The Divinity of Jesus Christ

                                                          We shall try to understand the Divinity of Jesus Christ from the title 'Son of God' applied to him, basing ourselves on biblical texts as well as from the teaching of the Church. No study on Jesus Christ could claim authenticity without trying to understand this very important title, which has evoked mixed reactions from people of different persuasions and beliefs. The various reactions may be the result of unbelief, ignorance, a vague understanding of the concept of God , lack of proper understanding the doctrine on Trinity, fear of compromising on the belief that there is only one God, etc. It is, therefore, of utmost importance to present the concept of  Son of God and its identification with the Word of God manifested in Jesus Christ for the purpose of giving a fair chance to those who would like to believe and yet are prevented by opaque concepts on the subject. It should serve the believers to renew their faith and the non-believers to be open to belief in the one true God. This effort should be counted as an attempt to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that is identified with himself, to the present world we are living in.
                                                        Our method is to understand the title 'Son of God' with the aid of Linguistic Analysis whereby specific use of words in language determines their meaning. For this purpose, we shall examine a few prominent uses of the concept especially in the Bible and try to arrive at the meaning from various uses. For this purpose the Old Testament use, the New Testament use, the Church usage and the present use shall be considered. We shall discuss the Old Testament use of the 'Son of God' from a New Testament perspective, where the fuller meaning of the uses in the Old Testament is possible to be elucidated. It does not mean that the earlier form of its use was pointless as it served a purpose at the time and yet contained in itself implications for later realization. This view of ours should be of assistance in understanding the Old Testament in its own right as well as in its fulfillment in The New Testament.  
          "You are gods"
                        This method was actually used by Jesus himself in understanding many prophecies, events, passages in the Old Testament as they foretold about him and his mission. An example concerning our present topic can be seen in the Gospel according to John 10: 34, where Jesus refers to Psalm 82:6 in defending himself from the charge of blasphemy leveled against him by the Jews. The Jews wanted to stone Jesus in accordance with the injunction given in Leviticus 24:16 where it is said : "Whoever utters the Name of the Lord shall be put to death : all the community shall stone him; alien or native, if he utters the Name, he shall be put to death". This being the word of God,  the Jews could not be faulted if they thought that Jesus was to be stoned since he made himself equal to God, a greater sin than just pronouncing the name of God. Where they went wrong was in their failure to correctly understand the word of God, which was explained by Jesus quoting Psalm 82:6 that is no less word of God than Leviticus 24:16. Thus we have an instance of the right interpretation of the Scriptures, not by single words or phrases but by the sense underlying the passages concerned for which other passages too might be of help.
                                                   Jesus defended his innocence by citing the passage of Psalm 82:6 where God Himself calls human beings gods or sons of the Most High just because the word of God was delivered to them. Since Scripture cannot be set aside and the word of God has to be true always, we must come to the conclusion that there is a sense in which ordinary mortal human beings can be called gods. If that is so, Jesus argues, how could they charge him with blasphemy whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world? It is presupposed by the Evangelist in this argument that the believers knew about the relationship of Jesus to the Father as the Word of God whereas for the Jews of Jesus' time, the argument may not have had its full weight as they had a different perspective of the whole issue. This means that the Evangelist may have adapted the argument of Jesus to suit the situation of the faithful, whereas Jesus himself may have put forward the point differently to convince the Jews about the legitimacy of his claim to be one with God. Some scholars believe that the "you are gods" in Psalm 82:6 should be taken as metaphorical and therefore no real sense of identification with God may be seen in the verse. This view cannot be accepted since Jesus built up his argument for being equal to God from the same verse. If the verse means no more than metaphorically, Jesus himself could not be anything more than Son of God metaphorically. Here we have a very important sense in which the title 'Son of God' was used already in the Old Testament. It refers to our relationship with the word of God and the manner in which it is graded depending on our intimacy with the same word of God. (To be continued).  

Priesthood according to the Order of Melchizedek

                                                          According to the Letter to the Hebrews, every High Priest is called by God to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins as in the case of Aaron and Christ. As for Christ, when he was perfected through suffering and became the source of eternal life for all those who obey him, God named him High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek ( Hebrews, 5:1-10). Our hope in the promise of God is able to enter through the veil where Jesus has entered. on our behalf as forerunner who became a High Priest forever in the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews, 6; 19-20). It is essential to understand this mysterious figure of Melchizedek confronting Abraham on his victorious return from defeating the kings who conquered all neighboring kingdoms (Genesis, 14: 18-20) in order to understand the priesthood of Christ. He was king of Salem and brought bread and wine, being priest of God Most High he blessed Abraham who gave him a tithe of all the booty. Although it was to Abraham the promise was made by God and the priesthood was conferred on Aaron from the tribe of Levi descending from Abraham, he was blessed by Melchizedek to whom Abraham gave tithe. The people chosen specially by God through Abraham were, so to say, overshadowed in importance by Melchizedek who was priest of God Most High (Hebrews, 7: 4-10). This is not the only example when the Lord chastens His people for the purpose of bringing them back to their original vocation as may be seen from the call of Cyrus , the king of Persia, and Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, for reforming Israel (2 Chronicles,36: 1-21; Ezra, 1: 1-4). The meaning of Melchizedek is 'king of righteousness' and the king of Salem means 'king of peace' which are titles useful for understanding the historical figure who blessed Abraham as a prototype of the priest of God Most High. That a historical figure like Melchizedek was introduced as the priest of God Most High at the time of Abraham means two things. First, the chosen people were not to consider themselves as a privileged people with the exclusion of all others and second, the priest of God Most High could be none other than the Son of God Himself. The Son of God alone could be without father, mother, lineage, beginning and end and could remain a priest for all time (Hebrews, 7: 1-3) of whom Melchizedek was a mere prototype who could not be someone without father, mother, lineage, beginning and end.    
                                                     What is specific to a priest according to the order of Melchizedek is that his priesthood is not owing to a system of earthbound rules but to a power of life that cannot be destroyed (Hebrews, 7: 15-17). The priesthood according to the order of Aaron as well as all other priesthood of religions could not be free from the earthbound rules since they could not be governed by an indestructible power of life. This power of life could emanate only from the Holy Spirit given out by God only after the glorification of Jesus Christ (John, 7:39). With the new kind of priesthood the order of salvation itself has taken a new turn in the sense that external observances were relegated to a marginal space, the mainstream being the internal conversion expressed in acts befitting a renewed self of a new man. This does not mean that all laws will be abolished but that they will be set in the hearts and written on the understanding of real people as against stones and tablets used earlier for writing (Hebrews, 10:15-18). The Holy Spirit had given testimony to this new Law through the prophet Jeremiah, 31: 33-34 meant for generations to come. The universal salviific Will of God is evident in the new kind of priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek that entails internal laws and internal conversion of individuals and groups of people. The fact that the priesthood of Melchizedek was brought into the picture when Abraham was the specially chosen one by God bears testimony to the nature and function of the chosen people and their priesthood in relation to the entire humanity. The nature and function of the chosen people, both Israel and the Church, may be seen in the role they are meant to play in preparing the whole of  humanity for better things to come.Melchizedek is seen to have a superior role over Abraham and his descendants, which means that God intended to overrule the priesthood of the descendants of Abraham and of all other religions replacing them with the priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek. An example for the importance given to the tribe of Levi for Jewish priesthood may be seen from an instance narrated in the Book of Ezra, 2:59-63. People who returned from exile to Jerusalem and could not find their names in the genealogies wee considered as unclean and thus found unfit to become priests until a new priest arose in future who could consult with the Urim and Thummim. Jesus Christ, the priest according to the order of Melchizedek, did not descend from the tribe of Levi but of Judah thereby relegating the Jewish priesthood to the background and placing the kingship of the priest to the foreground. This kingship is spiritual in nature and has nothing to do with the kingship of this world.It is in consonance with the priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek who was king both of righteousness and of peace,both qualities being integral to the renewal of man.
                                                   Entering the presence of God, qualified as the sanctuary or the Holy of Holies, was the greatest problem for mankind after the first parents were expelled from Paradise, that is, the presence of God. Man devised various means with or without revelation from God in trying to achieve it for which actually he had to be thoroughly prepared. One such instance of preparation is seen in the rituals and the system of the Old Testament with an order of priesthood and a Temple designed in accordance with the reality in heaven of which they could only be a shadow. According to this system, the sanctuary was divided into two parts; the Holy place and the Holy of Holies and in the latter only the High Priest could enter once in a year. However, with all the elaborate system of approaching God, they could not be internally renewed as the rituals were meant only for external purification (Hebrews, 10: 1-7). Without internal renewal meant for becoming a new creature no one could hope to enter the presence of God, which is the original Holy of Holies.      
                                               Jesus Christ enters the scene to correct this debility of man for ever by his self-sacrifice and glorification whereby his glorified body stands as the veil or curtain through which we may enter the Holy of Holies or the presence of God (Hebrews, 10: 19-20). The glorified body of Jesus functions as the veil or curtain not to hide God's presence but to reveal it, his body being thoroughly soaked in the Holy Spirit is transparent to all those who are called by God. It can, however, be opaque to those who are not internally transformed and are unable to enter the presence of God. The mystery of salvation wrought by Jesus Christ is evident here in the fact that it is not a denial of nature , but its sublimation and transformation. This also explains why there is still evil evil in the world even after the supreme sacrifice of Christ on the cross as human nature is not cancelled out by Christ's redemptive work. Anyone within the ambit of the Spirit of God will naturally be drawn into the sphere of the glorified body of Jesus thereby being transported to the August Presence of God. Thus Jesus Christ continues to be a priest for ever and along with him all those who are called to the presence of God will remain priests of God and of Christ (Revelations, 1:6; 20:6). We may wonder about the need of priests in heaven as all those who are in the presence of God do not seem to need mediation, sacrifice, victim-hood or prayer etc. That is the reason why we have considered union with God as the goal and purpose of priesthood our defining criterion for priesthood where all other elements are secondary. Besides, it fits the eternal nature of the priesthood of Christ who was already a priest before the beginning of the world and will be one for ever in eternity. Union with God is a never ending process for which the priesthood of Christ and of all those with him is functional forever in eternity. We shall further discuss about the nature of Jesus Christ both as Son of God and as Son of Man in the coming Posts.  

