THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE, TO THE HEBREWS
PREFACE OF HAYDOCK COMMENTARY
The Catholic Church hath received and declared this Epistle to be part of the Canonical Scriptures of the New Testament, though some doubted of it in the first ages[centuries], especially in the Latin Church, witness St. Jerome on the 8th chap. of Isaias; Luther and most of his followers reject it, but the Calvinists and the Church of England have received it. Others, who received this Epistle in the first ages[centuries], doubted whether it was written by St. Paul, but thought it was written by St. Barnabas, or by St. Clement of Rome, or St. Luke, or at least that St. Paul only furnished the matter and the order of it, and that St. Luke wrote it, and St. Paul afterwards read it and approved it. It was doubted again, whether this Epistle was first written in Hebrew (that is, in Syro-Chaldaic, then spoken by the Jews) or in Greek, as Estius pretends. The ancient writers say it was written in Hebrew, but that it was very soon after translated into Greek either by St. Luke or St. Clement of Rome, pope and martyr. Cornelius a Lapide thinks the Syriac which we have in the Polyglot to have been the original; but this is commonly rejected. See Tillemont on St. Paul, Art. 46, and note 72; P. Alleman on the first to the Hebrews, &c. St. Paul wrote this letter about the year 63[A.D. 63], and either at Rome or in Italy. See Chap. xii. 24. He wrote it to the Christians in Palestine, who had most of them been Jews before. This seems the reason why he puts not his name to it, nor calls himself their apostle, his name being rather odious to the Jews, and because he was chosen to be the apostle of the Gentiles. The main design is to shew that every one’s justification and salvation is to be hoped for by the grace and merits of Christ, and not from the law of Moses, as he had shewn in his Epistles to the Galatians and the Romans, where we many observe this kind of difference: To the Galatians he shews, that true justice cannot be had from circumcision and the ceremonies of the law: to the Romans, that even the moral precepts and works of the law were insufficient without the grace of Christ: and in this to the Hebrews, he shews that our justice could not be had from the sacrifices of the old law. As to the chief contents: He exhorts them to the faith of Christ, by shewing his dignity and pre-eminence above the Angels, and above Moses, Chap. i, ii, iii.; that Christ’s priesthood was above that of Aaron, from the 4th to the 8th chap. ver. 6.; that the new law and testament is preferable to the old, form thence to the middle of chap. x.; he commends faith by the example of the ancient Fathers, Chap. xi. and in the beginning of the twelfth; then he exhorts them to patience, constancy, brotherly love, &c. The like exhortations are mixed in other parts of this Epistle. (Witham) — We must here remark, that our separated brethren, relying solely upon tradition, admit in general this Epistle into their canon of Scriptures, though they are necessitated to allow that for some centuries great doubts were entertained on the subject. According to Mr. Rogers, in his Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles, whilst several among the Protestants have rejected as apocryphal the Epistle to the Hebrews, that of James, the 2nd and 3rd of John, and Jude, others have as strenuously maintained that they ought to be admitted into the sacred canon. The Catholic Church admits them as deutero-canonical books, and of equal authority with the proto-canonical books….After the arguments had been justly weighed on both sides, they seem to have been admitted by the general consent of the Latin Church, as they had all along been admitted by the Greek Church. The canon, as it now stands, both of the Old and New Testament, we find enumerated in Pope Innocent’s letter to Exuperius, bishop of Toulouse, an. 405[A.D. 405], in St. Augustine, (lib. ii. de doct. christ. chap. viii.) and in the decrees of an African Council, an. 419[A.D. 419], consisting of 217 bishops, who declare that in giving a catalogue of the Holy Scriptures, they only confirm and ratify what they have received from their Fathers. This canon is attributed to the third Council of Carthage, an. 397[A.D. 397]. Dr. Cosin, an eminent Protestant divine, tells us in his canon of Scripture, p. 4, “that to know the books of Scripture, there is no safer course to be taken than to follow the public voice and the universal testimony of the Church.” The sixth of the thirty-nine articles gives a similar rule, which excludes private judgment. And “what is this,” asks Hooker, “but to acknowledge ecclesiastical tradition?” The mind of