Now This Melchizedek - Heb 7.1

7/31/2019 Now This Melchizedek - Heb 7.1

1/18

NOW THIS MELCHIZEDEK . . . (HEB 7,1)

To show the superiority of Christ's priesthood over that of Aaron andthe Lvites, the author of the epistle to the Hebrews introduces a comparison between Jesus and Melchizedek. The comparison is briefly statedin Heb 5,6-10 for the first time, but at the end of the following hortatorysection the author returns to the Melchizedek theme and affirms thatChristian hope is like an anchor firmly rooted in the heavenly sanctuarywhere Christ has gone on ahead of us, "forever a high priest according to

the order of Melchizedek" (6,20). There follows in ch. 7 an extendeddiscussion of Christ and Melchizedek, which C. Spicq has called the"culminating point of the epistle's argument."1 Much has been writtenon Melchizedek and his relation to Heb. It is our purpose here to sift fromthe more recent studies those elements which seem pertinent to hisappearance in Heb and relate to them some new data bearing on theMelchizedek tradition which have come to light in the Qumrn literatureand in the newly discovered Vatican codex of the Palestinian TargumNeofiti I.

Before we turn to these new data, we must stress with several modernwriters2 that the detailed comparison of Christ and Melchizedek in Heb 7is an excellent example of a midrash on Gn 14,18-20. Introducing hisimplicit quotation of Gn by 'outos gar (o Melchisedek, the author of Hebfirst gives a brief resume in w . 1-2 and afterwards takes up variouselements of it for comment. Thus in this section of Heb are verified thefive characteristics of midrash, pointed out by R. Bloch,3 viz., its point dedepart in an OT passage (Gn 14,18-20 implicitly quoted), its homileticcharacter (here for apologetic purposes), its attentive analysis of the text

(the interpretation of the names and explanation of the blessing andtithes), its adaptation of the OT text to a present situation (the priesthoodof Christ), and its haggadic character (an elaborative expos in which theinterest is centered on the biblical account rather than on the historicalfigure as such). Even in its outward form this section bears resemblanceto a classic midrash in Genesis Rabbah 43,6.4 Moreover, the manner in

1L'ptre aux Hbreux (tudes bibliques; 3d ed., Paris) 2,203.

2 See R. Bloch, "Midrash," VDBS S, 1279; H. Rusche, "Die Gestalt desMelchisedek," MUTZ 6 (1955) 230-52. This is certainly a more valid analysis of

Heb 7 than Spicq's view that the entire chapter 7 is nothing more than anexegesis of Ps 110,4 (op. cit., 205).s Op. cit., 1265-7.


2/18

306 T H E CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY [Vol. 25

which Heb introduces into the midrash on Gn 14 phrases from Ps 110

(see Heb 7,11.15.17.21.28) is strikingly similar to the technique of theso-called 4Q Florilegium? a Qumrn text which bears the name midrs aspart of an opening formula.6 The latter text is really a commentary on 2Sm 7,10-14, followed by one on Ps 1,1 and Ps 2,1 ; but into the commentaryon these passages other OT passages have been introduced (Ex 15,17-18and Am 9,11 into the part on 2 Sm; Is 8,11 and Ez 37,23 into that onPs 1,1). The only difference is that the OT texts are here introduced byexplicit formulae, whereas they are not in Heb.7 But the midrashic technique is basically the same. Further, Helga Rusche has recently shownthat the treatment of Melchizedek in Heb is not characterized by theextreme allegorical speculations found in Philo, Josephus, several Gnosticwriters and the Rabbis.8 The theological conception used is related muchmore to controllable Jewish apocalyptic writers with their expectations ofa messianic priesthood rooted in Gn 14. Since the two intertestamentalwritings in which she finds the relevant material are Jubilees and theTestaments of the Twelve Patriarchstexts with known connections withthe Qumrn literatureanother point of comparative interest is thusestablished between Qumrn and Heb.9

