REFLECTIONS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

It is my desire to use my retirement to write a book about an Epistle that deserves to be considered in light of how history and theology combine. I am posting what I may use as a prologue to see if it wets the appetite of readers for more. 

Prologue

Before opening the Epistle to the Hebrews for examination, it seems useful to look at a story from the Second Book of Samuel about Uziah, King of Judah, whose fifty-two-year rule lasted from about 790 to 739 B.C., beginning when he was only sixteen years of age. Let us look at some of the account from II Chronicles chapter 26. First of all, we see that he was a righteous king: “And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father Amaziah did (v.4).”

We will pick up at v. 16.

But when he was strong, his heart was lifted up to his destruction: for he transgressed against the LORD his God, and went into the temple of the LORD to burn incense upon the altar of incense. And Azariah the priest went in after him, and with him fourscore priests of the LORD, that were valiant men: And they withstood Uzziah the king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the LORD, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed; neither shall it be for thine honor from the LORD God. Then Uzziah was wroth, and had a censer in his hand to burn incense: and while he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy even rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the LORD, from beside the incense altar. And Azariah the chief priest, and all the priests, looked upon him, and, behold, he was leprous in his forehead, and they thrust him out from thence; yea, himself hasted also to go out, because the LORD had smitten him. And Uzziah the king was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house, being a leper; for he was cut off from the house of the LORD: and Jotham his son was over the king's house, judging the people of the land. (vs. 16-21)

The text tells us that “his heart was lifted up,” and ascribes his presumption to the sin of pride. Nonetheless, no king of Judah had ever presumed to usurp the priestly office, the office of the Kohanim, that belonged exclusively to the sons of Aaron, the brother of Moses since the time of the Exodus. What had entered into the mind of this king, one of the few who was generally a good and righteous king, that emboldened him to assume a priestly role based on his royal position? It is difficult to find what it was that seems to have created in his mind a confusion between his role and that of the male descendants of Aaron, but once we see it, it actually makes logical sense. Yes, he should have added to his learning the traditional teaching that he was reminded of, urgently reminded of, by Azariah and the other Levitical priests. But it seems apparent that his pride was that of a young man with a bit of education, a sophomore of sorts, too proud to heed those whose learning was more complete.

         Indeed, there was an old tradition from the Book of Genesis that showed an understanding that was already ancient in the time of Uziah. The story is that of Abraham who was blessed by, and paid tithes to, Melchizedek (Genesis 14:12-18). This mysterious man is described very simply, “And Melchizedek the king of Salem brought out bread and wine, and he was a priest to the Most High God.” In fact, this priest even had the word “king” in his name, which means “King of Justice,” or “King of Righteousness.” Salem (Shalem), which means Peace, is a very ancient name for what later became known as Jerusalem to this day. Perhaps Psalm 110 was used as a coronation Psalm for the kings of Judah. It opens with the words “The LORD (YHVH) said unto my Lord, ‘Sit thou on my right hand.’” In the fourth verse these words appear:

“The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, ‘Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.’”

Having a memory of those words addressed to him when he was sixteen, he may have long considered it his right to assert a priestly role as a privilege to be exercised by the king in Jerusalem, a right that went back to Melchizedek himself. The possible confusion in his mind may well have been strengthened by the record we see today in the actual Hebrew words of II Samuel 8:18, which I translate literally: “And the sons of David were priests (V’b’nai David Kohanim hua).”1 I noticed that when reading the Hebrew text, and saw that English translations were mostly deficient, saying things like “royal officials” or, as even the translators of the court of King James were unwilling to deal with the seeming contradiction, “chief rulers.”

I finally found, with no surprise, a correct rendering in Robert Alter’s translation (“And David’s sons served as priests”). Alter’s explanation, in a footnote, is that “This curious detail is probably parallel to a palace guard of foreign origins: just as David creates an elite military contingent outside the framework of the Israelite troops, he invests his own sons with sacerdotal duties within the circle of the court, outside the framework of the hereditary priesthood that controlled the public cult.” 2. That may well be the case, but it is difficult to know much more about it. Perhaps this royal priesthood, of sorts, consisted simply of singing the works of their father in prayer services. It is obvious that the Psalms of David, and others, found a place of Liturgical use in the temple led by men who were not Levitical priests. They did not approach any altar of sacrifice or incense.

         In terms of Christian interpretation, most notably in the Epistle to the Hebrews about which I am undertaking this endeavor, the combination of two royal lines, a priestly lineage and a kingly dynasty, was reserved for the great High Priest who is himself the reality of which all things and persons in the temple were types and shadows. The time had not come in the eighth century B.C. because the types and shadows of the Law were yet serving as “our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.” (Galatians 3:24)

 The history of the Old Testament contains a shape, a pattern, in which two kinds of men are called “Messiah”– Meshiach 3 First it is the priests, those who offer sacrifice, and then it is the kings. To the writer of the Epistle, both offices are combined in Christ, the true Priest after the order of Melchizedek. He was writing to explain the meaning of the temple, for much of the city was about to be destroyed by the Roman army as Jesus himself had lamented and foretold in a Jeremiad.

