PRIESTS AND LEVITES

meat. (2) Another change in organization testified by the Chronicler is the division ot priests and Levites (singers) into 24 'courses' (1 Ch 24'-" 25). These were believed to have been arranged by David, but first appointed by Solomon (2 Ch 8"). This meant that in later times the whole body of priests and 'Levites' was arranged in 24 guilds, each ot which was believed to be a separate family. So the worlc could be con-veniently arranged. Thus it became customary for each ot the courses ot priests to attend in turn to the public work of the Temple. Like much that came to be ascribed to David, the beginning of some arrangement of the kind was probably the work of Nehemiah (Neh

1330. SI).

3. Further development of Levitical theory. — In the Books of Chronicles we find a considerable development of the Levitical theory of the hierarchy. (1) A Levitical origin is assigned to Samuel, Asaph, Heman, etc. (1 Ch 627. 2a. M. 89. «). (2) Zadok is held to be a descendant of Eleazar (1 Ch B'-''); Ahimelech (or Abimelech), Abiathar's father or son, a descendant of Ithamar, Eleazar's younger brother (1 Ch 243- «; cf. 1 S 222», 2 S 8", 1 Ch 245). That Abiathar was a descendant of Eli, and Eli a descendant of Aaron, had already been implied by an editorial note in 1 K 2", which explained Solomon's supplanting Abiathar by Zadok as a fulfilment of the prophecy against the house of Eli (1 S 22'-'«), whereas in all probability by the ' faithful priest ' is meant Samuel. According to the Chronicler, what Solomon did was to restore the high priesthood from the line of Ithamar to that ot Eleazar. The ofiice had originally passed, according to the priestly tradition, from Eleazar to his son Phinehas (Jg 20"), but how or when it got into the line of Ithamar is nowhere explained. There is a tendency in the Chronicler to ignore the priesthood of Abiathar, even in David's reign. In 1 Ch IS^' Zadok is appointed priest when the ark is first brought to Jerusalem, and in 29^^ he is anointed together with Solomon shortly before David's death.

4. Extra ecclesiastical work of the priests andLe vites.— The later books ot the Bible make it likely that in the later period, at least from Nehemiah onwards, the priests and Levites engaged in other than sacrificial work, and especially in religious teaching (see 2 Ch 15', where the Chronicler characteristically reads into the history the Ideas of a later time, Mai 2', Neh 8<- ')• In 2 Ch 19»-" the work of administering justice is similarly referred to them. Thus the influence and also, to some extent, the work which in primitive times had been theirs, and had dwindled with the rise of king and prophet, seem to have returned to them, when these oSicers disappeared.

IV. Influence of the hiehakchy on the religion of Israel at different periods. — 1. In primitive times, when each local sanctuary was the centre of religious, and, to some extent, of social and political, life, we find the influence ot the priests very considerable (see II. A.). They were the natural persons to consult in case of difficulty. With them grew up a religious and moral tradition. They became the earliest channels of Divine revelation, and handed down that Divine teaching or instruction (the 'law' of our English Bibles, as in Is 1'°).

2. It was probably out of the early priesthood that the prophetic office, as represented in the Books of Samuel, emerged. 'The prophet Samuel, who, accord-ing to tradition, combined the two offices, marks the transition between the spiritual influence of priest and prophet.

3. As the priestly power declined through loss ot spiritual vigour, the prophetic influence became stronger, and we find the early prophets, in both the North and the South, but in the North especially, denouncing the unspiritual character of the priesthood, and the prevailing religious rites (see esp. Hos 4<-«, Is l'"-").

4. With the religious revival under Josiah and the publication of the early chapters of Dt. we may notice a temporary reaction, but one marked by a strong

754

PRIEST (IN NT)

tendency to give religion a more spiritual tone. It is still the prophet who is to be the source of Divine revelation (Dt 18"), though even the words of a prophet are not necessarily infallible (13'-«). At about the same period Jeremiah denounces the popular valuation ot a purely formal worship and an unworthy priesthood (316 531 711).

6. The possibilities, however, of a spiritual worship and a holy priesthood were never lost sight of, and a fresh impetus to priestly ideas is given, at latest during the Exile, by the ' Code of Holiness ' (Lv 17-26) and the ideal sanctuary and priesthood sketched by Ezekiel (40-48).

6 .With the first Return and the re-institution of Temple worship, the priesthood gained a fresh accession of power, all the greater as the secular power was under Persian rule. The contemporary prophets, Zech. and Haggai, not only insistently urge the importance of using every effort to re-build the Temple, but speak ot Joshua the high priest as though on all but equal terms with Zerubbabel (Hag 1» 2'-', Zee 3. 4"-" 6»-«).

7. The same priestly feelings influence Malachi, almost the contemporary ot Nehemiah, who, while he attacks unmercifully the unworthy priests (l'-2»), is loud in denouncing those who robbed Godiby not paying tithes (S'"), and seeks for a religious ideal in a purified Levitical system (3'- *).

8. The exaltation of the priesthood reached its climax in the person of Simon,the Just, who restored the Temple, and re-built the city walls which had been demolished by Ptolemy. The people regarded him with supreme veneration. Sir SO'-" gives a most glowing description of the impression that he made as he officiated in his high-priestly vestments: ' He was as the morning star in the midst of a cloud, and as the moon at full; as the sun shining upon the temple of the Most High, and as a rainbow giving light in the bright clouds,' etc. etc.

9. In the Maccabaean period we find Simon 11., the younger brother 'of Judas, actually ruling the people as high priest. Later on (b.c. 106) Judas (Aristobulus) , according to Josephus, bore the title ot 'king,' and the title actually appears on the coins of his brother Jannseus.

10. The close of this period, nevertheless, marks a decline, at any rate in the spiritual influence ot the priesthood, and especially ot the high priest. The latter office ceased to be hereditary, and was often bought and sold. A high priest could be deposed, and another ap-pointed for political purposes. One reason for this decline was that religious interest tended in an increasing degree to be diverted to ethical and moral questions, as we see in the Wisdom literature of the age. Other causes or perhaps rather symptoms of the spirit of the time at a later period were the growth of the Jewish sects and the practice of a childish casuistry, which depended more on the opinion ot the ancients.than on the spiritual needs of the present. ' F. H. Woods.

PRIEST (In NT).— 'Priest' (Gr. Uerem') is employed in the NT to denote anyone whose function it is to offer a religious sacrifice. 1. It is used ot a GentiU priesthood in Ac 14" ('the priest of Jupiter'), and also in Heb. as applied to the 'order ot Melchizedek' (5=- '" 620 7iff,)^ (or Melchizedek, it is evident, was not merely a pre-Aaronic but a Gentile priest.

2. It is constantly employed to denote the members of the Jewish priesthood in their various ranks and functions. The ordinary officiating priests of the Temple come before us discharging the same offices of which we read in the OT. They burn incense (Lk !>• s), present the sacrificial offerings (Mt 12», ct. Nu 28»- i»), effect the ceremonial cleansing ot the leper (Mt 8'=Mk l"=Lk 5", cf. 17"). The high priest (.archiereus) appears as president of the Sanhedrin (Mt 26S' II, Ac 5" 7' 23^ etc.), and as entering every year on the Day ot Atonement into the Most Holy