New Testament Priesthood?

[CollegeKid]

Is the priesthood of the new covenant somehow substantially different from that of the old, or is it just “more perfect,” so to speak?

Is the principal difference the fact that priests of the old covenant had to offer up sacrifices repeatedly and the Catholic priesthood only offers up Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice on Calvary during the Mass?

I’m confused about this, as I sometimes see the argument put forth that the priesthood was necessary under the old because one could not “go directly to God” with their own petitions as we now can, but now that we have Christ as our high priest, there is no need for an ordained priesthood because we can just go directly to God through Christ, on our own.

Basically, I’m trying to figure out the fundamental difference(s) between the priesthoods of the old and new covenants. Thank you.

 

[mercygate]

Is the priesthood of the new covenant somehow substantially different from that of the old, or is it just “more perfect,” so to speak?

Is the principal difference the fact that priests of the old covenant had to offer up sacrifices repeatedly and the Catholic priesthood only offers up Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice on Calvary during the Mass?

I’m confused about this, as I sometimes see the argument put forth that the priesthood was necessary under the old because one could not “go directly to God” with their own petitions as we now can, but now that we have Christ as our high priest, there is no need for an ordained priesthood because we can just go directly to God through Christ, on our own.

Basically, I’m trying to figure out the fundamental difference(s) between the priesthoods of the old and new covenants. Thank you.

Good questions, College.

I’m tired and need to go to bed but for starters, the Priesthood of the Church derives from the perfect High Priesthood of Jesus Christ. It is ESSENTIALLY different from the O.T. Priesthood, which was a foreshadowing of the real thing.

Can you take that ball and run with it?

Others will surely step in and amplify this sketch.

 

[confuzed]

.
Modern priests stand between the people and God, in the place Jesus rightfully occupies as our mediator, because you can’t have organized religion without a hierarchy. I’m sure its covered in the CCC quite extensively.

Paul seems to say that through the New Covenant God is no longer distant from us, that Jesus is the advocate between us and God, that believers are the new Temple, and the Holy Spirit, or Shekinah Glory, now dwells in the human heart.

I do not any more believe Jesus came to found a new religion on the order of a new-covenant Judaism. He was in a power-struggle with the church leaders of his day who wanted to ‘own’ God. Jesus knew that and came to be our priest in place of the corrupt human priests.

 

[CollegeKid]

.
Modern priests stand between the people and God, in the place Jesus rightfully occupies as our mediator, because you can’t have organized religion without a hierarchy. I’m sure its covered in the CCC quite extensively.

Actually, its covered in the Bible, too: Christ tells the Apostles to forgive sins in His name (John 20:21-23), to offer up Himself in the Eucharist (Luke 22:19-20), and James instructs that in the case of sick Christians, the presbyters should be called in to annoint them with oil and pray over them for the forgiveness of their sins (James 5:14), just to name a few instances.

Paul seems to say that through the New Covenant God is no longer distant from us, that Jesus is the advocate between us and God, that believers are the new Temple, and the Holy Spirit, or Shekinah Glory, now dwells in the human heart.

I agree that God is not distant from us, and that Jesus is our unique Mediator. But that the fact that other Christians can participate in His mediatorship on subordinate levels does not detract from His status as our ultimate Mediator. If you disagree with this, then I suggest you never pray for anyone but yourself; nevermind Paul’s clear desire that we would pray and intercede on behalf of each other (1 Timothy 2:1-4)

I do not any more believe Jesus came to found a new religion on the order of a new-covenant Judaism. He was in a power-struggle with the church leaders of his day who wanted to ‘own’ God. Jesus knew that and came to be our priest in place of the corrupt human priests.

With all due respect, this seems a little inconsistent. If Jesus was just some ordinary rabble-rousing human, how could He ever hope to assume this unique role as the Heaven’s One Mediator between God and all of mankind, unless He was both true God and true man, and unless He offered up a Sacrifice? My point is that I don’t really understand where you’re coming from. Messianic Judaism? Your own brand of Christianity? Frankly, I have a much easier time believing what the Catholic Church says about Jesus.

As and endnote, if you wish to discuss these typical tension-filled protestant v. catholic issues, could we do it on another thread? I didn’t start this one so it could get bogged down in quarrels with non-Catholics.

 

[BlestOne]

The whole chapter 5 of HEBREWS talks about Jesus being the high priest and if you continue reading up to chapter 9… he makes reference to priests and high priests… indicating as stated in chapter 8 that the new covenant disolves the old order and the new order is established.

 

[John_Henry]

I’m confused about this, as I sometimes see the argument put forth that the priesthood was necessary under the old because one could not “go directly to God” with their own petitions as we now can, but now that we have Christ as our high priest, there is no need for an ordained priesthood because we can just go directly to God through Christ, on our own.

The structures between the Old and the New Priesthoods are similar. Thus in the OT, there was a high priest, corresponding to Christ in the NT. In the OT, there was priesthood of all believers (Israel was regarded as a priestly people). In the NT, corresponding to this is the universal priesthood. In the OT, there was a ministerial priesthood, which participated in the high priesthood. And that is also what you find in the NT. Obviously there are differences between the sacrifices that are offered, but you can see that the NT was a fulfillment of the OT in regard to the priesthood.

