Mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises" (viii. 1–6). Our attention is here directed to the chief point of the writer's argument. It is that "we have such a High Priest " as has been described in the last chapter, that is, One Who fulfils all the conditions of priesthood; and that He has "sat down on the Right Hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a Minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle." as royal High Priest, a Minister of the sanctuary. The principal feature, we are told, in our great High The chief Priest's work, is that He reigns as a royal High Priest. characteristic, that He reigns The Fathers are never weary of pointing out that to sit down is not the attitude of a sacrificing priest, and is, indeed, entirely inconsistent with the idea of offering sacrifice. But while reigning as our High Priest, He and that He is is also a Minister (Aɛrovрyós) of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle. Thalhofer and his school contend that Aɛroupyós is equivalent to sacrificator, but an examination of the history of the word shows that this was not its meaning in classical Greek, nor is it the meaning in which it is used in other passages in the New Testament. The adoption of the word AεITоvрyia Aerovpyós not to describe the Sacrifice of the Eucharist led in later the same as times to a sacrificial idea being associated with λειτουρ yós, but we must not anticipate by five centuries this meaning of the word, and there are certainly no grounds for associating the idea of sacrifice with the word in the New Testament.* Bishop Westcott points out that there is a significant contrast here between the Session of CHRIST and His "serving; " that the two words, in fact, present the two complementary aspects of CHRIST'S Person and *For the history of this word and a discussion of its use in the New Testament, see Appendix A. "Sacrificator." CHRIST reigning and serving shows forth His Divine Majesty and infinite love. The idea suggested by the true tabernacle. The earthly tabernacle symbolized three things: among men, His holiness, ableness." The Fathers work, His Divine Majesty and His infinite Love. The true tabernacle (aλnový) is the ideal tabernacle, of which the earthly was a symbol. But no local distinction can be attached to this term. The general thought here expressed is that of the immediate Presence of GOD, not of a place which corresponds in heaven to the tabernacle on earth. The idea is taken up again in the eleventh verse of the next chapter, where we have the expression "CHRIST, having come a High Priest of the good things realized, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle," etc. In both places we observe that it is not "a tabernacle," but the tabernacle "; in one, the true tabernacle," in the other, "the greater and more perfect tabernacle." And it may be worth while to consider somewhat carefully the conception suggested by this image. The earthly tabernacle symbolized three main ideas: the idea of the dwelling of GOD among men, of His holiness, and of His "approachableness." It was that GOD dwelling through which He was pleased to make His Presence and His Nature known, under the conditions of earth, His" approach to His people Israel. And the antitype of the tabernacle, whether on earth or in heaven, must fulfil the same office, and fulfil it perfectly. The Fathers, both Greek and Latin, commonly understood this tabernacle be our LORD'S to be the LORD'S Flesh, or Humanity.* In our LORD'S historical work on earth He was the perfect revelation of the FATHER, and the Way to Him. In the ideal archetype of the tabernacle we must take account of our LORD's Ministry in heaven. In this the heavenly High Priest and the heavenly tabernacle are in some sense distinguished, and the LORD acts as High consider the tabernacle to Flesh or Humanity. * Cf. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Ecumenius, Primasius, Euthymius, Theophylact, in loc. Priest in His Human Nature. In this relation, then, it may be said that "the greater and more perfect tabernacle" of which CHRIST is Minister, and in which the Saints worship, gathers up the various means by which GOD reveals Himself in the spiritual order, and through which men approach to Him. Under one aspect these are represented by the union of the redeemed and perfected hosts made one in CHRIST, as His Body. Through this glorified Church, answering to the complete Humanity which CHRIST assumed, GOD is made known, and in and through this each believer comes nigh to GOD. In this Body, as a spiritual In this Body temple, CHRIST ministers. As members in this Body, believers severally enjoy the Divine Presence. vision enables us to connect redeemed humanity with the glorified Human Nature of the LORD, and to consider how it is that humanity, as the summing up of creation, may become in Him the highest manifestation of GOD to finite being, and, in its fulness, that through which each part is brought near to GOD. This heavenly tabernacle is spoken of as "greater and more perfect; " greater in comparison with the narrow limits of the earthly tabernacle, more perfect as answering to the complete development of the Divine plan.