Leviticus 8

SECTION II.

HISTORICO-LEGISLATIVE.

Consecration of the Aaronic Priest-hood

First Service Judicial Death of Nadab and Abihu. Chaps 8-10.

Jehovah having drawn near to his people by taking up his residence among them, now invites them to draw near unto him by the appointed sacrifices. But these must be offered in the manner which he has prescribed. This comprises a ritual so minute and elaborate that it requires for its proper performance the institution of a professional order. As sacrifices had existed before the promulgation of the Law so had priests, such as Melchizedek and Jethro, existed without the sanction of positive enactments. Now, however, for the first time, the priestly office is brought under the strict ordinance of law as a distinct order in the Hebrew commonwealth. Since the patriarchs were accustomed to perform sacerdotal functions, Aaron, the great grandson of Levi, would naturally be the priest of his tribe. The consecration of this entire tribe to sacred duties would point out Aaron as the head of the hierarchy, the high priest of the nation. The last public act of Aaron in permitting the abomination of the golden calf, only a few days before, followed so soon by his consecration to the high priesthood, strikingly exemplifies the truth declared to Moses: “The Lord,… merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,… forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin.” Exodus 34:6-7. The choice, moreover, fell upon one who could “have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity.” Hebrews 5:2. Fluent in speech, but, like many eloquent men, unstable, impulsive, and unfitted for the burden of administration for which his younger brother, of slow speech, was so admirably adapted, and on whom he leaned in times of fiery trial, Aaron was ever afterward earnest in his devotion to Jehovah and his people, and worthy of the high trust confided to him. This ordinance was altogether a most impressive scene. “In the background was seen Mount Sinai, silent and shrouded, as if it had never burned with fire or echoed along its gorges a solemn decalogue; around were the rich pastures of its slopes, stretching away far before their desert march. In the holy tabernacle, raised by the people’s liberality, was Aaron consecrated the first high priest, and clothed with the robes of beauty and glory in presence of all the people!” This chapter is a record of the investment and anointing of Aaron and his sons, and the anointing of the tabernacle, (1-13,) and the consecration of the priest, (14-36,) including the sin offering, (14-17,) the whole burnt offering, (18-21,) and the ram of consecration, (22-36.)

CONCLUDING NOTES.

(1.) In the Pontificale or Ceremoniale Romanum nearly all the ritualism of this chapter is found prescribed for the consecration of a modern Romish priest or bishop. The superficial observer of such a pageant in a papal cathedral might pronounce the ceremonial eminently scriptural. It would be, if Christianity had an order of priests set apart to make atonement for the sins of the people. But the Gospel has but one Priest, who, having finished his sacrifice in the outer court of this world, has entered into the holy of holies above to continue and complete the work of his office. Since “by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are [being] sanctified,” there is no more priestly work to be done on the earth, unless we assent to the blasphemous dogma of the “holy sacrifice of the mass,” in which, by the touch of a possibly drunken or lecherous priest, the body and blood of Christ are created to be offered anew for the sins of those who partake thereof. An institution is not scriptural simply because it has scriptural forms if those forms be destitute of authority. Hence the mitre, the robe, the girdle, the ephod of the Aaronic priesthood, exhumed from the sepulchre of Judaism to disfigure the simplicity of the Gospel, are a stupendous anachronism in the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, and an execrable imposition upon ignorance and weak-mindedness. To wear Aaron’s mitre is not to have Aaron’s succession, but to practice a worthless and an unmeaning ceremony; it is to bid men look for the living among the dead, for our High Priest is in the holy place, and God now seeketh not this mount nor that, but true Christians to worship him in spirit and in truth.

(2.) The Targum of Palestine has a valuable suggestion respecting the anointing of the tabernacle and its furniture, and the sanctification of the priestly vestments by sprinkling oil and blood, that they might be cleansed from any fraud or violence by which the contributor obtained their material, and from any unwillingness on the part of the giver, or improper motives prompting the gift. Jehovah cannot receive the wages of iniquity. Hence, even when no sin is known to inhere in the methods by which the gift was obtained, or in the motives, the holiness of God required their sanctification from all possible impurity of this kind before they could be acceptably used. Under the Gospel, our purest charities need and receive the blood of sprinkling before they can come up as a memorial before God. Luke 17:10.

(3.) The consecrated character imparted to the family of Aaron by this imposing and seven times repeated ceremonial did not need renewing. It was a perpetual inheritance, transmitted from father to son through all the following centuries. We do not read of its repetition in the case of any individual priest of Aaronic lineage. But where the line of succession was broken by Jeroboam’s intrusion of the lowest of the people into the sacred office, we find intimation of the use of a ritual of consecration which, from the idolatrous character of that king, was probably of Egyptian origin. 2 Chronicles 13:9.

(4.) Moses, who in the dedication of the tabernacle and the consecration of the order of priests had acted as a high priest, now divests himself of this office, provisionally assumed, and transfers it to his brother and his sons forever. Once only in the language of a later period (Psalms 99:6) is the term cohen, “priest,” applied to him, and even then it has reference to the extraordinary priestly functions discharged by him in the establishment of the Levitical ritual. The temporary priesthood of Moses was, like that of Melchizedek, απατωρ , αμητωρ , αγενεαλογητος , with no father nor mother nor genealogical record as the ground of his title. Hebrews 7:3.

(5.) According to the tradition of the Jews, the practice of anointing the high priest continued till the time of Josiah; then the holy anointing oil was hidden, and so lost. The succeeding high priests were consecrated only by investiture. See Leviticus 6:13, note.

(6.) “The selection and consecration of the high priest, the personal attributes and character required in the office, were all penetrated with a spiritual significance; as also were the places, instruments, robes, and offerings. As a natural and inevitable result, names, titles, figures, and symbolic phrases derived therefrom have been sown broadcast over the entire area of our religious literature. The most precious and significant names and official titles bestowed upon our blessed Lord came to us without modification from this source, as we learn from the epistle to the Hebrews.” Bibliotheca Sacra.

(7.) Sceptics who aver that the Aaronic priesthood is a distorted copy of the Egyptian should note the following contrasts: ( a) The Egyptian priests were a caste exempt from the civil law; the Hebrew priest, outside of his office, was a citizen in dress, and in all the duties of a layman he was subject to the same laws. ( b) The Egyptian priests were a landed aristocracy, owning a third of the real estate of Egypt; the Hebrew priests were the tenants of a few cities, and they could never become rich in lands. ( c) The Egyptian pontifex maximus was Pharaoh, the absolute monarch, and all the lower priests in some degree shared his authority; the Hebrew priests Samuel and Eli excepted were not allowed to exercise civil authority. ( d) The Egyptian priests had an elaborate esoteric or secret theology, taught only to the initiated; the Hebrew priests were required diligently to teach the whole law to the people, any one of whom might become as learned and skilled a teacher as themselves. Chap. Leviticus 10:11, note. ( e) The Egyptians had many gods and as many orders of priests, each having a high priest; the Hebrews were monotheistic, with one order and one high priest. ( f) The Egyptian priests were fed from the royal treasury; the Hebrew priests were dependent on the offerings of the people, which were precarious, and in times of religious decline, insufficient. ( g) Kine, the chief sacrifice offered by the Hebrew priest, was to the Egyptian priest an object of his idolatrous worship. Leviticus 9:2, note.