(supplements to novum testamentum 012) john hall elliott - the elect and the holy 1966

8/19/2019 (Supplements to Novum Testamentum 012) John Hall Elliott - The Elect and the Holy 1966

1/274

THE ELECT AND THE HOLY


2/274

SUPPLEMENTS

TO

NOVUM

TESTAMENTUM

EDITORIAL

BOARD

President: W. C.

VAN

UNNIK. Bilthoven (Utr.) Nether lands

P . BRATSIOTIS

K.

W. CLARK

H.

CLAVIER

J. W.

DOEVE

] . DORESSE

C.

W. DUGMORE

DOM

J.

DUPONT

O.S.B.

A. GEYSER

W.

GROSSOUW

A.

F.

J.

KLIJN

PH. H. MENOUD

B o

REICKE

K. H.

RENGSTORF

P.

SCHUBERT

E . STAUFFER

V O L U M E

XII

L E I D E N

E.

J.

BRILL

1966

SUPPLEMENTS

TO

NOVUM TESTAMENTUM

EDITORIAL

BOARD

President :

W.

C . VAN UNNIK. Bilthoven (Utr.) Netherlands

P. BRATSIOTIS

K. W. CLARK

H. CLAVIER

]. W. DOEVE

] .

DORESSE

C.

W. DUGMORE

DOM J. DUPONT O.S.B .

A.

GEYSER

W. GROSSOUW

A. F. J. KLIJN

PH. H. MENOUD

B o REICKE

K.

H. RE

NGSTORF

P. SCHUBERT

E.

STAUFFER

V O L U M E

XII

~ J ~ G I D ~

& ~

~ 1:

~ · c J Y " ~ ·

L E I D E N

E ] BRILL

1966


3/274

THE

ELECT

AND

THE HOLY

AN EXEGETICAL EXAMINATION OF I PETER

2:4-10

AND

THE

PHRASE

BY

JOHN HALL ELLIOTT

Dr.

Theol.

Assistant

Professor of

Exegetical

Theology

Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri

U.S.A.

LEIDEN

E. J. BRILL

1966

THE

ELECT

AND

THE HOLY

AN

EXEGETICAL EXAMINATION OF I

PETER 2:4-10

AND THE PHRASE

(.I. ' "

' I X O ' ~ I \ e : ~ O V ~ e : P I X ' t ' e : u f L l X

BY

JOHN

HALL

ELLIOTT

Dr. Theol.

Assistant Professor of Exegetical Theology

Concordia

Seminary,

St.

Louis, Missouri

U.S.A.

~ I ~ G / D ~

&

. ¢

~

t

C J \ ' > · ~

.

LEIDEN

E.

J.

BRILL

1966


4/274

Copyright I966 by E.

J.

Brill, Leiden, Netherlands

All

rights reserved. No part

of

this

book

may

be

reproduced

or translated

in any

form, by print, photoprint, microfilm or

any

other means without written permission from the publisher

PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

Copyright I966 by

E.

J. Brill, Leiden, Netherlands

All

rights reserved.

No

part

of

this book

may

be

reproduced

or translated

in

any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm

or

any other means without written permission from the publisher

PRINTED IN

THE NETHERLANDS


5/274

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

Foreword

by

CARL S. MEYER

Foreword . . . . .

Acknowledgements. . . . .

INTRODUCTION

. .

Page

IX

XIII

XV

I

The

Need of

an

Examination 1

The Present Position of Research 6

The Problem . . . . . . . . . 14

I. THE STRUCTURE

AND

CONSTRUCTION

OF

1 P 2: 4-10 16

A.

The Structure of vv. 4-10 . . . 17

B. The OT Passages in vv.

6-8

. .

23

Excursus

1:

A )..(60


6/274

VI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

G. Philo:

De

Sobrietate 66, De Abrahamo 56 96

I.

De Sobrietate

66. . . 96

2. De Abrahamo 56 . . . 98

H. The Rabbinic Literature. . I02

I.

Apocalypse I:6, 5:10, 20:6. I07

Summary

and

Conclusions . I20

III. THE

UNITY OF VERSES 6-IO . I29

A. A Testimonia Source? I30

B.

A Christian Hymn? . I33

C. A "Aoc6c; Complex"? I38

D. An Election Theme I41

Conclusion . . . . . I45

IV. VERSES 4-5 AND THE ELECTION AND HOLINESS OF

THE

BODY OF

THE

FAITHFUL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I46

A. The Election Motif

in

vv. 4- 5: 146

B. The Structure

and

Content of v. 5 148

I. Syntactical Considerations. . 148

2. oIxoc;

7tVeUfLOC't"Lx6c; • • • • • •

149

a. ~ o c O ' L A e L O v

and

oIxoc; 7tVeufLoc't"Lx6c; 149

Excursus 2: 7tVeufLoc't"Lx6c; and the Method of

Spiritualization . . . . . . I54

b. oIxoc;: House(hold) . . . . . . 156

Excursus

3:

oIxoc;: a Temple? . 157

3.

Lep


7/274

TABLE OF CONTENTS

VII

c.

tEp&:t"EU[J.OC

and

Suffering . . . . . . .

188

d.

tEpOCTEU[J.OC,

Ministry,

and

Church

Order.

192

Summary

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

V.

CH. 2 :

4-10

IN

THE GENERAL

CONTEXT

OF I P.

. . . .

199

A. The Preceding Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

Excursus

6 : EpOCTEU[J.OC, Baptism,

and

a " N eo-Levitical

Community". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

1 . Baptism.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

207

2. A Holiness Code and a "Neo-Levitical Commu-

nity"

. . . . . . . 208

B. The Relation with 2:

4-10

213

Conclusion . . . . . . 217

SUMMARY AND

CONCLUSIONS

219

ABBREVIATIONS 227

BIBLIOGRAPHY

230

INDEX OF

PROPER

NAMES.

INDEX

OF

PASSAGES • • •

TABLE

OF CONTENTS VII

c. tepcheu Loc and Suffering . . . . . . . 188

d.

tep&:reu Loc,

Ministry,

and

Church

Order.

192

Summary

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

v. CH. 2 : 4-10 IN THE GENERAL

CONTEXT

OF I

P . . . . .

199

A.

The Preceding Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

Excursus 6: tepoc't"eu Loc, Baptism,

and

a "Neo-Levitical

Community". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

207

1. Baptism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

2. A Holiness Code

and

a "Neo-Levitical Commu-

nity"

. . . . . . .

208

B.

The

Relation with 2: 4-10 213

Conclusion . . . . . . . . 217

SUMMARY

AND

CONCLUSIONS

219

ABBREVIATIONS 227

BIBLIOGRAPHY

230

INDEX

OF PROPER NAMES

INDEX

OF PASSAGES • • •


8/274


9/274

FOREWORD

The publications

of the

School for Graduate Studies of Concordia

Seminary, St. Louis, are products of the members of

the

staff of

Concordia Seminary or works prepared within

the

School.

Dr. Elliott's

The Elect and The Holy

was written, as

the

acknow

ledgments show, as a dissertation for

the

Evangelical Theological

Faculty

of

the

Wilhelms University

in

Munster.

He

was appointed

as assistant professor of Exegetical Theology at Concordia Seminary

in I964. His services have been utilized also

by the

School for

Graduate Studies. His intensive

study

of a significant theological

topic deserves

to

be disseminated. The Council for Graduate Studies

was happy for the opportunity to publish this scholarly contribution

by a member of the faculty of Concordia Seminary as Graduate

Study

Number

VII.

We are grateful, too,

to the

Aid Association for

Lutherans of Appleton, Wisconsin, for the financial help given

to

the

Publication Fund of

the

School for Graduate Studies. The con

tinued

support of this group for various scholarly enterprises has

been of great value

to

The

Lutheran

Church--Missouri Synod.

I t is

not

supposed that all readers will fully concur with all of

the

findings of

the

author.

They

will acknowledge his rigorous wissen

schaftliche Untersuchungen,

his great care in documentation,

and

his

precise

statement

of his findings. We ask

them to

weigh these

findings carefully in the light of the new evidence

the

author

presents.

CARL S. MEYER, DIRECTOR

School for Graduate Studies

Concordia Seminary, St. Louis

FOREWORD

The publications

of

the School for Graduate Studies of Concordia

Seminary, St. Louis, are products of

the

members of

the

staff of

Concordia Seminary or works prepared within

the

School.

Dr. Elliott's The Elect and The Holy was written, as the acknow

ledgments show, as a dissertation for

the

Evangelical Theological

Faculty of the Wilhelms University in Munster.

