Christ, Our Great High Priest

     When one thinks of titles for Jesus Christ, the title of King is the most common. We even celebrate the feast of Christ the King in our liturgy. We tend to focus on Christ’s kingship by itself, but He is not solely a king. He is also a priest; a royal priest. Thus, the Epistle to the Hebrews encourages us: “Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.”¹ As Catholics we affirm this (or at least we should since the infallible Word of God has revealed it to us), yet some Christians are hesitant to give this title to Our Lord. Likewise, Jews in the early days of Christianity (and I daresay throughout history up to the present time) would have a very major and significant objection to Christ’s priesthood: He is not from the tribe of Levi. It is true, Christ is from the tribe of Judah which was prophesied to bring forth a line of kings. Even a messianic king. A Jew might be able to grant that Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem, is from the tribe of Judah and a descendant of the line of David, thus heir to the Davidic throne and any orthodox Christian would do the same. But a priest? Isn’t that stretching it a bit far? After all, the Levites ordained themselves after they slaughtered their brethren for worshiping the Golden Calf. Where was Judah? There is no record of them ordaining themselves by sticking up for God! Where do these Christians get off saying that this Judahite named Jesus is a priest?

      Yet, that is precisely what the author of Hebrews claims. Hebrews goes so far as to say that Christ is a priest “after the order of Melchizedek.” It even says that he was designated so by God Himself.² A thorough reader of the Gospels might object that nowhere does Christ ever refer to Himself as a priest, nor do the Gospel writers make such a claim. Even more so, God never designates Him a “priest after the order of Melchizedek.” Where then does the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews find the basis for his theology? Does he make it up? Does the Catholic Church base its doctrine of Christ’s priesthood on only one book of the Bible? Surely there has to be more to it, even if that one book is inspired. Moreover, who is Melchizedek and how did he get a priesthood?

     I intend to show that the Epistle to the Hebrews does not invent the theology of Christ’s priesthood, but rather the Gospel writers put forth the concept and Christ Himself also alludes to it. The author of Hebrews says explicitly what the Gospels say implicitly. To do this, I will first provide a brief history of the origins of the priesthood, touching on the priesthood of Melchizedek and the split into two subsequent priesthoods. Next, I will show how David reestablished the Melchizedekan royal priesthood which was central to the rule of his Kingdom and his worship in the Temple. From there, I will move into the Gospels and their portrayal of Christ as the fulfillment of the Davidic royal priest after the order of Melchizedek. Lastly, I will show how Christ’s royal priesthood provides the link between the Kingdom, Temple, and Church and its implications for our worship in the Mass.

     The priesthood is as old as the first man. God instituted the “original covenant of royal-priestly primogeniture” from the very beginning.³ He created the world in six days and on the seventh he rested. The Sabbath is set up by God as a holy day of rest. It is the climax of creation; God’s covenant with mankind. When we celebrate the liturgy, we celebrate this covenant that God has made with man. In fact, all of creation is oriented towards this divine liturgy of the divine covenant. That is why we work six days out of the seven. The whole week leads up to this one day, so that each week is a sort of new creation. With this in mind, it is no surprise that Adam, the first man, was a priest. His priesthood, however, is not the same as the kind we know now, nor was it like the priesthood of the Levites. Adam’s priesthood was a natural one. The actions that Adam was to do in the Garden of Eden, “keep” and “till”, are priestly actions also proscribed for the Levitical priests in their duties in the temple. Eden was a primordial temple.⁴ Scott Hahn explains that “the basis for the patriarchal religion was the natural family order, most especially the patriarchal authority handed down from father to son—ideally the firstborn—often in the form of ‘the blessing.’”⁵ He also points out that “at this point in salvation history, family and church are coextensive—houses are domestic sanctuaries, meals are sacrifices, hearths are altars—all because fathers and their (firstborn) sons are empowered as priests by nature.”⁶ The “domestic church” existed way before Christianity.

