The Levitical priesthood (perpetual or not?)

  • Thread starter Thread starter JosephJohn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JosephJohn

Guest
Hey all. So I was trying to make a list of all of God’s covenants with humanity in the Bible. My understanding is that covenants don’t end though new covenants might add to them and fulfill them. The Levitical covenant or the Aaronic covenant seems to lay out that there is a perpetual Levitical priesthood (language like “it will be a perpetual statute” and “[the levis] will have a lasting right to the priesthood”. Now maybe this is only for jews and only Christians who happen to be jews should observe it (so long as they aren’t tempted to believe that it has saving power). But Hebrews states In strong -maybe even harsh- terms that this priesthood and covenant has passed away and been replaced by Christ’s covenant with us.

Can someone please help me understand Paul’s argument a little bit better?

TLDR: what is the current status of the Levitical priesthood? Is it completely gone or is it and it’s power licit but unnecessary? Is that answer consistent to the promise that Aaron’s people have a perpetual right to the priesthood
 
I’ll add biblical citations when I can. I wrote the question quickly.
 
Christ the High Priest fulfills the Levitical Priesthood. There is no need for Earthly descendants of Aaron. The Priesthood continues in Christ, and so the covenant is unbroken and perpetual. Am I reading right?
 
Like I said I wrote quite quickly so there’s definitely many typos and just bad writing. Sorry about that everyone.

And ok that’s interesting. Is Christ then both a priest in the line of Aaron and a priest in the line of Melchizedek? His perpetual priesthood is a Levitical priesthood (in that he is the only man to completely adhere to those laws). But, it is also a more than that?

So is Christ from more than one tribe. I know he is from the tribe of Judah but is he also a descendant of Levi so that he could validly be a (the) Fulfillment of the promise of a permanent levitical priesthood?
 
Ha, these are a lot of questions for a simple layman to answer. I’m going to have to answer yes to most of your questions. I’m not sure if it is more than that though.
 
A fellow laymen! Cheers to that. Yeah uh I’m very confused about fulfillment theology. Hopefully some smart layperson or religious can help us out.
 
One of the things the priest did was to offer sacrifice. With the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 AD, the role of the Levitical priest changed in the Jewish context.
 
JosephJohn said:
Hey all. So I was trying to make a list of all of God’s covenants with humanity in the Bible. My understanding is that covenants don’t end though new covenants might add to them and fulfill them.
Click to expand...
I think St. Paul answered that question:

Heb 7: 12 When there is a change of priesthood, there is necessarily a change of law as well. 13 Now he of whom these things are said[i] belonged to a different tribe, of which no member ever officiated at the altar. 14 It is clear that our Lord arose from Judah,[j] and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 [k]It is even more obvious if another priest is raised up after the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become so, not by a law expressed in a commandment concerning physical descent but by the power of a life that cannot be destroyed.[l] 17 For it is testified:

“You are a priest forever
according to the order of Melchizedek.”

18 On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness, 19 for the law brought nothing to perfection; on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God. 2—for others became priests without an oath, 21 but he with an oath, through the one who said to him:

“The Lord has sworn, and he will not repent:
‘You are a priest forever’”—

He said:

18 On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness,

So, it sounds as though the Levitical Priesthood has been annulled. Thus, although they may be descendants of Levi, they no longer hold any authority.
The Levitical covenant or the Aaronic covenant seems to lay out that there is a perpetual Levitical priesthood (language like “it will be a perpetual statute” and “[the levis] will have a lasting right to the priesthood”. Now maybe this is only for jews and only Christians who happen to be jews should observe it (so long as they aren’t tempted to believe that it has saving power). But Hebrews states In strong -maybe even harsh- terms that this priesthood and covenant has passed away and been replaced by Christ’s covenant with us.

Can someone please help me understand Paul’s argument a little bit better?
Click to expand...
It sounds to me as though there is no more Levitical priesthood. The only thing that remains of the Old Covenant is the Ten Commandments.
TLDR: what is the current status of the Levitical priesthood? Is it completely gone or is it and it’s power licit but unnecessary? Is that answer consistent to the promise that Aaron’s people have a perpetual right to the priesthood
Click to expand...
There are no more sacrifices. If they don’t become Catholic priests, what would they do?
 
The three-fold Levitical priesthood is a typology, or a pre-figuring of the priesthood of Jesus Christ:
  • [Tribe of Levi] Levites prefigure deacons
  • [Tribe of Levi and house of Aaron] Priests prefigure priests
  • [Kohen Gadol] High Priests prefigures bishops
“You are a priest forever, in the order/line/manner of Melchizedek,” speaks to the fact that Jesus would not come from the Tribe of Levi and the house of Aaron - the heriditary Jewish priesthood, but rather, from the non-priestly Tribe of Judah and the house of David.

So, Jesus completes and perfects the priesthood.

I would not say that the Levitical / Aaronic priesthood is abolished. Remember, it a typological reference to the Christian priesthood. In similar fashion, the covenants made with Abraham, Noah, and Moses are not abrogated, they are still valid - but are perfected by the arrival of the Son of God who "came not to destroy the Law and Prophets, but to fulfill them."

