Tag Archives: Melchizedek

Jethro and Moses … and Christ

Posted on by
Reply
Bodelian Library, Oxford, MS Bodley 2708, Folio 39V
A good man? Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro, is a devoted family man, well respected for his advice on governing and his benevolent leadership of the tribes of Midian. This early 13th-century illustration from the Bible moralisée depicts Jethro (seated under the arch on the right) rewarding Moses (left) for rescuing his daughters (six of whom are pictured in the center) and their flocks from rival shepherds.



Jethro, to most people, was the not-so-bright son of Jed and Granny on “The Beverly Hillbillies.” How many realize that Jethro was the name of Moses’ father-in-law? Jethro was “priest and prince of Midian,” the area where Moses encountered the Burning Bush.

Jethro comes to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, before the giving of the Ten Commandments, because he is bringing his daughter–Moses’ wife–back to him. Although the text does not tell us this earlier, she evidently took their children and went to her father for safekeeping during Moses’ confrontation with Pharoah; when Moses tells Jethro everything the Lord did for the people, including the plagues, this is all news to Jethro. If his daughter had seen any of this, she would have told him; evidently, she left Moses in Egypt before the plagues began. In thanksgiving for the deliverance of the people, Jethro offers a large sacrifice and invites all the clan leaders to the feast that follows.

The text tells us that Jethro is priest-and-prince. We already knew that he was wealthy because of the description of his large flocks when Moses first meets him. Whether Jethro was a wealthy herdsman who was therefore acknowledged as “prince” or was the prince and therefore was wealthy, we don’t know. But the linkage of royalty and priesthood only occurs one other time in the Old Testament: the priest-king Melchizedek who blesses Abraham and is seen as a “type” of Christ by the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Medieval rabbis were eager to avoid the embarrassment of Moses having a pagan priest-prince as a father-in-law and so they began to suggest that Jethro was circumcised after he heard the recitation of God’s mighty acts of deliverance–after he heard what became the Passover haggadah, in effect. This made Jethro, like Melchizedek, a legitimate priest before Aaron and his sons were made a legitimate priesthood. This makes Jethro, like Melchizedek, a foreshadowing of Christ–the Son of David who is both priest and king on the Cross. Jethro, however, was not the focus of the typology in the Epistle to the Hebrews because he did not evidently live forever, like Melchizedek did; Jethro was an imperfect type of Christ, the ultimate king-priest who is eternal.

Nevertheless, this makes for fascinating speculation about Moses–raised as a prince of Egypt– and his immediate family as Middle Eastern royalty and their connection to priesthood in both Moses’ father-in-law (Jethro) and his brother (Aaron).

Corpus Christi = Triumph of Orthodoxy

Posted on by
Reply
Scenes related to Corpus Christi: the elevation of the Host at Mass; the pelican’s piety, piercing her own breast with her beak in order to raise her chicks from the dead with the blood of her pierced breast; an image of Christ the priest-and-king, offering the Host and Chalice.



Twice the Christian Church has been overwhelmed by controversy about whether God can be present in or act through material things.

The first time was in the Christian East, when the iconoclasts insisted that icons should be destroyed, not merely not venerated. You can read about all the dates and details in a book. The important thing to know is that the iconoclasts systematically leveled churches that were adorned with icons and dissolved monasteries, confiscating monastic property because the monks led the resistance against the iconoclastic efforts to wipe out icons. Finally, in AD 843, the icons were restored to the great cathedral of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople and a massive procession was held. People carried icons large and small through the streets of the imperial capital to celebrate the vindication of the icons, the triumph of Orthodoxy as it is still referred to, and every year on the first Sunday of Lent—the anniversary of that massive procession—each parish of the Greek and Russian Churches celebrates the Triumph of Orthodoxy again, processing with icons at least around the aisles of the church if not through the streets of the city.

The second time the Christian Church was torn apart by the controversy about whether God can be present in or at through material things was in the Christian West. You can read about the details of these Eucharistic controversies in books as well; the important thing being that these continued on and off for nearly 400 years. The Western Church was torn by riots between those who did vs. those who did not believe that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. It was not until AD 1215 that the question was settled that yes, indeed, Christ IS truly present in the Eucharist and in 1246 a nun, Juliana, organized a procession with the Blessed Sacrament through the streets of a city in Belgium to celebrate Christ’s presence in the Eucharistic bread.