As for the part highlighted above in your quote, that argument is sheer question-begging. The people who make that argument: 1) assume there is no NT ministerial priesthood, 2) draw a false conclusion from this false premise that the reason for there being no NT priesthood is that we can now go straight to the high priest, and 3) therefore draw the inference that the OT people, who had a ministerial priesthood therefore must not have been able to pray to God. But any cursory reading of the OT will quite plainly demonstrate that the people described therein could most certainly pray directly to God. And could also offer the sacrifices of a contrite heart and spirit. So don’t buy the hype. Lay off the Kool Aid. Don’t let them dupe you!

 

[confuzed]

As and endnote, if you wish to discuss these typical tension-filled protestant v. catholic issues, could we do it on another thread? I didn’t start this one so it could get bogged down in quarrels with non-Catholics.

Hey CollegeKid you suddenly don’t seem so confused any more! Did you do a lot of studying between your first post and this one?

I didn’t know this was a tension-filled topic - I’m new here. Thanks for putting me in my place. But, if its so tension-filled, why did you bring it up? Or did you not write the 1st post? It’s the 1st one I saw - sorry if I made any assumptions. You know what assumptions make of one …

You seem a bit tightly wound to me - or maybe I’m prejudiced by your defensive reply to my post. Defensiveness usually means doubt - are you sure you really believe everything you believe you’re supposed to believe?

Doctrine doesn’t save us, Kid. But it can become an ego-trip for people too afraid to think for themselves. But if you’ve already decided to believe everything the church teaches at the moment, then why not just get a CCC and ‘indoctrinate’ yourself?

I’m not a Protestant, just someone who took the red pill rather than drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

[Darrel]

Basically, I’m trying to figure out the fundamental difference(s) between the priesthoods of the old and new covenants. Thank you.

The difference in the Priesthood is the difference in the covenant. The old covenant was for Israel alone and we gentiles were excluded. The new sacrifice in it’s perfection is carried out by Christ for all.

The old Priesthood operated under the law of Moses and the new Priesthood operates under the gift of Gods love through his sons sacrifice. “This is my body” and “this is my blood” is what the new Priesthood is here for. They speak persona christi. If anyone sees any error what I’ve said here please correct the rookie.

-D

 

[CollegeKid]

Hey CollegeKid you suddenly don’t seem so confused any more! Did you do a lot of studying between your first post and this one?

I didn’t know this was a tension-filled topic - I’m new here. Thanks for putting me in my place. But, if its so tension-filled, why did you bring it up? Or did you not write the 1st post? It’s the 1st one I saw - sorry if I made any assumptions. You know what assumptions make of one …

I brought it up because despite the little I do know about the priesthood, there’s a whole lot more that I don’t. I’d like to get the answers from Catholics who know what they’re talking about (and my own research), rather than have this thread turn into a debate with someone from the background of another faith. If you wish to debate, I simply suggest you start a new thread.

You seem a bit tightly wound to me - or maybe I’m prejudiced by your defensive reply to my post. Defensiveness usually means doubt - are you sure you really believe everything you believe you’re supposed to believe?

I sure hope so.

Doctrine doesn’t save us, Kid. But it can become an ego-trip for people too afraid to think for themselves. But if you’ve already decided to believe everything the church teaches at the moment, then why not just get a CCC and ‘indoctrinate’ yourself?

I’m not a Protestant, just someone who took the red pill rather than drinking the Kool-Aid.

I disagree. I think doctrine does save us. It is a doctrine that Christ is our Lord and Savior. It is a doctrine that we must have faith (manifested in works) in Jesus in order to be saved. If you believe in absolute truth, believing in doctrine should be the obvious next step.

You’re not a Protestant. Well, I mean no offense, but you’re apparent total reliance on your own abilities to figure out the truth sure seems like a product of Protestantism. I used to be a protestant, and personally, after looking at the biblical and historical evidence, I think that believing in the Catholic Church is a much safer bet for one’s eternal salvation than the chaotic reality that is sola scriptura.

 

[confuzed]

Kid -

Does doctrine save you, or does Christ?

I’ve never been a Prot so I am confuzed as to your take on what I write. I am a born Jew, from an orthodox background. Jews believe (the ones I know anyway) that every possible meaning or understanding of scripture is to be studied, that nothing in scripture can be understood on only one level, and that if it doesn’t become real to you, as deep-down-in-your-soul personal experience, then start over and read with your heart, not just your mind.

Catholics I know say they believe in a personal God. So, putting doctrine and theology and priestcraft and lack of confidence in your own relationship with God between oneself and God is, to me, an unacceptable filter. We are to come with confidence to the throne of grace, as the author of Hebrews says.

Yes, priests are here to stay and as I said before, some sort of leadership is necessary - sheep need an earthly shepherd.
According to my reading of the NT, ministers are supposed to be servants, not masters. When I read what Jesus said to and about the Pharissees, Saducees, and scribes I see a picture of power that Jesus hated. When I read about Jesus washing the disciples feet I see the example we are to follow - especially if we are in a leadership role.