He

was appointed

as assistant professor of Exegetical Theology at Concordia Seminary

in 1964. His services

have

been utilized also by the School for

Graduate Studies. His intensive

study

of a significant theological

topic deserves

to be

disseminated. The Council for Graduate Studies

was

happy

for

the

opportunity

to

publish this scholarly contribution

by

a member of

the

faculty of Concordia Seminary as Graduate

Study Number VII. We are grateful, too,

to

the Aid Association for

Lutherans of Appleton, Wisconsin, for

the

financial help given

to

the Publication Fund of the School for Graduate Studies.

The

con

tinued

support of this group for various scholarly enterprises has

been of great value

to The

Lutheran

Church--Missouri Synod.

I t

is

not

supposed that all readers will fully concur

with

all of

the

findings of the author.

They

will acknowledge his rigorous wissen

schaftliche Untersuchungen, his great care in documentation,

and

his

precise

statement

of his findings. We ask

them to

weigh these

findings carefully in the light of the new evidence the

author

presents.

CARL

S. MEYER,

DIRECTOR

School for Graduate Studies

Concordia Seminary, St. Louis


10/274


11/274

Meiner Zieben Frau Linde, die die Zie

benswertesten Eigenschaften

des

V oZkes

und

die teuerste Verbindung

mit

dem

Lande verkorpert, in dem diese Arbeit

entstanden ist.

Meiner lieben Frau Linde, die die lie

benswertesten Eigenschaften

des

Volkes

und die teuerste Verbindung

mit dem

Lande verkorpert,

in dem

diese Arbeit

entstanden ist.


12/274


13/274

FOREWORD

"The danger for us is

not the

theological problems but

rather

the

untheological slogans," one of Germany's outstanding theologians

has perceptively observed.* The danger is

that

convenient slogans

and

generalizing labels

not

only hinder

the

accurate

treatment

of

theological issues; even worse,

their

very presence

and

use often

implies a consensus of opinion which,

in

turn, denies that certain

problems even exist.

Such is

the

case with

the

Biblical pericope I

Peter

2 :4-10

and

the

slogan "the universal (or royal) priesthood of believers." For centu

ries, but particularly since

the

Reformation, theologians have found

the import of this text to be an affirmation of the priestly character

of all believers and of their royal and sacerdotal perogatives. Not

only does this apply

to

scholars of

the

historic churches of

the

Reformation but

in

more recent time, though with varying accent,

to Roman

Catholic theologians as well. In view of

the

increased

emphasis laid upon this text among all communions engaged

in the

ecumenical dialogue,

the

question regarding

the

accuracy of this

popular interpretation becomes an urgent one. From the surprisingly

few exegetical investigations ever devoted to this question

it

be

comes apparent

that

for the most part

the

popularity of this ex

planation has provided

the

chief canon of acceptance.

Such a situation suggests

the

stifling influence of a theological

slogan

and

a less

than

critical reception of

an

assumed opinio

commun'ts.

To

raise

the

question regarding

the

accuracy of a current

trend

in the interpretation of

I

Peter

2

:4-10 and from this point of de

parture

to subject

the

text to critical scrutiny-and

thus

to dig at

the

roots of this particular

slogan-is the

purpose of this present

undertaking. Its prime concern, therefore, involves the structure,

content,

and import

of this pericope. The analysis

attempts to

be

strictly exegetical throughout. The relatively few references to

the

"universal priesthood of believers"

in

this

study

indicate that this

theme,

though the

original stimulus of this investigation, proved

insignificant, if not altogether useless, in the specific exegesis

of

the

*Ernst Kasemann, "Eine

Apologie der

urchristlichen Eschatologie,"

Zeit

schrift

fur

Theologie und Kirche,

49 (1952), p. 296.

FOREWORD

"The danger for us is not

the

theological problems but

rather the

untheological slogans," one of Germany's outstanding theologians

has

perceptively observed.*

The

danger is that convenient slogans

and

generalizing labels not only hinder the accurate treatment of

theological issues; even worse, their very presence

and

use often

implies a consensus of opinion which,

in

turn, denies

that

certain

problems even exist.

Such is the case with the Biblical pericope

I

Peter

2

:4-10

and

the

slogan

"the

universal (or royal) priesthood of believers." For centu

ries, but particularly since

the

Reformation, theologians have found

the import

of this text to be an affirmation of

the

priestly character

of all believers

and

of their royal

and

sacerdotal perogatives. Not

only does this apply to scholars of the historic churches of the

Reformation

but in

more recent time, though with varying accent,

to Roman Catholic theologians as well. In view of

the

increased

emphasis laid upon this text among all communions engaged

in the

ecumenical dialogue,

the

question regarding

the

accuracy of this

popular interpretation becomes an urgent one. From

the

surprisingly

few exegetical investigations ever devoted to this question it be

comes apparent that for

the

most

part the

popularity

of this ex

planation has provided

the

chief canon of acceptance.

Such a situation suggests the stifling influence of a theological

slogan

and

a less than critical reception of an assumed

opinio

communis.

To

raise

the

question regarding

the

accuracy of a current

trend

in

the

interpretation of

I

Peter

2

:4-10

and

from this point of de

parture to subject the

text

to critical scrutiny-and thus to dig at

the

roots of this particular

slogan-is

the purpose of this present

undertaking. Its prime concern, therefore, involves

the

structure,

content,

and

import of this pericope. The analysis

attempts

to be

strictly exegetical throughout. The relatively few references to

the

"universal priesthood of believers" in this study indicate that this

theme, though

the

original stimulus of this investigation, proved

insignificant, if not altogether useless, in

the

specific exegesis of

the

• Ernst Kiisemann, HEine Apologie der urchristlichen Eschatologie,"

Zeit

schrift

fur

Theologie

und

Kirche,

49 (1952). p. 296.


14/274


15/274

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study constitutes,

in

the main, the inaugural dissertation

submitted to

the

Evangelisch-Theologische Fakultat of the

Wilhelms-Universitat

in

Munster, Westfalen, Germany,

in

the fall

of 1963. Revisions made subsequent to this time involve corrections

in the

interests of greater clarity,

the

addition of further pertinent

literature and

the

concluding indices.

To all who have contributed

to this

work,

be it

through theo

logical stimulation, personal encouragement, or through practical

assistance

in the

preparation of

the end

product, I express

my

profound gratitude.

For

my esteemed advisor, Professor D. Dr. Karl Heinrich

Rengstorf, this book reflects

in

but small part

the

bond of respect

and

appreciation which had its beginning during my years at

Munster, a bond which transcends the realm of academic disser

tation. To Professor D.

Franz

Hesse,

the

thesis' Korreferent,

and

the

other members of

the

Evangelisch-Theologische Fakultat I

express the wish that this study

in

some way convey

the

pride and

honor I consider

it to

have studied under

their

tutelage

and

now

in

the

United States to be a representative of this distinguished

German university.

In August 1962 I had

the

privilege and pleasure of discussing at

length

the

subject of this work with Dr. Josef Blinzler whose article

on I Peter is cited frequently throughout the book. Dr. Blinzler

welcomed this

study

most cordially

and

his friendliness

and

en

couragement were most appreciated. I f occurrences of differences

of opinion between Dr. Blinzler

and

myself seem abundant, this is

witness only to the Grundlichkeit

and

comprehensiveness of his brief

but significant contribution to the understanding of I

Peter

2.

The

Bibliothek der WestfaIischen Wilhelms-Universitat was most

helpful in the obtaining of much material unavailable in Munster

and the Institutum Judaicum Delitzschianum in Munster, beside

providing certain Rabbinic materials, offered an atmosphere of

stimulation for which I

am

most grateful.

Through

the

generosity of

the

Ev.-Iuth. Zentralverein fur Mission

unter

Israel

and the

Board fof Higher Education of

the

Lutheran

Church-Missouri Synod I received

the

financial support necessary

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study constitutes,

in the

main, the inaugural dissertation

submitted to the Evangelisch-Theologische Fakultiit of the

Wilhelms-Universitiit

in

Munster, Westfalen, Germany, in

the

fall

of 1963. Revisions made subsequent

to this

time involve corrections

in

the interests of greater clarity,

the

addition of further pertinent

literature

and the

concluding indices.

To all who have contributed to this work, be it through theo

logical stimulation, personal encouragement, or through practical

assistance in

the

preparation of

the

end product, I express

my

profound gratitude.

