From: Jeremiah 31:31-34
The New Covenant
*********************************************************************************************
Commentary:
31:31-37. The words of this oracle are central to Jeremiah’s message, and they
constitute the passage in the book that has had most impact on the New Testa-
ment and on Christian teaching. Most ancient and modern commentators consi-
der these words to be original words of Jeremiah, and they generally attribute
them to the early stages of his, ministry, because they express support for King
Josiah’s religious reform.
The oracle is made up of two contrasting parts: the first (vv. 31-32) describes the
Old Covenant, broken by the people’s sins; the second (vv. 33-35) speaks very
forcefully of the New Covenant which will endure forever.
The old Covenant is described in terms of three characteristic features: it carried
the force of tradition because it was a pact made “with the fathers”; it was a sign
of divine election, as can be seen from a phrase exclusive to Jeremiah: “when “I
took them by the hand” to bring them out of the land of Egypt”; and it showed the
Lord’s authority over his people.
The new pact has three key features, too: it is “new”, it is something “interior”,
and it is “heartfelt”, written upon their hearts. It is “new”, because prior to this
the pact with God was never described in that way; that is, it is new not in terms
of the previous covenant which has ceased to operate (cf. Heb 8:18-13) but in the
sense that it is definitive and will not be superseded. When, at the Last Supper,
Jesus said the words of consecration over the chalice: “This cup which is poured
out for you is the new covenant” (Lk 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25), he brings Jeremiah’s
words to fulfillment. It is “interior” because it is etched in the heart of the people
and of each individual. Its content did not change (it is the Law of God) but peo-
ple will know it in a different way: the previous covenant was written on tablets
of stone (Ex 31:38; 34:28ff), but this one will be written on the heart and soul of
man. Therefore, it is part of a person’s very being; it is not just an external obli-
gation; people’s well-formed consciences tell them what they ought to do; if
they fail to live up to the demands of the Covenant, they lose their identity until
they are converted and are redeemed from sin. In the Letter to the Hebrews it
says, by way of explaining this passage, that in the New Covenant Christ has
obtained forgiveness of sins for us through the cross, and therefore the old sin
offerings no longer have any effect: “Where there is forgiveness (of sins), there
is no longer any offering for sin” (Heb 10:18).
Finally, it is “heartfelt” because it is based on a loving relationship between God
and his people. The wording that Jeremiah likes so much (”I will be their God,
and they shall be my people” (Jer 31:33; cf. 7:23) implies bonds, of fidelity and
love. The nearest precedent for this is Hosea, who used the metaphor of mar-
riage as the hinge of his preaching and who defined sin as estrangement from
God, and punishment in terms of marital breakdown: “Call his name not my peo-
ple,for you are not my people and I am not your God” (Hos 1:9). Therefore, moral
imperatives should not come via legal imposition from outside; they should arise
from a person’s heart—the aim being not so much perfect, guiltless behavior as
living in union with God: “All who keep his commandments abide in him, and he
in them” (1 Jn 3:24).
The New Covenant has given its name to the, “New Testament”, on which the
new people of God is founded, as the Second Vatican Council says: “At all times
and in every race God has given welcome to whosoever fears him and does what
is right. God, however, does not make men holy and save them merely as indivi-
duals, without bond or link between one another. Rather has it pleased him to
bring men together as one people, a people that acknowledges him in truth and
serves him in holiness. He therefore chose the race of Israel as a people unto
himself. With it he setup a covenant. Step by step he taught and prepared this
people, making known in its history both himself and the decree of his will and
making it holy unto himself. All these things, however, were done by way of pre-
paration and as a figure of that new and perfect covenant, which was to be rati-
fied in Christ, and of that fuller revelation which was to be given through the Word
of God Himself made flesh. ‘Behold the days shall come saith the Lord, and I
will make a new covenant with the House of Israel, and with the house of Judah.