The Role and the Authority of the Apostles in the Church of Jesus Christ

                                                           The Church is built as a household of God on a foundation laid on the Apostles and the prophets where Christ himself is the chief corner stone (Ephesians, 2: 19-20). While the Apostles belong to the New Testament period, the prophets should be taken as not only of those of the Old Testament, but also of all other religions from the beginning of the world. If we restrict the category of prophets to those from Samuel onward only, thereby we exclude not only Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but also Moses and others who were people who spoke the word of God as the situation demanded. There are different kinds of prophets for various purposes and yet the one criterion that sets apart a true prophet from false ones is the speaking of the word of God. On many occasions we see that some prophets perform signs and wonders and even predict future events in testimony of their genuineness.. However, these are not the ultimate criteria for distinguishing a genuine prophet from the false ones as even the Egyptian magicians were able to perform many of the feats executed by Moses. The genuine prophet is always identified with his message, which is the word of God, and is ready to face the consequences for announcing the same. The words of God announced by genuine prophets ultimately point towards the Word of God Himself and thereby those prophets turn out to be the foundation of the household of God along with the Apostles.
                                                        In order for us to know the nature of the Church and its priesthood, it is enough to start with the call of the Apostles by Jesus provided we do not exclude the pre-history of the Church envisaged by God from the beginning of the world. The first promise Jesus made to Peter and Andrew when they were called from their daily work of fishing was to make them fishers of men (Matthew, 4: 19). The only condition for the same was to go with Jesus, that is, to follow him. Going with Jesus or following him is an absolute requirement for truly attracting people to us for the purpose of making them see him through us for which the Church and the priesthood were established. That is why Jesus called the twelve from his many disciples for the specific purpose of being with him, to be sent for proclaiming the Gospel and to be given authority to drive out the devils (Mark, 3: 14-15). From that time onward, the Apostles were close witnesses of what Jesus said and did and above all his special and constant communion with God Whom he addressed as his Father. This communion was very specifically expressed through his prayer, especially during night, as the daytime was fully packed with proclaiming the Gospel in support of which he had performed signs and wonders for the benefit of the people. Even these activities were nothing other than prayer for Jesus as he was always in communion with God. The Apostles were called to learn this first lesson of their priesthood to be always in communion with God wherever they were and whatever functions they were performing.    
                                                   The second lesson they were to learn was to seek the Will of God always and everywhere. Jesus experienced how difficult it was to form the character of the Apostles for the purpose for which he had called them. They always had the tendency to substitute God's Will with their own believing that they were still with Jesus following him everywhere. What Jesus wanted from them was not merely their physical presence, but their presence in spirit so that they would be able to do God's Will. But, this could not be a reality for them during the public life of Jesus as a presence in spirit was not possible without the presence of the Holy Spirit and this was their third lesson. This, however, could not be achieved by the Apostles before the resurrection of Jesus as the Holy Spirit was not given before the glorification of Jesus (John, 7:39). The fourth lesson the disciples learned from Jesus was that their communion with God should be reflected in their communion with their fellow-human beings with a soft corner for the poor, the marginalized, the incapacitated, the outcasts and in general the powerless of this world. Jesus introduced table-fellowship as one of the main means of initiating, developing and sustaining the bond between individuals and groups of people in the form of a celebration of life. The culmination of such a fellowship was executed by Jesus in the Last Supper by offering his own body and blood for our eternal life, which is re-enacted in our Eucharistic celebrations. Jesus instituted the Eucharist in the midst of the Paschal meal and the early Church continued the practice of celebrating the Eucharist, known as breaking of the bread, followed by a full meal. The fifth lesson Jesus taught his disciples was the rule to conduct themselves in communion with each other through service exemplified in the washing of the feet of the disciples by the Master. Washing of the feet was but an external expression of the internal attitude one must have to others in the daily interaction of life and was not meant for the mere observance of an annual ritual with full solemnity without any relevance for the daily life!  
                                                In order to continue the mission of Jesus, it was necessary to establish certain parameters for action and  life itself for which Jesus equipped the Apostles with authority to carry out their duty. The authority he conferred on them was not one of domination, practiced in the world , but of service to convey his love for the world. The authority to bind and loose, to forgive sins or to retain them,, etc., is not something the world can give as it is spiritual authority capable of binding or liberating the conscience of people for leading them to eternal life. It is not meant to be mingled with worldly authority called power nor with material benefits accruing from the exercise of such authority as it is received freely to be given freely. This authority is received on the basis of the reception of the Holy Spirit, so understood even by Simon the magician who confronted Peter in Samaria with his unholy request for receiving the same power (Acts, 8: 18-24).
                                            The authority conferred on the Apostles after the resurrection of Jesus and effectively received by them in the infusion of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost was already indicated in the public ministry of Christ. It is seen in the promise to Peter in Matthew 16:17-20, in sending the Apostles with authority over the devils in Luke 9: 1-6 and in sending the seventy two with powers of healing ahead of his own visit in Luke 10: 1-12. The priesthood of Christ shared by the Apostles through their position as leaders of the community of the disciples of Christ does not abrogate the other forms of the same priesthood seen in the royal priesthood of the faithful (1 Peter, 2: 9-10) as well as forms of priesthood outside the confines of the visible Church (Acts, 10: 34-36). There is an interesting instance of the permanent character of the priesthood of Christ in those who have received Holy Orders and are forbidden by the Church to practice public ministry as they violated some discipline or other of the Church. They too do not lose the indelible character imprinted on them at the priestly ordination and are even allowed to administer necessary sacraments in exigencies when other priests are not available. The ultimate reason for this is that God does not repent of the gifts once given whatever the consequences. As Jesus Christ is the Lord of all, his priesthood cannot be restricted to within the visible Church, which is made visible for the purpose of promoting all types of priesthood acceptable to God. The trusteeship character of the Christian priesthood may be expressed by saying that it is priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek just as in the case of Jesus Christ about which we shall see in the next Post.                

