Posted on 01/15/2019 9:01:47 AM PST by Salvation
The Message of the Letter to the Hebrews
Msgr. Charles Pope • January 14, 2019 •
This week in daily Mass, we are reading from The Letter to the Hebrews, one of the most underappreciated books of the New Testament. It has long been one of my favorites from which to teach; in it we are summoned to faith in Jesus, our Savior and Great High Priest.
The opening lines in the Latin Vulgate are exquisite, particularly to those who can read and recite Latin well.
Multifáriam, multísque modis, olim Deus lóquens pátribus in prophétis. Novíssime, diébus istis locútus est nobis in Fílio. (In many and varied ways, God once spoke to our fathers through the prophets. In these last days, he has spoken to us through the Son.)
Though many doubt that St. Paul wrote Hebrews, I believe he did; it is here that we best see his priestly identity as an apostle, his deep knowledge of the Temple rituals and how they pointed to Christ and are perfected by Him.
The Letter to the Hebrews does not begin with the usual epistolary greetings and salutations, though it does end with them. Throughout, the text “sounds” more like a sermon. The audience of the letter is clearly Jewish Christians; the writer is exhorting them not to fall back on Jewish rituals, which cannot save, but rather to cling ever more closely to Christ, who alone is savior and Lord.
Hebrews was surely written before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. (References to the Temple speak of sacrifices as still going on there.) It occurs to me that the context of Hebrews is that of the years from 65-70 A.D., a time during which wars and rumors of wars were growing. Indeed, the tragic Jewish war began in 66 A.D. The Romans had had more than enough of Jewish Messianism and uprisings. It was a horrible, bloody war that cost the lives of more than one million Jews. During this period, Jewish nationalism was on the rise, likely even among those who had become Christians.
Politics has a strong pull, and it is in this context that the author addresses his audience. In effect, his position is that they should not return to what cannot save merely out of some sense of loyalty to a doomed nation. Jesus had prophesied the tragic destruction of Jerusalem in the Mount Olivet discourse recorded in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13, and Luke 21). With the war clouds gathering, this was the time to cling to Him ever more!
What follows is a quick summary of the exhortation in the Letter to the Hebrews. (In most cases I have not cited chapter and verse below because I pulled from many parts at once.)
Jesus is Lord: Particularly in the first three chapters of Hebrews, the author reminds his audience of the glory of Christ.
Jesus Christ is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word. Having provided purification for sins, He now sits at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Christ is far superior to the angels, as the name He has inherited is excellent beyond theirs. To which of the angels did God ever say, “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father,” or “I will be His Father, and He will be My Son”? When God brings His firstborn into the world, He says: “Let all God’s angels worship Him.”
Yes, God has subjected all things to Him, leaving nothing outside of His control. Christ is crowned with glory and honor because He suffered death so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone, bringing many sons to glory. By His death Christ destroyed him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and freed those were held in slavery by the fear of death.
Jesus is the True High Priest: The author of the Letter to the Hebrews then goes on to describe how Jesus has a true priesthood, greater than that of the priests in the Temple.
Jesus has been counted worthy of greater glory than Moses. He is the great high priest who has passed through the heavens, entering the inner sanctuary behind the curtain. Jesus has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever in the order of Melchizedek. Indeed, God the Father says of Jesus His Son, “You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.”
If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood, why would there have been a need for another priest to appear, one in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron?
Jesus is the Perfection that was Promised: The Letter to the Hebrews is essentially an exhortation not to leave the perfect to go back to the imperfect. The Temple and what takes place there is now no more than a movie set filled with actors playing their roles. Jesus is the true and perfect High Priest, who enters into the true and actual Holy of Holies. The Temple rituals merely point to what Jesus actually does:
Jesus is the true High Priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in Heaven and who ministers in the sanctuary and true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not man. He entered the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made by hands (that is, not of this creation).
Because every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, it was necessary for this One also to have something to offer. He did not enter by the blood of goats and calves, but He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by His own blood, thus securing eternal redemption. If the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that their bodies are clean, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself unblemished to God, purify our consciences from works of death so that we may serve the living God?
Jesus has established the New Covenant in His Blood: The author exhorts his audience not to return to the Old Covenant from the New Covenant. To this he adds this warning:
By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one obsolete, and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear (Heb 8:13).
Anyone who rejected the Law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think one deserves to be punished who has trampled on the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant that sanctified Him, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
Do not throw away your confidence; it holds a great reward. You need to persevere, so that after you have done God’s will, you will receive what He has promised.