For

my esteemed advisor, Professor D. Dr. Karl Heinrich

Rengstorf, this book reflects in

but

small

part the

bond of respect

and

appreciation which

had its

beginning during

my

years

at

Munster, a bond which transcends

the

realm of academic disser

tation. To Professor D. Franz Hesse,

the

thesis' Korreferent,

and

the other

members of

the

Evangelisch-Theologische Fakultiit I

express

the

wish that this study in some way convey

the

pride

and

honor I consider it to have studied under their tutelage

and

now

in

the

United States to be a representative of this distinguished

German university.

In August 1962 I had

the

privilege

and

pleasure of discussing at

length

the

subject of this work with Dr. Josef Blinzler whose article

on

I Peter

is cited frequently throughout

the

book. Dr. Blinzler

welcomed this

study

most cordially

and

his friendliness

and en

couragement were most appreciated. I f occurrences of differences

of opinion between Dr. Blinzler

and

myself seem abundant, this is

witness only to

the Grundlichkeit and

comprehensiveness of his brief

but significant contribution to the understanding of

I

Peter

2.

The Bibliothek der Westfiilischen Wilhelms-Universitiit was most

helpful in

the

obtaining of much material unavailable in Munster

and

the Institutum Judaicum Delitzschianum

in

Munster, beside

providing certain Rabbinic materials, offered an atmosphere of

stimulation for which I

am

most grateful.

Through

the

generosity of

the

Ev.-Iuth. Zentralverein fUr Mission

unter Israel

and the

Board fof Higher Education of

the

Lutheran

Church-Missouri Synod I received

the

financial support necessary


16/274


17/274

INTRODUCTION

THE NEED OF

AN

EXAMINATION

"The doctrine of the universal priesthood is one of the basic

truths

of Catholic ecclesiology."

I t

is no insignificant

matter

that

these are the recent words of a Roman Catholic scholar, the re

nowned professor of

Fundamental

Theology at

the

University of

Tubingen,

Hans

Kung.

1

Less than two decades ago this same

doctrine was described

by

the

Anglican Bishop of Oxford, Kenneth

E.

Kirk, as

"the

decisive formula of all non-episcopal Christendom."2

In their

inclusiveness these two statements spotlight a concern

which embraces

the totality

of

the

Church Catholic.

In the ecumenical conversation of the post World

War II

years

the

significance of

the

priestly character of

the

Church has received,

and continues

to

receive, increasing accentuation. This, of course,

is a logical consequence of

the

interdenominational dialogue which

has concentrated more

and

more upon

the

ecclesiological question

the

nature

and

function of

the

Church.

In

view of

the

host of recent

literature which has appeared

treating

the question of the Church's

priesthood under such various aspects as universal priesthood,

priesthood, priesthood and ministry, laity

and

hierarchy, and lay

apostolate, it is

not

surprising that precisely

this

concern has been

labeled "perhaps

the

major theological problem of

the

twentieth

century."

Certainly the excited echo stimulated

by the important

contri

butions of

the

French Dominican scholar Yves M.-J.

Congar,jalons

pour une theologie du laicat

3

and

the

Dutch Reformed theologian

1 Formerly a Privatdozent at the University

of Munster, Kung

made this

point during his

inaugural

address at the University of

Tubingen,

November

24, 1960. The

statement

is

taken

from the English translation

of the

same,

which

appeared

in

Dialog

1/3

(Summer 1962).

pp. 40-49,

under

the title,

"The Ecumenical

Council

in

Theological

Perspective"

(translation

by J. W.

Kleiner), p. 46.

2 "The Apostolic

Ministry,"

The Apostolic Ministry, Essays on the History

and the Doctrine of

Episcopacy, ed. K. E.

Kirk,

London, 1946, p. 48.

3

Jalons pour une tMologie du laicat, Paris, 1952

(2nd ed.

1954).

German

translation

from

the

original

French by the

Gemeinschaft

der

Dominikaner

in

Walberberg: Der Laie,

Entwurf einer

Theologie

des

Laientums,

Stuttgart,

1957. English translation from

the original

French

by Donald Attwater:

Suppl. to Novum Testamentum XII

INTRODUCTION

THE

NEED OF AN EXAMINATION

"The doctrine of

the

universal priesthood is one of

the

basic

truths of Catholic ecclesiology."

I t

is no insignificant matter that

these are

the

recent words of a Roman Catholic scholar,

the re

nowned professor of

Fundamental

Theology at the University of

Tiibingen,

Hans

Kiing.

1

Less

than

two decades ago this same

doctrine was described

by

the

Anglican Bishop of Oxford, Kenneth

E.

Kirk, as

"the

decisive formula of all non-episcopal Christendom."2

In

their

inclusiveness these two statements spotlight a concern

which embraces the

totality

of the Church Catholic.

In the

ecumenical conversation of

the

post World

War

II

years

the

significance of

the

priestly character of the Church has received,

and continues

to

receive, increasing accentuation. This, of course,

is a logical consequence of

the

interdenominational dialogue which

has

concentrated more and more upon the ecclesiological question

the nature and

function of

the

Church.

In

view of

the

host of recent

literature which

has

appeared

treating the

question of

the

Church's

priesthood under such various aspects as universal· priesthood,

priesthood, priesthood

and

ministry,

laity and

hierarchy,

and

lay

apostolate, it is

not

surprising that precisely this concern has been

labeled "perhaps

the

major theological problem of

the

twentieth

century."

Certainly

the

excited echo stimulated

by the important

contri

butions of

the

French Dominican scholar Yves M.-J. Congar,Jalons

pour une tMologie du laicat

3

and

the

Dutch

Reformed theologian

1

Formerly a

Privatdozent at the University of

Miinster,

Kiing made

this

point during

his inaugural

address at

the University of

Tiibingen, November

24, 1960. The

statement

is

taken

from

the

English translation

of the same,

which

appeared

in

Dialog

1/3 (Summer 1962), pp. 40-49, under the title,

"The Ecumenical

Council

in

Theological

Perspective" (translation

by

J. W.

Kleiner),

p. 46.

2

"The Apostolic Ministry,"

The Apostolic Ministry,

Essays on the

History

and the

Doctrine of Episcopacy, ed.

K.

E.

Kirk,

London, 1946, p. 48.

3

Jalons pour une tMologie du laicat, Paris, 1952 (2nd ed. 1954).

German

translation

from

the

original

French

by

the

Gemeinschaft

der

Dominikaner

in Walberberg:

Der Laie,

Entwurf

einer Theologie

des Laientums, Stuttgart,

1957.

English

translation

from the

original French

by Donald Attwater:

Suppl. to Novum Testamentum XII


18/274

2

INTRODUCTION

Hendrik Kraemer, A Theology

of

Laity,1 is representative of

the

enthusiasm

with

which this emphasis upon

the

charge

and

mission

of

the

priestly

ecclesia in toto has

been received. Moreover,

the

attention

which is being focused upon

the

idea of the priesthood of

all believers in

the

current Vatican Council IJ2 is nothing short of

historical moment.

3

The Biblical

text

which is consistently cited in this connection,

the

passage which

has

come

to be

regarded as

the

"locus classicus"

for the idea of a "universal priesthood" or a "priesthood of all

believers," is

I

P

2 :

4-10, specifically, vv. 5

and

9. Supremely influ

ential

in

this identification was Dr. Martin

Luther and the

reform

movement of

the

sixteenth century. Over against

the then

current

conception of the priesthood as representing a special religious class,

a "geistlicher

Stand"

imbued with a

character indelebilis

in contrast

to the "weltlicher

Stand"

of the laity, Luther, pointing to I P 2(:9)

and

Apoc. (5:10), rejected this differentiation

and

character indele

bilis on the basis that Christians are "allesampt durch die tauff zu

priestem geweyhet.'" According

to

Luther,

the

function of this

priesthood is precisely that of

the

ministry or

Amt-the

proclamation

and

administration of

the

media gratiae. This

identity

was seen as a

result of

the

fact

that

both priesthood and ministry devolve from

participation in

the

priesthood of Christ. The ministerial office,

according

to

Luther, itself a divine institution, is responsible for

the

public exercise of

this

priestly task within the congregation.

5

Lay

People in the Church, A

Study

for a Theology

of

Laity, London, 1957.

Citations of this book

in

this

study,

unless

otherwise stated,

are

made ac

cording to

the

English translation.

1

Theology

of

Laity,

London,

1958.

a Cf. e.g. Kiing, op. cit. On

Nov.

