Hebrews 7:18–25

Because of their earthly voluptuousness and desire for pleasure, which the former priests showed, and because of their infirmity, through which they made their people infirm before their cupidities, they did not bring any of them to that perfection, thanks to which we got rid of all our material goods. In fact, "the introduction" of the gospel made for the hope which surpassed what was previously preached to us, was also made for the introduction of this precept: through our own freedom from material possessions "we approach God," whereas through the voluptuousness and pleasures of the law we were rejected and removed from God.

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before, for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof." Here the Heretics press on. But listen attentively. He did not say "for the evil," nor, "for the viciousness," but "for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof," yea and in other places also he shows the weakness; as when he says "In that it was weak through the flesh." The law itself then is not weak, but we.

He said that the new covenant is better. And this indicates, he says, the difference of the priests. He said that everything has changed. Therefore, he speaks of the reason for the change, and he says, "For annulment occurs of the preceding command." Therefore, an annulment occurs when the preceding commandment is in force, that is, of the older law. Not simply, but then when it was found to be weak and unprofitable. Since there is no fault, what need is there for the change? Therefore, he says, this is also the law. For this, the preceding commandment has been annulled due to weakness and uselessness.

We may also ask what it means when it says in the law that Moses' face was shining with glory, though covered with a veil, while his hand when put "into his bosom" became "leprous as snow." In this it seems to me the form of the whole law is quite fully described. For his "face" is the word of the law, and by "hand" are described the works of the law. "For no human being will be justified by works of the law." Nor could the law lead anyone to "perfection." In the same way the "leprous" hand of Moses was hidden in his bosom, since it could not perform any perfect work; but his face shone, though covered with a veil, since his word has the glory of knowledge, but a hidden glory.

The law ceases to have effect, he is saying, and the hope of better things is introduced. It ceases to have effect, not for being evil (the frenzied view of the heretics), but for being ineffective and incapable of providing the perfect benefit. It must be noted, of course, that he refers to the obsolete prescriptions of the law as ineffective and useless—circumcision, sabbath observance and similar things; the New Testament also bids us observe to a greater extent the commandments, you shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, and suchlike things. In place of the former, therefore, we receive the hope of the good things to come: it relates us to God.

He said that the law undergoes a change, and he demonstrated this. Next he seeks out the reason as well. For we humans find rest only when we learn the reason. And he says: the annulment and rejection of the formerly existing commandment, that is, of the formerly existing covenant, occurred because it was found to be unprofitable and weak. So then, what? Did the law bring no one any benefit? Of course it brought benefit, but it proved useless for making people perfect.

361. – Then when he says, On the one hand, a former commandment is set aside, he lays down two consequents: first, in regard to the voiding of the Old Testament; secondly, the institution of the New.

362. – The first consequent is that the Old Testament came about by the law of carnal commandments, and the other is then introduced. The first, therefore, is changed: and this is what he says, namely, there is a setting aside of the former commandment. But nothing is set aside except what is evil: 'That he may know how to refuse the evil' (Is. 7:15). But the commandment is not evil: 'The law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good' (Rom. 7:12). I answer that it was not evil in itself, but inasmuch as it was unsuited to the time. For the things of the Old Testament are not to be kept in the New Testament: 'Sacrifice and oblation you did not desire: then said I: behold, I come' (Ps. 39:8). Therefore, it is said to be set aside because of its weakness and uselessness. For that is said to be weak which cannot produce its effect; but the proper effect of the Law and of the priesthood is to justify. This the Law was unable to do: 'For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh; God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and of sin has condemned sin in the flesh' (Rom. 8:3); 'How turn you again to the weak and needy elements, which you desire to serve again?' (Gal. 4:9). Likewise, it is called useless, inasmuch as it prepared one for the faith: 'All these died according to the flesh, not having received the promises' (Heb. 11:13). But he shows why it is weak and useless when he says, it made nothing perfect in regard to justice or eternal life. Hence, it was imperfect, but it was made perfect by Christ.

"For the Law made nothing perfect." What is, "make nothing perfect"? Made no man perfect, being disobeyed. And besides, even if it had been listened to, it would not have made one perfect and virtuous. But as yet he does not say this here, but that it had no strength: and with good reason. For written precepts were there set down, Do this and Do not that, being enjoined only, and not giving power within. But "the Hope" is not such.