[...] I will give my law in their bowels, and I will write it in their heart, and I will be
their God, and they shall be my people.[...] For all of them shall know Me, from
the least of them even to the greatest, saith the Lord’ (Jer 31:31-34). Christ insti-
tuted this new covenant, the new testament, that is to say, in his Blood, calling
together a people made up of Jew and Gentile, making them one, not according
to the flesh but in the Spirit” (”Lumen Gentium”, 9).
*********************************************************************************************
Source: “The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries”. Biblical text from the
Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries by members of
the Faculty of Theology, University of Navarre, Spain.
Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland, and
by Scepter Publishers in the United States.
From: Hebrews 5:7-9
Christ Has Been Made High Priest by God the Father
*********************************************************************************************
Commentary:
7-9. This brief summary of Christ’s life stresses his perfect obedience to the
Father’s will, his intense prayer and his sufferings and redemptive death. As in
the hymn to Christ in Philippians 2:6-11, the point is made that Christ set his po-
wer aside and, despite his being the only-begotten Son of God, out of obedience
chose to die on the cross. His death was a true self-offering expressed in that
“loud voice” when he cried out to the Father just before he died, “into thy hands
I commit my spirit” (Lk 23:46). But although Jesus’ obedience was most obvious
on Calvary, it was a constant feature of “the days of his flesh”: he obeyed Mary
and Joseph, seeing in them the authority of the heavenly Father; he was obedient
to political and religious authorities; and he always obeyed the Father, identifying
himself with him to such a degree that he could say, “I have glorified thee on
earth, having accomplished the work which thou gavest me to do [...]. All mine
are thine and thine are mine” (Jn 17:4, 10).
The passage also points to Jesus prayer, the high point of which occurred in
Gethsemane on the eve of his passion. The reference to “loud cries and suppli-
cations” recalls the Gospel account of his suffering: “And being in an agony he
prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling
down upon the ground” (Lk 22:44).
Hebrews 5:7-9 is probably referring not so much to his prayer in the Garden, still
less to any prayer of Christ asking to be delivered from death, but to our Lord’s
constant prayer for the salvation of mankind. “When the Apostle speaks of these
supplications and cries of Jesus,” St John Chrysostom comments, “he does not
mean prayers which he made on his own behalf but prayers for those who would
later believe in him. And, due to the fact that the Jews did not yet have the eleva-
ted concept of Christ that they ought to have had, St Paul says that ‘he was heard’,
just as the Lord himself told his disciples, to console them, ‘If you loved me, you
would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I’
[...]. Such was the respect and reverence shown by the Son, that God the Father
could not but take note and heed his Son and his prayers” (”Hom. on Heb”, 11).
7. “In the days of his flesh”, a reference to the Incarnation. “Flesh” is synony-
mous with mortal life; this is a reference to Christ’s human nature—as in the pro-
logue to St John’s Gospel (cf. Jn 1:14) and many other places (Heb 2:14; Gal
2:20; Phil 1:22-24; 1 Pet 4:1-2) including where mention is made of Jesus being
a servant and capable of suffering (cf. Phil 2:8; Mt 20:27-28). Jesus’ human nature
“in the days of his flesh” is quite different from his divine nature and also from his
human nature after its glorification (cf. 1 Cor 15:50). “It must be said that the word
‘flesh’ is occasionally used to refer to the weakness of the flesh, as it says in 1
Cor 15:50: ‘flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God’. Christ had a weak
and mortal flesh. Therefore it says in the text, ‘In the days of his flesh’, referring
to when he was living in a flesh which seemed to be like sinful flesh, but which
was sinless” (St Thomas Aquinas, “Commentary on Heb”, 5, 1). So, this text
underlines our Lord’s being both Victim and Priest.
“Prayers and supplications”: very fitting in a priest. The two words mean much
the same; together they are a form of words which used to be employed in peti-
tions to the king or some important official. The plural tells us that there were lots
of these petitions. The writer seems to have in mind the picture of the Redeemer
who “going a little farther fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it be possible,
let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt” (Mt 26:39).