6,1962

in

Rome, Pere Jer6me Hamer, O.P.,

delivered a lecture entitled "The

Relation

between Priesthood and Laity"

before the delegated observers to the

Council. Pere

Hamer

has

kindly advised

this author that the essence of this lecture is to be found in Ch. V, esp. § 2,

of

his recent

pUblication, L'Eglise est une communion (Unam Sanctam 40),

Paris, 1962.

3 For further Roman Catholic treatments of this

subject

d. P. Dabin, S.].,

Le Sacerdoce Royal

des

Fideles dans la tradition ancienne et moderne, Paris,

1950; Congar, op. cit.;

and

the unpublished

Leipzig

Dissertation of

Ch. M.

Haufe, Das Allgemeine Priestertum im Katholizismus der Gegenwart, 1961.

, WA

6, 407,

22-25.

Cf. also 6, 564, 6f.

6

For these thoughts

d .

W A 6, 408,

32-

35

where

in

connection

with

1 P

2:9 Luther

states

"das wir aIle

ein

corper sein des heubts Jesu Christi, ein

yglicher

des

andern glidmasz. Christus hat mit zwey noch zweyerley Art

corper,

einen weltlich, den andern geistlich.

Ein heubt und

einen

corper

hat

er." WA 6,564,6-13:

"Qui

si cogerentur

admittere, nos

omnes

esse aequaliter

2

INTRODUCTION

Hendrik Kraemer,

A Theology

of

Laity,l

is representative of

the

enthusiasm

with

which this emphasis upon

the

charge

and

mission

of the priestly

ecclesia in

toto

has

been received. Moreover, the

attention

which is being focused upon

the

idea of

the

priesthood of

all believers

in the

current Vatican Council

112

is nothing short of

historical moment.

3

The Biblical text which is consistently cited in this connection,

the

passage which has come

to be

regarded as

the

"locus classicus"

for

the

idea of a "universal priesthood"

or

a "priesthood of all

believers," is

I

P

2:4-10 ,

specifically, vv. 5

and

9. Supremely influ

ential in

this

identification was Dr. Martin

Luther

and the reform

movement of the sixteenth century. Over against the then current

conception of

the

priesthood as representing a special religious class,

a "geistlicher Stand" imbued

with

a

character indelebilis

in contrast

to

the

"weltlicher

Stand"

of the laity, Luther, pointing to I P 2(:9)

and Apoc. (5:10), rejected this differentiation

and

character indele

bilis

on

the

basis

that

Christians are "alIesampt durch die

tauff zu

priestern geweyhet."4 According

to

Luther, the function of

this

priesthood is precisely that of

the

ministry

or

Amt-the

proclamation

and administration of

the

media gratiae. This

identity

was seen as a

result of

the

fact that

both

priesthood and ministry devolve from

participation

in the

priesthood of Christ.

The

ministerial office,

according

to

Luther, itself a divine institution, is responsible for

the

public exercise of

this

priestly

task

within

the

congregation.

6

Lay

People

in

the Church, A

Study

for a Theology

of

Laity, London, 1957.

Citations of this book in this

study,

unless otherwise stated,

are made ac

cording

to

the English translation.

1

Theology

of

Laity,

London,

1958.

2

Cf. e.g. Kiing, op. cit.

On Nov.

6, 196z

in Rome,

Pere

Jer6me

Hamer, O.P.,

delivered

a lecture entitled "The Relation between

Priesthood

and Laity"

before the delegated

observers

to the

Council. Pere

Hamer has

kindly

advised

this

author

that the essence

of

this

lecture

is

to

be found in Ch. V, esp.

§

z,

of his

recent

publication,

L'Eglise est une communion (Unam Sanctam 40),

Paris,

196z.

3 For further Roman Catholic treatments of this subject d . P. Dabin,

S.J.,

Le

Sacerdoce

Royal des

Fideles dans la tradition ancienne et moderne,

Paris,

1950; Congar,

op. cit.;

and

the unpublished Leipzig Dissertation of Ch. M.

Haufe,

Das Allgemeine Priestertum im Katholizismus der Gegenwart, 1961.

,

WA

6, 407, ZZ-Z5. Cf. also

6,564,

6f.

6

For these thoughts

d .

W A 6, 408,

3Z-

35

where

in

connection

with

1 P

Z :

9

Luther states "das

wir aIle ein corper sein

des heubts

J

esu Christi,

ein

yglicher des

andern glidmasz. Christus hat

mit

zwey noch zweyerley Art

corper,

einen weltlich,

den andern

geistlich.

Ein heubt und

einen

corper hat

er." WA

6, 564,

6-13: "Qui si cogerentur

admittere,

nos omnes

esse aequaliter


19/274

THE NEED OF AN EXAMINATION

3

Of course,

the

associations made between these verses of I P

and

Holy Baptism,

the

priesthood of Christ,

and the

ministerial office

by

no means originate with

Luther

but reflect

the

thinking of

the

Church from the

Early

Fathers onward.

l

However, it was Luther's

co-ordination of these associations to meet a crisis of the moment

which enabled his formulation to leave a profound

and

indelible

imprint upon subsequent thinking concerning the nature of the

Church and her priestly character.

2

I t was from this point onward

that

the

idea of a priesthood in which all believers shared began

to

assume pre-eminent significance for

the

Church's

self-image-at

least among

the

churches of

the

Reformation. In fact, Cyril

East

wood

in

his recent study, The Priesthood oj All Believers, goes so far

as

to

maintain that

"the

history of

the

Reformation,

the

History

of Puritanism,

and the History of the Evangelical Revival, are the

story

of

the extent

to which Christians have understood

and

applied

the doctrine of

the

priesthood of all believers."3

So it was destined

that

also Luther's interpretation of IP 2:5,9

was to figure determinatively in all subsequent evaluation of these

verses-even

up to the very present. Yet, as is evident

in

all too

numerous "loci classici" used as bludgeons or swords

in

the inter-

sacerdotes, quotquot

baptisati

sumus, sicut

revera

sumus,

illisque solum

ministerium, nostro tamen consensu commissum, scirent simul, nullum eis

esse super

nos

ius imperii, nisi

quantum nos

sponte nostra

admitteremus.

Sic

enim I Pet. ii dicitur: Vos

estis

genus electum, regale sacerdotium et sacer

dotale

regnum.

Quare

omnes

sumus sacerdotes, quotquot Christiani

sumus.

Sacerdotes

vero quos vocamus ministri

sunt

ex

nobis

electi, qui nostro

nomine

omnia faciant, et

Sacerdotium aliud nihil est quam ministerium."

WA

12, lBo,

1-4: "Sun t autem

sacerdotalia officia ferme haec: docere, prae

dicare annunciareque

verbum

dei,

baptisare,

consecrare seu

Eucharistiam

ministrare, ligare et salvare peccata, orare pro aliis, sacrificare

et iudicare

de

omnium doctrinis et

spiritibus."

Cf.

further WA 6,370;

407, 13ff.;

d .

40B,

2ff.; 409,7; 44

0

, 30ff.;

56df.; 7,

27,

17-23; B, 4B6,

27;

11,411,31-413,2;

12, 17B, 26-179, 39f.; lBo, 17-23; IB, 202; 30, 2, 526-30; 554,

2;

3B, 230,13;

299, 19; 4

1

,

20

7,

37;

50, 63

2

, 35-634, 15·

I Cf. Dabin, Sacerdoce

...

moderne

and

infra, p. 14, n. 2.

2 For

discussions

of Luther's interpretation of the

idea

of

a priesthood

of

all

believers

d .

recently H.

Storck, Das allgemeine Priestertum bei

Luther

(ThEx

37), 1953;

W.

Brunotte,

Das geistliche Amt bei Luther,

Berlin, 1959;

R. Prenter, "Die gottliche

Einsetzung des

Predigtamtes und das allgemeine

Priestertum

bei

Luther," ThLZ B6/5 (1961),321-32;

B. Lohse,

RGG

V,

57B

BI;

R.

Prenter,

ibid.,

5Bd.;

W.

Joest,

"Allgemeines

Priestertum der

GHi.u

bigen,"

EKL III, 330-32.

Further Protestant

literature on the subject of

universal

priesthood

is

also offered

in the above-mentioned

works.

3 C. Eastwood, The Priesthood of All Believers, An Examination of

the

Doctrine from

the

Reformation

to

the Present Day, London, 1960, p. 241.

THE NEED OF AN

EXAMINATION

3

Of course, the associations made between these verses of I P

and

Holy Baptism,

the

priesthood of Christ,

and the

ministerial office

by no means originate

with Luther

but reflect

the

thinking of

the

Church from

the Early

Fathers onward.