     So, in Genesis, we see the natural priesthood passed down from Adam to Seth⁷ down to the time of Noah. When God causes the flood starting the world over with Noah and his family, we see Noah performing the same priestly actions as Adam did in the garden.⁸ The natural priesthood goes on and Shem inherits his father’s blessing and so on. Then, we reach chapter 14 of Genesis and seemingly out of nowhere comes this mysterious “Melchizedek king of Salem [who brings] out bread and wine” and he is also “priest of God Most High.”⁹ This is the first instance in the Bible where a person is referred to as a priest. But he is not just any priest. He is a “priest of God Most High.” Melchizedek also blesses Abram. But who is this Melchizedek? Who made him a priest? More importantly, where did he get this blessing that he gives to Abram?! For, a person cannot give a blessing without first receiving one. The answers to these questions can be found in St. Ephrem the Syrian’s Commentary on Genesis: “Melchizedek is Shem¹⁰, who became a king due to his greatness; he was the head of fourteen nations. In addition, ‘he was a priest.’ He received this from Noah, his father, through the rights of succession.”¹¹ Shem/Melchizedek passes the blessing he received from Noah onto Abram who was promised to be blessed by God back in chapter 12 . The priesthood continues on this way up to the time of Moses and the Exodus.

     Before leaving Egypt, Israel’s firstborn sons, spared by the blood of the paschal lamb, are consecrated formally as priests at the Passover.¹² Israel is now truly “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”¹³ Unfortunately, this does not last long. The Israelites make for themselves a golden calf as their god, rejecting the One True God who brought them out of Egypt. On that day, Moses put forth a cry not unlike the Archangel Michael’s, “Who is on the Lord’s side?”¹⁴ Only the tribe of Levi respond. The Levites go forth and slaughter all their kinsmen who committed idolatry, some three thousand men. This loyalty on the part of the Levites earns themselves consecration as Israel’s official priests, with the high priests descending from Aaron. Israel from that day onward is no longer a kingdom of priests nor is it by any means a holy nation. Even the Levitical priesthood itself becomes corrupted. All this leads up to the establishment of the Kingdom of Israel and its first royal priest—King David.

      David’s role as a royal priest is a reestablishment of God’s original intention for the priesthood. David initiates once again the natural order of priests. A priesthood after the order of Melchizedek. Under David and his son, Solomon, two priestly orders coexists side by side. The Melchizedekan priesthood, exercised by David, is superior at this time to that of the Levitical, for David appoints and commands the Levite priests in the ministering of the ark. One of the important things to notice is that no one questions David’s priesthood. David is definitely not a Levite. He is from the tribe of Judah, fulfilling the prophecy of Jacob that a line of kings will spring up from Judah.¹⁵ Yet, David carries out priestly actions without any opposition. Not even from God! He truly is a priest. And not just by virtue of his kingship. For, King Saul performed priestly actions and because of it, lost his kingship.¹⁶ We see David acting in his priestly role when he recovers the ark and brings it back to Jerusalem. In 1 Chronicles 15:27 we read, “David was clothed with a robe of fine linen, as also were all the Levites…and David wore a linen ephod.” The robe of linen is a priestly garment and the ephod is worn by the high priest.¹⁷ The Chronicler specifically mentions David alone wearing the ephod to show that David is the high priest and he is well aware of it. In the next chapter, David offers burnt offerings and peace offerings, blesses the people “in the name of the Lord,” and distributes to them bread and wine. All of these are priestly actions. Moreover, David, in offering a blessing and distributing bread and wine, performs the same actions as the other royal priest from Jerusalem; Melchizedek! And as a true “priest of God Most High,” David desires to build a house for God; a Temple. God, however, has other plans:

“Moreover I declare to you that the LORD will build you a house. When your days are fulfilled to go to be with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, one of your own sons, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for me, and I will establish his throne forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son; I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from him who was before you, but I will confirm him in my house and in my kingdom for ever and his throne shall be established forever.”¹⁸

The son of David, Solomon, becomes the son of the Lord who builds a house for God and partially fulfills this prophecy. It is important to note that God mentions that the son of David will be his son. This sonship of God has priestly connotations as Pablo Gadenz points out:

“After the development of the Israelite monarchy, the king is referred to as the first-born son. King Solomon, the son of David, functions as a priest at the dedication of the Temple. According to Ps. 110:4, he is a priest ‘after the order of Melchizedek’ not only because Jerusalem is identified with the Salem of Gen. 14 (cf. Ps. 76:2), but also because he has received the title of first-born son.”¹⁹

Yet, as I said earlier, Solomon only partially fulfills the prophecy of God. The Son who will build a house for God and Whom God will establish His throne forever is our “great high priest,” Jesus Christ!

