Melchizedek : Reimagining the Order of Ministry

Melchizedek : Reimagining the Order of Ministry

The order of Melchizedek finds very brief mention in the Bible. Only at three places does it find explicit mention, viz, Gen 14: 18-20, Psalm 110; 4 and Hebrews chapters 5-7. But this brief appearance of Melchizedek can not be easily dismissed as a shadowy figure from the distant past. It is very much part of a living tradition that has historical and theological significance. The Israelites commemorated this tradition throughout the history of their existence as a people countering the cultic Levitical priesthood. As it can be easily assumed from the etymology of the term, Melchizedek combines two important aspects of the leadership in ancient Israel society namely, the priestly and the kingly. The priestly dimension of this leadership always stands in opposition to the cultic Levitic priesthood mentioned in the priestly writings of the Old Testament.  The character that appears in genesis 14 verse 18, who encounters Abram in his victory march, is the king of Salem. What is interesting here is that Abram the father of the nations spontaneously offers the tithe of his loot to the king of Salem. This incident has become the theme of reflection and rereading in other parts of the writings of the scripture later on. The writers of Psalm 110 and Hebrews interpreted Melchizedek rather in messianic terms.[1]

The tradition and etymology

Melchizedek remains as a mysterious figure. His priest/king status signifies that Canaanite kingship was understood as a sacral/political office. Israel too might have drawn meaning from this tradition already existed in the later periods of their history. Melchizedek in the history of Israel might have been viewed as the precursor of both priestly and royal lines of offices in the Davidic kingdom. David’s kingship is sometimes seen as combining these two aspects of the leadership as we see david sometimes taking up the priestly responsibility of showing incense. T. K. Thomas puts it thoughtfully by saying that the first priest ever mentioned in the Bible is neither a Jew nor a Christian; means God establishes God’s priesthood in a distinct order that will never be allowed to be captivated by any human made categories.[2] The initiation of this order comes from God and the basis of this vocation is not the parentage but the oath/promise that God does (Ps 110:4).

Minister mediates the reciprocity of blessing and “tithing”

In Genesis 14 he is mentioned as the King of Salem. As drawing from the etymology of the terms Bruggemann commends that he is the king of Uprightness/Righteousness and Peace. The usage seen in the Mar Thoma Thaksa has correspondence with this meaning of uprightness. Melchizedek’s bringing of bread and wine to refresh the battle-drained Abram is also very significant and cannot be trivialized as a mere offering of food and drink. It cannot be separated from the blessing that follows. At the first instance it is a blessing on Abram by the Creator God. Secondly it blesses God in a direct address; as it implies a  praise and thanks giving for their deliverance from a common enemy. In both instances the blessing increases power and renown. It at the same time bestows strength on Abraham and also increases the renown of God in the world.[3] What is offered through the bread and wine is friendship, hospitality, life and nourishment. A priest of the order of Melchizedek must primarily be aware of the task of nourishing the lives of the people entrusted by God.

It in all its form and depth represents a precursor of a ritual meal and worship, where both dimensions of the blessing suggested earlier in this study is pronounced. The blessing and tithing are acts that always reciprocate in the Jewish and Christian worships. Tithing in this instance rather serves as an act of worship than simply as a military political settlement. Thus the reciprocating acts of blessing and tithing entailed in worship nourished the life of the worshipper and the community to which he belongs

.

Minister encounters the worshipper with the divine name

Though the role of Melchizedek in this episode is not clearly mentioned as Mark G. Brett points it out that, this Canaanite Priest/King plays a crucial part in supplying the divine name that Abram takes up later on in verse 21.[4] El Elyon stands for “God the Most High.” It is the tithing act that was prompted by the presence of Melchizedek that introduces this divine name to Abram. After a victory over the 5 Kings, who earlier defeated the 4 other great kings, Abraham could have been taken to a very arrogant self image. But the encounter with Melchizedek helps him to be humble before God Most High.

In the midst of all the violent military actions and political movements the concern for the family is not lost. It is evidenced in Abram’s care for his nephew Lot. But it is not only Lot who was redeemed through the raids conducted by Abram but the whole community of people subjugated by the unjust kings. Peace and well-being of the communities is emphasised and all including the insiders and the outsiders join hands in the rescue act of the family of Creator God. The worship led by Melchizedek celebrates this wellbeing of Individuals and communities created and sustained by God.