Ps 110,4Before we take up the use of Gn 14 in Heb, a few preliminary remarks

are in order about the author's use of Ps 110. Heb first cites it in 5,5-10,to set up the comparison of Jesus and Aaron. The rle of high priest wasnot usurped in either case, but bestowed by divine appointment. This ideaforms part of the development of Heb at this point, where Jesus is shownto have all the qualities of the "perfected" (or "qualified") high priest. Inproof, the author cites Ps 2,7, "You are my son ; this day I have begottenyou," and joins to it Ps 110,4, "The Lord has sworn and will not go back

5 See J. M. Allegro, "Fragments of a Qumran Scroll of Eschatological Midrasm"JBL 77 (1958) 350-4.

6 Ibid., 353 (I, 14). Cf. W. R. Lane, "A New Commentary Structure in 4QFlorilegium," JBL 78 (1959) 343-6; Y. Yadin, "A Midrash on 2 Sam. vii and Ps.i-ii (4Q Florilegium)," IsrEJ 9 (1959) 95-8.

7 See J. A. Fitzmyer, "The Use of Explicit Old Testament Quotations in QumranLiterature and in the New Testament," NTS 7 (1960-1) 297-333.

s Op. cit., 238-44.9 Y. Yadin, "The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Epistle to the Hebrews," Aspects of

the Dead Sea Scrolls (Scripta hierosolymitana 4; Jerusalem, 1958) 36-55; C. Spicq,

"L'ptre aux Hbreux, Apollos, Jean-Baptiste, les Hellnistes et Qumran,"RevQumr 1 (1958-9) 365-90; H. Kosmala, HebrerEssenerChristen. Studienzur Vorgeschichte der frhchristlichen Verkndigung (Studia Post-Biblica 1;


3/18

1963] "Now THIS MELCHIZEDEK . . ." 307

on his word: 'You are a priest forever according to the order of

Melchizedek.' " As Dom J. Dupont, and more recently a young Swedishscholar, E. Lvestam, have pointed out,10 all the clear instances of the use

of Ps 2,7 in the NT relate it to the Resurrection. As of the time of his

resurrection Christ became a "son of God" in a special sense (in the

understanding of the early kerygma reflected here)God's son endowed

with universal and everlasting royal dominion (cf. Rom 1,4) ,11 To this

notion derived from Ps 2,7, Heb now links another from Ps 110,4: God's

appointment of the risen royal Son as the possessor of the eternal priest

hood of Melchizedek.

Though the messianic character of Ps 110 is debated among OTcommentators,12 there is rather general agreement that it is at least a royal

psalm, one in which David is addressed as the hero13 and associated with

the past as the successor of Melchizedek. Like Ps 2, it echoes the dynastic

covenant established in the oracle of Nathan (2 Sm 7,8-16). But the

psalmist thinks of the reigning Israelite king, "not . . . as a simple historical

figure, but as a religious figure who incorporates in himself the kingdom

of Israel and its hope for a future in which the kingship of Yahweh will

become universally effective. In this sense the Ps is messianic since it

repeats the messianic outlook of the dynasty of David."14 It has beenmaintained that v. 4, in which the Israelite monarch is presented as a

king-priest, is a gloss, because it is unique in the OT. However, the

excision of it has to be based on something more than a hunch, and the

otherwise early date of the Ps points to its composition in the time of

David or Solomon,15 when the connection of the Davidic dynasty with the

io J. Dupont, "Filius meus es tu," RSR 35 (1948) 522-43; E. Lvestam, Sonand Saviour: a Study of Acts 132-37. (Coniectanea Neotestamentica 18; Lund,1961) 15-37; E. Ksemann, Das wandernde Gottesvolk (FRLANT 37, Gttingen,

1939) 58-9; R. H. Fuller, The Mission and Achievement of Jesus (SBT 12; London,1954) 87.

11See E. Lvestam, op. cit., 37.