The Resurrection of Jesus and the Institution of the Church

                                                           We shall now discuss a crucial phase in our understanding of the priesthood of Christ in relation to which the discussion so far could be termed preliminary. In this connection, the need of our awareness of the institution of the Church and its importance in the history of salvation cannot be minimized. With the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, the prominence of the Church came to the fore since it was the Church that was duty-bound to proclaim his resurrection and continue his mission on earth. With the institution of the Church, the priesthood of Christ took a very concrete and visible form to stand as testimony to the real import of the exercise of his priesthood. Throughout the ages this exercise was performed with the aid of various religions, intermingled with abuses and excesses, which were but a temporary phase to be renovated in due course of time  Jesus Christ showed us the way how to be genuine priests in accordance with the ordinance of God to perpetuate which the Church was instituted. It does not mean that all other modes of priesthood in all other religions should be discarded or abolished as they too serve purposes acceptable to God and therefore to be respected by all of us. The need for reform and renovation is present not only in other religions and their priesthood, but also and especially in the Church and its priesthood claiming to be a model fashioned from the reality of Jesus Christ. Although this section deals with the priesthood of Christ from the perspective of his resurrection, in line with our thesis that there should not be a separation between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith, we are forced to discuss the institution of the Church and its priesthood from the time of its public ministry.
                                                        Just like the economy of salvation that has a history and is gradually realized in time so also the institution of the Church was a gradual process. Where do we pinpoint its beginnings? It depends on our concept of the Church,  whether we want to believe in its beginnings from eternity or with the Incarnation of Jesus or with his public ministry or after his resurrection, etc. Clearly each moment has its importance since Jesus Christ himself has different manifestations as the Lamb of God, the Word of God, the Jesus of history, the Christ of faith, etc. The Church herself has a broad view of her beginnings going beyond to eternity from which perspective alone the immaculate conception of Mary, for example, could be defended.  For, it was in view of the birth of Christ from her that she was declared to be immaculately conceived, being the first fruit of Christ's work of salvation, Mary herself being an exemplar of God's graces showered on all the just from the very beginning of the world. Thus we may say that Mary is the first member of the Church not only after Pentecost but also from eternity in virtue of her association with the Lamb of God so constituted by God.
                                                      God justifies man or counts him as justified not by anything he does or does not do, but merely by his faith in the God Who is the God of all to whatever religion one belongs. The fundamental reason for this is that there is only one God (Romans, 3: 27-31). In the same spirit as Paul who did not think that he was undermining the Law of Moses by his insistence on faith that actually put the Law on a firmer footing , we may say that faith in God as the fundamental requirement of our salvation keeps the Church on a firmer footing to fulfill its mission. Where does the role of Jesus Christ come in, if faith in God alone is sufficient for salvation? It is the 'raison d'etre of the Church to convince the world that Jesus Christ is God Himself, faith in whom is sufficient for salvation. Anyone ho has seen Jesus has seen the Father (John, 14:9) and therefore believing in Jesus is the same as believing in God the Father (More about it when we deal with the Divinity of Jesus Christ). This means that the Church to be worthy of her name has to present herself to the world in such a way that seeing her one should be able to see Jesus Christ himself. If the world is unable to see this, it means that the Church has not succeeded in its mission in spite of  (or because of?) so many items of spectacle marshaled by her before the disbelieving world.     

The Relevance of the Cross and the Last Supper

                                                           God has placed the cross in the midst of human history as an answer to man's folly that is considered wisdom by him, the real wisdom of God being Jesus crucified (1 Corinthians, 1: 18-19). Those who are on the way to ruin cannot accept the doctrine of the cross , while it is the power of God for those who are on the way to salvation. Paul himself was sent by Christ to proclaim the Gospel without relying on the language of worldly wisdom, the reason for this being that the fact of Christ on his cross might have its full weight. Since the world failed to find God through its wisdom, the wisdom of God ordained that those who believe in the folly of the Gospel should be saved. People like the Jews demand miracles and those like the Greeks look for wisdom, whereby Christ nailed to the cross proclaimed by the Church remains a stumbling-block and folly to them. However, for all those who have heard God's call, irrespective of which religion, region, caste, race, language, etc., they belong to, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God ( 1 Corinthians, 1: 17-24).  
                                                           How is that man created in the image of God Himself had to undergo such a tremendous sacrifice in the person of Jesus Christ as if there was no other alternative to save man from sin and the degradation he brought upon himself? The answer to this question would reveal the inner essence of the priesthood of Christ consisting in the Will of God as well as the plan of God for men and women of all ages. The first point to keep in mind here is that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross was not an afterthought from the part of God when Adam sinned with the assistance of Eve prodded by Satan taking the form of a serpent. This is evident from the fact that the Lamb of God standing for Jesus Christ was slain even before the foundations of the world were laid (Revelation, 13: 8; 1 Peter, 1: 19-20). This means that the spiritual foundations of the universe created by God were laid much before its material foundations, both of which were created through the Word of God. By spiritual foundations we mean here the level of access to God specifically in human beings, apart from the creation of angels some of whom had fallen from grace and turned into devils whose chief is called the Satan. Given the nature of man created in the image of God , once it was marred by sin, God wanted to restore it to its pristine purity for which His original and eternal image was called upon to do the job. For restoration purposes of anything invaluable, there is no better option than to commission the original author or artist who knows how best to do it. The Word of God, through whom and for whom the entire universe was created by God, becoming man as Jesus Christ knew exactly how to restore his own image, himself being the very image of God. He wanted to do it submitting his will completely to God's Will that entailed suffering and death, in a world estranged from God, because it was decided so from all eternity with God's foreknowledge of what man was going to do with his free will. Because of Adam's sin death took over man's life and to liberate him from its shadow Jesus had to defeat death itself that was achieved through his own passion and death. The Father approved of this restoration work of Jesus by raising him from the dead implying that death had no more any hold on those who cling to Jesus Christ through faith. Thus God did not go for any other alternative in order to avoid turning man into mere puppets of His Will or robots and automatons. Men and women were to be internally renewed and become a reservoir of powers beyond their ordinary selves, if only they were willing freely to associate themselves with the Lamb of God slain before the foundations of the world were laid. For achieving this, men and women only have to leave their selves behind, take up their daily cross and follow Jesus (Mark, 8: 34).  
                                                    When speaking of the priesthood of Christ, the Last Supper should be seen as its focal point as far as the Church is concerned since the sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted there, which is re-enacted in the sacrifice of the Holy Mass. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, however, is not re-enacted in the Holy Mass as the one and the only sacrifice of Christ need not be and cannot be repeated (Hebrews, 10: 12-14). The Holy Mass is truly a sacrifice not because it is a repetition of Christ's sacrifice on the cross, but because it is a representation of the same in virtue of its commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ. The Last Supper in which the Eucharist was instituted by Christ contained in itself his paschal mystery to be effected through his passion, death and glorification. Whenever the Church re-enacts the Eucharist in accordance with the command of Christ to do it in his memory, the members of the Church are able to receive his body and blood under the guise of bread and wine (Luke, 22: 19). Paul clarifies further and says that whenever we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes ( Corinthians, 11: 26).
                                                    Let us try to see the interconnections between the Last Supper, the sacrifice on the cross, the Eucharist, the priesthood of Christ and our share in it. Strictly speaking, there is only one priest who is both priest and victim at the same time and any one of us can be a priest in the measure in which we are able to be approximate to this reality of the priesthood of Christ. To be a real victim is more important than to be a priest in so far as a victim is at the same time a priest in virtue of the priesthood of Christ, whereas a priest may not be a genuine one in the absence of a real victim in his or her own person. What a priest offers stands for him or her and the people for whom it is offered, which is an invitation for all of them to be victims. This is true also in the Eucharist, although Christ himself is present there both as priest and victim because he has become a life-giving Spirit  Christ is represented by the priest and the people in the Eucharistic celebration and these are invited to turn out to be real victims of the sacrifice offered by Christ himself. Both the present Eucharistic celebration in the Church and the Last Supper of Christ are related to the sacrifice of the cross without which they would not have been able to participate in Christ's sacrifice. The time lag in both of these cases should not be seen as a problem as the priesthood of Christ is eternal and not bound by the limitations of time and space. However, for us who are bound by the limitations of time and space, salvation is achieved through enactment of events in history in tune with the principles of the economy of salvation. This means that everything in God's mind for our salvation is not revealed in full and at once, but gradually through history called the history of salvation.       