 

        

1.       וּבְנֵי דָוִד, כֹּהֲנִים הָיוּ

2.       The Hebrew Bible, A Translation with Commentary, Alter, Robert, Norton Books, New York and London, 2019

3.       Meshiach  (  מְשִׁיחָ anointed ) from the word Meshach  ( מָשַׁחְ anoint).

EASTER FUGUE

                                                          CLICK ON THE EASTER ICON

In The News

I read this report. It is time for many of you to realize that the “Christian” Nationalist Movement will not tolerate those of us who hold the old liturgical traditions.

*********

BREAKING: Pete Hegeth's Pentagon SPITS on Catholic soldiers on Good Friday by hosting a Protestants-only chapel service with the message "No Catholic Mass."

This is absolutely jaw-dropping....

According to HuffPost's Jennifer Bendery, the Defense Department has invited over 3,500 employees to a Good Friday service at the Pentagon Chapel "except it’s only for Protestants, not Catholics." She obtained an email sent out by Air Force leadership, which laid out the outrageous abuse of religious liberty in plain text.

“Just a friendly reminder: There will be a Protestant Service (No Catholic Mass) for Good Friday today at the Pentagon Chapel,” it reads.

“I guess so the Catholics know their kind ain’t welcome. It’s so ridiculous," a Pentagon employee told her.

When Bendery reached out to the Pentagon, a spokesperson confirmed that there will not be another, separate service for Catholics in the Pentagon chapel today. While Catholics do not celebrate the full Mass on Good Friday, they do hold liturgies, intercessions, distribute pre-consecrated Eucharist, and observe the Stations of the Cross. Hegseth’s Pentagon has done nothing to honor these sacred traditions.

This one isn't hard to puzzle out. The Christian Nationalist movement that Hegseth is part of is Evangelical to its core. They view Catholics with something between suspicion and outright hostility. Hegseth previously invited pastor Doug Wilson to lead a prayer service at the Pentagon. Wilson has called for a Christian theocracy in America, suggested that "biblical slavery" might come back under that theocracy, and called for banning Catholic processions.

In this Evangelical vision of a Christian America, Catholic cathedrals are torn down and replaced with golden statues of Trump holding the cross.

This animosity towards Catholics is also rooted in backlash against Pope Leo XIV's outspoken anti-MAGA sentiments. He has repeatedly condemned the cruel treatment of migrants as well as Trump's illegal, bloody Iran War. Many Republicans now view Leo and by extension all Catholics as an enemy.

Maundy Thursday and the One Mass

In the Anglican Tradition we call the day Maundy Thursday, from the same root as the word “Mandate.” The mandate is Dominical, that is, from the Lord himself: “Do this in remembrance of Me.” What is the “this” that we are commanded to do? The answer is in scripture.

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink of it all of you; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. (Matthew 26:26-28)

The requirements laid down for us in the Mandate are few, simple, and easy. Several different liturgies have been in use over all of the centuries since that night. This is a point that should be one of unity rather than of division, because whether one uses the Divine Liturgy of the Orthodox Church, the Tridentine Mass of the Roman Catholic Church, or the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, etc., the essentials are the same. The celebrant, serving in the role of Christ, blesses the bread and brakes it, and then takes the cup and gives thanks, with each element repeating the Lord’s Words of Institution. It seems only right to surround this holy service with sincere worship, the kind that is best expressed in profound liturgy and that can be enriched with music. The use of vestments helps because it adds a feeling of timelessness as we give eucharist (good thanksgiving) across generations in the Communion of Saints.

In each of those details our difference of custom is evident, differences in vestments, different additional prayers, different kinds of music, all from the riches of almost every language and culture under heaven. Someday I hope to see an Ethiopian Orthodox liturgy just to appreciate the differences in detail that are, essentially and spiritually the same Lord’s Supper, the same Holy Communion, to which I am accustomed. Years ago, I found myself trying to correct a fellow American Christian who was scandalized by a picture of Arabs prostrating and speaking in Arabic. He was offended because he thought I had posted a video of Muslims at prayer (maybe he thought I was promoting that other religion). I failed to convince him that Arab Christians were calling God “Allah” before Mohamed was born - long before.

Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. (Acts 2:6-11)

Those Arabians, the last group mentioned by Saint Luke when writing about the Day of Pentecost, called God “Allah” because Arabic and Hebrew, as well as Aramaic, have the same root, El (or Al) as the word for God. It is simply a linguistic and etymological fact with a lot of history attached. The old phrase “Diversity in unity” may seem corny, but it was Saint Paul who appreciated that concept even on the level of a local congregation, the diversity necessary to a body in which each part is necessary for the whole body to live and function. For this reason, the Apostle warned of the danger of failing to “discern the Lord’s Body,” that is that “we are members one of another,” when partaking of that bread and of that cup (after all why else would he mention the betrayal of Christ? See I Corinthians 11:18-34).

Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord…For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. (I Corinthians 12:4,5 14-18)

What was true, and of great importance to Paul, for mutual edification and charity in one local church, became, for it was inevitable, of the same importance on a much larger level because the Church kept growing throughout the world. Yes, the faith of Christ is alive in every language and in every culture - not only Western culture for heaven’s sake! There exists no justification for confusing Christianity and the Body of Christ with Christendom (a word that lost all meaning in 1914) and Western culture. That nonsense is a prejudice we can do without.

Yes, our customs are diverse because the Church is universal, so much so that we may struggle to overcome suspicion by learning appreciation for the richness of what is, in the eyes of God, one and only One Body of Christ wherever it may be manifested in the world. And, as the place of unity is the Lord’s table, there is only one Holy Communion supper as long as we obey the Mandate to “Do this in remembrance of Me.” This one and the same supper has been going on since “The night in which he was betrayed,” and it continues because we continue, all over the world, to “Show the Lord’s death until he come.” (I Corinthians 11:26)

____________________________________________________

Speaking of languages - tongues - here is some Latin with the translation next to it. This is the chant for Maundy Thursday.

Pange lingua - gregorian chant

ORIGINAL MUSIC FOR HOLY WEEK

Use this link.

Feast of the Annunciation

Click on the icon for the link

SPEAKING THE TRUTH IN LOVE

        

                                                     For the video click on this link.

Eschatology Kooks

Watch out for the “End times Bible prophecy” people. They connect dots that should not be connected. Their interpretation of scripture is ridiculous. This current war (and it is a war) has nothing to do with “fulfilling Bible prophecy.“ And their focus on some need to rebuild the temple is nonsense. What we learn from the Epistle to the Hebrews is that it doesn’t matter whether the temple is ever rebuilt or not. The Epistle was obviously written to the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem to warn them to leave the city, because the Roman army was coming as Jesus had foretold. So he explains how the temple had fulfilled its purpose with prophetic types and shadows of which Christ is the reality. It was a very realistic concern, because those Christians were also Jews who would have felt the pressure to remain in the city and fight to the death. But God had another mission for the Church, which did not include taking up arms.

Hebrews 13: 12Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. 13Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. 14For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.

——

🔥BREAKING: Pope Leo Condemns Trump’s Oval Office Evangelical Pro-War Gathering! – "War is not sacred; only peace is sacred!"

Pope Leo XIV, the first American pope, delivered a strong condemnation from the Vatican today, directly confronting the Christian Zionist leaders who convened in the Oval Office to pray over Donald Trump and "sanctify" his unauthorized military actions against Iran.

In a passionate address, the pope, originally from Chicago, declared: "War is not sacred; only peace is sacred because it is willed by God." He emphasized this point repeatedly, denouncing the conflict as an "immoral" aggression that has already cost American and Iranian lives (including innocent schoolgirls) and risks spiraling into a broader global catastrophe.

"If the world turns a deaf ear to this plea, we are certain that God will hear our prayer and the cries of the suffering," the pope said. He urged religious leaders around the globe to join the call for peace, standing up for the voiceless poor, displaced persons, and the earth itself ravaged by violence.

"We must have the courage to choose peace," he declared. "Enough of these wars, with their tragic toll of death, destruction, and displacement." The pope framed the conflict as a moral dilemma, calling on governments to heed the cries of the suffering, rather than the zealots who justify violence with scripture.

This statement comes as Christian Zionist leaders – many affiliated with evangelical networks supporting Trump’s "end-times" rhetoric – have been praying over the president in the Oval Office, presenting the military action as God's will and a fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

The pope’s remarks sharply rejected that narrative, asserting that no war can be deemed holy, regardless of how it is justified with scripture. His Chicago roots and consistent opposition to Trump’s policies lend additional moral weight to his rebuke, shedding light on the growing global concern over the lack of congressional approval, the human cost, and the reckless escalation without a clear end in sight.

While Trump brushes off the increasing death toll as "just the way it is," and his energy secretary acknowledges the war's connection to securing long-term oil interests, the pope calls for de-escalation, challenging the world to prioritize peace over violence. With even the pope denouncing the war as immoral and the justifications for it as misguided, the moral bankruptcy of MAGA warmongering is exposed.