What is "a disannulling"? A casting out. A "disannulling" is a disannulling of things which are of force. So that he implied, that it once was of force, but henceforward was of no account, since it accomplished nothing. Was the Law then of no use? It was indeed of use; and of great use: but to make men perfect it was of no use. For in this respect he says, "The Law made nothing perfect." All were figures, all shadows; circumcision, sacrifice, sabbath. Therefore they could not reach through the soul, wherefore they pass away and gradually withdraw. "But the bringing in of a better hope did, by which we draw nigh unto God."

"But the bringing in of a better hope." For that system also had a hope, but not such as this. For they hoped that, if they were well pleasing to God, they should possess the land, that they should suffer nothing fearful. But in this dispensation we hope that, if we are well pleasing to God, we shall possess not earth, but heaven; or rather (which is far better than this) we hope to stand near to God, to come unto the very throne of the Father, to minister unto Him with the Angels. And see how he introduces these things by little and little. For above he says "which entereth into that within the veil", but here, "by which we draw nigh unto God."

For the law was not able to produce any perfection in virtue. For it only said, "Do this," and "Do not do that," and it was no longer able to strengthen and assist in bringing about what was said, which now happens to us through the Spirit. "but is a certain introduction." It is done in common. "of a greater hope." For the law had hope, but not such as that which was introduced. For those who were observing the law hoped to possess the land. "For you shall eat the good things of the land," (Is. 1:19) but the hope through Christ gives the kingdom of heaven, and the nearness to stand before God, and to serve Him with angels.He said above (Heb. 4:6): Entering into the inner part of the veil; but now: Through which we draw near to God, he says; for the hope that is with him leads us to the divine throne, and stands with the Cherubim.

Why then was the law weak? Because in it only mere letters were proclaimed: do this and do not do that; but it imparted no power for the fulfillment of the commandments, which is now granted to us by the Spirit. However, here the heretics who revile the law attack, saying: even Paul himself disparages the law. But he, O fools, did not call it bad, but unprofitable and weak precisely for the purpose of making people perfect. For just as milk is beneficial to infants, suited to their age, yet is useless for the mature, so also the law was beneficial for the immature Jews, drawing them away from idols and leading them to God, imparting to them commandments suited to their condition, but for those who needed more perfect commandments it was not sufficient. For it prescribed fleshly sacrifices and purifications, which the spiritual do not need. Therefore it has now been annulled. And annulment is the annulment of that which had force. Thus the law held authority at the time when its time had come.

The commandment of the law, he says, has been annulled, and a hope has been introduced, such as the Jews did not have: for they too had a hope, that by pleasing God they would possess the land, overcome their enemies, and in general they placed their hope in bodily goods. But our hope is not of this kind; it is far superior: for we hope for heavenly things, that we shall be near God, that we shall stand before Him and serve Him with the angels. Above he said: "which enters into that within the veil" (Heb. 6:19), but now: "through which we draw near," he says, "to God." For hope brings us to the very throne of God and sets us together with the cherubim.

363. – Then when he says, on the other hand a better hope is introduced, he lays down the second consequent from the second antecedent, saying, a better hope is introduced by the new priest, through which we draw near to God. For if a new priest arises, it is according to the power of an indestructible life (this is the antecedent); and the introduction of a better hope (this is the consequent): 'He has regenerated us unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ' (1 Pt 1:3). Likewise, through Him we draw near to God, for through sin we are separated from Him: 'But your iniquities have divided you between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you that he should not hear' (Is. 59:2). He, therefore, is the one who removes this and makes us draw near to God. He is that new Priest, namely, Christ, Who takes away the sins of the world: 'Being justified, therefore, by faith, let us have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom also we have access into this grace' (Rom. 5:1).

In the house of Levi, because "they became priests without an oath," they did not last; he, on the contrary, lasts forever. In fact, it cannot happen that he speaks falsely about the oath, because he said, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, 'You are a priest forever' " of the priests according to the order of Melchizedek. And "Jesus Christ" was "a much better" mediator than the former priests in that thing, which he promised us through the New Testament.While before it was necessary that the priests were many, because death interrupted the older ones in the course of their office and they did not last forever, now there is no other high priest with our Lord, "who lives forever to make intercession for us," not in the victims of the sacrifices but in prayers.