The Priesthood of Jesus Christ and his Passion and Death

                                                           When we think of the priesthood of Jesus Christ, what comes to our mind immediately is his passion and death without reference to which no other aspect of his priesthood could be understood. The importance of the identification between priest and victim in the case of Jesus , as pointed out above, is evident from the depiction of Jesus as the Lamb of God slain from the beginning of the world. This means that Jesus is a priest by being the victim that is offered to God, which implies his passion and death. During his public ministry, Jesus took pains to explain to the disciples the necessity of his passion and death that could not be grasped , let alone accepted, by them. In this connection Peter was severely reprimanded by Jesus as his thinking was too human in trying to dissuade Jesus from undergoing suffering and death (Mark, 8: 31:33). It was necessary for Jesus to undergo passion and death not only because the prophets had foretold that it was the destiny of the servant of God fixed by God himself , but also and more radically because the real and eternal priest was destined to be the victim as well. A step further, we may say that Jesus is a priest in virtue of being a victim to which status all priesthood is internally ordered by reference to the priesthood of Jesus Christ. Such a priest did not require any offering other than himself for the sacrifice most pleasing to God prefigured in the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham (Genesis, 22:1-18). In the same spirit, Paul exhorts us to offer our own selves as a living sacrifice to God, being a worship offered by mind and heart, and acceptable to Him (Romans, 12: 1:2). This means that a genuine victim, for whatever reason, is also a priest whose ministry could be exercised by a simple act of self-offering to God for whatever intentions we choose and this would be acceptable to God as a real sacrifice.
                                                           The inexplicable mystery of predestination and free will has its origin in the priesthood of Jesus Christ that is inseparably connected to his victim-hood as the Lamb of God. It is Paul who brings out clearly the problem of predestination in his Letter to the Romans 8:29-30 and the whole of Chapter 9. The question of free will and our responsibility to work out our salvation are a constant theme of the Bible that a seeming conflict between predestination and free will is seen here. The solution to this apparent dilemma is to be sought in the eternal priesthood of Jesus Christ. Though predestined as victim before the foundations of the world, how did Jesus exercise his free will in offering himself as a sacrifice to the Father? We must follow him in his footsteps so that though predestined to glory or destruction, everyone should exercise his or her priesthood in union with that of Jesus Christ in order to achieve the purpose intended by God before the foundations of the world. As the Good Shepherd, Jesus laid down his life on his own accord for the whole world without being forced by anyone  (John, 10:18). Our little sacrifices for others should help us to freely access the predetermined glory to which we have been called.    
                                                         The value of Jesus' passion and death should be seen not so much in his physical suffering or even in the agony of death as in the complete submission of his will to that of the Father. His passion and death were but a consequence of his strict adherence to the Will of God in everything he said or did in his public ministry to the utter consternation of his enemies. Jesus could not care less for the opinions of those who were blinded by their authority , whether real or imagined, as long as he was on the right track of his mission entrusted by the Father. Besides, Jesus knew that those who were busy with acquiring honor for themselves could not love God nor could they have faith if they were busy with receiving honor from one another instead for caring for the honor that comes from Him Who alone is God (John, 5: 41-44). The fundamental reason for this kind of pathetic attitude arises from a study of the Scriptures that misses the real import of the message contained in them , although the belief that they contain eternal life is true (John, 5: 39-40). The Jewish authorities saw Jesus as a rebel and a threat to their way of practicing religion, entrusted to them by God Himself, and yet Jesus could not but continue his mission of leading people to worship God in spirit and in truth as God Himself was Spirit (John, 4: 23-24). The conflict between Jesus and the Jewish authorities had to lead to his passion and death and yet he could not compromise on fulfilling the Will of God that actually consumed him. The same thing may be said about his trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin and the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate when Jesus could have escaped his terrible end with a little bit of compromise on his attitude to truth and justice. The compromise would have involved the denial of whatever he stood for so far and thereby place his own will to live over against the Father's Will for him to die. This was the great struggle Jesus had undergone in the garden of Gethsemane and on the cross just before he died that was but a resumption of the temptations offered by the devil in the desert at the beginning of his public ministry.         

The Nature of Jesus' Priesthood in his Public Ministry (Cont'd)

                                                           After the first sign or miracle, Jesus and his family went to Capernaum to stay and from there he proceeded to Jerusalem for the Paschal festival. Although many believed in him in Jerusalem seeing the signs he performed  there, Jesus did not give much value to their allegiance to him as he knew every person without testimony from others and so did not trust himself to them (John, 2: 12-25). Chapters 3 & 4 of John's Gospel are beautiful examples of how Jesus effectively exercised his priestly ministry of teaching and guiding a learned teacher of Israel, Nicodemus, and a simple Samaritan woman. When he came back to Cana-in-Galilee, he performed his second sign after returning from Judea. It was also by a simple command from far off that Jesus healed the son of an officer in the royal command at Capernaum. We have an interesting point of humility from the part of Jesus in this case when the father of the boy who was ill did not have the patience to listen to Jesus' concern about the usual tendency of the people not to believe unless confronted by signs and portents. Jesus immediately understood the actual and pressing concern of the man and gave priority to his need without taking offence at his attitude , curing the illness of his son on the spot. Jesus was willing to submit himself to the wishes of the man who came seeking a favor from him. His humility shone out of the action of immediately healing a person whose father, so to say, thwarted the procedure of Jesus in teaching the people. Any ordinary person would have thought of teaching a lesson to the man who was so audacious, but not so Jesus. His priestly ministry of healing and restoring wholeness to an afflicted person took precedence over the duty of teaching the real significance of signs and miracles he performed. At the same time, Jesus never encouraged indifference in matters of faith as we may note from his reaction of surprise to the father of the boy who was possessed and whose request was conditional (Mark, 9:22-24). The remark of Jesus in this connection that everything is possible for one who believes throws light on his world-view and the kind of priesthood he is invested with.
                                                     From the above instances it is clear that anyone participating in the Priesthood of Jesus Christ is a true upholder and promoter of human dignity without seeking honor and subservience from the beneficiaries of the favors done. A step further, one who renders service should have the attitude of a servant with regard to the beneficiaries of their service from whom nothing in return is expected. Those who are ordained to the priesthood in the Church are sealed with this special mark of a call to humble service without any selfish motives. Whether they succeed in their special vocation or not, we may say for certain that anyone, ordained or not, Christian or non-Christian, who lives out a life of selfless service without expecting anything in return from here below, participates in the Priesthood of Jesus Christ.        
                                                     On rare occasions Jesus has taken initiative to perform signs and miracles unasked for by anyone, but out of pure compassion for the plight of the afflicted people. Examples for the same can be seen in the cure of the man who was crippled for 38 years at the sheep-pool in Jerusalem, known as Bethesda, and the raising to life of the dead son of the widow of Nain (John, 5: 1-9; Like, 7: 11-15). In such cases, Jesus dispenses with the usual requirement of faith from the beneficiary of favors received as they were not even aware of the presence of Jesus in their midst. The cripple was not able to answer the Jews about their query about who cured him as they wanted to find out who ordered him to break the law of Sabbath by asking the man to carry his bed on the day of rest (John, 5: 12-13). The widow of Nain was, so to say, transported to another world by the experience of receiving back her son alive who was being carried away for burial that she could not even thank Jesus for this great favor (Luke, 7:15). That Jesus did not expect anything in return for favors rendered should explain the real intent of the surprise expressed in Luke, 17: 11-19 reporting the curing of 10 lepers. That only one of them returned to thank Jesus for his cure may have elicited the thought in Jesus about the spiritual condition of the other ten. In these instances we see another mark of the priestly ministry of Jesus in coming to the aid of people without waiting for requests from them and without any requirement as pre-condition including faith. The absolutely gratuitous nature of the priestly ministry is exemplified in these cases. The self-giving of Jesus in his passion and death prefigured in the Last Supper, the culmination of his priestly ministry was expressed through the multiplication of loaves and fish standing for himself as the bread of life (John, Chapter 6). Our next Post shall discuss the priestly ministry of Jesus through his passion and death                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

The Nature of Jesus' Priesthood in his Public Ministry

                                                           It is easier for us to see how Jesus exercised his priesthood in the public ministry after he was baptized by John the Baptist as it is recorded in the Bible.In the river Jordan John protested that the proper order or the hierarchy was not kept by the candidate before him for baptism as it was he who ought to be baptized  by Jesus (Matthew, 3: 13-15). Jesus did not attempt to argue and convince John about the new order he wanted to inaugurate by submission before him like a servant , although it was he who was the real master and John the servant. In the new order of priesthood Jesus was invested with , order and hierarchy were to be subservient to the dignity of each and every man and woman to liberate whom from slavery Jesus was ready to sacrifice himself. This idea of servant-hood and victim-hood portrayed in the Synoptic Gospels is very well brought out by the Gospel of John with the imagery of the Lamb of God. John the Baptist was sent by God to bear witness to Jesus and at the very first sight of Jesus coming to him he declared that that was the Lamb of God (John, 1: 29). How did John recognize Jesus  without any previous acquaintance with him? John himself tells us how he recognized Jesus as the one who was to baptize in the Holy Spirit as he had been given a sign by the one who sent him to baptize in water (John, 1: 32-34). Besides, John must have been aware of the prophecy of Prophet Isaiah about the lamb that is dumb before its shearers, (Isaiah 53: 7). We shall ignore here the inconclusive arguments among the biblical scholars about the role of John the Evangelist in this and similar passages as well as the opinion that the roles played by the two groups, one supporting the Baptist and the other Jesus, might have influenced the passage. This is not to deny the fact that John the Evangelist or the author who wrote the fourth Gospel in his name laid the foundation of the whole Gospel in the very first chapter dealing with the identity of Jesus Christ.
                                                          We shall now consider how the miracles, called signs in John's Gospel, performed by Jesus aided his priestly ministry. As a rule, Jesus was reluctant to perform miracles as he knew that very often they would only hinder his mission of proclaiming the Kingdom of God announcing it as good news to the people. An instance of this kind of a complete misunderstanding is recorded in John's Gospel 6: 15 where the crowd is said to have wanted to take Jesus by force to make him a king after they were fed with the multiplied  five loaves and two fish. This instance shows that miracles were neither a requirement nor an aid for the fulfillment of the mission of Jesus as they were very often misunderstood by the people. Why did Jesus perform so many miracles, if they were a hindrance to his true mission? In one word we may answer this problem by saying that the compassion of Jesus for the plight of the people he came to save, so to say, forced him to go out of his way to address the immediate needs of the people he encountered. At the same time, they were meant to serve the higher purpose of revelation of mysteries of the kingdom Jesus came to announce and establish. In order to steer clear of misunderstandings and not to deviate from his true mission, Jesus had to very often order the beneficiaries of such acts of compassion not to publicize what he had done for them. The very first miracle performed by Jesus at Cana-in-Galilee by changing water into wine in order to save the family in wedding celebration from embarrassment is an example of his reluctance noted by us  (John, 2: 1-11). Although it was due to an intervention by Mary, his mother, Jesus made a few things clear pertaining to his priestly ministry.The family in question would not have known that Jesus would be able to solve their problem because till then he was not known as a miracle  worker. Noticing the terrible embarrassment on such a joyous occasion, Mary took the initiative to quietly solve the problem through Jesus as if it was her own problem. Here we see how Mary was able to exercise her priestly ministry in conjunction with that of her son through her compassionate action. We have a lesson here for all  those who are trouble-makers at functions for celebrating moments of joy in that they act against the priestly ministry of Jesus Christ.  
                                                       Although Jesus had to save the situation at that wedding, it was actually too early for him to be out in the public eye with miracles before people were prepared to grasp their significance. Thus he had to take precautions so that the people were not able to distort the true meaning of what he was going to do. Jesus, so to say, sounded a negative note to his mother's request that would have dissipated the attention of the people surrounding him about what he was going to do. He also told his mother that actually she did not know what she was asking for since a miracle is the first step to the cross at the foot of which she had to stand. Jesus also distanced himself from her addressing her 'woman' a title bestowed on her from the cross making her a close partner in the salvation he wrought harking back to the woman in the Garden of Eden story. Detachment from family connections was necessary for Jesus to bring out the true significance of his miracle and that too was expressed in his answer to Mary. Besides, Jesus quietly changed the water into wine by just his command to the servants to draw water from the well and take it to the steward. He did not make a spectacle out of it by insisting, for instance, that he had to bless the water before taking it to the steward as his word was powerful enough to do what was intended. This was how Jesus exercised his priestly ministry of compassion even in a very awkward situation without a show of having done something spectacular. (To be continued in the next Post).               

