John Calvin Commentary Hebrews 5:4

"And no man taketh the honor unto himself, but when he is called of God, even as was Aaron." — Hebrews 5:4 (ASV)

And no man, etc. It should be noted in this verse that there is partly a likeness and partly a difference. What makes an office lawful is the call of God, so that no one can rightly and orderly perform it unless God has made them fit for it. Christ and Aaron had this in common: God called them both. But they differed in this: Christ succeeded by a new and different way and was made a perpetual priest.

Therefore, it is evident that Aaron’s priesthood was temporary, because it was to cease. We see the Apostle's purpose: it was to defend the legitimacy of Christ’s priesthood, and he did this by showing that God was its author.

But this would not have been sufficient unless it was also made evident that an end had to be put to the old priesthood to make way for this new one. And this point he proves by directing our attention to the terms on which Aaron was appointed, for we are not to extend them further than God’s decree; and he will soon make it evident how long God had designed this order to continue.

Christ then is a lawful priest, for He was appointed by God’s authority. What is to be said of Aaron and his successors? That they had as much right as was granted them by the Lord, but not as much as men, according to their own fancy, concede to them.

But though this has been said with reference to the matter at hand, yet from this we may draw a general truth—that no government is to be set up in the Church by human will. Instead, we are to wait for God's command, and we also ought to follow a certain rule in electing ministers, so that no one may intrude according to his own whim.

Both these things should be distinctly noted, for the Apostle here speaks not of persons only, but also of the office itself; indeed, he denies that the office which men appoint without God’s command is lawful and divine. For since it belongs only to God to rule His Church, so He claims this right as His own, that is, to prescribe the way and manner of administration.

Therefore, I consider it indisputable that the Papal priesthood is spurious, for it has been framed in the workshop of men. God nowhere commands a sacrifice to be offered now to Him for the expiation of sins; nowhere does He command priests to be appointed for such a purpose.

So, when the Pope ordains his priests for the purpose of sacrificing, the Apostle denies that they should be considered lawful priests. They cannot, therefore, be such, unless by some new privilege they exalt themselves above Christ; for Christ Himself dared not take this honor upon Himself but waited for the Father's command.

This principle also applies to individuals: no one should seize this honor for himself without public authority. I am speaking now of divinely appointed offices.

At the same time, it may sometimes happen that someone not called by God is nevertheless to be tolerated—however little they may be approved—provided the office itself is divine and approved by God. For many often creep in through ambition or other bad motives, their call having no evidence; and yet they are not to be immediately rejected, especially when this cannot be done by the public decision of the Church.

For during two hundred years before the coming of Christ, the foulest corruptions prevailed regarding the priesthood, yet the right of honor, which proceeds from God's calling, still continued for the office itself; and the men themselves were tolerated, because the freedom of the Church was subverted.

Thus, it appears that the greatest defect lies in the nature of the office itself—that is, when men, on their own, invent what God has never commanded. Then, those Romish sacrificers are even less endurable, who prattle of nothing but their own titles so that they may be counted sacred, while yet they have chosen themselves without any authority from God.