1

However, it was Luther's

co-ordination of these associations to meet a crisis of the moment

which enabled his formulation

to

leave a profound

and

indelible

imprint upon subsequent thinking concerning

the

nature of

the

Church

and her

priestly character.

2

I t was from this point onward

that the idea of a priesthood in which all believers shared began to

assume pre-eminent significance for

the

Church's

self-image-at

least among

the

churches of the Reformation. In fact, Cyril

East

wood in his recent study, The Priesthood oj

All

Believers, goes so far

as to maintain

that

"the history of

the

Reformation,

the

History

of Puritanism,

and the

History of

the

Evangelical Revival, are

the

story

of

the extent to

which Christians have understood

and

applied

the

doctrine of the priesthood of all believers."3

So

it

was destined

that

also Luther's interpretation of

I

P 2: 5,9

was to figure determinatively

in

all subsequent evaluation of these

verses-even up to the very present. Yet, as is evident

in

all too

numerous "loci classici" used as bludgeons

or

swords in the inter-

sacerdotes, quotquot baptisati sumus,

sicut

revera sumus,

illisque

solum

ministerium,

nostro tamen consensu commissum,

scirent

simul, nullum

eis

esse super nos ius imperii, nisi

quantum

nos sponte nostra admitteremus. Sic

enim

I

Pet. ii dicitur: Vos

estis

genus electum, regale sacerdotium et sacer

dotale regnum.

Quare omnes

sumus

sacerdotes, quotquot Christiani sum

us.

Sacerdotes

vero quos vocamus ministri sunt ex

nobis

electi, qui

nostro

nomine omnia faciant, et Sacerdotium aliud

nihil

est quam

ministerium."

WA 12,180,1-4:

"Sunt

autem sacerdotalia

officia

ferme haec:

docere, prae

dicare annunciareque

verbum

dei,

baptisare,

consecrare seu

Eucharistiam

ministrare, ligare et salvare peccata, orare pro

aliis, sacrificare et

iudicare

de

omnium doctrinis

et

spiritibus." Cf. further WA

6,370;

407, 13ff.;

d .

408,

2f£'; 409, 7; 44

0

, 3

0f

£.;

56lff.; 7, 27, 17-23; 8, 486, 27;

II,

411, 31-413,

2;

12, 178, 26-179, 39f.; 180,

17-23;

18,

202; 30,

2, 526-

30;

554,

2;

38, 230, 13;

299, 19; 4

1

,

20

7, 37;

50, 632,

35-

6

34, 15·

I Cf. Dabin,

Sacerdoce ... moderne and

infra,

p.

14, n.

2.

2 For discussions

of Luther's

interpretation

of

the idea of a priesthood

of

all

believers

d . recently

H. Storck,

Das allgemeine Priestertum bei Luther

(ThEx 37), 1953; W. Brunotte, Das geistliche Amt bei Luther, Berlin, 1959;

R. Prenter,

"Die

gottIiche

Einsetzung des

Predigtamtes

und

das allgemeine

Priestertum bei Luther," ThLZ 86/5 (1961),321-32; B. Lohse, RGG V, 578-

81;

R.

Prenter,

ibid., 581f.;

W.

Joest,

"Allgemeines

Priestertum der

GHiu

bigen,"

EKL

III , 330-32.

Further

Protestant

literature on

the subject of

universal priesthood

is

also offered in

the

above-mentioned works.

3

C. Eastwood, The Priesthood of All Believers, An Examination

of the

Doctrine

from

the

Reformation

to the

Present Day,

London,

1960,

p.

241.


20/274

4

INTRODUCTION

Churchly

and

denominational battles which marked Reformation

and

post-Reformation history,

the primary

content

and intent

of

Biblical texts

were often misconstrued, misrepresented,

and

mis

applied

in the

rush for dicta probantia intended to strengthen

the

bulwarks of hierarchical station or to sharpen the wedge of congre

gational or individual supremacy.

If,

in

this new

and

positive atmosphere of inner-Churchly dia

logue, there is "need

and

room for a thorough examination of the

basis, meaning

and

development of

the

doctrine of

the

Priesthood

of all Believers," then this need includes not only historical

systematical surveys, but also

an

exegetical examination of

the

assumed

NT

basis of this idea, namely 1P 2:4-10.

Yet

it is

an

irony of modern scholarship that though systematic

or

historical investigations of

the

idea of a priesthood of believers

are numerous enough to fill a library shelf, all

the

exegetical exami

nations of

the

Scriptural basis of this doctrine, when

taken

together,

would

not

fill

the

first hundred pages of a single book No less

ironical is the fact that of the few exegetical studies devoted to the

"locus classicus" of

the

doctrine which

until

recent time has been

regarded as so characteristic of

Protestant

theology,

the

majority

have

been authored by Roman Catholic scholars.

To be sure, references to

I

P 2: 4-10 are frequent among Biblical

studies of a more general

nature treating

such themes as "royal or

universal priesthood," "priesthood

and

ministry,"

or

"priesthood

and

sacrifice."2 However, such investigations, seeking as

they

do a

comprehensive Biblical or

NT

conception of priesthood, on

the

whole are operating with presuppositions with which I P 2: 4-10

does

not

necessarily concur. Presupposed is

the

notion

that

the NT

presents a uniform or a unified conception of Christian priesthood.

1

Ibid., p.

ix.

2 Cf. e.g. E. Niebecker, Das Priestertum der Gliiubigen,

Paderborn,

1936;

H. Asmussen, Das Priestertum aller Gliiubigen,

Stuttgart,

1946, esp.

pp. 20-

27;

E.

Kinder,

"Allgemeines Priestertum

im Neuen

Testament," (Schriften

des Theologischen Konvents A ugsburgischen Bekenntnisses,

Nr.

5), Berlin, 1953,

pp.

5-23;

T. F.

Torrance,

Royal

Priesthood (SJT Occasional Papers 3),

Edinburgh/London,

1955; V. Ordonez, "El Sacerdocio de los Fieles," Revista

Espanola

de Teologia 64

(Madrid

1956),

359-79; T. W.

Manson,

Ministry

and

Priesthood, Christ's and Ours,

London/Richmond,

1959; E. Schweizer, Ge

meinde

und

Gemeindeordnung

im

Neuen

Testament,

Zurich,

1959

cited here

according

to the

English translation

by Frank Clarke:

Church Order in the

New Testament

(SBT

32), London, 1961, esp. Ch. 23; E. Best, "Spiritual

Sacrifice, General Priesthood in

the New

Testament," Interpretation 14/3

(19

60

), 273-99·

4

INTRODUCTION

Churchly

and

denominational battles which marked Reformation

and

post-Reformation history,

the primary

content

and intent

of

Biblical

texts

were often misconstrued, misrepresented,

and

mis

applied

in the

rush for dicta probantia intended

to

strengthen

the

bulwarks of hierarchical

station or to

sharpen

the

wedge of congre

gational or individual supremacy.

If,

in

this new

and

positive atmosphere of inner-Churchly dia

logue, there is "need

and

room for a thorough examination of

the

basis, meaning and development of

the

doctrine of

the

Priesthood

of all Believers,"l then this need includes not only historical

systematical surveys, but also an exegetical examination of

the

assumed

NT

basis of this idea, namely

rP

2:4-ro.

Yet it

is an irony of modern scholarship that though systematic

or historical investigations of

the

idea of a priesthood of believers

are numerous enough to fill a library shelf, all

the

exegetical exami

nations of

the

Scriptural basis of this doctrine, when

taken

together,

would

not

fill

the

first hundred pages of a single book No less

ironical is

the

fact that of

the

few exegetical studies devoted

to the

"locus classicus" of

the

doctrine which until recent time has been

regarded as so characteristic of

Protestant

theology,

the majority

have been authored by Roman Catholic scholars.

To be sure, references to rP 2:4-10 are frequent among Biblical

studies of a more general nature treating such themes as "royal or

universal priesthood," "priesthood

and

ministry,"

or

"priesthood

and

sacrifice."2 However, such investigations, seeking as they do a

comprehensive Biblical or

NT

conception of priesthood, on the

whole are operating

with

presuppositions

with

which rP 2:4-10

does

not

necessarily concur. Presupposed is

the

notion

that the NT

presents a uniform or a unified conception of Christian priesthood.

1 Ibid.,

p. ix.

2 Cf. e.g. E. Niebecker,

Das Priestertum der Gliiubigen,

Paderborn, 1936;

H. Asmussen, Das Priestertum aller Gliiubigen,

Stuttgart,

1946, esp. pp. 20-

27;

E.