Minister embodies the Indestructibility of life

A comparison of the Levitical priesthood with that of the priestly order of Melchizedek is made possible by the writer of the Hebrews. The presentation of the Melchizedek’s priesthood as from nowhere to nowhere is said to be a literary technique to announce the eternity of this priesthood against the biologically limited priesthood exercised by the Levites depending on the approved parentage and genealogy.[5] Christ’s being a “melchizedek priest” is not a matter of lineage or tradition or succession but of likeness and similarity to Melchizedek. If Christ’ similarity to the order of the “melchizedek priesthood” is not by the descent; it is clearly put as because of “the power of the indestructible life” (v16 of Heb ch7). [6] As it is mentioned earlier the Melchizedek imagery remained in the Israelite tradition as a perpetual ideal type that always challenged both the religious and political leadership by setting standards of uprightness and peace. The faith in the power of the indestructibility of the life is that which made Jesus different and political in his comparison with his contemporaries. He was daring enough to challenge those powers which can destroy only the body with this indestructible power of life. The perpetuity mentioned about the priesthood of Melchizedek does not depend upon the parental lineage but on the oath or promise that God had made about it. the person who is in the order of Melchizedek is not living for himself or herself but make this perpetual order to live perpetually. Paul says, “it is not me but Christ lives in me”.

Minister perfects the people as the children of God

Heb 7: 11-12

Here the question of perfection appears. Whose perfection? The mention is about the perfection of the people, whom the priest serves for God. “The ineffectiveness of Levitical priesthood lay in its inability to “perfect” the people.”[7] The law also failed in perfecting people as the children of God. Perfection implies the right relationship with God. The priestly activities of sacrifice, sanctification etc also point to this reality of right relationship with God. This has resemblance with the idea of theosis that underlies all the theological understandings and liturgical celebrations of the Eastern Church. The sacraments in the Eastern Church are Liturgical events that initiate us to formation as the children of God. Unlike the western idea of sin and fallen nature of human, it emphasises the potential of the human to be nourished into the status of God’s children and in right relationship with God. This aspect of the role of the clergy is expected in the ordination certificate of the Mar Thoma Clergy Towards the end where blessings and prayers for the candidate pronounced, “ We pray that he may be granted the divine grace to lead many to salvation offered to all mankind by the Incarnation, Cross and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The writer of Hebrews puts Christ as the leader of the salvation for the world (2: 10ff). Christ’s sufferings and death gains glory not only for him but also for “many children”.

Conclusion

The priestly office is often considered as delivering certain patterned duties entrusted by the traditions. As the days go by the priest looses the joy of serving the people and God as life becomes repetitions of cycles. Eventually it looses all excitements and becomes a shallow and less sensitive experience. Here the order of Melchizedek comes as a new challenge shaking us off our slumber to explore new and relevant models of ministry for our times. It calls our attention to the reality that ministry happens in the context of a constant encounter with the socio-political realities in which the life of our people are embedded. Primarily it demands a courage that believes in the indestructibility of life and thereby a sincere yearning for peace and uprightness. It should always be a meditative experience where the reciprocity of God’s blessings and the worshipper’s gift to God are carefully maintained. The minister needs to feel the transformative experience of Christ-likeness in being a leader of salvation for the people and must be able to perfect the people in the experience of being the children of God. The all important responsibility of introducing the divine name to the worshipper should be something that radiates from the life, beliefs and choices of the minister than his/her proclamation.

Rev. Jacob P. Thomas

Dharma Jyoti Vidya Peeth

---

[1] Leander E. Keck, The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol 1, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994, p 439.

[2] T.K. Thomas, “Melchizedek, King and Priest: an Ecumenical Paradigm?”, Bangalore Theological Forum, 31/2 (December, 1999) 

[3] Leander E. Keck, The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol-1, Nashville: Abingdon, 1994, p 440.

[4] Mark G. Brett, Genesis: Procreation and the Politics of Identity, London: Routledge, 2000, p 55.

[5] Leander E. Keck, The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol-XII, Nashville; Abingdon, 1998, p. 87.

[6] Walter Bruggemann, “Genesis” in Interpretation; a Bible Commentary for teaching and  Preaching, Westminster: John Knox Press, 1982, 296.

[7] Leander E. Keck. The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol-XII, Nashville: Abingdon, 1998, p. 89.