The Nature of Jesus' priesthood as an Adult

                                                           When he was 12 years old Jesus was at the Jerusalem Temple discussing serious matters of the Law of Moses and later went home with his parents and lived with them under their authority. This was after calling God his father and expressing surprise at the anxiety of his parents searching for him when he was lost in the Temple. Here we see that Jesus already gave indications of his function as a priest in teaching even the learned and through detachment from his immediate family falling back on his real father as the source of his authority. Yet he went back home obediently with Mary, his mother, and Joseph, his foster-father, thereby exercising his priesthood as an adolescent. We do not know any thing about Jesus as a grown-up person from the Gospels before his public ministry started. This does not mean that we may assume his function as a priest was dormant during those crucial adult years till he started his public life. We may naturally infer that he was a carpenter following in the footsteps of Joseph whose profession was carpentry. Through his daily work Jesus exercised his priesthood by being dutiful and faithful in whatever he undertook professionally to the satisfaction of his customers. Truthfulness and genuine concern for the welfare of his customers would have constituted the exercise of his priesthood during the period.
                                                        Jesus was born and brought up as a Jew and yet did not belong to any group in the Judaism of the day. He was neither a Pharisee nor a Sadducee nor a revolutionary like an insurrectionist nor even an Essene, a monastic sect of the times. Although the New Testament was written in Greek, the language spoken by Jesus and his disciples was probably Aramaic, a Semitic tongue related to Hebrew, but not identical with it. Jesus was a carpenter and the term in Greek is 'tectone' in Mark's Gospel. 'Artisan' may be a better term than 'carpenter' that denoted a lower status in society than that of even a peasant farmer. Jesus used metaphors by means of words like 'farming','land owners','bailiffs', 'courts' 'rich people', 'kings' etc., all of which were appropriate to someone from a small village like Nazareth with about 200 people as its inhabitants at the time. Yet we know that Sepphoris, the capital of Galilee, was a multicultural city hardly 4 miles from Nazareth. But Jesus never spoke of Sepphoris nor did he use metaphors connected with urban centers. He mostly spoke to a rural audience, which was very familiar to him. Sepphoris and Tiberius were the two settlements in Galilee that could be called cities and Jesus seems to avoid them, concentrating instead his activities in rural areas. Cities and towns in those days were where the rich and the mighty lived.They could be government officials, judges, tax collectors, and land owners, etc., whose culture was different from that of the peasants, fishermen etc. and Jesus chose to intermingle with the latter rather than the former. Why did Jesus avoid the rich and the powerful in favor of the poor? The Gospel itself is preached to the poor and does it mean to exclude the rich people from eternal salvation? What we should try to understand from the actions of Jesus in this regard is related to the very substance of the Gospel. The rich and the powerful are so full of themselves that they cannot imbibe the blessedness promised in the beatitudes, which is part and parcel of the Good News (Gospel). Jesus could not have taken the risk of diluting and disfiguring his message at the formative stage itself of its implantation in the Apostles and the disciples. The poor are ready to deny themselves as they are habituated to it by their very life and anyone who is willing, including the rich and the powerful, to deny oneself in its real sense is poor in spirit.
                                                       Although Jesus was a peasant craftsman, it did not mean that he was untutored or unlettered. He was brought up in a good and pious family undergoing the normal education of any child of the time. Probably Jesus was multilingual with Aramaic as the spoken language, Hebrew as the scriptural language and Greek as the business language as he had to deal with all sorts of people in the course of his daily work-life. From this brief picture of Jesus' life before his public ministry, we may conclude that his priesthood was exercised in various and manifold ways depending on the situation at hand. He did this when he fulfilled his obligation to his family by working to support them and yet with detachment as his real obligation was to his Father in heaven. He must have been a model to his colleagues and co-workers without even the thought of exploitation of their labor crossing his mind. He would have pointed out to his customers the advantages and disadvantages of their orders for work supplied to him without thinking about enhancing his own profits by hiding facts known to him as an expert in the field. As a result, many a time Jesus would have suffered losses in his business as a craftsman  or an artisan because of his honesty and concern for the welfare of his customers. We must say that in doing so Jesus exercised his priestly ministry even as he was trying to cater to the material needs of people who approached him. Besides, the leaning of languages and Scripture prepared him not only to deal with the people around him but also for teaching and preaching in his public ministry This means that the very attempt of learning was an occasion for Jesus to exercise his priesthood even before his public ministry started about which we shall see in the next Post.   

The Nature of Jesus' Priesthood in his Infancy

                                                           The announcement of the birth of the Messiah by the angel of the Lord to Joseph citing the text in Isaiah 7: 14 about the virgin conceiving and bearing a son called Emmanuel, meaning God with us,  already contained the roles of Jesus as priest, king and prophet (Matthew,1: 18-25). It was further enhanced by Matthew by the story of the visit of the Magi from the East who offered the baby Jesus gifts of Gold, frankincense and myrrh signifying the Messiah's roles of kingship, priesthood and prophet-hood (Matthew,2:11). In Luke's Gospel it is specified that it was angel Gabriel who was sent to Mary to announce the birth of a son who should be called Jesus. His title was given as "the Son of the Most High" who will be given the throne of David to rule over Israel as king forever and he will be called "son of God" as he was going to be conceived by the power of the Most High overshadowing Mary at the coming of the Holy Spirit. The apprehension of Mary being a virgin, contrary to what the angel seemed to imply and therefore inconsistent with the plan unveiled by him, was overcome by the revelation of God's plan for her by the angel. It was after the birth of Jesus that a group of angels announce to the shepherds in the field that the Messiah, the Lord, was born in the city of David (Luke, 2: 10-11). Being the promised Messiah and the Son of God, Jesus was and is and will be the most eminent priest of God.
                                                          It is imperative to have an idea of the kind of priesthood Jesus was invested with in order to appreciate the comprehensiveness of his priesthood. If we are obsessed with any one idea to the exclusion of the other equally legitimate ones concerning the priesthood of Jesus Christ, we shall have an incomplete if not distorted view of his priesthood. Thus even the most sublime aspect of his priesthood manifested through his resurrection, ascension and sitting at the right hand of God the Father may not be taken as the defining criterion of his priesthood to the exclusion of his sacrificial death, public ministry, preparatory life, Incarnation and the pre-existence as the Word of God. All of them have a bearing on the nature of his priesthood that Jesus remains the eternal priest in participation from whom every other priest or priestess may be called a priest or priestess. The reason why one tends to reject a particular form of priesthood as invalid is his or her pre-conceived idea about what constitutes a priest as priest. If we think that the imposition of the hands of the Apostles and their successors is the only valid mode of conferring priesthood, we are thinking of the ministerial priesthood established in the Church by Christ and the Apostles. What about the royal priesthood conferred on the baptized where the imposition of the hands is not mandatory to be participants in Christ's priesthood? A step further, we may think of the universal priesthood of all men and women conferred on them in virtue of the Incarnation and the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. Finally, the cosmic priesthood of Christ as the Word of God through whom and for whom everything was created and in whom the whole universe is reconciled to God bears testimony to the elements of transformation created in the entire universe for unification with God. Thus we see that there are different senses in which the priesthood of Christ may be considered without sticking to an abstract and unitary concept of priesthood.
                                                     It is true that even the Apostles and the Evangelists could see the baby Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God and consequently as priest only after his resurrection from the dead and the coming of the Holy Spirit on them on the day of Pentecost. It does not, however, diminish the importance of his priesthood even as a child understood in the sense proper to the life of children. As we have remarked earlier, the goal and purpose of priesthood is union with God and that was never lacking in the life of Jesus at any time. As a child, when he was prompt in doing his duty and was obedient to his parents, Jesus was exercising his priesthood in a very true sense of the word. Further Posts shall treat about the nature of Jesus' priesthood at various stages of his life as an adult, in public ministry, passion and death etc. culminating in 'the priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek'         

