Thomas Aquinas Commentary Hebrews 7:1-3

"For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of God Most High, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham divided a tenth part of all (being first, by interpretation, King of righteousness, and then also King of Salem, which is King of peace; without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God), abideth a priest continually." — Hebrews 7:1-3 (ASV)

In Hebrews 5, the Apostle proved that Christ is a priest, but in Hebrews 6, he inserted certain points to prepare the minds of his hearers. Now he returns to his main theme, intending to prove the excellence of Christ’s priesthood over the Levitical priesthood.

In this regard, he does two things. First, he shows the excellence of Christ’s priesthood compared to the priesthood of the Old Testament. Second, he shows that believers should reverently subject themselves to the priesthood of Christ (Hebrews 10).

Concerning the first point, he again does two things. First, he shows the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over the Levitical regarding the person of the priest. Second, he addresses the superiority of Christ's ministry (Hebrews 8).

Focusing on the person of the priest, he first proves the existence of Christ’s priesthood because of a divine promise, and second, he proves the need for this priesthood (Hebrews 7:26). He demonstrates this promise from the words of Psalm 109:4: The Lord has sworn and he will not repent: You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

From this verse, he draws three points to prove his thesis: first, the phrase, according to the order of Melchizedek; second, the statement He swore (Hebrews 7:20); and third, the statement, You are a priest forever (Hebrews 7:23).

Regarding the first point, he does two things: first, he shows the likeness of Christ to Melchizedek, and second, based on this likeness, he establishes the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over the Levitical (Hebrews 7:4). To show this likeness, he first describes Melchizedek’s qualities and then shows how they apply to Christ (Hebrews 7:2b).

He describes Melchizedek, first of all, by his name when he says, For this Melchizedek. Scripture names him this way in Genesis 14:18, where his history, which the Apostle assumes here, is recorded. According to a gloss, the Hebrews say that this was Shem, the first-born of Noah. When Abraham won the victory, Shem was 390 or 309 years old and met Abraham, his nephew.

Second, he describes him by his dignity, for he was both a king and a priest. Regarding his kingship, the text says he was king of Salem. Some say that Salem is another name for Jerusalem. However, Jerome denies this in a letter, arguing that based on its location, Melchizedek could not have run into Abraham from Jerusalem. Others say that Salem is the place where John baptized (John 3:23), and that the walls of that place still existed in Jerome’s time.

Regarding his priesthood, the text says he was a priest of the Most High God. In ancient times, the elder brother was often the priest. However, because the worship of idols was increasing in Abraham’s time, the author adds the phrase of the Most High God so that no one would think Melchizedek was a priest of idols. This refers to God by His essence, not by participation or by name only.

For God is the Creator of all who are called gods, whether by participation or in error, as the Psalm says, The Lord is a great king above all gods (Psalms 94:3). And elsewhere, You shall be called priests of the Lord: to you it shall be said: You ministers of our God (Isaiah 61:6).

Third, he describes him by his office: who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him. A priest stands between God and the people. Therefore, he should confer spiritual things upon the people and receive temporal things from them: If we then have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter, if we reap your carnal things? (1 Corinthians 9:11).

First, a priest should offer strength through good counsel. Thus, it is said in Genesis 14 that the four kings represent the four principal vices opposed to the four cardinal virtues, which hold the emotions—the nephew of reason—captive after the five bodily senses are overcome. A person who overcomes and frees the emotions deserves to be comforted by a priest: Meeting the thirsty, bring him water (Isaiah 21:14); Strengthen the feeble hands, and confirm the weak knees (Isaiah 35:3).

Second, a priest should give strength by administering the sacraments with a blessing; hence, he blessed him. As the Psalm says, We have blessed you in the name of the Lord (Psalms 117:26). This is done by conferring the sacraments, through which a person is strengthened in grace: They shall invoke my name upon the children of Israel and I will bless them (Numbers 6:27). For God blesses by His authority, but the priest blesses by his ministry. In return, Abraham apportioned... a tenth part of everything, that is, he properly distributed tithes to him for his sustenance.

But it seems from Numbers 18:21 that the giving of tithes began with the Law, meaning there were none before the Law. I answer that the ceremonial precepts of the Old Testament are expansions of the precepts of natural law and moral law. Therefore, those aspects derived from natural law were observed before the Law, even without a specific command.

For example, it is natural to offer something to God in recognition of His creation and dominion, but the specific offering of goats and heifers is a ceremonial precept. Similarly, it is according to natural law that ministers serving God should be sustained by the people, as is clear from Genesis 47:22 that this was even observed among the Gentiles. There, priests were fed from public storehouses and were not compelled to sell their possessions.

Therefore, tithes existed before the Law, but the specific amount was fixed by the Law: All tithes are the Lord’s (Leviticus 27:30). A sign of this is that Jacob, before the Law, vowed to give tithes in the place where the temple was later built. This was done particularly because the main reason for rendering worship to God is to signify that whatever a person has, he has received from God, and that he depends on God for his entire perfection.