     “Everything that the priesthood of the Old Covenant prefigured finds its fulfillment in Christ Jesus, the ‘one mediator between God and men.’”²⁰ In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the title of priest is the most frequently used title to described Christ and is the only Book of the Bible to ascribe the title to Him.²¹ However, it is not the only book to portray Christ as a priest! Priestly allusions of Christ are woven throughout the Gospel accounts. But why don’t the Gospels say explicitly that Christ is a priest? Jean Galot answers that if Christ “abstains from using the title of priest, the reason is that the priesthood he claims is not like the Jewish priesthood then in place.”²² For if Christ called Himself a priest, people would associate Him with this priesthood consisting of Pharisees and Sadducees. Jesus has no intentions of that. Rather he points out their corruption and calls them “hypocrites,” “a brood of vipers,” and so forth. The priesthood in place also “[looked] out for its own interest and glory and [heaped] heavy burdens on the ordinary faithful.”²³ More importantly, “those who are called high priests in the texts, and who command the highest degree of priestly power within the Jewish nation, reject the message of the gospel.”²⁴ Christ’s priesthood is the complete opposite. Our Lord came “not to be served but to serve.”²⁵ This is an essential element of the Christian priesthood.

     Christ also does not call Himself a priest because He is not a Levite. If He had done so, He would have been laughed at and even stoned! Only a Levite could be a priest. Andre Feuillet mentions, “It is a fact that in late Judaism there was widespread expectation of a priestly Messiah, a Messiah from the house of Levi to whom the kingly Messiah from the house of Judah would be subordinated, an ideal priest who would be quite different from the traditional priesthood in which men were so disappointed.”²⁶ Yet Christ, not of the house of Levi but of Judah, becomes both the priestly and kingly Messiah shattering all expectations. St. John Chrysostom explains, concerning the tribe of Judah, “First it was royal, and then it is become sacerdotal: so therefore also in regard to Christ: for King indeed He always was, but has become Priest from the time that He assumed the Flesh, that He offered the sacrifice.”²⁷ Gadenz says that Christ “abolishes the Levitical priesthood and restores—on a supernatural level— the priesthood of the first-born sons.”²⁸ This would leave only the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek. Gadenz notes that “Christ is a priest after the order of Melchizedek not only because of the foreshadowing of the Eucharist in the offering of bread and wine, but also because He is the first-born Son of God as Shem-Melchizedek is the first-born son of Noah.”²⁹ I think he makes a very important point about Christ’s priesthood deriving from His firstborn sonship. It is the basis for the natural priesthood, of which Melchizedek’s priesthood is from. Feuillet as well notes, “The priesthood of Jesus acquires its dignity, efficacy, and duration from the fact that he is the Son of God.”³⁰ But if it is true that Christ fulfills everything that the priesthood of the Old Covenant prefigured, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church suggests³¹, then the Levitical priesthood cannot be fully abolished. I would suggest rather, that Christ merges the two Old Covenant priesthoods into the ideal priesthood which He embodies. Elements of the natural priesthood naturally were carried into the Levitical priesthood. And certainly the Melchizedekan priesthood is the greater, hence the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews states:

“See how great he is! Abraham the patriarch gave him a tithe of the spoils. And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brethren, though these also are descended from Abraham. But this man who has not their genealogy received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. Here tithes are received by mortal men; there, 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.”

But, the Epistle to the Hebrews also compares what Christ accomplished with what the Levitical priesthood should have done, yet was incapable of doing. Hence St. John Chrysostom proclaims, “But if he who bears a type of Christ is so much better not merely than the priests, but even than the forefather himself of the priests, what should one say of the reality? Thou seest how superabundantly [the author of Hebrews] shows the superiority” of Christ’s own priesthood.³² Hebrews shows that Christ fulfilled both types of priesthoods, yet there is more fulfillment in the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek. Alexander Nairne tells us that:

“The author [of the Epistle to the Hebrews] has in his mind a priesthood which is universal, has been in the world from the beginning, and possesses an unbroken life of growth running up at last into the perfect achievement of our Lord Jesus Christ. In Genesis he found a record of a king-priest not Israel’s race, who was nevertheless recognized by the founder of Israel, and is entitled by the author of Genesis ‘Priest of God most high.’ He blessed Abraham, that is he stood on his Godward side; through him, on that day in the far-off beginnings of the world’s history, Abraham drew near to God. The author has also to shew that this ancient, abiding, universal priesthood has never been superseded by the Levitical, but has gone on side by side with it, and at last outstays the aged and worn-out Levitical institution. And ready for his purposes he found a Psalm in which a later king of Israel is hailed priest after the order of Melchizedek. The narrative in Genesis and the appeal to it in the later Psalm give him the illustration, the argument, above all the name he wants, and he describes this priesthood as Priesthood after the order of Melchizedek.”³³

This is for good reason too, since Christ is the actualization of the Davidic King, and David himself possessed the Melchizedekan priesthood.

     All of the Synoptic Gospels portray Christ as a priest for sure, but the one that does so the most is the Gospel of Luke. In fact, Luke refers to Christ’s priesthood so heavily throughout his Gospel that, since He was a companion of St. Paul, it seems to help support the traditional view of Pauline authorship for the Epistle to the Hebrews.³⁴ Gadenz notes that “Luke is unmistakably presenting Jesus in the narrative as a priest– a priest not in virtue of his being a Levite, but in virtue of his being a first-born son.”³⁵ Luke presents Jesus’ priestly role right from the beginning of his Gospel. In the Annunciation, the angel says that Christ “will be called the Son of the Most High” and also he “will be called holy, the Son of God.” These titles of Christ reference back to 1 Chronicles 17:13 as well as to Psalm 110. Christ is the Son of God, a priest after the order of Melchizedek, who is “a priest of God Most High.”

     Also, Peter Leithart tells us that the births of John and Jesus are presented in order to show the similarities between the two men. John the Baptist was a Levitical priest who declared that he is preparing the way for One greater than himself.³⁶ Luke is telling us that not only is Christ a priest, but he is of a priesthood greater than the Levitical priesthood. The Presentation of Jesus in the Temple also points us to Christ being set apart, or consecrated, for priesthood. When Christ is presented in the Temple, he isn’t bought back as the law proscribed for the firstborn sons, rather, like Samuel, he was dedicated to God. The two doves mentioned in Luke are not for Christ’s ransom (which would have been five shekels), but for the removal of uncleanness incurred by Mary in giving birth to Christ according to Jewish custom.³⁷

      The Baptism in the Jordan alludes to Christ’s priesthood as well. Leithart points out:

“[W]hy did Jesus accept a baptism ‘of repentance for the forgiveness of sins’? Theologians have often answered, correctly it seems, by stating that Jesus’ baptism identified Him with Israel as her sin-bearing Substitute; Jesus was baptized ‘when all the people were being baptized.’ This fits snugly with a priestly interpretation, for the High Priest was the Old Covenant sin-bearer.”³⁸

He also mentions that by his preaching and at the baptism, John, a priest of the order of Aaron and Zadok, pays homage to Jesus, as Levi did to Melchizedek.³⁹

     Another important key to recognizing the priesthood of Jesus Christ is the genealogy found in chapter three. “Genealogies were particularly important for priestly houses. To qualify for service, Israel’s priests had to prove descent from Aaron, and later from Zadok….Thus, the genealogy of the Pentateuch runs from Adam to Aaron, while Luke’s runs from the Melchizedekan priest, Jesus, back to Adam.”⁴⁰ Another clue found in the genealogy is the mention that “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age.”⁴¹ This is precisely the age at which Levites would become priests.⁴²

     Andre Feuillet, in his book The Priesthood of Christ and His Ministers, gives a nice summary of the actions of Christ in Luke that are seen as priestly:

“the blessing of the little children, the exorcisms and expulsions of demons, and especially the forgiveness of sins whereby Christ reconciled men to God. The name ‘the Holy One of God’ (Mk. 1:24; cf. Jn 6:69), which is given Christ by a possessed person, is sometimes said to be a priestly title, since priests were said to be ‘consecrated to their God’ (Lv. 21:6; 2 Chr. 23:6; 35:3) and the high priests were said to wear on his turban a plate with the inscribed words: ‘Consecrated to Yahweh’ (Ex. 28:36). Jesus liked to apply to himself Psalm 110 in which the Messiah is a king and a priest according to the order of Melchizedek (Mk. 12:35-36; 14:62). In Luke 24:51 Jesus blesses his disciples as he leaves them and ascends to heaven; this solemn blessing seems to recall the blessing given either by the high priest (cf. Si. 50:22) or by Melchizedek, in whom the Letter to the Hebrews sees a prefiguration of Christ the priest.”⁴³

As you can see, Luke’s Gospel has Christ’s priesthood implied at every point of Jesus’ life.