man, naturally fickle and unsettled, stands in need of a guide in the road to eternal life. I shall never hesitate, says a spirited author, to take for my guide the Catholic Church, which contains in herself the authority of past and future ages. The Syriac version of the Old and New Testament, which is deservedly allowed to be of greatest antiquity and authority, comprises the same deutero-canonical books as the canon of the Council of Trent; a convincing proof that the Church of Syria, immediately after the times of the apostles, considered them as part of the sacred canon, no less than the Catholics of the present day. For a very satisfactory account respecting the authenticity and inspiration of this Epistle, as also for an excellent commentary with notes moral, doctrinal, and critical, see a late work entitled, An Explanation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews, by the Rev. Henry Rutter. — What can be the reason why Protestants admit the deutero-canonical books of the New and reject those of the Old Testament? — This Epistle merits the particular attention of Christians of every denomination, since it points out to them their various duties in respect to the necessity of faith and the practice of a holy life. In opposition to the Socinians, it tends to shew not only the divinity of Jesus Christ, but also that his death was a true and real sacrifice of atonement for the sins of mankind. See Chap. i, ver. 5, &c. In opposition to other sectarists, it proves that the bloody sacrifice of Christ, once offered on the cross, though a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice of redemption, does not exclude the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass, by which he is a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech. See Chap. v, &c. It is no less applicable to Catholics, in order to confirm them in the faith once delivered to the saints, and to point out the dreadful consequences of abandoning that religion which Jesus Christ came to establish in the world. The just man lives by faith; but if he draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. Let us, therefore, hold fast the confession of our hope, without wavering, or forsaking our assembly, the Catholic Church, as many have done to follow Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and other separatists. But we, says the apostle, are not of them who draw back unto perdition, but of them who have faith unto the saving of the soul. (Hebrews x. 39.)
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Chapter 13
Commentary of St Thomas Aquinas
‘There is none like you among the gods, O Lord, nor are there any works like yours’ (Ps. 86:8).
1. – In these words Christ’s transcendence is described under two aspects: first as compared to other gods, when he says, ‘There is none among the gods like thee, O Lord’; secondly, as reflected in His effects, when he says, ‘nor are there any works like yours’.
2. – In regard to the first it should be noted that although there is but one God by nature, as it says in Deut. 6:4: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord’, nevertheless, by participation there are many gods both in heaven and on earth: ‘For there be gods many, and lords many’ (1 Cor. 8:5). For angels are sometimes called gods: ‘When the sons of God came to stand before the Lord’ (Jb. 1:6 & 11), and also prophets, as is said of Moses: ‘Behold I have appointed you the god of Pharaoh’ (Ex. 7:1), and priests: ‘You shall not speak ill of the gods’, i.e., of the priests (Ex. 22:28); ‘If the thief be not known, the master of the house shall be brought to the gods’ (Ex. 22:8). Angels are called gods on account of their rich splendor of divine brightness: ‘Upon whom shall not his light arise?’ (Jb. 25:3). But angels are not like unto Christ among the gods, because He is the ‘brightness of the Father’s glory’ (1:3); ‘Setting him on his right hand in the heavenly place above all principality and power and above every name named in this world and in the world to come’ (Eph. 1:20). The prophets are called gods, because the word of God was spoken to them; ‘He called them gods, to whom the word of God was spoken’ (Jn. 10:35). Therefore, Christ is God in some more excellent way, because He is the substantial Word of God. Priests are called gods, because they are God’s ministers: ‘You shall be called priests of the Lord, you ministers of our God’ (Is. 61:6). But Christ is God in a stronger sense, for He is not a minister but the Lord of all: ‘Lord of Lords’ (Rev. 19:16). ‘But Christ was faithful in his own house as a son’ (Heb. 3:6). Christ, therefore, is the great God above all the gods, because He is the splendor, the Word, and the Lord.