In both cases—the iconoclastic controversy in the East and the eucharistic controversy in the West—the dispute was about whether God can be truly present in material objects and whether it is appropriate to offer incense, prayers, and proskynesis (prostrations and genuflections). In both cases, the Church acknowledged that God can be present in material things because God himself was made flesh in the womb of the great Mother of God, Mary most holy and—in both cases—that incense, prayers, and genuflections are appropriate recognition of the presence of God. And in both cases people began to hold processions through the streets with the material objects that were at the heart of the controversies… icons in the east, the Eucharist in the west.

We hold processions through the streets with icons or the Eucharist to celebrate God’s blessing on the world in general and on our neighborhood in particular. We acclaim the Eucharist and offer our worship—music, incense, singing, kneeling and genuflecting—to recognize and celebrate God’s presence with us. God is with us and what else can we do but sing like the angels and bow down with our faces to the ground?

We should-we must carry the Eucharist in procession to celebrate that God is with us. Even here. Even now. But we should-we must examine ourselves, turning ever more completely toward the God who gives himself for us. Even here. Even now. And we should-we must forgive and embrace the neighbor that we find beside us—whether we like them or not—if we hope to experience the NOW of eternity as abundant, inexpressible joy. Even here. Even now.

My most popular post was also about Corpus Christi—almost 1,000 people viewed it on the day it was published! Read it here.

Whoever Eats or Drinks in an Unworthy Manner

Posted on by
2
This icon of Melchizedek is one of several that I painted many years ago. You can see the curls of the challah bread in his hand reflected in the curls of his beard. He wears the turban of a high priest and the crown of a king, as he was both priest of God Most High and king of (Jeru-)Salem. His sacrifice of bread and wine (described in Genesis 14 and Psalm 110) is considered an anticipation of the Eucharist.


Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself…. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement upon himself. (1 Cor. 11:27-29)

The apostle’s words are blunt and sharp. Whoever shares in the Eucharist unworthily brings condemnation on themselves. Although meant to be life-giving, the Holy Gifts can bring judgement and condemnation because the presence of God is a two-edged sword: his light exposes and reveals the truth, whatever that truth might be. If it reveals our honest struggle to live in fellowship with him, we share the fellowship we seek. If it reveals either no such struggle or even active struggle to avoid his light, then we are judged because our partaking of the Eucharist reveals that we knew better, that we turned our back on our own words by refusing to even attempt to live up to the words we said at our baptism and at the celebration of the Eucharist.

“What does it mean to receive unworthily? To receive in mockery, to receive in contempt.”

St. Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 227

How do we mock the Eucharist? When we dare to consume the Eucharist when we are allowing ourselves to be consumed with greed, or anger, or malice. These attitudes are what make us unworthy to receive the Holy Gifts. It was these attitudes–especially greed and selfishness–on display among the Corinthians that made them refuse to wait for one another at the parish dinners, some eating too much and getting drunk while others were going hungry.

To struggle against our greed, anger, or malice is a sign of life and God honors that struggle by remaining in fellowship with the one who struggles. If we give up the struggle against these attitudes, we are already spiritually dead, even if we are physically still alive.

“Do you work wonders for the dead? Will those who have died stand up and give you thanks?” (Psalm 88:11) This question in the psalms concerns not just those dead and buried in the ground but those spiritually dead, still walking around the surface of the earth. In hell, there is no Eucharist; the spiritually dead, in need of Resurrection, are equally outside the Eucharist. “For in death, no one remembers you; and who will give you thanks in the grave?” (Psalm 6:5)

The dead, those who have surrendered to their greed-anger-malice, are incapable of giving thanks or honest participation in the Eucharist. These are the people who mock the Eucharist and receive it with contempt. Struggling against these attitudes are what make us capable of giving thanks and honest participation in the Eucharist; even if we fail and must renew our struggle time-after-time-after-time-after-time, this is the behavior of a person who honors the Eucharist and avoids bringing judgement and condemnation upon themselves.