than by professing him to be their Priest, with their trust thereby to be saved by him, and yet not endeavor to be holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, like to him.

2. Seeing all these properties were required to Christ and in him, that he might be our High Priest; he was all that he is here said to be for us, and for our sakes; and benefit from them does redound to us. For seeing he was a Priest for us, all that he was that he might be a Priest, was for us also. Such a High Priest became us, and such a High Priest we have.

3. The infinite grace and wisdom of God are always to be admired by us in providing such a High Priest as was every way meet for us, with respect to the great end of his office, namely, the bringing of us to himself.

4. The dignity, duty, and safety of the Gospel church depend solely on the nature, qualifications, and the exaltation of our High Priest. Or our High Priest every way answering the mind, the holiness and wisdom of God, as also all our want and necessities, our whole state and condition, the work of our salvation is absolutely secured in his hand. The great design of the Gospel is to satisfy believers herein. And God would have it so, that he might provide not only for our future salvation, but for our present consolation also.

5. If such a High Priest became us, was needful to us, for the establishment of the New Covenant and the communication of the grace thereof to the church, then all persons, Christ alone excepted, are absolutely excluded from all interest in this priesthood. He that takes upon himself to be a Priest under the Gospel, must be holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, that is, absolutely so; or he is an impostor, who endeavors to deceive the souls of men.

6. If therefore we consider aright what it is that we stand in need of, and what God has provided for us, that we may be brought to him in his glory, we shall find it our wisdom to forego all other expectations, and to betake ourselves to Christ alone.