"And he is able for all time to save us," not in the earthly delights, which nourish us for a few days, but "when we draw near to God through him" in eternity.

"And forasmuch as not without the taking of an oath." Thou seest that the matter of the oath becomes necessary for him here. Accordingly for this reason he previously treated much hereon, how that God swore; and swore for the sake of our fuller assurance.

"because the matter was not done without an oath." And so much, he says, the hope has been greatly improved, insofar as Christ has become a priest without an oath. For the oath indicates the unchangeable nature of his being a high priest forever.

He says that it shows the difference between Christ and Aaron in that Christ received the priesthood with an oath. For those who became priests without oaths became so because of their need to cease being priests at some time, but Christ entered the priesthood with oaths, since he intended to remain based on his rank. He shows his rank is far greater than those under the law, since he intended also to furnish a greater high priest to those coming to him. For in this way he says he becomes "a surety" … for being the first to rise, just as he also calls him a "high priest," so he pledges to us a similar resurrection.

Since he was the one who under the law appointed priests but brought them to an end and declared another in their place, he was obliged to say that he appointed them without taking an oath, but in his case included an oath as well. Do not think, then, that this priesthood will cease to have effect like that one, or that another one will take its place; the taking of an oath excludes such a false impression.

Here is another distinction of the new Priest from the ancient ones and of one covenant from the other. For the priesthood of Christ was promised not simply, but with an oath, so that the word of God would be fully believed, just as above, for greater persuasiveness, he said that God swore to Abraham (Heb. 6:13).

364. – Having proved by the authority of the Psalmist that the priesthood of Christ is preferred to the Levitical and does away with it, the Apostle now proves the same thing by two other authorities: first, from the fact that he says, 'The Lord has sworn'; secondly, that he says, 'You are a priest' (v. 23).

Whence also the prophet says, The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent: Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedec.

For also our Father, on beholding the Good One, and on being initiated with Him, preserved the mysteries respecting which silence is enjoined, and sware, as it has been written, "The Lord sware, and will not repent." Having, then, in this way set the seal to these tenets, he seeks to inveigle (his followers) with more legends, (which are detailed) through a greater number of books; and so he conducts (his readers) to the Good One, consummating the initiated (by admitting them into) the unspeakable Mysteries. ... And this oath, (Justinus) says, our Father Elohim sware when He was beside the Good One, and having sworn He did not repent (of the oath), respecting which, he says, it has been written, "The Lord sware, and will not repent." Now the oath is couched in these terms: "I swear by that Good One who is above all, to guard these mysteries, and to divulge them to no one, and not to relapse from the Good One to the creature."

"And inasmuch as not without an oath." What is "And inasmuch as not without an oath"? That is, Behold another difference also. And these things were not merely promised (he says). "For those priests were made without an oath, but This with an oath, by Him that said unto Him, The Lord swore and will not repent, Thou art Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better covenant." He lays down two points of difference, that it hath no end as the covenant of the Law had; and this he proves from its being Christ who exercises the priesthood; for he says "according to the power of an endless life." And he proves it also from the oath, because "He swore," and from the fact; for if the other was cast out, because it was weak, this stands firm, because it is powerful. He proves it also from the priest. How? Because He is One only; and there would not have been One only, unless He had been immortal. For as there were many priests, because they were mortal, so here is The One, because He is immortal. "By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better covenant," inasmuch as He swore to Him that He should always be Priest; which He would not have done, if He were not living.

"For they indeed became priests without an oath." Then, from the lesser, the comparisons of the priests among the Jews and our High Priest.For the legal priests, he says, were made priests without an oath; for God never found it necessary to swear: "You shall be a priest according to the law." But Christ, with an oath, made by the one who said to Him, as it were, by God; for God spoke through David: "You are a priest," in a certain new way; for He is not according to Aaron, but according to Melchizedek.

For, he says, the priests of the law are appointed without an oath, and God swore concerning none of them, saying: you shall be a priest according to the law. But Christ with an oath, given through God, who says to Him: You are a priest according to a certain new order: not according to Aaron, but according to Melchizedek.