The Relevance of Priesthood in Religions

                                                           From what we have seen in the last Post, it is clear that there was some sort of priesthood among all types of peoples of the world from the very beginning. What is the connection between the priesthood of Christ, especially before the Incarnation, and those kinds of priesthood? We must say that Jesus Christ as the Word of God exerting influence over all peoples made use of their Institutions of priesthood to lead those people to God, however imperfect their forms and rituals were. We see glimpses of Monotheism among the general tendency of polytheistic practices and abolition of the heinous practices of human sacrifices in certain religions. These are just examples of the illumination of human minds flowing from the Word of God existing with Him from eternity. In other words, these are cases of the discrete functions of the priesthood of Christ before the Incarnation. The same may be said about the highly developed philosophies of Greece and India enlightening the minds of so many people aiding them in dispelling superstitions and dissuading them from deviant practices.
                                                         How do we explain so many inhuman and irrational practices found in all kinds and races of peoples, if Jesus Christ as the Word of God was exercising his priestly functions even before his Incarnation? The deviant practices arise from the divided nature of men and women hinted at earlier, as a result of which they are at a loss in doing the good they want to do. If even people who want to do good are unable to do as per their desire, what would be the pathetic condition of  those who want to do evil or are prone to promote their own selfish motives? The priesthood of Christ is exercised as enlightenment of human minds as well as a healing inner strength that should be freely accepted by us in order to benefit ourselves. The freedom of everyone to accept or reject inspirations from above is clearly evident from the fact that , even after the unique sacrifice of Christ and institution of the Church with its own priesthood, ignorance, superstitions and deviant practices are not completely absent even in the followers of Christ. God is very particular to safeguard and promote our freedom that He reluctantly allows waywardness from our part until we see our folly and return to His love that is inexhaustible. Unless we use our freedom responsibly, how shall we be able to participate in the nature of God Himself that is our ultimate destiny? the fact that people can reject light and inspiration from above is very well brought out by Paul in his Letter to the Romans in chapters 1&2.
                                                       Paul pinpoints the fundamental fault that prevents men and women from acknowledging God and His sovereignty over everything as stifling the truth on their wicked ways(Romans, 1: 18). This is in spite of the fact that all that may be known of God by them lies plain before their eyes besides the fact that God Himself has disclosed it to them. The eye of Reason, a unique gift bestowed on us by God, alone is enough to see His invisible attributes in the things He has made. They have no excuse to pretend that they do not or cannot know God as they pride themselves to be sharp enough to understand the worldly wisdom that too requires application of their Reason. Theoretically speaking, they could not defend themselves against their ignorance of God and therefore they showed it practically in their refusal to honor God and thank him. As a result of this kind of their behavior, God too abandoned them to their wicked devices leading them to all kinds of depravity  making them real fools although they themselves claimed to be wise people. Knowing the just decree of God that those who engage in such practices deserve to die, they not only go on doing the same things but also actually applaud those who imitate them (Romans, 1: 19-32). The duty of priests to advice and admonish people to turn away from the path of death to one of life shows the relevance of priesthood in religions.
                                                     No one is allowed to sit in judgement about the behavior of other people as God alone is the true and just Judge, although His kindness and patience have kept it in check for the Day of Judgement. Since God has no favorites and everyone would be judged according to their conscience, all are invited to pursue life in tune with the enlightenment and graces they have received, within the Law or outside of the Law. When God judges the secrets of the human hearts through Christ Jesus, their conscience will be called as witness and their thoughts themselves will accuse or excuse them (Romans, 2: 1-16). Paul says that this is what his Gospel declares and we see how Jesus Christ is mentioned as the criterion of judgement of every human being. This is in consonance with what we read in John's Gospel 5:22 that the Father does not judge anyone having left all judgement to the Son who will actually be the criterion of judgement instead of being the judge himself (John, 8: 15). Here we see the role of Christ's priesthood as the criterion of all kinds of priesthood just as he himself is going to be the criterion of judgement on the Day of Judgement. Jesus Christ qualified himself to be this Criterion in virtue of being the eternal victim and priest as the Lamb of God slain from the beginning of the world (Revelation, 13: 8). 

An Overview of Priesthood in General

                                                           India can lay claim to have one of the oldest religions and the most developed one when we consider the Philosophy and Theology attendant on various forms of her religion, although the actual practice may not have measured up to the ideal. This kind of discrepancy between theory and practice is the common lot of all religions, which points to the divided nature of the human being who is not able to do what one wants to do as warned by Jesus pointing out to his disciples about the willingness of the spirit and the weakness of the flesh (Mark, 14: 38). The Vedic religion, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism may be seen as different stages of the development of the Indian religion. Even in the ancient Vedic times a special priesthood is discernible in as far as the father of the family , the original offerer of sacrifices usually sought the advice and assistance of a Brahmin  Buddhism, through the reforms effected by King Asoka in the 2nd century B. C. minimized the importance of Brahmanism. However, Lamas in Buddhism have developed a hierarchy in Tibet seemingly alien to their opposition to priesthood.
                                                          There was priesthood in the Iranian religion of Zoroastrianism with a special priestly caste. The human sacrifices practiced from time immemorial were abolished by Zoroaster. There was no exclusive priestly caste in Greece as the nobility and even kings offered sacrifices to gods and public worship was undertaken by the State. The ancient Romans considered religion, sacrifice and the priesthood as obligations of the State. At the beginning of their history, kings themselves were the priests offering sacrifices. As a Republic, the Roman Empire allowed Patricians to be priests, which was later (around 300 B. C.) extended to Plebeians also. Later still various classes of priests were added and the emperor himself was the High Priest (Pontifex Maximus). The ancient Germans worshiped the gods without temples and images. Their services took place in sacred groves and their priests had judicial powers who were highly respected. The Celtic priests or the Druids, originally from Ireland and Britain, were transplanted to Gaul (France) in the third century before Christ. They too were highly respected by the people and were exempt from taxes and military service as they belonged to a priestly and ruling class. They were mainly teachers, judges and physicians. The people believed in Divine Providence, immortality and transmigration of souls. They had images of gods and practiced human sacrifices.  
                                                        Sinism is the oldest religion of the Chinese and it had no distinct priesthood. They practiced monotheism and State officials offered sacrifices of animals , fruits and incense in the name of the ruler. In the 6th century B. C. Confucius endorsed this system without priests and debased the concept of religion, deifying the emperor as 'the son of Heaven'. Against this system without priests, Laotse (born in 604 B. C.) introduced monasticism and priesthood with a high priest at its head (Taoism: Tao means reason). In the first century B. C. Buddhism entered the scene as a rival of both these religions, although Confucianism is the official religion of China today. Shintoism is the original national religion of Japan. There are no dogmas, moral codes or sacred writings in Shintoism. The emperor being the son of the Deity is the high priest and his palace is also the temple. The Egyptians had their ancient religion completely under the influence of priests. Although the ruler was the only priest in principle , a special priestly caste had evolved from 3400 B. C. onward. Moses himself learnt a few things from the Egyptian mode of worship. Yet he was completely original in the establishment of Jewish priesthood, under divine inspiration, based on the unique idea of Yahweh's covenant with his chosen people. Among the Semites, we have the Babylonian-Assyrian priests, also known as Chaldean. Among Syrians, Phoenicians, Ammonites and Philistines the cult of Moloch and Astarte was prevalent. The howling and dancing priests tried to appease Moloch by sacrifices of children and self-mutilation. The Phrygian goddess Cybele was similarly pacified. The priests of Baal of the Canaanites encouraged the Jews for idolatry and the cult of Astarte was an invitation to immorality. The ancient Arabians had a plain religion without any priesthood. Modern Islam has a clergy for leading the prayers (Imams), but no real priesthood.      
                                                        As for the Jews, during the time of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (the Patriarchs), the offering of sacrifices was done by the father or head of the family (Genesis, 8: 20; 12: 7; Job, 1: 5). Later on, there were regular priests (Exodus, 19: 22 ff.). In the Mosaic priesthood, we have Levites, priests and the high-priest. The Jewish priesthood became a special class after Sinaitic covenant through Moses by the choice of the tribe of Levi by Yahweh. The house of Aaron from the tribe of Levi was to discharge all priestly functions (Exodus, 29: 1-37; 40: 12 ff; Leviticus, 8: 1-36). The Jewish priesthood ceased with the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 A. D. by the Roman emperor Titus. The later Rabbis are not priests, but only teachers of the Law. The next Post shall discuss the relevance of priesthood in religions.    