     Jesus Christ also performs the office of priest at the institution of the Eucharist. A parallel can be seen here with Solomon, who after dedicating the Temple, held a feast. F.X. Durrwell tells us that “Our Lord had always pictured the Kingdom as a feast.”⁴⁴ And also that “All the mystery of the Kingdom is contained and expressed in the Eucharist.”⁴⁵ The offering of bread and wine also remind us of Melchizedek in Genesis, but it is also a reference to the suffering servant told of in Isaiah. Again, Feuillet provides important insight on the matter:

“Every time the New Testament speaks of Christ’s role by alluding to the self-offering of the Servant of Yahweh, it is implicitly presenting Jesus to us as the priest of the new covenant. The accounts of the institution of the Eucharist, in which Jesus refers to Isaiah 53 (he gives as food and drink his own body and blood that are offered for mankind in his passion), are usually considered to be an implicit testimony to his priestly status.”⁴⁶

Scholars have noted that the prophecy of Isaiah 53 begins with a penitential liturgy in which the Servant is both priest and victim!⁴⁷

      After looking at the Synoptic Gospels, we can turn to the Gospel of John to see images of Christ’s priesthood that are not found in the previous three (or at least not to the extent of the fourth Gospel). For instance, in John 10:36 Christ refers to Himself as being consecrated and sent into to the world by God. Feuillet points out that Jesus is speaking on the Feast of the Dedication, or Hanukkah. This feast commemorates the rededication of the altar desecrated by Antiochus Epiphanes and also recalled the consecrations of Solomon’s Temple and the tabernacle by Moses. Feuillet notes that F. M. Braun sees this as a clear self identification on the part of Christ as the new Temple of God. Feuillet however, following W. Thusing, thinks of it as Christ referring to Himself as both priest and victim and points out that in Exodus 28:36, 41, “consecrate” is short for “consecrate as priest.”⁴⁸ In my opinion, the two interpretations do not have to be separated. In fact, they must not be! Christ is telling the Pharisees that His body is the New Temple which will become the Church, wherein He will be both the High Priest and victim. Christ effects a new priesthood. With this new priesthood there is a change in the law. Sacrifices will no longer be in one localized Temple. They will take place in His body, the Church. All sacrifices from this point on will be through Him and will actually be Him! For there is no other sacrifice worthy for our sins. No other sacrifice accomplishes what it intends; the washing away of sins. Only Christ as the priest, offering Himself, can wash sins away. That is why in the Mass the priest presiding is not the one offering the sacrifice to God. A priest, at his consecration, becomes an alter Christus- another Christ. Through the priest, acting in persona Christi, Christ is made present to offer Himself up in the form of bread and wine which truly is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ!

      The prayer that Christ prays in chapter 17 is also recognized by scholars as a key point in the Gospel where He reveals His priesthood. It does not matter that Jesus uses not the title “priest” in reference to Himself. The fact that Christ says in verse 19 that he consecrates Himself is a direct proclamation that He is a priest! John clearly sees Christ as a priest and portrays him as such. The place that he does the most in his Gospel is the account of Christ’s crucifixion. John tells us that Christ was handed over for crucifixion at the “sixth hour.” This is the exact hour that the Lamb was being ritually slaughtered in the Temple by the high priest for the Passover. John also tells us that Christ was wearing a tunic that “was without seam, woven from top to bottom.” The description of Christ’s clothes (a priestly garment) and the notation of the time that Christ was handed over for crucifixion are John’s way of alerting us that Christ is the high priest and also the victim! “According to Leviticus 16 the Jewish high priest sacrificed two victims for sin, then entered the holy of holies, and sprinkled the throne of mercy with the blood of the victims. This final action was the decisive one for the expiation of sins. The death of Christ on the cross corresponds to the immolation of the two victims by the high priest, and the ascension of Christ corresponds to the high priest’s entrance into the holy of holies as well as to the sprinkling of the throne of mercy with the blood of victims.”⁴⁹ In giving of Himself, Christ makes the perfect sacrifice. This perfect sacrifice can only be made by a perfect high priest. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. tells us that “Christ’s priesthood cannot be more perfect by reason of the union of the priest and the victim, and of the dignity of the latter.”⁵⁰ On the Cross, Jesus Christ performed “a supreme liturgy, in which the beautiful fruits of grace would be poured out upon the world and enter the hearts of the faithful through the channels of Baptism, the Holy Eucharist, and the other sacraments.”⁵¹