* In the third verse of the eighth chapter we have a disputed passage: "For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; whence it was necessary that this [High Priest] also should have something to offer." Here we have first to notice a controversy in respect to the tense of the verb which must be supplied with ἀγαγκαῖον. Is it ἦν or ἐστί? Our version and the Vulgate read "is." Scholars of many different * Cf. Westcott, on Heb., pp. 214, 240, 256-258. CHRIST min isters. In Heb. viii. 3 are we to sup ply ἦν οἱ ἐστί? schools consider that it should be "was." The point is not easily decided. The aorist subjunctive πроσεvéyuŋ would seem to suggest v, as has been pointed out by Bengel, Meyer, and others, and adopted by Westcott and Thalhofer. The aorist subjunctive, however, has not any necessary temporal significance, and therefore others have thought that the tense must be decided by the general context of the passage, which they consider demands the present. The matter is really of little consequence to our argument, as may be seen by the fact that Thalhofer and Bengel, who hold the Modern view, read йv, and from it support their own position, while Catholic writers generally read έorí, and refer it to the Sacrifice of the Cross. It is simply asserted that it is necessary that a high priest should have something to offer; and this is equally well satisfied, whether we refer it to the Offering once made upon the Cross, or to an Offering made immediately after our LORD'S Ascension, or, again, to a continuous Offering. We may therefore pass over this passage with the remark that pooɛvéyun reminds us that in the next chapter it is said, ὁ Χριστὸς ἅπαξ προσενεχθείς,* where the idea of the Offering being once for all" is again insisted on. The other question suggested by this passage is, the nature of the Offering which CHRIST made. It was necessary that He should have something to offer." What was this something? Bishop Westcott justly observes that it seems necessary to supply that object which is elsewhere used with πроσpέрɛiv in the same connection. Some have interpreted the Ti of the Blood, but, as we shall see later, the blood was not properly offered in the Holy of holies on the Day of *Heb. ix. 28. Atonement, but was used rather as the means of entrance and purification. So CHRIST entered into the Divine Presence "through" (Sia), not "with" (uɛTά), His own Blood, and by that purifies the heavenly things and people, but we do not read that He offered it. but either We should rather supply either "Himself" (vii. 27, ix. 14, 25) or "His Body" (x. 19). Himself or His Body. LORD'S hood as typified by the Day of Atonement. ritual of the iii. We now come to the second part of the argument iii. Our of the Epistle, that which is drawn from our LORD'S High-Priesthood as typified by the high priest on the Day of Atonement (ix., x.). After describing the tabernacle, with the Holy Place and its furniture, and the Holy of Holies and its contents, we read: "But when these things have been thus prepared, the priests enter into the first tabernacle continually, accomplishing the Divine services; but into the second, once in the year, the high priest alone, not without blood, which he offereth for himself and for the ignorances of the people, the HOLY GHOST thus signifying that the way into the Holy Place hath not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle hath still an appointed place; which is a parable for the season now present" (ix. 6-9). Before we pass to the second part of the chapter, in which our LORD's fulfilment of the type is indicated, it will be well for us to pause and carefully consider exactly what was signified by the ritual of the Day of Atonement. The signification of this ritual, The effect of sin twofold: alienation A sense of The effect of sin on the human soul is twofold: first, a sense of alienation from GOD, Who is the Source of all true life; and, flowing from this, when the consequences of this separation from GOD are realized, an intense longing for reconciliation or restoration to com- viction of guilt. munion with GOD. Secondly, an even more deeply from GOD, and a con |