Fragments on Hebrews
Fragmenta in epistulam ad Hebraeos
The Word as Radiance and Substance§1
1The heretics claim that the epistle is not Paul's, and they bring forward two proofs for this: first, that his name is not placed at the front as in the other epistles; second, that the phrasing is different, meaning it is foreign to Paul and his style. Therefore, it must be known that Paul was hated by the Jews as one teaching a departure from the law, which is why he was endangered in Jerusalem and, having only just escaped, was sent to Rome. Thus, writing something useful to the Hebrews, he does not set forth his own name, so that he might not be harmed by the hatred toward him, losing the benefit from the epistle. He writes to them, as the blessed Severianus says, in the Hebrew tongue, which was also interpreted by one of the disciples, either Luke or rather Clement, of whom he remembers. Because of this, the phrasing is foreign. And this was sought by those before us, and Eusebius, being more historical than those before and after him, mentioned this inquiry, and that it seemed to our ancient fathers, the bishops, that the epistle is Paul's.
In many ways, according to the differences of the ages in which things concerning us were dispensed (Hebrews 1:1-2), such as in the generation of Adam, in those according to Cain, in those according to Noah, in those according to Abraham, in those before the law, and in those after the law; for many are the parts of God's administration on our behalf. Also in various ways, that a command was given to Adam, another to Noah, another to Abraham, and through Moses another, and through the prophets various. He spoke...
In us in the Son, instead of through the Son; for not in him as in an instrument, but through him as one managing the flesh, so that from here the hearing of the Jews, having grasped the Word by a certain touch, might be lifted up to the eternal existence. For previously it was said: he spoke to us in a Son whom also he appointed heir—instead of he made—he led the Word into the eternal existence. And he does this continuously, partly ascending into theology, partly descending into humanity.
Seeking to present more grandly that the Word was begotten from the essence of the Father, he mentioned the radiance; for the radiance is from the essence of that of which it is a radiance, and it is continuous both from it and never thought of without it. But since the radiance shows a lesser nature compared to that of which it is a radiance and not in its own subsistence, he presented this in a different expression, saying: and the character of the subsistence, the first having set forth for the proof that it is purely from the essence, and the second, that it is not unsubstantial. Just as John, having named the Word, led us forward: he was with God and he was God (John 1:1), so also Paul, having said radiance, added: and the character of the subsistence.
This is what Jeremiah says: mighty works of his word (Jeremiah 32:27). Even if the Word became flesh, yet indeed he was in the glory and nature of the deity, and from the most high of God the Father he did not depart from the thrones; and being abased briefly by the angels because of the measure of humanity.
Greek · §1
The Greek is on each section page: §1
The Superiority of the Son over Angels§2
2For the glorious human nature is placed beneath the angels, yet it was also thus superior to every name that is named. Just as John imitated the mind in the dawn and the character, having named the Word and having said he is toward God (John 1:1), so also here he imitates John. Just as he said: 'This was in the beginning, all things came through him' (John 1:2), instead of 'this was, these things were', so also Paul: regarding the angels, 'the one doing'; but regarding the Son, 'your throne'—in order to show: that which is being done was not, but the one having the throne was always toward the Father eternally.
He does not say a change of nature is happening, but speaks by comparison, that these things are more likely to perish, just as they are destroyed in comparison to the setting forth of the Son's immortality (Heb 1:12–14). For the Lord, foretelling the second coming, says that stars shall fall, but not yet sun or moon or heaven. To which of the angels has he ever spoken? Having left all creation behind, he says that which is superior to this, the angels; for if there is a difference to the Son according to the fact of being born versus not being born, how much more according to all the invisible things? And it must be noted that through the phrase 'you yourself are' (Hebrews 1:12), he demonstrated the eternal and the unshakeable nature, and through the phrase 'are not all they are ministering spirits for service' (Heb 1:14), he demonstrated that the Son is not a minister but a co-worker.
He does not say a law, but the one many times administered through angels (Heb 2:2). It was confirmed to us by those who heard. This is similar to that in the epistle to the Galatians, where he says, 'I went up according to a revelation, and I proposed the gospel to them, lest I should be running in vain or have run' (Galatians 2:2). It was confirmed not by our asking, but by the being fully convinced of all the others, that what I preach, I preach well.
He says 'the time to come' (Heb 2:5). Immediately he added 'the last'; but now we do not yet see all things made subject to him; but we see Jesus, being made a little lower than the angels (Heb 2:7–9). So what is it that he says, 'you remember him'? He says it was fitting for Jesus; for the things of common humanity were fitting for him. But as the Son himself says, 'out of the mouths of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise for yourself, and I will see the heavens as the work of your fingers' (Ps 8:2), no one would say that the man of whom God remembered, having prepared praise out of the mouths of infants and nursing babies for the sake of your enemies, and I will see the heavens as the work of your fingers, had prepared it; he remembered the man and made him a little lower than the angels. And who is the man? Jesus. Because of the suffering of death, being made a little lower than...