3. – Secondly, this transcendence is shown by His works; hence it says, nor are there any works like thine. Here it should be noted that the matchless work of Christ is threefold: one extends to every creature, namely, the work of creation: ‘All tings were made through Him’ (Jn. 1:3); a second extends to the rational creature, who is enlightened by Christ, namely, the work of enlightenment: ‘He was the true light which enlightens every man that comes into the world’ (Jn. 1:9); the third extends to justification, which pertains only to the saints, who are vivified and sanctified by Him, i.e., by life-giving grace: ‘And the life was the light of men’ (Jn. 1:4). Now, the other gods cannot perform these works: for the angels are not creators, but creatures ‘Who make your angels spirits’ (Ps. 103:4); prophets are enlightened and not enlighteners: ‘He was not the light, but was to give testimony of the light’ (Jn. 1:8); and priests do not justify: ‘It is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats sin should be taken away’ (Heb. 10:4).
4. – The transcendence of Christ is thus clearly shown in our text; and this is the subject matter of this epistle to the Hebrews. By this subject matter this epistle is distinguished from the other epistles: for some of the epistles deal with the grace of the New Testament, so far as it extends to the whole mystical body of the Church. This is the theme of all the epistles he sent to the churches, i.e., to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, up to the first epistle to Timothy. In the others he treats of this grace, insofar as it extends to individual persons, namely, Timothy, Titus, Philemon. But in the epistle to the Hebrews he treats of this grace, inasmuch as it pertains to the head, namely, Christ. For these three things are found in the body of the Church, just as they are found in the natural body, namely, the mystical body itself, its chief members, namely, prelates and rulers, and the head, namely, Christ, from Whom life flows to all the members.
5. – But before we come to the task of dividing this epistle, it should be noted that before the Council of Nicaea, some doubted that this was one of Paul’s epistles for two reasons: first, because it does not follow the patters of the other epistles. For there is no salutation and no name of the author. Secondly, it does not have the style of the others; indeed, it is more elegant. Furthermore, no other work of Scripture proceeds in such an orderly manner in the sequence of words and sentences as this one. Hence, they said that it was the work of Luke, the evangelist, or of Barnabas or Pope Clement. For he wrote to the Athenians according to this style. Nevertheless, the old doctors, especially Dionysius and certain others, accept the words of this epistle as being Paul’s testimony. Jerome, too, acknowledges it as Paul’s epistle. To the first argument, therefore, one may respond that there are three reasons why Paul did not write his name: first, because he was not the apostle of the Jews but of the Gentiles: ‘He who wrought in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, wrought in me also among the Gentiles’ (Gal. 2:8); consequently, he made no mention of his apostleship at the beginning of this epistle, because he was unwilling to speak of it except to the Gentiles. Secondly, because his name was odious to the Jews, since he taught that the observance of the Law were no longer to be kept, as is clear from Acts (15:2). Consequently, he concealed his name, lest the salutary doctrine of this epistle go for naught. Thirdly, because he was a Jew: ‘They are Hebrews: so am I’ (2 Cor. 11:22). And fellow countrymen find it hard to endure greatness in their own: ‘A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country and in his own house’ (Mt. 13:57). To the second argument the answer might be given that the style is more elegant, because even though he knew many languages: ‘I speak with all your tongues’ (1 Cor. 14:18), he knew the Hebrew language better than the others, for it was his native tongue, the one in which he wrote this epistle. As a result, he could write more ornately in his own idiom than in some other language; hence, he says: ‘For though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge’ (2 Cor. 11:6). But Luke, who was a skillful writer, translated this ornate Hebrew into Greek.
