> ‎Chapter 11‎ > ‎Chapter 12‎ > ‎Chapter 13‎ >  

 

 

 

Chapter 10. 1-25: Summary

Since the law provided only a shadow of the good things to come,
but did not present the full likeness of those things, so the law
with the same sacrifices that are offered continually, every year,
never brought to perfection those who approach God.

 

If it were so, would not the sacrifices have stopped being
offered, since the worshippers would no longer have a conscience of
sin, having been cleansed once-for-all? But in those sacrifices
there is a recalling of sin every year. For it is not possible for
sins to be taken away through the blood of bulls and goats.

Because of this situation, Christ on entering into the world said
to God: "You did not want sacrifice and offering. But you fitted a
body to me. You did not want holocausts for sin. So I said: Behold,
I come - as it is written in the scroll of the book about me - do
to your will, O, God.

Since He said first; You had no pleasure in sacrifices, and
holocausts or sin offerings (all of which are offered according to
the law), but then, after saying that, He said: Behold, I come to
do your will. Thereby He did away with the first state of things so
as to establish the second. By this will we have been made holy
through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once-for-all.

Every priest of the old regime stood daily, ministering and
offering many times the same kind of victims which can never take
away sins. But this our priest, Jesus, having offered one perpetual
sacrifice for sins has taken His seat at the right hand of God, as
for the rest, waiting until His enemies are made His footstool.

For by one offering He has made perfect continually, those who are
sanctified.

The Holy Spirit assures us of this. After saying: This is the
testament which I will settle for them after these days, says the
Lord, putting my law in their hearts and I will write them on their
mind, and I will no longer remember their transgressions. Once
there is remission for these, there is no longer an offering for
sin.

Now the author exhorts them to draw near with confidence to the
throne of mercy - language he had use previously in 4. 16. Jesus
our great priest, has pierced the inner veil for us, opening the
way to the Father. But we must go there with a true heart. So there
is no hint here that after the once-for-all sacrifice all can sin
as much as they will, or that they are all finally perfect.

Chapter 10. 1-25: Comments

The law was only a foreshadowing, and not a very good one, for the
image it gave was far short of that which was to come. For the old
sacrifices could only remove involuntary sins, and not voluntary
sins (9. 7). The latter remained even after the Day of Atonement.

Jesus cleansed once for all, and by one offering "He made forever
(eis to dienekes) perfect those who are being sanctified." Does it
mean no Christian sins? Of course not. And he said earlier (4. 16)
let us go with confidence to the throne of Mercy. If sinless there
would be no need of mercy.

What this means is that the old ceremonies were only for
sanctifying of the flesh, and were temporary - repeated every year
- in the new regime, the sanctification is of consciences as well,
and is by nature permanent, is continual, it lasts on and on (eis
to dienekes). That is, of course, unless we throw it away by sin.
The perfection given is justification, which in itself lasts
forever, and constitutes a ticket to enter the Father's house, if
only we do not throw away that ticket. We did not have to earn it,
but we could forfeit it. That is justification by faith,

taking faith in the Pauline sense.

The old sacrifices left behind a recollection (10. 3) of sin,
inasmuch as they took away only involuntary sins, or sins of
ignorance (cf. 9. 7 above), not voluntary sins. The voluntary sins
remained, until the one perfect sacrifice came to take them away,
in such a way that the guilt and liability would not revive -
though a person might commit new sins, of course.

The thought pattern here is much like that seen in 1 John 3. 9
where we read: "Every one who is born of God does not commit sin,
for His seed remains within him. And he cannot sin, because he is
born of God." St. Paul speaks in a similar pattern in Romans
chapter 8 of the Church as a fail-safe mechanism to bring final
salvation. Paul also described in Romans 8. 7-8 the opposite
situation: "The wisdom of the flesh is hostile to God, it is not
subject to the law of God, for it is unable. Those who are in the
flesh cannot please God." In all these texts we see an almost
abstract way of thinking: being in the flesh, as such, cannot
produce any good. But being a son of God, as such, cannot produce
any sin.

Since we might cast it away by sin, for that reason, in His very
first appearance to the Apostles after the completion of His
sacrifice and resurrection, even though they had been sanctified
"once for all", He told them: "Whose sins you shall forgive, they
are forgiven them."

We note too, as we explained more fully in comments on chapter 9,
we can speak of a once-for-all offering in that His interior
obedience which constitutes the heart of the Mass, is not repeated,
it is continuous (cf. eis to dienekes), since the moment of
conception: Heb 10. 7.

Further, Hebrews stresses the need of faith. But as we saw above
(on 3. 19) faith includes obedience.