365. – In regard to the first he forms the following argument: That which is instituted without an oath is less valid than that which is instituted with an oath. But the priesthood of Christ was instituted with an oath, as is clear from what he says, the Lord has sworn; but not the priesthood of Aaron, as is clear from Exodus (28:1): 'Take unto you also Aaron', therefore, etc. In regard to the major premise he says, and it was not without an oath. Those who formerly became priests took their office without an oath, but this one was addressed with an oath. All this is set down to prove that the priesthood of Christ is firmer; because, as has been stated above, every promise made in the Old Testament by an oath is a sign of God's unchangeable plan. Therefore, because that promise about Christ was made with an oath of David and to Abraham, Christ is called their son in a special way (Mt. 1:1). But that oath designates the eternity of Christ's power: 'His power is an everlasting power' (Dan. 7:14); 'And of his kingdom there will be no end' (Lk. 1:33).

"by the one who said to him." As through God. For God spoke through David, "So much better is Jesus." "For," he says, "they indeed became priests without an oath, but Christ has become a high priest with an oath. And this would not have happened, he says, if the difference were not great. Therefore, there is also a great difference between the new and the old." "the Guarantor [Έγγυος]." Like a guarantor [ἐγγυητὴς], Mediator.

Since the New Covenant promised us the kingdom of heaven, resurrection from the dead and life everlasting, though none of these is in sight, he had to call the Lord Jesus its "surety," who through his own resurrection confirmed the hope of our resurrection, on the one hand, and on the other continued to give his own resurrection through the miracles worked by the apostles.

That is, since He swore that He would always be a priest. For He would not have sworn if He were not superior. Hence the New Testament is also superior to the Old.

366. – This makes Jesus the surety of a better covenant, because His priesthood is firmer, which is evident, because it was set up with an oath. Therefore, it is necessary that something better and firmer be obtained by it. But it should be noted that a priest is a mediator between God and the people: 'I was the mediator and stood between the Lord and you' (Deut. 5:5). But a priest should bring God and the people to concord. And this is done, as it were, by a pact dealing with temporal goods, in which only the affection for carnal things rested, as it says in Ps. 72 (v. 25): 'For what have I in heaven? and besides you what do I desire upon earth?' Consequently, it was fitting that another priest should come to be a surety, i.e., a promise, of a better testament and of a better pact, because it is concerned with spiritual and stable goods; and this is Jesus: 'I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers' (Jer. 31:31); 'Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand' (Mt. 4:17).

For the high priest being eternal, of necessity the salvation also and the Tabernacle are eternal, in accordance again with what is written: And they indeed are many priests, because that by death they are hindered from continuing: but he, because he abideth for ever, hath his priesthood unchangeable. Wherefore also, he is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through him, seeing that he always liveth to make intercession for them. For such a high priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. The expression higher than the heavens means, according to the idiom of the language, heaven; and, more clearly still, the expressions "unchangeable", and "the abiding for ever", and "always" indicate a state of things that is indissoluble. For if the priest is unchangeable, the Tabernacle also, wherein he exercises his office, must of necessity be unchangeable, that is, exempt from succession.

"And indeed, there were many." And according to another, he says, the high priest is greater than us, not only because of the oath, but also because he is immortal. "because they were prevented by death." For it is through death and change, namely of the priest.

And here he shows the advantage that Christ has in comparison with the high priests according to the law, and says that there are many priests there, because they are mortal; but here there is one, because He is immortal.

367. – Then when he says, the former priests were many in number, he uses another clause stated in the authority: You are a priest forever. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows why this phrase forever, is used; secondly, from this he shows that the priesthood of Christ has greater efficacy than the priesthood of the Old Testament (v. 25).

"from continuing." in the priesthood, namely, "permanently." Lacking succession, forever, "Therefore." Since he always living. "always." Not only in this age, but also in the future. For this is what they want entirely and completely.

"He has a priesthood that does not pass away," that is, one that is shared with no one and not transferable. Do you see how much higher it is? As much as the immortal is higher than the mortal.