     The Epistle to the Hebrews not only is the place that Christ is most explicitly designated as a priest, it also “discusses the tabernacle or temple more than any other New Testament book, except perhaps for John’s Apocalypse, which gives prolonged descriptions of the heavenly temple. The author speaks more of the ‘tabernacle’ than the ‘temple’, but what he says of the former also applies to the latter.”⁵² This is important because embodied in Christ is both the Temple and the Kingdom. The Temple because of Christ’s priesthood and the Kingdom because of his kingship. “Part of Jesus’ doing what Adam should have done included establishing the new temple and extending it obediently.”⁵³ He does this in the Church, which is His Body. Edmund Clowney recognizes this when he asserts that “Christ is the meaning for which the temple existed.”⁵⁴ Durrwell gives a splendid explanation of the mystery:

“On Easter Day, Christ’s body became the temple of the new people, the place where they gathered together, their point of unity, the dwelling place of glory where the multitude would rest in adoration, contemplating the face of God, and hearing his word. There they would come to offer the sacrifice of praise and expiation, they would adore and beseech. In the past, the Jews used to pray in a stone temple in Jerusalem. But the hour has come when the true adorers adore in spirit and in truth, in the glorified Christ, the true temple of God’s holiness, and in the Spirit of God, the supreme truth and divine holiness, who filled Christ on Easter morning.”⁵⁵

If the Mass is “Heaven on Earth” because Christ the high priest is truly present, then when we worship Christ in the Mass, we are worshiping Him in His heavenly Temple here on Earth. Our Liturgy is Temple worship! Not like in the Old Testament Temple, but in the New Temple that is Christ’s body. For wherever Christ, the royal high priest, is truly present in the Sacraments, there dwells God’s name and God’s house. No longer is the House of God a localized place. Travel to Jerusalem is no longer required to worship our God. Due to Christ’s death and Resurrection, we are able to receive Christ as He has given Himself (truly his body, blood, soul, and priestly divinity) in the Sacraments. Wherever there are valid Sacraments, there is the Church, the New Temple, and there God dwells. Hence, it is important to evangelize to bring the Church (the New Temple) to the ends of the earth. Not only will we fulfill the Great Commission given us by Christ, but God’s Temple will truly be the entire world as described in Revelation 22. In order to do that we need priests, validly ordained after Christ in the order of Melchizedek. For without priests, there are no valid sacraments. “The Church will exist in her fulness only where the priesthood of Christ—through Christian worship—continues to be exercised.”⁵⁶ Charles Journet wrote that “Christian worship is the place of passage through which the double current of love mounts from earth up to heaven and from heaven down to earth.”⁵⁷ Christ is the head of this worship. He is the priest who “suffers, sheds His own blood, operates through His own will, but through His own will lost and found in the will of God; that is, He obeys and therefore governs natural law, and is not bound by artificial rules.”⁵⁸

      In this paper, I have shown that the Epistle to the Hebrews does not invent the theology of Christ’s priesthood. After carefully examining the two Old Covenant priesthoods of the natural/Melchizedekan and Levitical, and exploring how David assumes the office of royal priest even though he is from the tribe of Judah, I have shown that the Gospels testify as well to Christ’s priesthood. Lastly, I showed that Christ’s royal priesthood provides the link between the Kingdom, Temple, and Church and that the Mass which we celebrate today, is nothing less than temple worship in Christ’s own Body, the new temple of God. “One cult and one liturgy are at the heart of Christianity. The blood-soaked Cross remains forever planted at the center of the true religion.”⁵⁹ And all this thanks to Christ, our royal high priest!

Copyright Danny Garland Jr. 2006