The chief reason God was displeased with the old sacrifices was the
lack of the interior, which should have been obedience. But Jesus
from the start makes obedience the program of His life. The quote
is from Psalm 40. 7-9 (Septuagint version). the words could not
have applied literally to David, or to a later Psalmist, and so our
author takes them to refer to Jesus - not improperly, for all the
prophets stressed the need of interior obedience without which the
outer forms of sacrifice were worthless. Especially Isaiah 53. 11
said: "By His obedience, my servant shall justify many (rabbim)"
(We translate daetho not as knowledge, but as obedience since the
infinitive of yada as a noun should have these same breadth of
meaning as the root verb yada does, which includes both mind and
will).

Clearly, then, one cannot expect to cultivate disobedience, even to
fornication and murder a thousand times a day, and still be perfect
as a result of the obedience of Jesus.

Jesus was literally able to have that obedience within His soul at
the first moment of conception, for the Church teaches that from
that first instant, his human soul saw the vision of God, in which
all knowledge is present. He saw in that vision with merciless
clarity and infallibility everything He would have to suffer, and
He embraced it all, in obedience. He let us see inside Him as it
were a few times later. In Lk 12. 50 he said:"I have a baptism to
be baptized with, and how am I straitened until it be
accomplished." That is, I must be plunged int a seas of suffering
and I feel in a tight place, constricted, unable to get
comfortable, until I get it over with. The same appears in John 12.
37: "Now my heart is troubled. What shall I say? Father save me
from this hour." (On the vision in the soul of Jesus, cf. Wm. Most,
The Consciousness of Christ, Christendom College Press, 1980.

Finally the author exhorts them to draw near with confidence to the
throne of mercy - language he had use previously in 4. 16. Jesus
our great priest, has pierced the inner veil for us, opening the
way to the Father. But we must do this with a true heart. So there
is no hint here that after the once-for-all sacrifice all can sin
as much as they will, or that they are all finally perfect.

The mention of being sprinkled with clean water naturally brings to
mind Ezekiel 36. 25-27.

Chapter 10. 26-39 Summary

If one sins deliberately, not just in ignorance, there is no
further sacrifice for his sin - there is only looking forward to
judgment and fiery indignation from God. For if one who violated
the law of Moses had to die, how much more one who tramples the Son
of God under his feet, and treats as ordinary the blood of the
covenant? For God has said: "I will straighten things out. I will
repay. The Lord will judge His people."

Please recall your early days, after Baptism, when you had
difficult sufferings. You were exposed to public shame with
insults, or else you became sharers with those who suffered in that
way. You showed sympathy for those in prison and cheerfully endured
plundering of your property, since you knew you had and have a
better possession, one that is permanent.

So do not throw away your confidence. It brings great reward. You
need patience, so that when you have done the will of God, you may
receive what He promised. For (cf. Isaiah 26. 20 and Habakkuk 2.
3): "Just a little while, and the One who comes will come, and will
not delay. My righteous one will live by faith. But if one draws
back, I have no pleasure in him."

But we do not belong to those who draw back and so perish. We
belong to those who have faith, and so gain our souls.

Chapter 10: 26-39: Comments

Commentators on the first verse here tend to think the author
speaks of apostasy, as in Hebrews 6. 6 above. But the case is
different here. Here he speaks merely of sins committed
"deliberately". That is Hebrew be yad ramah, the kind of sin not
covered by the Day of Atonement, of which he has spoken so much.

He says that no sacrifice is left for them: Christ has died, but
they have not heeded. One who violated the law of Moses was to die:
how much more severe should be the penalty of him who has trampled
the Son of God underfoot and treats His covenant blood as nothing?

But if we put this into the background of the Day of Atonement of
which, as we said, the author has been speaking so much, the matter
is clear: Here the case is any sin committed be yad ramah, with a
high hand in contrast to sins of ignorance. Apostasy is not the
only thing.

How then can the author speak so strongly? Because even one mortal
sin was enough to call for the death of Christ. In fact, in
Galatians 2. 20, Paul wrote that He,"loved me, and gave Himself for
me." Vatican II, Church in Modern World #22 explained: "Each one of
us can say with the Apostle: The Son of God loved me, and gave
Himself for me."

So in this sense Hebrews can speak of trampling under foot the Son
of God and the covenant blood. It would call for another death of
Christ (cf."crucifying again" in 6. 6).

Does he mean that ordinary mortal sins cannot be forgiven at all?
Of course not. Protestant commentators are inclined to think one
has only to ask God privately to forgive, and it is done. They
ignore the fact that Christ Himself, on His very first visit to the
Apostles after His resurrection, in John 20, told the Apostles;

"Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them." He said
that after completing His once-for-all sacrifice. And no
contradiction. That once-for-all sacrifice earned all forgiveness:
there was still the process of giving it out. He Himself spoke of
that in John 20. To ignore that and say in effect; I do not care
what method you want - just forgive me my way -- that would be much
like scorning the Son of God of which Hebrews has just spoken.