The number ‘ten’ is perfect because it is the sum of its parts (one plus two plus three plus four equals ten). Furthermore, we count up to ten, and all other numbers are repetitions of or additions to ten. Therefore, all numbers are imperfect until ten is reached. Likewise, all perfection is from God. To signify that the fulfillment of all perfection is from God, he gave tithes.

Then, in Hebrews 7:2b, the Apostle shows the likeness to Melchizedek. He does this in two ways: first, he suggests a likeness regarding the condition of the person, and second, a likeness regarding the priesthood (Hebrews 7:3b). Concerning the person, he again does two things: first, he states a likeness based on things recorded in Scripture, and second, a likeness based on things not mentioned in Scripture (Hebrews 7:3).

Two things are said of Melchizedek in Scripture. First is his name, Melchizedek, which by translation means king of righteousness. This signifies Christ, who was a king: And a king shall reign, and shall be wise: and shall execute judgement and justice in the earth (Jeremiah 23:5). Christ is not only called righteous, but the king of righteousness, because He was made wisdom and righteousness for us (1 Corinthians 1:30).

The second thing said of him is his status; he is called king of Salem, that is, king of peace. This also suits Christ: For he is our peace (Ephesians 2:14), and, In his days shall justice spring up and abundance of peace (Psalms 71:7). In this, the Apostle teaches us to use the interpretation of names in preaching.

He does well to join justice and peace, because no one can make peace who does not observe justice: The work of justice shall be peace (Isaiah 32:17). In this world, people are governed in justice, but in the world to come, they will be governed in peace: My people shall sit in the beauty of peace (Isaiah 32:18).

When the Apostle says Melchizedek was without father or mother or genealogy, he presents a likeness based on things not mentioned about him in Scripture. Because of this, some of the ancients fell into error, saying that since God alone is without beginning and end, Melchizedek must have been the Son of God. This, however, has been condemned as heretical.

It should be noted that whenever the Old Testament mentions an important person, like Isaac and many others, it names his father and the time of his birth and death. But here, Melchizedek is suddenly introduced with no mention of his birth or anything related to it. This was not done without reason.

Since it is said he was without father, this signifies the birth of Christ from the Virgin, which occurred without a human father: That which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:20). What is proper to God should not be attributed to a creature, and it is proper to God the Father to be the Father of Christ. Therefore, in the birth of the one who prefigured Him, no mention should be made of a carnal father.

Regarding Christ's eternal birth, the text says without mother, so that no one would think that birth was material, since the mother provides the matter for her offspring. Instead, it is a spiritual birth, like brightness from the sun: Who being the brightness of his glory and figure of his substance (Hebrews 1:3). Also, when generation proceeds from a father and a mother, it is not all from the father, as the mother provides the matter. Therefore, to exclude all imperfection from Christ and to show that all He has is from the Father, no mention is made of a mother. Hence the verse: ‘He is God without a mother; He is flesh without a father.’ As the Psalm says, From the womb before the day star I begot you (Psalms 109:3), meaning, ‘I alone.’

He is without genealogy for two reasons. First, because the generation of Christ is ineffable: Who shall declare his generation? (Isaiah 53:8). Second, because Christ, who is introduced as a priest, does not belong to the Levitical priesthood or to a genealogy of the Old Law. This is the Apostle’s intention.

Hence, he says Melchizedek has neither beginning of days nor end of life. He says this not because Christ was not born in time or did not die, but because of His eternal generation, in which He was born without the beginning of any time. As Basil explains, In the beginning was the Word (John 1:1) means that no matter what time you mention, the Word was before it. Likewise, no end of life is true regarding His divinity, which is eternal. Regarding His humanity, He no longer has an end of life, because Christ rising again from the dead, dies now no more (Romans 6:9). And as it says below, Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today; and the same forever (Hebrews 13:8).

When the Apostle says, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever, he indicates a likeness regarding the priesthood. It should be noted that later things are sometimes said to be similar to earlier things, and vice versa. Consequently, so that no one would think that Christ’s priesthood is later than Melchizedek’s, the Apostle dispels this idea.

Although Christ as a man was born after Melchizedek and existed in time, as God and as the Son of God, He exists from eternity. Therefore, Melchizedek was like Christ, the Son of God, in all these features. This is true insofar as he continues a priest forever, which can be explained in two ways.

First, it can mean that no mention is made in Scripture of the end of his priesthood or of his successor, as God says, I have used similitudes by the ministry of the prophets (Hosea 12:10). Second, he is called a priest forever because that which he prefigured—namely, Christ’s priesthood—lasts forever.

For this reason, even in Scripture, temporary symbols are frequently referred to as perpetual, such as, It shall be a perpetual observance (Exodus 27:21), and, By a perpetual service and rite (Leviticus 24:3), because that which was symbolized by them is perpetual. In this way, the Apostle connects this point with what came before.