Kinder, "Allgemeines Priestertum im Neuen

Testament," (Schriften

des Theologischen Konvents AugsburgischenEekenntnisses ,

Nr. 5).

Berlin, 1953,

pp.

5-23;

T.

F.

Torrance,

Royal

Priesthood

(SJT

Occasional Papers 3),

Edinburgh/London,

1955; V. Ordonez,

"El Sacerdocio de

los Fieles," Revista

Espanola de Teologia 64 (Madrid 1956), 359-79; T. W.

Manson,

Ministry and

Priesthood, Christ's

and

Ours,

London/Richmond, 1959;

E.

Schweizer,

Ge

meinde

und

Gemeindeordnung

im

Neuen

Testament,

Zurich,

1959

cited here

according to the English

translation

by

Frank

Clarke:

Church Order

in

the

New Testament

(SET

32),

London,

1961, esp. Ch. 23; E.

Best, "Spiritual

Sacrifice, General Priesthood in the

New

Testament,"

Interpretation 14/3

(19

60

), 273-99·


21/274

THE NEED OF

AN

EXAMINATION

5

Hence it is considered justifiable

to

equate individual statements on

priesthood or those connoting a notion of priesthood.

I

P is compared

with

and

interpreted in the light of certain passages from the Ep.

Hebrews or

the Apocalypse, for instance. However, it has never

been demonstrated that this presupposition is valid. I t simply is

universally

taken

for granted. Again, presupposed is

the

idea that

Christian priesthood necessarily derives from

the

priesthood of

Jesus Christ. On

the

basis of a

theory

of

the Soma Christou the

Church is assumed

to

participate in

the

priesthood of her Head.

Is

this

assumption valid

a limine in I

P also, even though no such

theory of incorporation

has

been employed? Popular also is

the

notion, reminiscent of

Luther

and the

early Fathers, that

I

P

2:

9

relates directly

to baptism

as

the

source

and to

the ministry as

the

exercise of

the

"priesthood" described here. Despite

the

wide ac

ceptance of these associations, however, they have never been

proved-unless Luther

is regarded as

the

final court of appeal.

The danger always embodied in topical approaches

to

the

NT

or

in

studies seeking a comprehensive

NT

view on a certain subject

is that of overgeneralization

and

oversimplification. The specifics of

individual

texts

are often neglected

and the

oversight of particular

nuances is frequently the price

paid

for the construction of

an

all

inclusive conception.

To

avoid these pitfalls

and the temptation

of accommodating

the

statements of I P

2: 4-10 to

pre-conceived ideas concerning a priest

hood of

the

Church,

it

would seem

advisable-if not

imperative

that a

study

of these verses begin

not with

a general treatment of

such subjects as "sacrifice" or "Jewish priesthood" or "ministry

and

office

in the Early

Church,"

but

rather

with this

text

alone. Com

parison

with

other

NT

statements would be made only after

the

particular nuance of

this

section

had

been determined. In this

process

attention

would be concentrated primarily upon

the

context

of I

P,

and the specific import of this

text,

the peculiar

rather than

the common characteristics, would

be

spotlighted.

Aside from the commentaries on I P,

the

only significant analysis

of I P 2 :

4-10,

or a part thereof, which has taken this approach is

the

brief but instructive article of

the

Roman Catholic New Testament

scholar, Josef Blinzler, "IEPATEYMA, Zur Exegese von

I

Petr

2,5 u.

9."1

Two

important

contributions preceded Blinzler's study,

1 Published in

Episcopus, Festschrift

fur

Kardinal Michael von Faulhaber,

Regensburg,

1949,

pp. 49-65.

The

polemical thrust of P. Ketter's study,

THE NEED OF AN EXAMINATION

5

Hence

it

is considered justifiable

to

equate individual statements on

priesthood or those connoting a notion of priesthood. I P is compared

with and

interpreted in

the

light of certain passages from

the

Ep.

Hebrews or

the

Apocalypse, for instance. However, it has never

been demonstrated

that this presupposition is valid.

I t

simply is

universally

taken

for granted. Again, presupposed is

the

idea that

Christian priesthood necessarily derives from the priesthood of

Jesus Christ. On the basis of a theory of the Soma Christou

the

Church is assumed

to

participate

in the

priesthood of her Head. Is

this assumption valid a limine in I P also, even though no such

theory

of incorporation

has

been employed? Popular also is

the

notion, reminiscent of Luther

and

the early Fathers, that I P 2: 9

relates directly

to baptism

as

the

source

and

to

the

ministry as

the

exercise of the "priesthood" described here. Despite the wide ac

ceptance of these associations, however,

they

have never been

proved-unless

Luther

is regarded as the final court of appeal.

The

danger always embodied in topical approaches

to the NT

or

in studies seeking a comprehensive

NT

view

on

a certain subject

is

that

of overgeneralization

and

oversimplification.

The specifics

of

individual texts are often neglected

and the

oversight of particular

nuances is frequently the price

paid

for the construction of

an

all

inclusive conception.

To

avoid these pitfalls

and the temptation

of accommodating

the

statements of I P 2: 4-IO

to

pre-conceived ideas concerning a priest

hood of

the

Church, it would seem advisable-if

not

imperative

that

a

study

of these verses begin

not

with a general

treatment

of

such subjects as "sacrifice" or "Jewish priesthood" or "ministry

and

office

in the Early

Church,"

but

rather

with this

text

alone. Com

parison

with

other NT

statements

would be made only after

the

particular nuance of

this

section

had

been determined.

In this

process

attention

would be concentrated primarily upon

the

context

of IP,

and the

specific import of this

text, the

peculiar rather than

the common characteristics, would be spotlighted.

Aside from

the

commentaries on I P,

the

only significant analysis

of IP

2

:4-IO, or a part thereof, which has taken this approach is the

brief but instructive article of

the

Roman Catholic New Testament

scholar, Josef Blinzler, "IEPATEYMA, Zur Exegese von I

Petr

2,5 u. 9."1 Two

important

contributions preceded Blinzler's study,

1

Published in

Episcopus, Festschrift

fur

Kardinal Michael von Faulhaber,

Regensburg,

1949,

pp. 49-65.

The

polemical thrust of P. Ketter's study,


22/274

6

INTRODUCTION

however,

and

provided the foundation upon which he built.

I t

is

with

these two investigations

that

we commence

our

review of

the

present position of research concerning I P 2 : 4-10.

THE PRESENT POSITION OF RESEARCH

In 1938 appeared

an

article by Gottlob Schrenk

in the

TWNT on

one of

the

most

important

words of this pericope, tEpOC"t'EU(lOC.

1

Schrenk pointed

out the rarity

of

this

word

and

its occurrence only

in the

Biblical literature

or

closely related writings. The particular

contribution of this brief

three

page article is the collection of the

majority

of

the

occurrences of this

term and the

notation of its

constant relationship

to Ex.

19:6 (LXX).

One year

later

Monseigneur Lucien Cerfaux of Louvain Uni

versity published his

study,

"Regale Sacerdotium."2 Taking account

of

the texts

assembled by Schrenk, Cerfaux

attempted to

sketch

the

various emphases which

the

ideas of

the

kingship and the

priesthood of God's people received

in

connection with

the trans

mission of

and

allusion to Ex. 19: 6. From

the

period between the

MT

Ex.

19: 6

and

its allusions

in

the NT he found three main

types

of

interpretation

and

two variations of emphasis.

Cerfaux saw an emphasis falling on either the royalty or the

priesthood of God's folk. Determinative for

the

accent upon royalty,

he felt, was

the

messianic hope

and

those periods of history when

this hope was especially alive. This emphasis he held

to

be a charac

teristic of Palestinian exegesis. The idea of

priesthood,

on

the

other

hand, he found stressed

in

the "spiritualistic" exegesis of Alexandrian

Judaism and the

apocalyptic idealizations of

the

Law

and

cultus.

I

P,

according to Cerfaux, stands

in

line with Philo and

the

"spiritualistic" exegesis of Alexandria. This means

that

especially

v. 5 describes, in contrast to the institutional conception of temple,

priesthood,

and

sacrifice, the "culte interieur" of the pious soul.

s

"Das Allgemeine

Priestertum

der GHiubigen

nach

dem I.

Pbrf,"

TThZ 56

(1947),43"-51, makes

it difficult to reckon

this work as a

strictly

exegetical

undertaking. The concern of W. Arndt, "A Royal Priesthood,"

CTM

19

(1948),241-49,

is

other than

that

of

a

comprehensive analysis of

1 P

2:4-10.