St Thomas comments on this description of Christ’s prayer as follows: “His ac-
tion was indeed one of offering prayers and supplications, that is, a spiritual sacri-
fice: that was what Christ offered. It speaks of prayers in the sense of petitions
because ‘The prayer of a righteous man has great power’ (Jas 5:16); and it speaks
of supplications to emphasize the humility of the one who is praying, who falls on
his knees, as we see happening in the case of him who ‘fell on his face and
prayed’ (Mt 26:39)” (”Commentary on Heb”, 5, 1).
To emphasize the force of Christ’s prayer, the writer adds, “with loud cries and
tears”. According to rabbinical teaching, there were three degrees of prayer,
each stronger than the last—supplications, cries and tears. Christian tradition has
always been touched by the humanity of the Redeemer as revealed in the way
he prays. “Everything that is being said here may be summed up in one word—
humility: that stops the mouths of those who blaspheme against Christ’s divinity
saying that it is completely inappropriate for a God to act like this. For, on the
contrary, the Godhead laid it down that [Christ’s] human nature should suffer all
this, in order to show us the extreme to which he truly became incarnate and as-
sumed a human nature, and to show us that the mystery of salvation was accom-
plished in a real and not an apparent or fictitious manner” (Theodoret of Cyrus,
“lnterpretatio Ep. ad Haebreos, ad loc.”). Christ’s prayer, moreover, teaches us
that prayer must 1) be fervent and 2) involve interior pain. “Christ had both [fervor
and pain], for the Apostle by mentioning ‘tears’ intends to show the interior groa-
ning of him who weeps in this way [...]. But he did not weep on his own account:
he wept for us, who receive the fruit of his passion” (St Thomas, “Commentary
on Heb., ad loc.”).
“He was heard for his godly fear.” St John Chrysostom’s commentary is very ap-
posite: “’He gave himself up for our sins’, he says in Gal 1:4; and elsewhere (cf.
1 Tim 2:6) he adds, ‘He gave himself as a ransom for all’. What does he mean
by this? Do you not see that he is speaking with humility of himself, because of
his mortal flesh? And, nevertheless, because he is the Son, it says that he was
heard for his godly fear” (”Hom. on Heb.”, 8). It is like a loving contention between
Father and Son. The Son wins the Father’s admiration, so generous is his self-
surrender.
And yet Christ’s prayer did not seem to be heeded, for his Father God did not
save him from ignominious death—the cup he had to drink—nor were all the Jews,
for whom he prayed, converted. But it was only apparently so: in fact Christ’s pra-
yer was heard. It is true that, like every one, the idea of dying was repugnant to
him, because he had a natural instinct to live; but, on the other hand, he wished
to die through a deliberate and rational act of his will, hence in the course of the
prayer, he said, “not my will, but thine, be done” (Lk 22:42). Similarly Christ wan-
ted to save all mankind—but he wanted them to accept salvation freely (cf. “Com-
mentary on Heb., ad loc.”).
8. In Christ there are two perfect and complete natures and therefore two different
levels of knowledge—divine knowledge and human knowledge. Christ’s human
knowledge includes 1) the knowledge that the blessed in heaven have, that is,
the knowledge that comes from direct vision of the divine essence; 2) the know-
ledge with which God endowed man before original sin (infused knowledge); and
3) the knowledge which man acquires through experience. This last-mentioned
knowledge could and in fact did increase (cf. Lk 2:52) in Christ’s case. Christ’s
painful experience of the passion, for example, increased this last type of know-
ledge, which is why the verse says that Christ learned obedience through suffe-
ring. There was a Greek proverb which said, “Sufferings are lessons.” Christ’s
teaching and example raise this positive view of suffering onto the supernatural
level. “In ‘suffering there is concealed’ a particular ‘power that draws a person in-
teriorly close to Christ’, a special grace [...]. A result of such a conversion is not
only that the individual discovers the salvific meaning of suffering but above all
that he becomes a completely new person. He discovers a new dimension, as
it were, ‘of his entire life and vocation’” (Bl. John Paul II, “Salvifici Doloris”, 26).