Commentary of St John Chrysostom
[1.] The blessed Paul, writing to the Romans, says, “Inasmuch then as I am the Apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: if by any means I may provoke to emulation them that are my flesh”:26642664 Rom. xi. 13, 14 and again, in another place, “For He that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles.”26652665 Gal. ii. 8 If therefore he were the Apostle of the Gentiles, (for also in the Acts, God said to him, “Depart; for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles,”26662666 Acts xxii. 21 ) what had he to do with the Hebrews? and why did he also write an Epistle to them?
And especially as besides, they were ill-disposed towards him, and this is to be seen from many places. For hear what James says to him, “Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe…and these all have been informed of thee that thou teachest men to forsake the law.”26672667 Acts xxi. 20, 21 And oftentimes he had many disputings concerning this.
Why therefore, one might ask, as he was so learned in the law (for he was instructed in the law at the feet of Gamaliel,26682668 Acts xxii. 3 and had great zeal in the matter, and was especially able to confound them in this respect)—why did not God send him to the Jews? Because on this very account they were more vehement in their enmity against him. “For they will not endure thee,”26692669 “Wherefore God foreseeing this, that they would not receive Him,” Ben. K. Sav. God says unto him; “But depart far hence to the Gentiles, for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me.”26702670 Acts xxii. 21, 18 Whereupon he says, “Yea, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee; and when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him.”26712671 Acts xxii. 19, 20
And this he says26722672 “they show,” K. Ben. is a sign and proof of their not believing him. For thus it is: when a man goes away from any people,26732673 ἔ θνους if he be one of the least and of those who are nothing worth, he does not much vex those from whom he went; but if he be among the distinguished and earnest partisans and those who care for these things, he exceedingly grieves and vexes them beyond measure, in that26742674 “Departing from them, going to others,” K. Ben. Sav. he especially overthrows their system with the multitude.
And besides this, there was something else.26752675 Add: “Which should make them incredulous,” Bened. K. Sav. What now might this be? That they who were about Peter were also with Christ, and saw signs 364 and wonders; but he [Paul] having had the benefit of none of these, but being with Jews, suddenly deserted and became one of them. This especially promoted our cause. For while they indeed, seemed to testify even from gratitude, and one might have said that they bore witness to those things in love for their Master; he, on the other hand, who testifies to the resurrection, this man was rather one who heard a voice only. For this cause thou seest them waging war passionately with him, and doing all things for this purpose, that they might slay him, and raising seditions.26762676 “For this purpose, and raising seditions that they might slay him,” Bened. A. K.
The unbelievers, then, were hostile to him for this reason; but why were the believers? Because in preaching to the Gentiles he was constrained to preach Christianity purely; and if haply even in Judæa he were found [doing so], he cared not. For Peter and they that were with him, because they preached in Jerusalem, when there was great fierceness, of necessity enjoined the observance of the law; but this man was quite at liberty. The [converts] too from the Gentiles were more than the Jews because they were without.26772677 “The chosen people being fewer than all people, encircled on all sides by the heathen” ; see Mic. v. 7, 8 And this26782678 “By this he enfeebled,” Ben. enfeebled the law, and they had no such great reverence for it, although26792679 “Because,” Ben. Sav. K. Q. R. he preached all things purely. Doubtless in this matter they think to shame him by numbers, saying, “Thou seest, brother, how many ten thousands of Jews there are which26802680 Acts xxi. 20 are come together.”26812681 “which believe,” Ben. Sav. K. Q. On this account they hated him and turned away from him, because “They are informed of thee, he says, that thou teachest men to forsake the law.”26822682 Acts xxi. 21