What is the meaning of this letter for us who read it so long after the Jewish war of 70 A.D? It is simply this:
We are easily mesmerized by politics and cultural movements, exhibiting more loyalty to them that to our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. Distracted by modern ideas and urgencies, we forsake the message of Christ. We’ll salute Christ, but only if His message agrees with our views and priorities. The Letter to the Hebrews tell us not to give our heart to what cannot save, not to return to the obsessions of a worldly kingdom of darkness now that we have been summoned to the Kingdom of Light.
Jesus deserves your highest loyalty; He alone can save you. Put not your trust in princes and in mortal men in whom there is not help (Psalm 146:3-4). If we forsake Christ for something lesser, do we not treat lightly His blood, which sanctified us, and insult the spirit of grace? Are you worthy of Jesus Christ or are you just worthy of a political party or some popular ideologies of this passing world?
Monsignor Pope Ping!
Not unusual assigns authorship to Paul.
But there are other candidates whose identify the early church fathers may have seen cit to excise from the text. Among them Apollos or Priscilla.
The more I read it, the more I doubt Hebrews could have been written by a gentile. I’m back to leaning toward Paul.
Apollos and Priscilla both jewish.
As an aside: like to remind my kids that God knows what He’s doing, and He knows that some people love a good mystery. The unsolved case of who wrote Hebrews draws people to His word.
But didn’t Apollos and Priscilla convert to the Catholicism of that day?
She’s been venerated for a long time.
https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=769
Priscilla is a JewEl and a saint; the liberal German professor who first proposed her as the author, not so much; the idea of a female author of a New Testament book is irresistible for modern liberal feminism.
But didn’t Apollos and Priscilla convert to Christianity?
OR
But didn’t Apollos and Priscilla become Christians?
c.f. Acts 11:26, Acts 18:2-28
As a matter of Biblical fact.
Perhaps you would like to read the letters of Bishops Ignatius and Polycarp that used the name Catholic church.
In the New Testament the community of Christ’s disciples incorporated into him through baptism and the Eucharist was called simply “the Church.” From the time that any other adjective was applied to the noun “Church,” though, the term was derived not from the name of the divine Founder of this Church,but rather from one of its special characteristics: its catholicity. This body was the one, unique, saving body for everyone, everywhere, as distinguished from the partial or even counterfeit groups or sects that, already in New Testament times (1 John 2:19), were springing up in opposition to the true Church. They have not ceased to spring up in every age since.
These “protesting” splinter groups are usually offshoots from the true Church. They are, characteristically, self-established bodies or communities, while the true Church remains Christ-established. The name “Catholic Church” thus also has meant the one, true Church as distinguished from the sects separated from her.
Not surprisingly, the name “Catholic Church” caught on, and it has been employed down to our own day; there never has been a time when the one true Church, the real one, did not need to be distinguished from the many churches, communities, and sects claiming, with greater or lesser plausibility, to be “the Church.”
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-church-of-the-early-fathers
What's not surprising is that what purports today to be THE exclusive catholic/universal church/assembly of Jesus Christ bears little resemblance to the early Apostolic catholic church. It is easily discernible from the actual (AKA "real") body that has always been distinguished from sects by the doctrines and rule of faith that unites them.
St. Vincent of Lerins had a formula that helped to differentiate the true faith from counterfeits - it was based upon that which "has been believed always, everywhere and by all". Not surprising is that he based this upon what could be verified by THE rule of faith, the Holy Scriptures - the writings of the holy men of God who spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
I know Roman Catholics today like to boast that they are THE True Church Jesus established and all others are sects, partial or even counterfeit groups, but that has to be demonstrated by their statement of faith and what sets their faith view apart or confirms it is orthodox and genuine.
As much as modern Roman Catholics insist and demand recognition as THE church, there remain those who hold to the SAME faith "once delivered unto the saints" unadorned with the trappings and additions slowly mandated through the centuries by sometimes, ruthless and power-hungry leaders who, though designated as heads, acted in direct contradiction to the Word of God. What we have learned is that calling oneself THE Church of Jesus Christ is in no way the same thing as demonstrating it through a profession of faith, a way of holy living, obedience to God and His sacred word.
The actual ONE, TRUE Church is comprised of ALL nations, tongues and people who worship the one, true God and who follow the faith as taught by the incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ, and His Apostles and Prophets and preserved through the written word. Saying one is a member of this body and actually being a member of this body are two different things.
