Aaron, they own to be an abomination. As therefore they know not how to look for a Messiah from the tribe of Judah, seeing all sacred genealogy is at an end; no more can they look for a priest of the house of Aaron. Again observe,

2. The efficacy of all ordinances, or institutions of worship, depends on the will of God alone.

3. Divine institutions cease not without an express Divine abrogation. Where they are once granted and erected by the authority of God, they can never cease without an express act of the same authority taking them away.

4. God will never abrogate any institution, or ordinance of worship, to the disadvantage of the church. He would not abolish the priesthood of Levi, until that which was incomparably more excellent was introduced and established.

5. God in his wisdom so ordered all things, that the taking away of the priesthood of the law, gave it its greatest glory; and what more honorable issue could it come to? The Jews by their pretended adherence to it, are they who cast the highest dishonor upon it.

$5. We may further infer the following things:

1. How it is a fruit of the manifold wisdom of God, that it was first a great mercy to receive the law, and afterwards a greater to take it away. And,

2. If under the law the whole worship of God did so depend on the priesthood, that upon that being taken away, the whole worship of God itself was to cease, as being no more acceptable before God; how much is all worship under the New Testament rejected by him, if there be not a due regard therein to the Lord Christ as the only high priest of the church, and the efficacy of his discharge of that office.

3. It is the highest vanity to pretend use or continuance in the church, from possession or prescription; or pretended benefit, beauty, order, or advantage, when once the mind of God is declared against it.

VERSE 13.

For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

$1-3. (1.) Exposition of the text. §4. (II.) Brief observations.

§1. (I.) THE causal conjunction (yup) for, doth not only intimate a pursuit of the foregoing argument, but also an entrance upon the express application of the whole preceding discourse to the person of Jesus Christ, the true and only high priest of the church. (EQ' ov λeyélai Taura, that is, Tɛp 8, de quo) he concerning whom; (quem designaverunt hæc ad quem hæc pertinent) He who is designed in all these things, to whom they all belong. He, with respect to whom, (TavTa) these things, that is, all that hath been spoken concerning Melchisedec and his priesthood, and that naturally thence follow. For although sundry of them were spoken immediately concerning other persons and things; yet they all belong ultimately and perfectly to Christ alone, whom they represented and made way for.

§2. It is added: "He pertained to another tribe;" to one of the tribes excluded from an interest in the legal priesthood. And this I look upon as the principal reason of the distinction of that people into their tribes; namely, that God thereby might provide for their instruction, as to the continuance of the legal worship among them, which could be no longer continued than the priesthood was reserved to that one

tribe, to which it was originally granted; (μElExYue, see on chap. ii, 11, 12.) His share, lot, and interest lay in another tribe.

§3. Of which no man gave attendance at the altar; (ans) whereof, from which, none that was genealogized attended at the altar, that is, had right so to do. That expression (προς εσχηκε τω θυσιαστηρίω) attended, waited on the altar, may be a synechdochical description of the whole priestly office, from its principal work and duty. But I suppose the apostle may not only include the priests, to whom the immediate work of sacrificing at the altar belonged, but all those who attended the services of it, (though they could neither offer burnt incense nor sacrifice) that is, all the Levites in their courses. For he so excludes the tribe, whereof he speaks, from the least relation to the sacerdotal work or office.

§4. (II.) Two or three brief observations here offer themselves:

1. That it is our duty in studying the scripture to inquire diligently after what is spoken and taught concerning Jesus Christ. This our apostle, and this our Lord himself gives in charge, John v, 39, "Search the scriptures, they are they which testify of me." Our principal aim in searching the scriptures ought to be, that we may find out what they say, and what they testify concerning Christ, 1 Pet. i, 11, 12. Let the pains, and industry, and skill of men, in reading and interpreting the scriptures, be what they will, without this design they will never rightly be understood, nor duly improved.

2. All men's rights, duties, and privileges in sacred things, are fixed and limited by Divine institution. And,

3. Seeing Christ himself had no right to minister at the material altar, the re-introduction of such altars is inconsistent with the perpetual continuance of the priesthood.

VERSE 14.

For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

§1. The evidence of our Lord's descent from Judah. $2. 3. The other part of the words explained. §4. Observations.

§1. THE word (рodyλov) evident, seems to intimate what was manifest beforehand; and this may not only respect, but be confined to the preceding promises and declarations, that the Messiah should be of the tribe of Judah and of the family of David. And thus it was manifest to them beforehand. For to Judah the promise was solemnly confined, Gen. xlix, 8-10, and frequently reiterated to David. And none of the unbelieving Jews made use of this objection, "that he was not of the tribe of Judah," which, if they could have managed, had absolutely justified them in their unbelief.

It was in those days manifest by his known genealogy; for by the providence of God his parents were publicly enrolled of the family of David, in consequence of the tax appointed by Augustus Cæsar, Luke ii, 4. And this was yet made more famous by the cruelty of Herod, seeking his destruction among the children of Bethlehem, Matt. ii. The alliance between the blessed Virgin and Elizabeth was doubtless by an antecedent intermarriage of the tribes of Judah and Levi, as Elizabeth's mother might be sister to the father or grandfather of the holy Virgin. And this was not only lareful between the tribes of Judah and

Levi, or the regal and sacerdotal families, whence Jehoshabeath, the wife of Jehoidah, was the daughter of Jehoram the king, 2 Chron. xxii, 11, as some have imagined; but such marriages were usual and lawful among all other tribes, where women had no inheritance of land, which was expressly provided against by a particular law. And this very law of exception sufficiently proves the liberty of all others. Both the express limitation of the law to those who possessed inheritances, and the reason of it for the preservation of the lots of each tribe entire, as Num. xxxvi, 3, 4, 8, manifest, that all other were at liberty to marry any Israelite, be he of what tribe soever. And thus the genealogies of Matthew and Luke, one by a legal, the other by a natural line, were both of them from the tribe of Judah, and family of David.

§2. (Avalelaλne,) he sprang; the word (avaleλλw) is usually taken in an active sense, to cause to rise; (Matt. v, 45, tov yλiov avls avalehλɛi) he causeth his sun to rise; and some think it peculiarly denotes the rising of the sun, in distinction from the other planets. Hence (avaloλn) the east, from the rising of the sun. So the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ is called "the rising of the sun of righteousness" with healing in his wings; Mal. iv, 2, who is (avalon ε v↓es, Luke i, 78,) "The day-spring from on high;" a "light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of his people Israel."

§3. (Eiç yv Quany, i, e. de qua tribu) with reference (Εις ην Φυλην, to which tribe, Moses, as the law-giver, when the office of the priesthood was instituted in the church, and confirmed by special law or ordinance, spake nothing; for as the first institution of it was directly confined to the tribe of Levi, and house of Aaron, so there is not in all the law of Moses the least intimation, that, on any occasion, it should be translated to the tribe of