[2.] Why, then, not being a teacher of the Jews, does he send an Epistle to them? And where were those to whom he sent it? It seems to me in Jerusalem and Palestine. How then does he send them an Epistle? Just as he baptized, though he was not commanded to baptize. For, he says, “I was not sent to baptize”:26832683 1 Cor. i. 17 not, however, that he was forbidden, but he does it as a subordinate matter. And how could he fail to write to those, for whom he was willing even to become accursed?26842684 Rom. ix. 3 Accordingly he said,26852685 St. Chrys. introduces this as an instance of St. Paul’s interest in the Hebrews: that he not only wrote to them, but also intended to visit them; and on that digresses to the events of his history and the relative date of his Epistles. “Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you.”26862686 Heb. xiii. 23
For as yet he was not arrested. Two years then he passed bound, in Rome; then he was set free; then, having gone into Spain, he saw Jews26872687 [The text might perhaps leave it uncertain whether St. Chrys. meant to state that St. Paul saw Jews in Spain, or that, after visiting Spain, he went into Judæa. Ben. Sav. K. Q. are express, “Spain; then he went into Judæa, where also he saw the Jews.” εἰς τὰς Σπανίας ἦλθεν· εἶτα εἰς ̓Ιουδαίαν ἔβη ὅτε καὶ ̓Ιουδαίους εἶδε.—F.G.] also in like manner; and then he returned to Rome, where also he was slain by Nero. The Epistle to Timothy then was later26882688 πρεσβυτέρα. The word is elsewhere used in this sense by St. Chrys. See Mr. Field’s notes. St. Chrys. often points out that the Ep. ii. to Timothy is the last of all St. Paul’s Epistles. than this Epistle. For there he says, “For I am now ready to be offered”26892689 2 Tim. iv. 6 ; there also he says, “In my first answer no man stood with me.”26902690 2 Tim. iv. 16 In many places they [the Hebrew Christians] had to contend26912691 ἤ θλησαν, see ἤ θλησιν, Heb. x. 32 with persecution, as also he says, writing to the Thessalonians, “Ye became followers of the churches of Judæa”:26922692 1 Thess. ii. 14 and writing to these very persons he says, “Ye took joyfully the spoiling of your goods.”26932693 Heb. x. 34 Dost thou see them contending? And if men had thus treated the Apostles, not only in Judæa, but also wherever they were among the Gentiles, what would they not have done to the believers? On this account, thou seest, he was very careful for them. For when he says, “I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints”;26942694 Rom. xv. 25 and again, when he exhorts the Corinthians to beneficence, and says that the Macedonians had already made their contribution,26952695 2 Cor. viii. 1–3 and says, “If it be meet that I go also,”26962696 1 Cor. xvi. 4 —he means this. And when he says, “Only that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do,”26972697 Gal. ii. 10 —he declares this. And when he says, “They gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision,”26982698 Gal. ii. 9 —he declares this.
But this was26992699 “But these things he does not say merely for,” &c., Ben. Sav. K. Q. not for the sake of the poor who were there, but that by this we might be partakers in the beneficence. For not as the preaching did we apportion the care for the poor to each other (we indeed to the Gentiles, but they to the circumcision). And everywhere thou seest him using great care for them: as was reasonable.
Among the other nations indeed, when there were both Jews and Greeks, such was not the case; but then, while they still seemed to have authority and independence and to order many things by their own laws, the government not being yet established nor brought perfectly under the Romans, they naturally exercised great tyranny. For if in other cities, as in Corinth, they beat the Ruler of the synagogue before the Deputy’s judgment seat, and Gallio “cared for none of these things,”27002700 Acts xviii. 17 but it was not so in 365 Judæa.27012701 i.e. in Judæa, they beat and scourged, not through the indifference of the judge, but by their own authority. Thou seest indeed, that while in other cities they bring them to the magistrates, and need help from them and from the Gentiles, here they took no thought of this, but assemble a Sanhedrim themselves and slay whom they please. Thus in fact they put Stephen to death, thus they beat the Apostles, not taking them before rulers. Thus also they were about to put Paul to death, had not the chief captain thrown himself27022702 Acts xxi. 31–33 [upon them]. For this took place while the priests, while the temple, while the ritual, the sacrifices were yet standing. Look indeed at Paul himself being tried before the High Priest, and saying,“I wist not that he was the High Priest,”27032703 Acts xxiii. 5 and this in the presence of the Ruler.27042704 i.e. before Lysias. For they had then great power. Consider then what things they were likely to suffer who dwelt in Jerusalem and Judæa.