Read Justin Martyr’s description of the Catholic Mass during those days.
After all, The Church was founded by Jesus Christ on the Apostles, the first Bishops.
As a matter of Biblical and historic fact.
Thank you: that’s a very good summary.
Your comment: “What’s not surprising is that what purports today to be THE exclusive catholic/universal church/assembly of Jesus Christ bears little resemblance to the early Apostolic catholic church. It is easily discernible from the actual (AKA “real”) body that has always been distinguished from sects by the doctrines and rule of faith that unites them.”
Yes the Catholic (universal) Church is open to all and has always been open to those who accept the full teachings of Jesus. Yes, even baptized sinners are part of the Body of Christ.
St Vincent of Lerins in chapter i and ii established a practical guide to distinguish heresy from true doctrine.
While there are many heresies that differ from the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church has always held the Truth of Jesus and His teachings and exposed the difference of other groups that established different doctrines.
For example, the principle heresies of the protestant groups is the denial of the Real Presence of Jesus (Body and Blood) in the Eucharist and the denial of the authority of the Pope.
Can you document any other church founded by Jesus Christ other than the Catholic church? Yes there are sinners in the Catholic church including the leadership as God allows their free will. They will be punished if they do not repent and confess their sins before they die.
Jesus gave certain followers the authority to teach. The early Christians knew they could trust Peter’s teaching because he was one of Jesus’ apostles.
Peter taught that “no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Pet. 1:20–21) and went on to warn about those who taught without authority: “There will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction” (2 Pet. 2:1).
I stand with Jesus as the founder and Head of the Catholic church, as was stated by early Catholic Bishops as “One, Holy, catholic and Apostolic”.
I hope you seek and find the Truth of Christ and not the false doctrines of man.
Excellent!
I think you would probably prefer to copyright the title of "Catholic Church" when referencing the Roman Catholic church, but that would not be correct. We know that the Orthodox also claim to be "Catholic" - in fact they say they are the ones who are the genuine church, not Rome - and there are many other churches who do so as well. The "Roman" one is but one of dozens. Some are in communion with you and recognize the Pope of Rome and others don't accept his authority. When the word means "of the whole" or "universal", it is evident that it CANNOT mean only the Roman Catholic one since there have been and remain numerous church bodies which hold to the Apostolic faith as taught BY Jesus and the Apostles that have their foundation in the word of God. How we can know if a church teaches the true faith is by their faithfulness to the rule of faith. But THE Body of Christ is not an organization. It is the spiritual building of which all believers are living stones being its parts. No one denies that there is a visual church here on earth, but it is in no way limited to one organization no matter how much they may presume and demand everyone accept it.
I can name many doctrines that the Roman Catholic church teaches that have NO connection to the Biblical Christian faith. So, no, the Catholic Church has NOT always held the Truth of Jesus and His teachings. You don't have an elitist, exclusive corner on the truth.
For example, the principle heresies of the protestant groups is the denial of the Real Presence of Jesus (Body and Blood) in the Eucharist and the denial of the authority of the Pope.
You should do a little study on that phrase "real presence". It did not originate with the Roman Catholic church. Even the RC dogma concerning it developed over centuries. Transubstantiation wasn't even declared a dogma until the thirteenth century! How can you claim it was an Apostolic teaching when there is no evidence that was what the Apostles taught or that the early church held to it? I have no interest in going around the mulberry bush once again debating that point! Let me just say that Christians can and do participate in the Lord's Supper as Jesus said we should "in remembrance of me" as a sign of belief in His shed blood and broken body for our salvation. We don't have to "do it" like RCs do in order to be obedient and testify to our faith.
On the subject of the Pope, there WAS no central overall Pope until many, many centuries after all the Apostles had died. The idea of Apostolic Succession is a myth. What is handed down/passed on was the truth of the gospel, not a "crown" or a miter and septre intended to represent apostolic authority for whomever holds it. A large part of even Roman Catholics nowadays don't accept the authority of Pope Francis - many of them on this forum. Jesus ordained His Apostles. They didn't have the power to grant that authority in perpetuity.
I hope you seek and find the Truth of Christ and not the false doctrines of man.
I already have found the Truth of Jesus Christ and rejoice in my eternal salvation gifted to me by the grace of God through faith. I hope you find the Truth of Christ and come out from among the false teachers in your religion who pervert the truth of the gospel. It's a wonderful thing to KNOW you have eternal life!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.