1

TWNT

III ,

249- 52.

2

Published

in RSPhTh

28 (1939), 5 - 39 [reprinted in Recueil Lucien Ce1,/aux

II (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensum 6/7), Gembloux,

1954,

28

3- 3

1

5].

3

Ibid.,

pp. 25f. 1 P is treated on pp. 21-26.

6

INTRODUCTION

however,

and

provided

the

foundation upon which he built.

I t

is

with

these two investigations

that

we commence

our

review of

the

present position of research concerning I P 2

:4-IO.

THE

PRESENT

POSITION OF

RESEARCH

In I938 appeared an article by Gottlob Schrenk in

the

TWNT on

one of the most important words of this pericope, tE:poc't'E:u[J.oc.

1

Schrenk pointed

out the

rarity of this word

and

its occurrence only

in

the

Biblical literature or closely related writings. The particular

contribution of this brief three page article is

the

collection of the

majority of the occurrences of this term and the notation of its

constant relationship to Ex. I9:6 (LXX).

One year

later

Monseigneur Lucien Cerfaux of Louvain Uni

versity published his study, "Regale Sacerdotium."2 Taking account

of

the texts

assembled by Schrenk, Cerfaux

attempted

to sketch

the various emphases which the ideas of the kingship

and

the

priesthood of God's people received in connection with

the

trans

mission of

and

allusion to Ex. I9: 6. From the period between the

MT Ex.

I9:

6

and

its allusions

in the NT

he found three main types

of

interpretation

and

two variations of emphasis.

Cerfaux saw an emphasis falling on either

the

royalty or the

priesthood

of God's folk. Determinative for

the

accent upon

royalty,

he felt, was

the

messianic hope

and

those periods of history when

this hope was especially alive. This emphasis he held to be a charac

teristic of Palestinian exegesis. The idea of priesthood, on the other

hand,he

found stressed

in the

"spiritualistic" exegesis of Alexandrian

Judaism and the

apocalyptic idealizations of

the

Law

and

cultus.

I

P,

according to Cerfaux, stands

in

line with Philo

and the

"spiritualistic" exegesis of Alexandria. This means

that

especially

v. 5 describes, in contrast to the institutional conception of temple,

priesthood,

and

sacrifice,

the

"culte interieur" of

the

pious soul.

3

"Das

Allgemeine Priestertum

der

Glaubigen nach dem

1 .

Pbrf,"

TThZ

56

(1947),43-51, makes it difficult to reckon

this

work as

a strictly

exegetical

undertaking.

The concern

of W.

Arndt,

"A

Royal

Priesthood," CTM

19

(1948),241-49, is other

than that

of

a

comprehensive analysis of

1 P 2

:4-10.

1

TWNT

III ,

249-52.

2 Published in

RSPhTh

28 (1939), 5 - 39 [reprinted in Recueil Lucien Cet,/aux

II

(Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensum 6/7),

Gembloux,

1954,

28

3- 3

1

5].

3

Ibid., pp. 25f. 1 P

is treated on pp.

21-26.


23/274

THE PRESENT POSITION OF RESEARCH

7

Ch. 2:4-10, he maintained,

must

be seen in

its

paraenetic setting

l

and the

allusion

to

Ex.

19: 6, in

turn,

is

not to

be isolated from

the

other social

and

corporative expressions of

the

"prerogatives et

la

dignite de l'Eglise, Ie peuple de Dieu."2

Criticizing the Reformers' interpretation of I P

and other NT

texts

pertaining to priesthood, he argued that they were too de

pendent upon certain writings of

the

Church

Fathers

which were

very anti-traditionaL

In

his conclusion Cerfaux found

the

signifi

cance

and

relevance of the Exodus Formula (Ex. 19:6)

not

prima

rily

in

connection

with the

Eucharist

but in the

realization of

the

dignity, honor, and obligation of the Christian calling:

Un autre

champ, tres vaste, reste pour enseigner

aux

fideles

qu'lls

sont

rois

et

prHres. Lorsqu'il s'agira de leur donner

Ie

sens de leur dignite de chretiens, de l'honneur de leur

a p t ~ m e ,

de leurs obligations et

du

'service' religieux auxquels ils sont

appeles, notre formule sera merveilleusement

a sa

place et, en

troupeau serre, des developpements parenetiques accourront de

tous les horizons de la tradition.

8

Two years later,

in

1941, appeared

Le Sacerdoce Royal des Fideles

dans les Livres Saints,4

the

ambitious undertaking of

the

French

Jesuit,

Paul

Dabin. This work contains two major sections: a less

exegetical, more systematical treatment of

the

concept of "royal

priesthood" in

the OT and

NT,

and

a systematical-theological co

ordination of

the

idea of a "royal priesthood" with

the

sacramental

life of

the

Church which composes

the

second half of this almost

500 page work. As Blinzler

has

noted, however, Dabin's work does

not

pursue a specifically exegetical goal

5

and

therefore does not

figure significantly in the course of modern exegesis of IP 2:4-10.8

Then

in

1949 Blinzler offered his exegesis of

I

P 2: 5

and

9.

This

study

composes two parts:

an

interpretation of vv. 4f

and

9,

and

a

survey of

the

references

to

Ex.

19:6

previous

to IP,

including

an

evaluation of the various interpretations given this passage

and an

analysis of

its textual

form of transmission.

Blinzler built upon the conclusions of his predecessors but also

corrected

and

progressed beyond them. Of prime importance is his

1 Ibid., pp. 24

f

.

2

Ibid.,

p.

6.

3

Ibid.,

p. 3

8

.

, Le Sacerdoce

Royal

des

Fideles dans les Livres Saints,

Paris, 1941.

6

Blinzler,

op. cit.,

p. 50, n. 3.

8 For Dabin's treatment

of

1 P cf. pp. 179-97.

THE

PRESENT POSITION OF RESEARCH

7

Ch. 2:4-IO, he maintained,

must

be seen

in its

paraenetic setting

l

and

the

allusion

to Ex.

I9:

6, in

turn,

is

not

to

be isolated from

the

other social

and

corporative expressions of

the

"prerogatives

et

la

dignite de l'Eglise,

Ie

peuple de Dieu."2

Criticizing the Reformers' interpretation of I P

and other

NT

texts

pertaining

to

priesthood, he argued that

they

were too de

pendent upon certain writings of the Church

Fathers

which were

very

anti-traditional. In his conclusion Cerfaux found the signifi

cance

and

relevance of

the

Exodus Formula (Ex.

I9:6) not

prima

rily in connection

with

the Eucharist but in the realization of the

dignity, honor,

and

obligation of

the

Christian calling:

Un autre

champ,

tres

vaste, reste pour enseigner

aux

fideles

qu'lls sont rois et prHres. Lorsqu'il s'agira

de

leur donner Ie

sens de leur dignite de chretiens,

de

l'honneur

de

leur a p t ~ m e ,

de leurs obligations et

du

'service' religieux auxquels ils sont

appeles, notre formule sera merveilleusement a sa place et, en

troupeau serre, des developpements parenetiques accourront de

tous les horizons de

la

tradition.

8

Two years later,

in I94I,

appeared Le

Sacerdoce Royal des Fideles

dans les Livres

Saints,'

the

ambitious undertaking of

the

French

Jesuit,

Paul

Dabin. This work contains two

major

sections: a less

exegetical, more systematical treatment of the concept of "royal

priesthood"

in the

OT

and

NT,

and

a systematical-theological co

ordination of

the

idea of a "royal priesthood" with

the

sacramental

life of

the

Church which composes

the

second half of this almost

500

page work. As Blinzler has noted, however, Dabin's work does

not

pursue a specifically exegetical goal

5

and

therefore does

not

figure significantly

in the

course of modern exegesis of

IP

2:4-10.6

Then

in

I949 Blinzler offered his exegesis of I P 2: 5

and

9.

This

study

composes two

parts: an

interpretation of vv. 4f

and

9,

and

a

survey of

the

references

to Ex.

I9:6

previous

to

IP, including

an

evaluation of

the

various interpretations given

this

passage

and an

analysis of

its textual

form of transmission.

Blinzler built upon the conclusions of his predecessors but also

corrected

and

progressed beyond them. Of prime importance is his

1

Ibid.,

pp. 24f.

2

Ibid., p.

6.

3

Ibid.,

p. 3

8

.

• Le Sacerdoce

Royal des

Fideles dans les Livres Saints, Paris,

1941.