12 See the summary by J. L. McKenzie, "Royal Messianism," CBQ 19 (1957)25-52, esp. 34-6.

13The opinion of H. H. Rowley, "Melchizedek and Zadok (Gen 14 and Ps

110)," Festschrift fr Alfred Bertholet (Tbingen, 1950) 461-72, according towhich David addresses Zadok in v. 4, does not seem to have convinced many;see V. Hamp, "Melchisedech als Typus," Pro Mundi Vita: Festschrift zumeucharistischen Weltkongress 1960 (Mnchen, 1960) 16-17.

14J. L. McKenzie, op. cit., 35-6. H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen (Biblischer Kommentar

15/10; Neukirchen, 1959), 763-4; V. Hamp, op. cit., 18.15 Since Gunkel the early date of the Ps in the time of David or Solomon has


4/18

308 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY [Vol. 25

city of Melchizedek was still fresh and when many of the inhabitants were

not Israelites. Ps 110,4 thus presents the king as the heir of Melchizedek,succeeding him as a priest forever.16

In Heb 5 the author applies this verse of Ps 110 to Jesus, undoubtedly

understanding it as messianic (although he does not expressly state this

link).17 Having first introduced Ps 2,7 to establish the risen Jesus as the

possessor of regal inheritance, he adds Ps 110,4 to present this KinglySon of God as one appointed also to an eternal priesthood.

Whatever the puzzling Hebrew phrase 'al dibrt Malk-sedeq means,no one has ever suggested that it be understood in terms of hereditary

succession. Hence the priesthood of the king is due to something else. The

commonly accepted interpretation of the form 'al dibrt is that it is analternate, perhaps older, form of the construct 'al dibrat.18 Elsewhere inthe OT this phrase means "for the sake of" (Eccl 3,18; 8,2; 7,14). This

causal meaning, however, though defended here by a few scholars,10

scarcely suits the context of the Ps, and has been avoided both by ancient

versions and many modern commentators in favor of a modal sense.20 The

LXX rendered it kata ten taxin Melchisedek, and was followed by Heb5,6; 6,20; 7,11.17 and the Vg, secundum ordinem Melchisedech. But the

73 (1954) 152-6; H. Schmid, "Jahwe und die Kulttraditionen von Jerusalem," AW67 (1955) 175, . 42.

. Caquot, "Remarques sur Psaume CX," Semitica 6 (1956) 33-52, rightlystresses the emphasis in the Psalm on the eternal aspect; cf. R. Tournay, "Le PsaumeCX," RB 67 (1960) 5-41, esp. 19, . 2.

1 7It is apparently part of the author's own theology to apply Ps 110,4 to Christ

as the messianic priest. No rabbi is attested as having applied Ps 110,4 to theMessiah before the second half of the 3d cent. A.D. See C. Spicq, op. cit., 204, . 4.

1 8P. Joon (Grammaire de l'hbreu biblique [2d ed.; Rome, 1947], #931-m)

and G. Beer-R. Meyer (Hebrische Grammatik [Sammlung Gschen Berlin, I, 1952]#45d) explain the final yodh as fair e q compaginis; but Gesenius-Kautzsch-Cowley(Hebrew Grammar [Oxford, 1946], #90k-l), H. Bauer-P. Leander (HistorischeGrammatik der hebrischen Sprache des Alten Testaments [Halle a. S., 1918],#65j-k) more correctly explain it as an obsolete case-ending. Cf. H.-J. Kraus, op.

cit., 753.Despite a superficial resemblance to (and perhaps a common origin with)the Aramaic dbr (Cowley, AP 6,6 [in a context of swearing] ; BMAP 4,13) and'/ dbrt dy (Dn 2,30; 4,14), the phrase in the Ps seems to be different.