In our Lord’s case, his experience of suffering was connected with his generosity
in obedience. He freely chose to obey even unto death (cf. Heb 10:5-9; Rom 5:19;
Phil 2:8), consciously atoning for the first sin, a sin of disobedience. “In his suffe-
ring, sins are canceled out precisely because he alone as the only-begotten Son
could take them upon himself, accept them ‘with that love for the Father which
overcomes’ the evil of every sin; in a certain sense he annihilates this evil in the
spiritual space of the relationship between God and humanity, and fills this space
with good” (”Salvifici Doloris”, 17). Christ “learned obedience” not in the sense
that this virtue developed in him, for his human nature was perfect in its holiness,
but in the sense that he put into operation the infused virtue his human soul al-
ready possessed. “Christ knew what obedience was from all eternity, but he
learned obedience in practice through the severities he underwent particularly in
his passion and death” (St Thomas Aquinas, “Commentary on Heb., ad loc.”).
Christ’s example of obedience is something we should copy. A Christian writer
of the fifth century, Diadochus of Photike, wrote: “The Lord loved (obedience) be-
cause it was the way to bring about man’s salvation and he obeyed his Father
unto the cross and unto death; however, his obedience did not in any sense di-
minish his majesty. And so, having—by his obedience—dissolved man’s disobe-
dience, he chose to lead to blessed and immortal life those who followed the
way of obedience” (”Chapters on Spiritual Perfection”, 41).
9. Obviously Christ as God could not increase in perfection. Nor could his sacred
humanity become any holier, for from the moment of his Incarnation he received
the fullness of grace, that is, he had the maximum degree of holiness a man
could have. In this connection Thomas Aquinas points out that Christ had union
(that is, the personal union to the Son of God gratuitously bestowed on human
nature): clearly this grace is infinite as the person of the Word is infinite. The
other grace is habitual grace which, although it is received in a limited human na-
ture, is yet infinite in its perfection because grace was conferred on Christ as the
universal source of the justification of human nature (cf. “Summa Theologiae”, III,
q. 7, a. 11). In what sense, then, could Christ be “made perfect”? St Thomas pro-
vides the answer: Christ, through his passion, achieved a special glory—the im-
passibility and glorification of his body. Moreover, he attained the same perfec-
tions as we shall participate in when we are raised from the dead in glory, those
of us who believe in him (cf. “Commentary on Heb., ad loc.”). For this reason our
Redeemer could exclaim before his death, “It is finished” (Jn 19:30)—referring not
only to his own sacrifice but also to the fact that he had completely accomplished
the redeeming atonement. Christ triumphed on the cross and attained perfection
for himself and for others. In Hebrews the same verb is used for what is translated
into English as “to be made perfect” and “to finish”. Christ, moreover, by obeying
and becoming a perfect victim, truly pleasing to the Father, is more perfectly posi-
tioned to perfect others. “Obedience” is essentially docility to what God asks of
us and readiness to listen to him (cf. Rom 1:5; 16:26; 2 Cor 10:5; Heb 4:3).
Christ’s obedience is a source of salvation for us; if we imitate him we will truly
form one body with him and he will be able to pass on to us the fullness of his
grace.
“Now, when you find it hard to obey, remember your Lord: ‘factus obediens usque
ad mortem, mortem autem crucis”: obedient even to accepting death, death on a
cross!’” (St. J. Escriva, “The Way”, 628).
*********************************************************************************************
Source: “The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries”. Biblical text from the
Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries by members of
the Faculty of Theology, University of Navarre, Spain.
Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland, and
by Scepter Publishers in the United States.