6 Blinzler,

op. cit.,

p. 50, n. 3.

6 For

Dabin's

treatment of 1 P cf. pp. 179-97.


24/274

8

INTRODUCTION

recognition of

the

basic concern of

this

pericope: a demonstration

of "was die Lesser

an

ihrer Erwahlung

haben."l

He

rejected

the

theory

of a "spiritualistic" interpretation as suggested

by

Cerfaux

and

others,2

and

demonstrated

that

I

P's

relationship

to

Philo

centered

about

an

entirely different factor. His review of

the

Ex.

19: 6

occurrences pointed

out

variations of emphasis given the

Exodus passage and

the

influence which

the

LXX exerted upon

subsequent text-forms of this verse.

s

Over against a comparison or

equation of I P 2

with

other

NT texts

Blinzler emphasized that

the

meaning of

this

section, including tepcX:t'euILcx,

must

be determined

primarily within

its

own context.

Discussing in his conclusion

the

relevance of the results of

this

exegesis

to the thought

of

the

universal priesthood,

4

Blinzler called

attention to

the dynamic aspect of the Church's priestly character.

The

correlation between "Priesterschaft

und

Opfer" was noted, but

i t

was stressed

that

neither

the

idea of

the

Eucharistic sacrifice nor

the connection of

te:PcX.'t'EUILCX and

ministerial function is

to

be found

here. Indeed, according

to

Blinzler, it is questionable if this

text

is

at all appropriate as a basis of

the

views commonly associated with

the idea of the universal priesthood.

Both

the Reformers, he main

tained, with their idea that all baptized believers possess priestly

authority and

those who defend

the thought that

believers are

priests-not in an official but nevertheless real

sense-incorrectly

allude

to IP.

"Zur Rechtfertigung der Ansicht von einem wahren

Priestertum

alIer Glaubigen. . . hat

man

sich anderer Beweismittel

zu

bedienen."5

The

accent upon the dynamic character of the Church of I P made

by both

Cerfaux

and

Blinzler has been further developed

in

one of

the most recent discussions of I P

2: 4-10,

"Het Koning- en Priester

schap

der

Gelovigen

in Het

Nieuwe Testament"

an

article

written

in 1958 by

the

Leiden University scholar Gerhard Sevenster.6

He

has found

both

in

the

references

to

Ex.

19:6 and

in I

P,

as well as in

the

rest of

the

NT, the

thought

of priestly service and witness to the

world.

7

Calling

attention to

the idea of the holy life and of witness

1 Blinzler, op. cit., p. 51.

2 Ibid., p. 55.

8

Ibid.,

pp.

58-

62

.

4 Ibid.,

pp.

63-

6

5.

5

Ibid.,

p. 64.

6 Published in

NThT

13 (1958), 301-17.

7 The Ex. 19:6

texts

and 1 P are discussed on pp. 403-07.

8

INTRODUCTION

recognition of the basic concern of

this

pericope: a demonstration

of "was die Lesser

an

ihrer Erwahlung

haben."l

He

rejected

the

theory

of a "spiritualistic" interpretation as suggested by Cerfaux

and others, and demonstrated that 1P'S relationship

to

Philo

centered

about an

entirely different factor.

His

review of

the Ex.

19: 6 occurrences pointed

out

variations of emphasis given

the

Exodus passage

and the

influence which

the

LXX exerted upon

subsequent text-forms of

this

verse.

s

Over against a comparison

or

equation of I P 2

with other

NT texts Blinzler emphasized that the

meaning of

this

section, including tepoc't'eu(.Loc,

must

be determined

primarily within

its

own context.

Discussing

in

his conclusion

the

relevance of

the

results of this

exegesis

to

the

thought

of the universal priesthood,

4

Blinzler called

attention to the

dynamic aspect of

the

Church's priestly character.

The

correlation between "Priesterschaft und Opfer" was noted, but

it was stressed that neither

the

idea of

the

Eucharistic sacrifice nor

the connection of

tepoc't'eu(.Loc

and ministerial function is

to

be found

here. Indeed, according

to

Blinzler, it is questionable i f this

text

is

at all appropriate as a basis of the views commonly associated with

the

idea of

the

universal priesthood.

Both the

Reformers, he main

tained,

with their

idea

that

all baptized believers possess priestly

authority and those who defend the

thought

that believers are

priests-not

in an

official but nevertheless real

sense-incorrectly

allude to IP. "Zur Rechtfertigung der Ansicht von einem wahren

Priestertum

aller Glaubigen. . . hat

man

sich anderer Beweismittel

zu

bedienen."5

The

accent upon

the

dynamic character of

the

Church of

I

P made

by both

Cerfaux

and

Blinzler has been further developed

in

one of

the

most recent discussions of I P 2: 4-10, "Het Koning- en Priester

schap der Gelovigen in Het Nieuwe Testament" an article written

in

1958

by the

Leiden University scholar Gerhard Sevenster.6

He

has

found

both

in

the

references

to Ex.

19:6

and in

I

P,

as well as

in

the rest of

the

NT, the

thought

of priestly service and witness to the

world.

7

Calling

attention

to the

idea of

the

holy life

and

of witness

1 Blinzler,

op. cit.,

p. 51.

2 Ibid., p. 55.

8

Ibid.,

pp.

58

-62.

,

Ibid.,

pp.

63-65.

6

Ibid.,

p. 64.

8 Published in NThT

13 (1958), 301-17.

7 The Ex.

19:6 texts and

1 P are discussed

on

pp.

403-07.


25/274


26/274

10

INTRODUCTION

represents a

step

forward in

the

position of exegetical research.

In

view of

the

fact

that

a sizable portion of 1 P 2:4-10 also

in

volves, beside Ex. 19: 6, OT passages pertaining

to

a "stone"

or

"J..,(()oc;" analogy, mention might also be made of

the

investigations

dealing

with

this

NT

image. Since, however,

this

would entail

the

enumeration of a

vast

amount of literature not directly related

to

our

text, and

since

this

element heretofore has played a relatively

minor role

in

the exegesis of

this

pericope, we shall reserve a dis

cussion of these studies for a more pertinent point

in our

investi

gation.

I

The

Commentaries and

NT

Introductions,

responsible for ascer

taining

the

function of ch. 2: 4-10 within

the total

context of 1 P,

generally include

it

with

the

foregoing section

(1

:13ff) under

the

caption of "general admonitions

to

holiness

and

love,"2 take section

ch. 2 :1-10 as a description of

the

"nature

of

the

Church

and

her

priestly function"3 or of

the

community's "Anschluss an Christus,""

or treat the

pericope alone as a

statement

on

the

"new worship."6

Since

the

majority

of commentaries appeared earlier

than the

above mentioned studies,

they

were prepared without

the

benefit

of the insights of these later analyses. Especially in the explanation

of vv. 5

and

9 commentators have tended

to

follow

or

even defend

their

own ecclesiastical viewpoint. A

broad

expanse of interpre-

1 Cf. infra, pp. 23ff.

2 F.

J.

A. Hort, The First Epistle of St. Peter I. I

-II.

17, London, 1898;

A. Jiilicher, Einleitung

in

das Neue Testament,

7.

Aufl. neubearbeitet

von

E.

Fascher,

Tiibingen,

1931, p. 190;

H. Windisch,

Die Katholischen Briefe

(HNT

IS),

dritte,

stark

umgearbeitete

Auflage

von H.

Preisker, Tiibingen,

1951, p. 58; F.

W.

Beare,

The First Epistle

of

Peter,

2nd rev. ed., Oxford, 1958,

p. 52; J. Schneider,

Die Briefe

des

jakobus, Petrus,

judas

und johannes

(NTD 10), 9. Aufl., G6ttingen, 196I, p. 50; A. Wikenhauser,

Einleitung

in

das Neue Testament, 4. Aufl., Freiburg i. Br., 196I,

pp.

357f.;

P.

Feine

J.

Behm, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, I2. v6llig

neu

bearbeitete Auflage

von W. G.

Kiimmel, Heidelberg,

I963, p. 303.

3

E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle

of

St. Peter, 2nd ed., London/New York,

1955,

pp.

153ff.;

C.

E.

B.

Cranfield, The First Epistle

of

Peter, London, 1950,

pp.

43ff.; K. H. Schelkle, Die Petrusbriefe, Der judasbrief

(HTKNT I3),

Freiburg, I96I, p. 4.

,

(supplements to novum testamentum 012) john hall elliott - the elect and the holy 1966

Documents