The Jewish Levitical and Aaronic priesthood does continue today in the Jewish people; they just don’t have many functions since the Temple was destroyed. In regular synagogue worship any hereditary priests that are present have the honor of doing the first reading, and any hereditary Levites have the honor of doing the second reading.

If the Temple were ever re-built, and the animal sacrifices started up again, Levites and priests would resume their old duties.

Deacon Christopher
 
I will tag @CRM_Brother. He has given some good answers on theology and Biblical aspects. As has Deacon Christopher.
 
JosephJohn said:
Is Christ then both a priest in the line of Aaron and a priest in the line of Melchizedek?
Click to expand...
No, he isn’t a descendant of either Aaron or Melchizedek. That’s the point. Melchizedek was a contemporary of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20) and therefore lived too early to be a descendant of any of the twelve tribes, which began with Judah, Levi and the other sons of Abraham’s grandson Jacob. This is the point that the author of Hebrews is making with his expression, “the order of Melchizedek.” Jesus is not a Levite, and therefore lacks the genealogical qualification for the Temple priesthood. Many Jews would have said that means Jesus can’t be a priest in any sense of the word, but the author of Hebrews has a reply to that objection: If Melchizedek could be a priest without being descended from Levi and Aaron, then so can Jesus. Melchizedek sets the precedent, and Jesus is following in his footsteps.
 
Last edited:
Ok interesting. How do you square this with Numbers 25:13 (Aaron and his descendants have a lasting right to the priesthood). Now of course the descendants of Levi can still become catholic priests like any other man, but this only fulfills that promise if they receive the levitical priesthood. Maybe the Christian priesthood encompasses the levitical priesthood. Maybe the duties of that priesthood are absorbed into the celebration of the mass. But the promise has to either be kept in some sense in its fulfillment or the original promise had to be null in the first place.

So maybe we should hold that Christ’s priesthood somehow was also a levitical priesthood. (Even though that is far far less important than the fullness of the new law and new sacrifice; even though we shouldn’t put any faith in the saving power of the levitical priesthood)
 
There is not, at this moment, an active priesthood of any kind in Judaism. Rabbis are formally teachers, not priests. In the event that some form of Second Temple Judaism should be restored at some future date, with or without rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem, the question of the priesthood would be for the Jews themselves to decide, not for us.

In Christianity there are no genealogical requirements of any kind. A Catholic priest bearing the surname Levi, or Cohen for that matter (Kohen is Hebrew for “priest”), is no more and no less a priest than anyone else. Remember what Paul says in Gal 6:15, “In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.”
 
Certainly I agree that’s true. Being a Levi isn’t a requirement of the priesthood anymore. That’s perfectly consistent with the promise that Aaron recieved. His descendants being allowed the priesthood did not disallow the rest necessarily or else Christ couldn’t be a priest at all (and messianic prophesies both insist that Christ would be from Judah and that he would be a priest). My question is more whether the “perpetual statues” of the the Torah and mosaic/Levitical covenants still hold in some fashion. We have no need for the shadow of Christ now that we have Christ himself, but is the shadow in some way still present.

The thing is it seems to me that God doesn’t break or dissolve his promises. So either those promises are still active but are just eclipsed by better promises or those promises were null in the first place. Much like a marriage situation… in fact we use the same word, “covenant” for both.
 
Last edited:
In Hebrew, ko-HEN, with the stress on the second syllable.
In the plural, the e changes to a: kohanim, pronounced ko-ha-NEEM, with the stress on the last syllable.
 
Ah maybe I’m on to something. Marriage ends at death. Maybe so too does a covenant. Israel’s husband well and truly died on the cross and so her covenant dissolved at the same time. When he was resurrected the new covenant fully replaced it. We fully destroyed the covenant but he fulfilled it.

This is very conspiracy theoryish and I’m on thin ice here so someone who’s better at this than me please help point be the right way
 
Last edited:
JosephJohn said:
The thing is it seems to me that God doesn’t break or dissolve his promises.
Click to expand...
Yes, we’re in full agreement on that point. How it works out in practice, in terms of the Levites and the Jewish priesthood, I really don’t know. As I see it, though, it can only refer to a priesthood within Judaism, since the Christian church has a priesthood of its own, operating under rules of its own, in which descent from this or that ancestor has never been a specification.
 
Fair enough. It’s certainly mysterious. I’m consistently frustrated by the apparent contradiction here though. I’m sure the fullness of the answer on earth- but I’m sure there is a way to reasonably resolve the contradiction.

The contradiction being that there is a “perpetual” promise which seems not to be kept. I have the same problem with the fact that we don’t follow the “perpetual statute” not to eat leavened bread for an octave after the anniversary of the Passover in Egypt. Or the fact that we do work on Saturdays and even on Sunday’s sometimes. It’s not a big enough deal to shake my faith in general by any stretch but it does bother me a great deal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top