Greek · §2
The Greek is on each section page: §2
The Superiority of the Melchizedekian Priesthood§3
3Angels. Just as he leads in for one day the present age (Heb 3:13). He says of a division of soul and spirit (Heb 4:12), when the soul suffers with the body, but the grace of the Holy Spirit draws upward toward the heavenly things. Since the beginning of Christ is from Judaism—for he lived according to the law—because of this he says: leaving these, let us bring forward perfection, knowing that according to the order Melchizedek must be a priest who is to be without law. From dead works, and faith toward God, and baptisms. To the Christians, the earthly things are dead. It is therefore absurd, he says, to depart from this course, whether from faith, or from having been made dead by all, to come again to the baptisms according to the law. The Lord, having come, proclaimed repentance, saying: Repent; for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near; but repentance from dead works. Thus, therefore, it is to be read: repentance from dead works, instead of the repentance from the dead works. What he therefore says is this: it is not necessary to leave the repentance from dead works and the faith toward God and the baptism—which he named in the plural because of the multitude of those being made worthy. And he spoke of baptisms and the teaching, and the laying on of hands through which there are ordinations, and of the resurrection, the hope, and the following things—to turn back to the law. But this prepares the way, since the priests in the law were avenging the law, but Melchizedek was outside the law; and not having come according to the order, he was Melchizedek. It is not necessary, he says, to leave the Melchizedekian one according to the order to avenge the priesthood in the law, so that the things standing in the law might remain. But he said the things in the law are a foundation, since they have become a precursor of piety for men.
The apostles raised up dead men (Hebrews 6:5). And this was the power of the resurrection. Speaking by way of example, he said that if baptism is a mystery, the once-for-all suffices. But if the thing happens a second time, it is contempt and an example. An example was taken, not for the baptism—for how could a second baptism be prevented?—but for the power of the Holy Spirit greatly benefiting the land (Heb 6:7–8). Having spoken above of the full assurance of hope, he showed that God provided full assurance to Abraham, not through works that belong to the citizenship, but through the administration (Heb 6:17). It is impossible, having made God swear, to be changed; it was impossible to change the power of the promise. He does not merely mention how Melchizedek met Abraham when the Assyrians were surrounding, and gave him tithes from all things (Heb 7:1–2), but showing that the forefather of the Levitical tribe used Melchizedek. Therefore, the priesthood without law is superior to the priesthood.
Greek · §3
The Greek is on each section page: §3
Melchizedek and the Law§4
4Regarding those in the law (Heb 7:3). Without father, without mother, without genealogy in the way priesthood works, because in the Levitical tribe it appeared who was a priest or a woman priest. There were periods of priesthood, where some had them for a day, and others ministered for a whole life. And these both are found among the priests in the law, even if not in the same periods.
He says Melchizedek is without father and without mother and without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life according to the logic of priesthood; for he neither had a priestly race, nor did he begin anywhere as one succeeding another, nor from a day another, nor as having a law to be a priest for a whole life. And all these things are said entirely by way of analogy to the priests in the law. But it is said concerning Melchizedek: having been made like to the Son of God, he remains a priest continually. And how does Melchizedek remain a priest? It is a question called forth, but the solution is this: just as Moses calls the law, so likewise here Melchizedek says both the man and the priesthood itself. If then Melchizedek is made like through the priesthood according to Christ, he remains continually; for not the mortal man, but the dignity of the priesthood.
Just as the tabernacle was constructed according to Moses so that the services might take place (Heb 9:11), so this tabernacle, the composition of grace, is greater, the body of Christ having Christ as head. By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come (Hebrews 11:20). Previously he set Jacob, then Esau, not according to the sequence of birth, but according to the order of the blessing. The world was not worthy of them (Heb 11:38). He does not say this concerning all, but concerning these last ones whom even a witness saw. He remembers those who fell in the encampments and because of the usefulness of the people having received them.
Laying aside every weight (Heb 12:1). Sin of carnal enjoyment is a weight, from which the most easily encompassing sin is born. And he said the sin that easily surrounds us and leads us to its own will is 'most easily encompassing'. For a festival and a feast of angels is the one to the glory of God, and to the assembly of firstborns inscribed in the heavens and to God, the judge of all (Heb 12:22-23). This is what Paul says elsewhere: for he removes the form of this world, so that the temporary things might pass away and the eternal things might come (Heb 12:27). This is, those in the law do not have this gift of which we partake. But outside the encampment, instead of being outside the legal ones and the Israelite encampment.
Greek · §4
The Greek is on each section page: §4