368. – He shows that he is the true priest, because the others were prevented by death from continuing, because all must die. Hence, when Aaron died, Eleazar succeeded, as is clear from Numbers (20:28) and so on. For as we notice in natural things, which are signs of spiritual things, incorruptible things are not multiplied under the same species; hence, there is but one sun: so in the spiritual things in the Old Testament, which was imperfect, the priests were multiplied. This was a sign that the priesthood was corruptible, because incorruptible things are not multiplied in the same species. But the priest who is Christ is immortal, for He remains forever as the eternal Word of the Father, from Whose eternity redounds an eternity to His body, because 'Christ rising from the dead, dies now no more' (Rom. 6:9). Therefore, because he continues forever, he holds his priesthood permanently. Therefore, Christ alone is the true priest, but others are His ministers: 'Let a man so account of us as the ministers of Christ' (1 Cor. 4:1).

Petition does not imply here, as it does in popular parlance, a desire for legal satisfaction; there is something humiliating in the idea. No, it means interceding for us in his role of mediator, in the way that the Spirit too is spoken of as "making petition" on our behalf. "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Even at this moment he is, as human, interceding for my salvation, until he makes me divine by the power of his incarnate humanity. "As human," I say, because he still has with him the body he assumed, though he is no longer "regarded as human," meaning the bodily experiences, which, sin aside, are ours and his. This is the "advocate" we have in Jesus—not a slave who falls prostrate before the Father on our behalf. Get rid of what is really a slavish suspicion, unworthy of the Spirit. It is not in God to make the demand, nor in the Son to submit to it; the thought is unjust to God. No, it is by what he suffered as man that he persuades us, as Word and encourager, to endure. That, for me, is the meaning of his "advocacy."

"Wherefore He is able also to save them to the uttermost, that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them." Thou seest that he says this in respect of that which is according to the flesh. For when He appears as Priest, then He also intercedes. Wherefore also when Paul says, "who also maketh intercession for us," he hints the same thing; the High Priest maketh intercession. For He "that raiseth the dead as He will, and quickeneth them," and that "even as the Father" doth, how is it that when there is need to save, He "maketh intercession"? He that hath "all judgment," how is it that He "maketh intercession"? He that "sendeth His angels," that they may "cast" some into "the furnace," and save others, how is it that He "maketh intercession"? Wherefore (he says) "He is able also to save." For this cause then He saves, because He dies not. Inasmuch as "He ever liveth," He hath (he means) no successor: And if He have no successor, He is able to aid all men. For there under the Law indeed, the High Priest although he were worthy of admiration during the time in which he was High Priest (as Samuel for instance, and any other such), but, after this, no longer; for they were dead. But here it is not so, but "He" saves "to the uttermost."

What is "to the uttermost"? He hints at some mystery. Not here only (he says) but there also He saves them that "come unto God by Him." How does He save? "In that He ever liveth" (he says) "to make intercession for them." Thou seest the humiliation? Thou seest the manhood? For he says not, that He obtained this, by making intercession once for all, but continually, and whensoever it may be needful to intercede for them.

"To the uttermost." What is it? Not for a time only, but there also in the future life. Does He then always need to pray? Yet how can this be reasonable? Even righteous men have oftentimes accomplished all by one entreaty, and is He always praying? Why then is He throned with the Father? Thou seest that it is a condescension. The meaning is: Be not afraid, nor say, Yea, He loves us indeed, and He has confidence towards the Father, but He cannot live always. For He doth live alway.

"those who come to God." Through the faith that is in Him. For whoever believes in the Son, comes to the Father certainly; for he himself is the way to the Father, and whoever takes hold of this, dwells there. "always living." Therefore, He saves completely, because He always lives. Furthermore, He saves because He intercedes for those who approach God the Father. "to intercede for them." Concerning Christ, as He is according to the flesh, this humble word has been said. However, when I say according to the flesh, I do not mean division. Far from it: but I know Him to be worshiped indivisibly, without confusion in one hypostasis along with His flesh. But what does it mean, "to intercede for them "? For example, He asks his Father on our behalf. For when he called him a priest, it is characteristic of a priest to ask on behalf of the people; for this reason, he said, "to intercede." That this has been said for this reason is evident. For He who raises the dead by His own authority, forgives sins, does not need the Father to save, as if He were powerless to save by His own power.

What he says: "to intercede," take as what is said: "We have an advocate with the Father." (1 Jn. 2:1) From His very incarnation, He asks and intercedes with the Father that He may have mercy on us.

