Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

HIGH PRIEST

The primary official of the Israelite cultus. According to the Torah, the office of high priest goes back to the Sinaitic revelation. From Aaron, an uninterrupted hereditary chain of high priests links the portable tabernacle of the wilderness to the Second Temple in Jerusalem (Num. 25:10-13). However, from the historical perspective the actual existence of such an institution before the Babylonian Exile is very unlikely. When Ezek. 40–48 describes the temple to be rebuilt, the regulations on which the office of high priesthood is based are introduced as elements of a new order that God would establish in clear discontinuity with the past. In Ezekiel’s words, the king will no longer be the owner and leader of the temple, but simply its custodian. The Levites will no longer be allowed to minister in the presence of Yahweh, and will represent a group clearly separated from the priests. Among all the priestly families the leadership will be taken by only one particular Aaronite family, the sons of Zadok. None of these conditions set by Ezekiel existed before the Exile, and without them there was no room for the institution of the high priesthood. It was among the exiles that an autonomous priestly leadership first emerged, challenging the failing power of the house of David. At the time of Darius, when the Jews were allowed to return to Jerusalem and to build a new temple, the house of Zadok was already influential enough to force the Davidic Zerubbabel to share his power with the Zadokite priest, Jeshua (Ezra 3:8). This fragile compromise lasted only a few years; construction of the Second Temple marked the end of any political role for the Davidic house. The high priest, now the supreme authority of Judaism, gained the qualities of prestige and dignity that had formerly been held by the king.

By the time the books of Chronicles were written, the process of the replacement of the authority of the king by that of the high priest was so much consolidated that the very understanding of Jewish history was changed. According to Chronicles, the kings never held any priestly duties (2 Chr. 26:16-20) and the threefold hierarchy of high priest, priests, and Levites (1 Chr. 23–24) was fully in place during the First Temple period. Any contradictory report in the previous books of Samuel and Kings was skillfully eliminated (compare 1 Chr. 18:17 and 2 Sam. 8:18).

It was during the period between Ezekiel and Chronicles that the biblical legislation concerning the high priesthood took its final shape and was made part of the Sinaitic revelation. Although some laws might have preexilic roots, they were now part of a consistent view that mapped all the world’s geographical and social space in relationship to various levels of purity. As the temple with its concentric courts around the holy of holies reproduced the hierarchy of the cosmos, so the high priest was at the center of human holiness. While Gentiles, common Israelites (women and men), and the temple personnel (Levites and priests) were assigned the space reserved to each in the temple, only the high priest could enter the holy of holies, once a year for the rituals of the Day of Atonement. The high priest was bound to a degree of ritual purity, higher not only than common Jews but also than ordinary Levites and priests, with special and more restrictive laws, notably concerning marriage, contact with dead bodies, and sacrificial duties (Lev. 4:1-12; 21:10-15). The Torah also gives instructions about the investiture ceremony of the high priest (Exod. 29:1-37; Lev. 8:5-35) and a detailed description of his garments (Exod. 28:3-43).

After Jeshua, the high priesthood was hereditary and conferred for life. Despite the paucity of historical sources, it seems that in the Persian and Ptolemaic periods the leadership of the house of Zadok remained unchallenged, apart from some minor circles whose dissatisfaction toward the Second Temple found expression in the earliest Enochic literature. The end of the Zadokite priesthood at the beginning of the Seleucid period was due to political and economical factors more than to religious reasons, but had a tremendous impact on the religious authority of the office. The Zadokite Jason was able to replace his brother Onias III by bribing Antiochus IV, only to fall victim to the same trick a few years later by the non-Zadokite Menelaus (2 Macc. 4:7-27). Jason’s gesture destroyed the foundations of Zadokite power. The high priesthood no longer belonged to an old hereditary line, and no longer was for life, but now depended on the ambitions of Jewish priestly families and on the interests of foreign rulers. More damaging for the office, the legitimacy of the high priesthood was no longer widely recognized but openly questioned and frequently challenged. As the experience of the Hasmoneans would prove, a reestablished hereditary line, even when based on political and military power, remained vulnerable to religious attack and dependent on political fortune.

After the death of Herod, who had relegated the high priesthood to an almost marginal role, the Roman procurators gave the office greater power in local affairs, with the intention of creating a pro-Roman aristocracy of high priests (and former high priests). On the one hand, this policy strengthened the office (and the most actively pro-Roman family of Annas and Caiaphas) but, on the other hand, made the high priests even more suspicious of those who, for political or religious reasons, opposed Roman rule. It is not surprising that one of the first goals of the radical groups that led the anti-Roman revolt in 66-70 c.e. was to disrupt the priestly elite who in recent years had already become the target of political assassination. The last high priest of Israel was a layman named Phannias, chosen by lot during the revolt (Josephus BJ 1:147-57).

The destruction of the temple by Titus in 70 c.e. marked the end of the high priesthood. Ironically, the long crisis of the office following the deposition of Onias III had prepared many Jews to live without a high priesthood. The memory of that powerful institution, however, continued to be an amazingly creative source of inspiration for both Christians and Jews.

Bibliography. L. L. Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2 vols. (Minneapolis, 1992); M. S. Jaffee, Early Judaism (Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1997).

Gabriele Boccaccini

Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

HIGH PRIEST

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (2000)