The Priesthood of Jesus Christ.

                                                          The traditional method of Christology elucidates the person of Jesus Christ with the dual concept of a divine-human individual with a human and a divine nature, both of these supported by a divine person preexisting as the Word of God. In the Trinity of the Father- Son- Holy Spirit, the Son is identified with the Word of God. The Word incarnate, Jesus Christ, is further explained in Christology as the Priest, Prophet and the King. We shall try to cover all these points in our Study of Christology under the large themes of 'The Priesthood of Jesus Christ' 'The Son of God' and the 'Son of Man'. The priesthood of Jesus Christ is eternal not only after his ascension to God the Father, although that was a moment very special in its operation in accordance with the economy of salvation. Eternity suggests without beginning and end and thus the eternal priesthood too is without beginning and end. However, the economy of salvation demands gradual revelation of eternal mysteries of which the priesthood of Jesus Christ occupies a prominent place (Psalm, 110:4). We shall try through the following Posts to clarify the mystery of the eternal priesthood of Jesus Christ as well as the participation of all types of priesthood in the unique priesthood of Christ.
                                                          An objection may be raised against Christ's priesthood before Incarnation saying that the essence of priesthood is not found in the pre-existence of the Word with God the Father. What then is the essence of priesthood? Is it being a mediator between God and the human race or offering of sacrifice to God or standing before God in our place as a victim of sacrifice or offering prayers for us? What exactly constitutes the essence of priesthood so that we could determine the scope and nature of Christ's priesthood? If we try to discover such an essence, it would be like putting the cart before the horse since the very concept of priesthood originates from the priesthood of Christ as it is eternal. The relation of the priesthood of Christ to all kinds of priesthood is like that between a standard of measure and the things measured. We do not arrive at a standard of measure by putting together elements from the things to be measured in order to determine the essence of measuring of things. All measurements, for instance, in meter depend on the standard meter maintained in Paris as the criterion of measurement in meters. This criterion of measurement set up by convention or consensus is agreed upon by every one as the criterion of measurement in meters. Similarly, the priesthood of Christ is set up by God as  the criterion of all types of priesthood from the beginning till the end of the world. This claim is from the revelation of God through His Word presented as Theology in the form of an invitation to all those who are inspired to accept it as true. All types of priesthood in any and every religion, culture, language, castes and creeds have their legitimacy in relation to the priesthood of Christ. If this is true, it is necessary that the priesthood of Christ has relevance even before the Incarnation without which no priesthood till then could qualify as legitimate. Instead of hunting for the essence of priesthood in the abstract, if we consider the goal and purpose of priesthood as union with God , we see immediately that the priesthood of Jesus Christ is eminently suited to stand as the criterion for any priesthood. For, this union with God is not something which was achieved only after his Incarnation. but was always present from eternity as the Word of God and will continue to eternity as the slain Lamb of God (Revelation, 5:6).
                                                         If any one of the many and varied elements of the priesthood like mediation, sacrifice, victim-hood, prayer, etc. is considered as its essence, we shall end up denying that the other elements have any true value for priesthood. On the contrary, if we consider all of them as essential, priesthood in one or other religion , culture, etc., would be found wanting in meeting the essential requirements of priesthood. Therefore, our method is to look at the goal and purpose of priesthood as union with God that is fully realized in Jesus Christ from eternity to eternity  in relation to which every other priesthood is measured for its genuineness. Just considering one of the many manifestations of priesthood, for example the Jewish priesthood according to the Law of Moses, as the essence of true priesthood would make Jesus himself a layman who was outside of that priesthood. The eternal priesthood is in the succession of Melchizedek (Psalm, 110: 4) and Jesus is the High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews, 5: 10). Since Jesus was not of the tribe of Levi, the source of legitimacy for the Jewish priesthood, but of Judah from which king David descended, he could not be a priest according to the Jewish norms. He could very well be a king , being the son of David, and yet his kingship was subsumed under his priesthood as his kingship was not of this world (John, 18: 36). Even as a prophet Jesus is not just one of the prophets as he is the very Word of God of which a genuine prophet should be the official bearer and interpreter. Thus we see that all the traditional qualifications of men of God as prophet, king and priest in various religions have coalesced into the eternal priesthood of Christ. This priesthood of Christ is according to the order of Melchizedek, the meaning and scope of which we shall discuss in due course.
                                                    The reference in Revelation, 13: 8 to the slain Lamb from the beginning of the world indicates the eternal nature of the priesthood of Jesus Christ as he is the eternal Lamb of God. Since the priest and victim are identical in the case of Jesus Christ, being a victim is at the same time being a priest. Thus from the very beginning of the world Jesus as the Word of God exercised his function as priest though the sacrifices, mediation, offerings and prayers offered by people in various religions (1 Peter, 1:19-20). That is why St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica quotes Revelation , 13:8 to conclude that it is true to say that Christ was sacrificed even in the figures of the Old Testament ( Question 83, Article 1, Answer to objection 1). This he mentions in connection with his argument that the daily Eucharistic offering in the Church is actually the sacrifice of Christ, although Jesus offered himself up once and for all at Golgotha (Hebrews, 10: 12-14). In the same spirit of understanding the efficacy of Christ's sacrifice both before and after his unique sacrifice on Golgotha, we hold that any sacrifice, irrespective of religions, acceptable to God derives its value from the sacrifice of Christ. As we are interested in the relevance of Christ's priesthood before the Incarnation and how it was operative in the religions of the world, our next Post shall consider a brief overview of priesthood in general.   

Use of Language by Jesus

                                                          We read in the Gospels that the efficacy of the words of Jesus was so magnetic that the ordinary people heard him gladly who were amazed by the beauty of the language emanating from his mouth (Mark, 12:37; Luke, 4:22). This was in connection with his mission in general as well as the question of Son of David posed by Jesus himself that could not be answered by even the Doctors of the Law and yet was gladly accepted by the common people (Psalm 110: 1). The reason why the leaned and the wise people of this world were unable to understand a basic text about the Messiah was their inability to see the deeper and fuller meanings of such texts. A literal interpretation of the text, within a regimented and uniform set of rules of the language they used, prevented their understanding of the Messiah both as the Lord and the Son of David. According to their mental attitude, the Messiah had to fit into their forms of thought instead of the other way round, i.e., their forms of thought adjusting to the demands of the reality of the Messiah! The word 'Lord' in the two instances referred to from Psalm 110:1 pertains to two different language-games applied to God the Lord and to Messiah the Lord with different meanings. As applied to the Messiah, it refers to the Lordship conferred on the risen Jesus for which his descent from David as his son was presupposed. Besides, as preexisting Word of God the Messiah in the person of Jesus Christ already preexisted not only David, but also Abraham and even Adam, the progenitor of the human race, whose creation was through and for the Word! Thus the Messiah could both be the Lord and the son of David as he was preexisting with God the Father from eternity.
                                                        We have a case of dealing with those who questioned the authority of Jesus by a simple counter-question posed to them about the source of authority in the baptism administered by John the Baptist (Mark, 11:30). Only someone who was fully aware of the undercurrents of the times and surroundings could have asked such a question and silence those who confronted Jesus with a seemingly innocuous query. This shows that effective use of language demands an acquaintance with the forms of life of the people with whom we converse. The language-games emanating out of such forms of life confer meaning to what one says and are solid weapons against speech that is totally unconnected with the daily experiences of life. The chief priests, the lawyers and the elders of the Jewish people of Jesus' time learnt this lesson the hard way as they were put in a dilemma by the question of Jesus about John's baptism (Mark, 11:30; Luke, 20: 4).They knew that they could not give any random answer as it had to be in conformity with the real situations of life experienced by them as well as the people. They made themselves unworthy for an answer from Jesus to their question to him about his authority by their crafty pretension of ignorance about the authority of John the Baptist. As Jesus saw through their intention to trap him in his words for their own designs instead of a readiness to learn from Jesus anything about God, they did not deserve any proper answer. Wasting words without any purpose is a form of violence against the sanctity of words, which should ultimately reflect the Word of God Himself.    
                                                                  One of the most important elements in the meaningful use of language is revealed in the observation of Jesus that if the Jews had really believed in Moses they would have as well believed in him as the expected Messiah (John, 5: 46-47). The element in question is the requirement of application of language to reality for meaning and truth. Lack of application of the Laws of Moses, considered to be of supreme authority by the Jews, in their original and interior sense led the Jewish authorities of the time away from their true meaning and truth resulting in the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah. On the contrary, whatever Jesus said and did was corroborated by their application to his own life culminating in his death that was approved by God the Father by raising him from the dead. In other words, primacy of practice over theory is an essential element in the meaningfulness of language just like in the case of any rule that cannot be a rule unless it is observed at least once. A rule that is never observed by anyone is no rule at all and a language that is not capable of being applied to concrete situations of life is no language with meaning in any sense of the word 'language' as commonly understood.           