Jesus now stands "before the face of God interceding for us." He stands before the altar to offer a propitiation to God for us. As he was about to approach that altar, moreover, he was saying, "I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until I drink it anew with you." Therefore, he expects us to be converted, to imitate his example, to follow his footsteps, that he may rejoice with us and "drink wine with us in his Father's kingdom." For now, because "the Lord is merciful and gracious," he "weeps with those who weep and desires to rejoice with those who rejoice" with greater feeling than this apostle. And how much more "this one mourns over many of those who sinned before and have not repented." For we must not think that Paul is mourning for sinners and weeping for those who transgress, but Jesus my Lord abstains from weeping when he approaches the Father, when he stands at the altar and offers a propitiatory sacrifice for us. This is not to drink the wine of joy "when he ascends to the altar" because he is still bearing the bitterness of our sins. He, therefore, does not want to be the only one to drink wine "in the kingdom" of God. He waits for us, just as he said, "Until I shall drink it with you." Thus we are those who, neglecting our life, delay his joy.

Since, he says, He is immortal, He can intercede for all and save to the uttermost, that is, He can grant salvation not temporary, but complete, and naturally, both here and in the life to come. For the high priest in the Old Testament, however illustrious he may have been, offered sacrifices to God during the time he lived, such as Samuel and those like him, but after that no longer, for he died. But here the High Priest is eternal and ever-living. Therefore He can always save those who come through Him, that is, through faith in Him. For whoever believes in the Son undoubtedly draws near to the Father, for He is the way to the Father, and whoever held to this way here receives rest there.

This is said in such a humble manner about Christ according to the flesh. For indeed, He is the High Priest according to the flesh; and inasmuch as He is the High Priest, it is said that He intercedes. How does He who raises the dead and gives life, as the Father does, intercede, when it is His to save? How does He intercede, in whose power is all judgment, who sends angels to cast some into the furnace and to save others? Of course, He said "to intercede" according to His humanity. Condescending to his listeners, Paul says: do not be afraid and do not say: yes, He loves us and has boldness before the Father, but He cannot always accomplish the high-priestly work on our behalf. When I speak of His humanity, I do not separate Him from the Divinity, for both have one hypostasis, but I give the listeners to understand what is proper concerning each nature. Moreover, the very fact that the Son sits with the Father in the flesh is itself an intercession for us: as it were, the flesh entreats the Father on our behalf; certainly, it was assumed for this very reason, namely for our salvation.

369. – Then (v. 25) he shows His efficacy. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows His efficacy; secondly, the mode of His efficacy (v. 25b).

370. – His efficacy lies in the fact that the cause is more potent than its effect; therefore, a temporal cause cannot produce an eternal effect. But Christ's priesthood is eternal; but not the Levitical, as has been proved. Therefore Christ is able to save for all time. But this could not be done, unless He had divine power: 'Israel is saved in the Lord with an eternal salvation' (Is. 45:17).

371. – But the mode is that He goes by Himself to God. And he describes that mode from three standpoints, namely, from the excellence of His power, of His nature, and of His piety. Of His power, indeed, because by Himself. But on the other hand one who goes to another is distant from him. But Christ is not distant from God. I answer that in those words the Apostle shows forth the two natures: namely, the human according to which it befits Him to come to God, because in it He is distant from God (but He does not go from a state of guilt to a state of grace, but He goes by the intellect's contemplation and by love and by the attainment of glory), and the divine nature by the fact that he says that He goes to God by Himself. For if He were pure man, He could not go by Himself: 'No one can come to me, unless the Father who sent me draw him' (Jn. 6:44). Therefore, when the Apostle says that He comes by Himself, he is showing forth His power: 'Walking in the greatness of his strength' (Is. 63:1). Therefore, He comes as man, but by Himself as God.

372. – He shows the excellence of His nature when he says, always living; for otherwise His priesthood would come to an end: 'I was dead and behold I am living forever and ever' (Rev. 1:18).

373. – He shows the excellence of His piety when he says, to make intercession for them, because, although He is so powerful, so lofty, yet along with this He is pious, for He makes intercession for us: 'We have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the just' (1 Jn. 2:1). He interposes for us, first, His human nature, which He assumed for us by representing; secondly, His most holy soul's desire, which He had for our salvation and with which He intercedes for us. Another version has, 'coming by Him,' and then those whom He saves are designated, because they come to God by faith in Him: 'Being justified, therefore, by faith, let us have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom also we have access by faith into this grace' (Rom. 5:1).