A. Christ executeth the office of a priest, in his once offering up of himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice and reconcile us to God, and in making continual intercession for us.

Last time, we defined a prophet. Now we must ask the same of a priest. And there is something of a definition given in Hebrews 5:1. Although it says it of a “high priest,” it still makes the basic point.

“For every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.”

Hodge says that “a priest is (1.) A man duly appointed to act for other men in things pertaining to God … (2.) A priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins … (3.) He makes intercession for the people.”1 The assumption behind all that a priest did was that there was a chasm between God and the sinner in which the sinner could make no approach without danger. This division of the duties of the original priests is echoed by Brakel: “The priestly office consists of two particulars: sacrifice and prayer, the pronouncement of blessing being included in the latter.”2 Of course the prayer lifted up to God, and the blessing pronounced toward man, only have their efficacy because sin is removed. So satisfaction of divine justice must come before the expectation of reconciliation and all the good that flows from it. 

As with the office of prophet, so with the priest, there is an essential Old Testament prophecy pointing to Christ: “The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek’” (Ps. 110:4). What does this mean?

Whatever one thinks of this man as a “Christophany,” the argument that the author of Hebrews is making ought to be clear: 

“It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives.  One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him” (Heb. 7:7-10).

In his commentary on Hebrews, Vos makes the case that the inspired author has a very sophisticated vision of typology in mind. Without getting into its complexities, we can at least picture a kind of left to right of types and shadows leading to a fulfillment—all fitting under an archetypal priesthood of Christ in the heavenly places. 

Satisfaction

First we must define this word, as it is a satisfaction of God’s justice. If we remember the covenantal flow of the original state of man and his fallen state, nothing has changed of the obligation of the covenant of works. Righteousness in perfect obedience is still required. What has changed was that, in Adam’s sin, the exact opposite of righteousness was produced. Original sin and its guilt was inherited by all of Adam’s offspring. Therefore a twofold satisfaction of divine justice is still outstanding. Positive righteousness is still owed by man, and punishment is still owed by God.

So, to use the simple outline of Watson, the satisfaction of Christ “consists of two branches. [1] His active obedience. ‘He fulfilled all righteousness.’ Matt iii.15 … [2] His passive obedience. Our guilt being transferred and imputed to him, he suffered the penalty which was due to us.”3

As to that ACTIVE OBEDIENCE, here is Christ obeyed the positive demands of the law on our behalf. Any verse teaching that either his whole person or what he did to obey—that this stands in for us—is a teaching of active obedience. So, for instance, 1 Corinthians 1:30, Romans 5:18-19, or Hebrews 10:5-10. 

But I would also argue that Galatians 4:4-5 suggests the active obedience in our place, since it speaks of Christ being “born under the law, to redeem those who are under the law.” Someone may say that what he accomplishes under that law may only make the redemption possible because he himself had to be spotless. But this ignores the positive requirement that still hangs over those merely in Adam. 

Moving on to the PASSIVE OBEDIENCE, this means the way in which Christ obeyed even unto death. It covers his sufferings, as passio is the Latin word for suffering. So when we speak of Christ’s “passion” this is what we mean. Again the author of Hebrews links the human nature of Christ with this particular aspect of his priestly work—arguing a necessary connection:

“Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted” (Heb. 2:17-18). 

A text we have looked at already, Philippians 2:5-8, speaks of the obedience of Christ, even unto death. So his suffering on the cross was an obedience. 

Taking the whole of obedience, Hodge suggests that atonement is to too ambiguous a word. It “expresses the effect, and not the nature of Christ’s work.”4

Everywhere in the book of Hebrews the whole force of the argument is always “Christ is greater.” Greater than the angels. Greater than Moses. Greater than the Tabernacle which foreshadowed him. And here, He is greater than both the priest which offered up the sacrifice, and greater than the sacrifice offered.

“For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works uto serve the living God” (Heb. 9:13-14).

“For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Heb. 9:24-26) 

Now about that—namely, the manner of the suffering and his ability to absorb a punishment that we say is in some sense infinite. On the ability of the human Christ to suffer an infinite punishment for an infinite crime, by virtue of his divine infinity, yet without the divine essence suffering—see Brakel (I:481-82) and Turretin (II: ). Brakel seems to suggest that the same necessity of a divine Person exists for the positive satisfaction of righteousness, given that it was “for all the elect”.5

Watson eloquently expresses the same.

“But if only Christ’s humanity suffered, how could this suffering satisfy for sin? The human nature being united to the divine, the human nature suffered, the divine satisfied. Christ’s Godhead supported the human nature that it did not faint, and gave virtue to his sufferings. The altar sanctifies the thing offered on it. Matt xxiii 19. The altar of Christ’s divine nature sanctified the sacrifice of his death, and made it of infinite value.”6

By the way, I take Watson’s use of the question “if only Christ’s humanity suffered,” to be interpreted by the next line. He wasn’t denying that the divine nature cannot suffer—only insisting that it must be involved to make that human suffering efficacious. 

Intercession

As with the office of prophet, here too we want to know how Jesus is presently and personally for us and for our salvation. The author of Hebrews gives us an answer in another one of his “Christ is greater than” arguments. 

“The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:23-25).

So what is intercession and why do we need it? First we must understand that it goes together beautifully with everything else that comes before it—the cross, the empty tomb, the ascension to his throne. So Paul says,

“Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us” (Rom. 8:34).

Intercession does not imply any insufficiency in the redemption accomplished by the cross. 

As I brefly mentioned, the High Priestly Prayer of John 17 gives us something of a preview of what Jesus prays for us. Another clue verse is found in Luke 22, where Jesus intercedes for Peter for something very specific. 

“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers” (Lk. 22:31-32).

So Christ’s priestly office and our perseverance are very much connected. 

That Christ intercedes makes superfluous nonsense of seeking out other intercessors. Rome will say that they are not replacing Christ as Mediator by adding to his prayers those prayers of the saints, and especially of Mary. “Furthermore,” they object, “how are such prayers of the saints any different than when Protestants pray for each other?” 

_________________

1. Hodge, Systematic Theology, II:464

2. Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, I:539.

3. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 172.

4. Hodge, Systematic Theology, II:469.

5.. Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, I:482

6. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 172-73.