We have just shown how the vehement language of 10;26ff can be
understood. Further light comes from looking at the practice of the
early Church. The famous Shepherd by Hermas has language which many
commentators think is a psychological ploy. In Mandate 4. 3. 1-6
Hermas tells the Angel of Repentance: "I have heard sir... that
there is no second repentance except the one when we went down into
the water and obtained remission of our former sins." The angel
replied: "You have heard well, for it is so. The one who has
received remission of sin should never sin again, but live in
purity."

But right after that, the Angel explains: "After that first and
solemn calling, if a man should be tempted by the devil and sin, he
has one repentance." So there is another means of forgiveness. Then
come more mysterious words: "But if he sins repeatedly and repents
it is useless for such a man."

It is obvious that we are dealing, as we said, with a psychological
ploy. For to first say flatly: There is no other means of
forgiveness, and then right away to add another, is nothing but a
move to deter people from breaking the baptismal "seal"- for in the
first age Baptism was often spoken of as a seal: it marks us as
God's property, we must never break the seal by sinning again.

Yet in Parable 9. 26, speaking even of the great sin of apostasy --
which Hebrews 6. 4 seemed to say could not be forgiven -we find:
"It is impossible for him who now denies his Lord to be saved, but
for whose who denied long ago, repentance seems to be present."

The explanation is the same as that which we gave in our comments
on Hebrews 6. 4: the person is hardened, and so even though God is
always willing to forgive, and even though the merits of Christ
have earned forgiveness for every sin, yet the man has made himself
unable to take in the forgiveness. Clearly the merit and
satisfaction of Christ is infinite in worth: so on the part of God
there is always forgiveness. But - and here is th explanation of
the above words from Parable 9. 26 -- if he goes through years of
canonical penance such as was given in those days, the hardness may
be broken, so that he really repents, really has a change of heart.
Then forgiveness is possible.

Similarly we would explain the words we saw above of the angel
saying that if a man sins repeatedly, there is no forgiveness. This
does not mean that this Sacrament of Penance could be received only
once in a lifetime - it means that repetition of sin brings
hardness. Yet even that hardness could be dissolved by long hard
years of penance, as we have just said.

The very severe Tertullian, before becoming a heretical Montanist,
c, 200-206, though he thought there was Penance only once after
baptism, yet wrote (De paenitentia 4) "For all sins, whether of the
flesh or of the spirit, whether committed in act or [only] in the
will, He who destined punishment by judgment, also promised pardon
by penance."

We gather that the Sacrament could be used for things less than the
big three: murder, adultery, apostasy. In fact, Tertullian speaks
of merely internal sins,"of the spirit" or only "in the will".

Somewhat later, about 213-23, when he had already joined the
Montanist heresy, the same Tertullian, in De pudicitia seems to
imply confession more than just once for smaller faults (18. 3):
"But if the clemency of God is open yet to those who are ignorant
[of Him] and infidels, surely also penitence invites clemency to
itself, that kind of penitence being still on hand after believing
[after Baptism] which can obtain pardon for the [relatively] lesser
faults from the bishop, for greater and unforgivable ones, from God
alone." He continues in 19. 24-26: "For to whom does it not happen
that he is unjustly angry, and is angry beyond the setting of the
sun, or that he lays violent hands [on someone] or that he easily
curses or swears rashly... or that he lies out of shame or
necessity, in businesses, in duties, in making money, in manner of
living, in looking, in hearing - what great temptations! So that if
there be no pardon for these things, salvation would be open to no
one."

Not many years later, in about 250, St. Cyprian of Carthage, in
Epistle 10 (16) complained of laxity: "Whereas in the case of
lesser sins, sinners do penance for the fixed time and... come to
confession, and through the imposition of the hands of bishop and
clergy receive the right of communion, [now] while the ... time of
persecution still lasts... they are admitted to communion... though
penance has not yet been done, nor confession made, and though the
hand of the bishop and clergy has not yet been imposed on them, the
Eucharist is given to them."

Again, we gather that the Sacrament of Penance was used even for
lesser sins.

In verses 30-31 we meet an unfortunate translation in many
versions: "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." (The
version of Dt. 32. 35 used here in Hebrews is the same as that of
St. Paul in Romans 12. 19). The Hebrew has the concept of naqam ,
which does not mean revenge, but rebalance of the objective order
when it is put out of line by sin. It is the Holiness of God that
wills this.

Then (v. 32) our author speaks of their earlier sufferings. We
cannot identify the historical point to which he refers--obviously
a time of persecution or similar harsh treatment.

So they need patience and confidence in God. For the One who is
coming will surely come, and will not delay. Here our author echoes
Isaiah 26. 20 and Habakkuk, 2. 3. We wonder if he is speaking of an
impatience of some who had thought the return of Christ was very
soon?

Habakkuk was speaking of trust in God in the face of an invasion of
the Babylonians. (St. Paul uses the words of Habakkuk to mean faith
in this sense, which includes believing God, confidence in His
promises, and obedience to His commands).