[3.] He then who prays to become accursed for those who were not yet believers, and who so ministers to the faithful, as to journey himself, if need be, and who everywhere took great care of them;—let us not wonder if he encourage and comfort them by letters also, and if he set them upright when tottering and fallen. For in a word, they were worn down27052705 “having lost their freshness and vigor like salted fish.” See many instances of its use in this sense in Mr. Field’s note on St. Chrys. on 1 Cor. Hom. xxviii. (p. 255, A). [See p. 390, O.T.] and despairing on account of their manifold afflictions. And this he shows near the end, saying, “Wherefore lift up the hands that hang down, and the feeble knees”;27062706 Heb. xii. 12 and again, “Yet a little while, he that shall come will come, and will not tarry”;27072707 Heb. x. 37 and again, “If ye be without chastisement,…then are ye bastards and not sons.”27082708 Heb. xii. 8
For since they were Jews and learned from the fathers that they must expect both their good and their evil immediately and must live accordingly, but then [when the Gospel came] the opposite was [taught]—their good things being in hope and after death, their evils in hand, though they had patiently endured much, it was likely that many would be fainthearted;—hereon he discourses.
But we will unfold these things at a fit opportunity. At present: he of necessity wrote to those for whom he cared so greatly. For while the reason why he was not sent to them is plain, yet he was not forbidden to write. And that they were becoming fainthearted he shows when he says, “Lift up the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees, and make straight paths”27092709 Heb. xii. 12, 13 and again, “God is not unrighteous to forget your work and love.”27102710 Heb. vi. 10 [St. Chrys. here follows the better reading, omitting τοῦ κόπου.—F.G.]. For the soul overtaken by many trials, was turned aside even from the faith.27112711 Heb. ii. 1 Therefore he exhorts them to “Give heed to the things which they have heard, and that there should not be an evil heart of unbelief.”27122712 Heb. iii. 12 On this account also, in this Epistle, especially, he argues at length concerning faith, and after much [reasoning] shows at the end that to them [of old] also He promised good things in hand, and yet gave nothing.
And besides these things, he establishes two points that they might not think themselves forsaken: the one, that they should bear nobly whatever befalls them; the other, that they should look assuredly for their recompense. For truly He will not overlook those with Abel and the line of unrewarded righteous following him.
And he draws comfort in three ways: first, from the things which Christ suffered: as He Himself says, “The servant is not greater than his Lord.”27132713 John xiii. 16 Next, from the good things laid up for the believers. Thirdly, from the evils; and this point he enforces not only from the things to come (which would be less persuasive), but also from the past and from what had befallen their fathers. Christ also does the same, at one time saying, “The servant is not greater than his Lord”;27142714 John xiii. 16 and again, “There are many mansions with the Father”;27152715 John xiv. 2 and He denounces innumerable woes on the unbelievers.
But he speaks much of both the New and the Old Covenant; for this was useful to him for the proof of the Resurrection. Lest they should disbelieve that [Christ] rose on account of the things which He suffered, he confirms it from the Prophets, and shows that not the Jewish, but ours are the sacred [institutions]. For the temple yet stood and the sacrificial rites; therefore he says, “Let us go forth therefore without, bearing His reproach.” 27162716 Heb. xiii. 13 But this also was made an argument against him: “If these things are a shadow, if these things are an image, how is it that they have not passed away or given place when the truth was manifested, but these things still flourish?” This also he quietly intimates shall happen, and that at a time close at hand.
Moreover, he makes it plain that they had been a long time in the faith and in afflictions, saying, “When for the time ye ought to be teachers,”27172717 Heb. v. 12 and, “Lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief,”27182718 Heb. iii. 12 and ye became “Followers of them who through patience inherit the promises.”2719