1 9Cf. among others Koehler-Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros

(Leiden; 1958) 202; V. Hamp, op. cit., 18; J. M. P. Smith (American Translation[Chicago, 1951], 561) : "A Melchizedek, because of me." See also B. D. Eerdmans,

The Hebrew Book of Psalms (Leiden, 1947) 499: "For the sake of Melchizedek"(explained as "for the memory of").Still less convincing are the attempts ofA. Caquot (op. cit., 44), "Tu es prtre pour toujours. (Il Ta jur) propos de


5/18

1963] "Now THIS MELCHIZEDEK . *," 309

Greek word taxis is of little help, for neither its basic meaning, "arrange

ment, fixed order, succession," nor its Hellenistic meaning, "office, post"of a priest, nor even the meaning "character, quality" (apparently usedin 2 Mc 9,18), has won any general adherence of scholarly opinion. Andyet, there is little doubt of its meaning in Heb, for in 7,15a verse oftenstrangely omitted in many discussions of the meaning of the Greek or

Hebrew phraseit has been paraphrased by the author, kata ten 'omoioteta

Melchisedek, "according to the likeness of Melchizedek."21 Does the

Peshitta reflect this in Ps 110,4 or preserve its own ancient interpretation:

badmuteh deMelk%z?deq, "in the likeness of Melchizedek?" Heb 7,15 is so

obviously an allusion to Ps 110,4 that Nestle prints it in boldface exceptfor Omoioteta. It is this notion of "likeness" which is exploited in themidrashic commentary, even though the text of Heb may not really solve

the problem of 'al dibrt or kata ten taxin. In reality, kata ten 'omoiotetamay be no more than a paraphrase of the preposition kata alone.

Gn 14,18-20

We turn now to the midrash of Heb 7. But it will be well to juxtaposefirst of all the pertinent verses of Gn as they appear in the MT, the Genesis

Apocryphon

22

and the Targum Neofiti J.

28

MT lQapGn Neofiti I

"The king of Sodom i^The king of Sodom The king of Sodom went

went out to meet him, heard that Abram had out to meet him after

after his return from brought back all the he returned fromkilling Chedorlaomer captives 18and all the killing Chedorloamer

and the kings who were booty, and he went up to and the kings whowith him, meet him. He came to were with him in the plain

Salem, that is Jerusalem, Phordesaya,24 that is theand Abram was camped in King's Plain. .. .25 And

21 It has been noted independently by R. Tournay, op. cit., 19, . 2.2 2

. Avigad and Y. Yadin, A Genesis Apocryphon: A Scroll from the Wildernessof Judaea (Jerusalem, 1956).

2 3See A. Diez Macho, "Una copia de todo el Targum jerosolimitano en la

Vaticana," EstBb 16 (1956) 446-7; "Una copia completa del Targum palestinenseal Pentateuco en la Biblioteca Vaticana," Sefarad 17 (1957) 119-21; P. Boccaccio,"Integer textus Targum hierosolymitani primum inventus in codice Vaticano,"

Bib 38 (1957) 237-9.The text given here is taken from a microfilm suppliedby the Vatican Library.

2* See J. T. Milik, "'Saint-Thomas de Phordsa/" Bib 42 (1961) 77-84.

25 In the text of Neofiti I the beginning of each verse is indicated by two orthree words of the Hebrew, set off in quotation marks and followed by soph Th ft f ll th A i i f th l t S t


6/18

310 T H E CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY [Vol. 25

MT (cont'd)

to the Valley of Shaveh,that is the King's

Valley.

18And Melchizedek, the

king of Salem, brought

out bread and wine;

and he was a priest ofthe Most High God;

and he blessed him,saying,19

"Blessed he

Abram by the Most

High God, the creator of

the heavens and theearth!2And blessed be theMost High God, who has

delivered your enemiesinto your hand!" And he

gave him a tenth of

everything.21

And theking of Sodom said toAbram,

"Give me the men, but

the goods take for yourself."

22But Abram said to the

king of Sodom, "Iraise my hand to Yah-

weh, the Most HighGod, the creator of theheavens and the earth,2^that I shall not take

so much as a thread ora sandal-strap fromanything that is yours,lest you say,

24

Now This Melchizedek - Heb 7.1

Documents

Transcript of Now This Melchizedek - Heb 7.1