John Calvin Commentary Hebrews 10:1

"For the law having a shadow of the good [things] to come, not the very image of the things, can never with the same sacrifices year by year, which they offer continually, make perfect them that draw nigh." — Hebrews 10:1 (ASV)

For the Law having a shadow, etc. He has borrowed this comparison from the art of painting. A shadow here has a different meaning than it does in Colossians 2:17, where he calls the ancient rites or ceremonies shadows because they did not possess the real substance of what they represented.

But he now says that they were like rough outlines, which foreshadow the perfect picture, for painters, before they apply the vivid colors with a brush, usually mark out the outlines of what they intend to represent.

This indistinct representation is called by the Greeks σκιαγραφία, which you might call in Latin “umbratilem,” meaning shadowy. The Greeks also had the εἰκὼν, the full likeness. Therefore, “eiconia” are also called images (imagines) in Latin, which vividly represent the form of men, animals, or places.

The difference then which the Apostle makes between the Law and the Gospel is this: that under the Law was outlined only in rough and imperfect lines what is under the Gospel portrayed in vivid colors and graphically distinct. He thus confirms again what he had previously said, that the Law was not useless, nor its ceremonies unprofitable. For though there was not in them the image of heavenly things, finished, as they say, with the artist's final touch, yet the representation, such as it was, was of considerable benefit to the fathers; but still our condition is much more favorable. We must however observe, that the things which were shown to them at a distance are the same as those which are now set before our eyes. Therefore, to both the same Christ is presented, the same righteousness, sanctification, and salvation; and the difference only is in the manner of painting or presenting them.

Of good things to come, etc. These, I think, are eternal things. I acknowledge that the kingdom of Christ, which is now present with us, was previously announced as future; but the Apostle’s words mean that we have a vivid image of future blessings. He then understands that spiritual pattern, the full fruition of which is deferred until the resurrection and the future world. At the same time, I confess again that these good things began to be revealed at the beginning of the kingdom of Christ; but his current point is this, that they are not only future blessings regarding the Old Testament, but also for us, who still hope for them.

Which they offered year by year, etc. He speaks especially of the yearly sacrifice, mentioned in Leviticus 16, though all the sacrifices are here included as one type. Now he reasons as follows: When there is no longer any consciousness of sin, there is then no need of sacrifice. But under the Law the offering of the same sacrifice was often repeated. Consequently, no satisfaction was given to God, nor was guilt removed, nor were consciences appeased. Otherwise, sacrificing would have ceased. We must further carefully observe that he calls those the same sacrifices which were appointed for a similar purpose, for they can be better understood by the design for which God instituted them than by the different beasts which were offered.

And this one point is more than sufficient to refute and expose the subtlety of the Papists, by which they think they ingeniously evade an absurdity in defending the sacrifice of the mass. For when it is objected to them that the repetition of the sacrifice is superfluous, since the efficacy of the sacrifice Christ offered is perpetual, they immediately reply that the sacrifice in the mass is not different but the same. This is their answer.

But what, on the contrary, does the Apostle say? He expressly denies that the sacrifice which is repeatedly offered, though it is the same, is efficacious or capable of making an atonement.

Now, though the Papists should cry out a thousand times that the sacrifice Christ once offered is the same as, and not different from, what they perform daily, I will still always contend, according to the express words of the Apostle, that since Christ’s offering succeeded in pacifying God, not only was an end put to former sacrifices, but it is also impious to repeat His sacrifice. Thus, it is quite evident that the offering of Christ in the mass is sacrilegious.