Use of Language Before the Resurrection of Jesus

                                                           Jesus started his public ministry with the proclamation : "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matthew, 3:17). This is identical to the call of his fore-runner John the Baptist to those who gathered to hear him (Matthew, 3:2). Yet, do they have exactly the same meaning? In the case of the Baptist, when people volunteered to reform themselves through external acts of repentance and mercy, John seems to have been satisfied with the result of his preaching. He was justified in that feeling as John was only preparing the way for the one who was coming after him, the expected Messiah. John himself did not know who was the Messiah until Jesus came to be baptized along with others whom John was baptizing in the river Jordan  The message of Jesus using the very same words of John went much deeper demanding an inner conversion of mind and heart out of which other acts of repentance and mercy were welcome. Here we see how meaning flows out of words, even identical ones, out of the language-games arising out of the life-forms of people lived in specific situations. For, the mission of John demanded only preparation of people for the one who was coming and needed only to make people ready to receive the real message that was still coming. The real message was nothing short of complete transformation of our self so that we may see things through the eyes of God Himself in order to be re-created in His image and likeness. For this purpose Jesus himself went before us as model and mediator through his life, death on the cross, resurrection, ascension and sitting at the right hand of God. The proclamation of Jesus, therefore, of the kingdom of heaven drew meaning out of this form of life of Jesus himself that was not available to John when he announced the coming of the kingdom before Jesus entered the scene. This contrast between the use of language by John and Jesus is an indication of the workings of our language as far as the meaning intended to be conveyed is concerned.
                                                             In conversation with Nicodemus, a Pharisee and a member of the Jewish Council, Jesus revealed that he was eminently qualified to teach us the things of heaven. Jesus told him that no one ever went up into heaven except the one who came down from heaven, the Son of Man whose home is in heaven (John, 3:13). That was why Jesus was able to use language analogically in his parables, similes, examples, questions and answers and in general in all his teachings and turn out to be a genuine teacher. It is evident from the predicament of Nicodemus that even such a great and famous teacher like himself could not be a match for Jesus whose knowledge of matters divine did not originate from here on earth. Jesus saw from his encounter with Nicodemus that speaking about things of heaven with people who could not even understand the things of earth, and that too by a famous teacher like Nicodemus, was completely pointless if he were to teach the ordinary people. Thus Jesus chose the ordinary language of the people to express truths of the kingdom of heaven in such a way that people who did not harden their hearts would understand his teachings, while the others would be completely clueless of what he taught. Openness to the Word of God is the only condition for us to understand what is required for eternal salvation as God Himself would lead such a person to his or her ultimate destiny. Those who think that faith in God is a challenge to our capacity to reason and power of choice may calmly consider which of the options is more reasonable: to be open to all possibilities or to restrict oneself to certain pre-determined fields of our interest blocking out all other options in our life!  Both the grace of God and the freedom of men and women are jointly at work in those who open themselves up to higher realities without closing in on themselves and their ways of thinking.
                                                           The parables of Jesus are specimens of ingenious ways of speaking about divine realities in human terms, easily accessible to those who are willing to lend their ears to the message conveyed. There are a few parables meant for understanding by the Apostles and close disciples of Jesus and hidden from the general public as it was the former who needed a deeper understanding of the mysteries of the kingdom in view of heir future mission. The remaining parables were meant for everyone as they were more direct and easy to grasp with minimum chance of misunderstandings. Accordingly Jesus chose language appropriate to each category of people to convey the right message. As we have seen earlier about the requirement of meaningful use of language, Jesus connected even the most profound mysteries of the kingdom with the everyday situations of life of ordinary people. We might say that the references to his resurrection in his public ministry and those of his public ministry after his resurrection were meant by Jesus to ground the supreme truth of his new life in the Spirit on the level of our actual situations in life. By means of the ordinary language and the language-games flowing from it Jesus spoke meaningfully of divine realities incomprehensible to the wise and the learned, but open to the simple and humble of heart!           

Use of Language After the Resurrection of Jesus

                                                          After the present one, we shall have two more Posts, namely, 'Language before the Resurrection of Jesus' and 'Use of language by Jesus' before ending this section on the meaningful use of biblical language in the context of the theme: 'The Christ of Faith'. The importance of the correct use of language is evident from the fact that sometimes even scholars blindly use words like 'metaphor', 'analogy', etc., in order to get out of problems they cannot solve or to safeguard their own pet ideas against certain biblical expressions. What they do not understand is that a metaphor or analogy already presupposes that the one who employs it knows what is signified by them, whereas in these cases they use them as they don't understand them. We may say that Jesus was able to use language analogically about heavenly things as he knew them already before speaking about them. In fact he was the only one who could use language analogically about divine mysteries without fear of falling into a vicious circle as he knew both the ends of the analogy thoroughly from inside. Jesus did this by use of parables, allegories, similes etc. conveying the truth about the other world by using our ordinary language. All others could use analogy, when it is used for God and the world to come, only from their point of view though God's point of view was the one to be explained through analogy that was the unknown.
                                                        We read in the Acts of the Apostles Chapter 1, verse 3 thus: "He showed himself to these men after his death, and gave ample proof that he was alive: over a period of forty days he appeared to them and taught them about the kingdom of God". The first and most important means Jesus employed to teach his disciples about the kingdom of God after his resurrection was to connect that kingdom with his presence among them again. References to his life with them before his death were also reminisced as important evidence for his identity before and after his death and resurrection. In fact, the interconnection and continuity of his life before and after his death and  resurrection was a crucial point of his teachings with the added note of his self-transformation as a concrete manifestation of the coming kingdom. All attempts, therefore, of separation and division between a Jesus of history and a Christ of faith are completely off the mark from the New Testament testimony and the teaching and preaching of Jesus, the Apostles and the disciples.
                                                         The resurrection narratives in the four Gospels substantially agree on the main event of resurrection itself with variations in their modes of expression. As we noted earlier in the case of the creation narratives, here too the Evangelists freely used mythological elements with the appearance of the Angels at the tomb for expressing something that was unheard of till then. Even the Angels did not want to take the credit for convincing the disciples about the fact of resurrection as the latter's attention was called by the former to remember the past. (Luke, 24:8). This is an additional proof for our contention that the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith should be seen as one without any division between the two as the latter is a transformed self of the former. Memory of the past was considered by the risen Christ himself as the solid foundation on which he built the faith of the disciples in his new form of life.
                                                        However, the transformed form of Jesus after his resurrection was an enigma even for his closest disciples that he had to call their attention to his identity by reference to the past. We do not see any fixed form of the risen Jesus in his appearances to the disciples. Mary Magdalene, the first person to see the risen Lord mistook him for the gardener and was brought to her senses by the familiar voice of Jesus who called her "Mary"! The two disciples who traveled to Emmaus did not recognize Jesus who joined them on the way and was taken for a stranger until the breaking of the bread when they sat for the meals. Jesus himself had to prove his identity to his disciples by eating before them to dispel their doubts about the authenticity of his presence. The risen body of Jesus was not subject to the usual physical laws so much so that he could be present in a room even when it was locked from inside. All these instances of the appearances of the risen Jesus tell us about the special characteristics of the risen body, which would be called a spiritual body by Paul (1 Cor. 15:44). The connection and continuity of the physical and the spiritual body of Jesus consist in the fact that it was his physical body that was transformed in the resurrection. Given the completely new reality of the resurrection, there is no contradiction in the concept of a spiritual body since it arises out of the forms of life of a believing community. Such a community will have its own language-game and the meaning of a concept like 'spiritual body' is rooted in such a language-game. This is possible because words don't have a fixed meaning always and everywhere and are elastic enough to accommodate new meanings unheard of before, because of new forms of life of a community resulting in new language-games. This is especially true about events unheard of before and all the more about unique events that don't repeat themselves and, at the same time, are constitutive of our ultimate destiny. Besides, we acknowledge that only believers can become familiar with the reality of the resurrection of Jesus as he himself appeared only to believers and not to the general public. Given the importance of Jesus of history even for Christ of faith, let us go back in the next Post to the public ministry of Jesus in dealing with the problem of language.