Each of us is accountable to God, and those with authority over others may be more accountable. Just because a guy wears an alb doesn’t mean he’s better than me or holier than me - it just means he has a certain job. We are ALL members of Christ’s body.

BTW - I read some Prot stuff online occasionally - they aren’t completely clueless. And Martin Luther was a hero of the free market - he gave the Church some competition and I think its done Christianity some good.

As for being reunited with ‘our Protestant brothers and sisters’ … who cares? The only way that will happen is if everyone follows the same rules. But who’s rules? That’s the rub. Religion seems to always become about rules - the Catholic church now has more ‘laws’ than the Jews ever had.
But the Good News is, we don’t need rules cuz the law has been written on our hearts and we aren’t saved by rules any more than we are saved by doctrine - we’re saved by Christ.

 

[confuzed]

Well, I mean no offense, but you’re apparent total reliance on your own abilities to figure out the truth sure seems like a product of Protestantism. .

We ALL rely on our own abilities to figure out the truth. What else could we possibly rely on? You are relying on your ability to figure out the truth when you decide to follow the church’s doctrine.
Perhaps you meant by your remark that I am relying on some private interpretation of scripture. I don’t think so. I think my beliefs are in accord with what the scripture says. Scripture is one of the 3 pillars and we as Catholics are encouraged to read and study it.
However, we are all subject to error and in various stages of our Christian journey, so I most certainly do not claim to be ‘right.’
I only claim to be able to think for myself.

 

[CollegeKid]

Kid -

Does doctrine save you, or does Christ?

Christ saves us when we have faith in Him, and the essense of having faith in Him is believing the things He said about Himself, and in the power of the sacraments he left us (doctrine).

I’ve never been a Prot so I am confuzed as to your take on what I write. I am a born Jew, from an orthodox background. Jews believe (the ones I know anyway) that every possible meaning or understanding of scripture is to be studied, that nothing in scripture can be understood on only one level, and that if it doesn’t become real to you, as deep-down-in-your-soul personal experience, then start over and read with your heart, not just your mind.

Sorry for assuming (yes, I know what that makes me) that you were a protestant.

Catholics I know say they believe in a personal God. So, putting doctrine and theology and priestcraft and lack of confidence in your own relationship with God between oneself and God is, to me, an unacceptable filter. We are to come with confidence to the throne of grace, as the author of Hebrews says.

I’m glad to hear that the Catholics you know believe in having a personal relationship with God. I certainly do. But for myself, and I suspect for many Catholics, especially the ones on this forum, doctrine and theology and, as you call it, “priestcraft” (I don’t think that’s a very apt term) is an important part of that personal relationship. If I’m going to personally pray to God, I would want to know the types of things I should be praying about, the basic characteristics of the God I’m praying to, etc., etc. (again, doctrine). As for theology, as Frank Sheed says in Theology and Sanity, every new thing learned about God is another reason to love Him. If, by “priestcraft,” you are referring to the authority of priests to absolve sins, consecrate the Eucharist, annoint with oil, perform marriages, baptize, ordain, and confirm, then I believe, as the Church teaches, that this is an authority left by Christ, to be believed in, obeyed, and respected.

Yes, priests are here to stay and as I said before, some sort of leadership is necessary - sheep need an earthly shepherd.
According to my reading of the NT, ministers are supposed to be servants, not masters. When I read what Jesus said to and about the Pharissees, Saducees, and scribes I see a picture of power that Jesus hated. When I read about Jesus washing the disciples feet I see the example we are to follow - especially if we are in a leadership role.

Each of us is accountable to God, and those with authority over others may be more accountable. Just because a guy wears an alb doesn’t mean he’s better than me or holier than me - it just means he has a certain job. We are ALL members of Christ’s body.

I agree.

BTW - I read some Prot stuff online occasionally - they aren’t completely clueless. And Martin Luther was a hero of the free market - he gave the Church some competition and I think its done Christianity some good.

As for being reunited with ‘our Protestant brothers and sisters’ … who cares? The only way that will happen is if everyone follows the same rules. But who’s rules? That’s the rub. Religion seems to always become about rules - the Catholic church now has more ‘laws’ than the Jews ever had.
But the Good News is, we don’t need rules cuz the law has been written on our hearts and we aren’t saved by rules any more than we are saved by doctrine - we’re saved by Christ.

Well, I guess I just have a somewhat different view from yours of what it means to be a Catholic. I completely agree that it is Christ who saves us, though. But it must be remembered that He gave the Church the divine authority to bind and loose. If you’re referring to things like not being allowed to eat meat on Fridays, well if you have someone who just blindly obeys that, not out of love for Christ but just to follow the rules, then yes that person needs a serious re-adjustment of their priorities. But if we follow that rule (yes I know its not obligatory any more) out of love for Christ in remembering his passion and death, then we are truly manifesting our faith.

 

[CollegeKid]

We ALL rely on our own abilities to figure out the truth. What else could we possibly rely on? You are relying on your ability to figure out the truth when you decide to follow the church’s doctrine.

Yes, to an extent I did rely on my own abilities to find the truth when I converted. But I hope that it was mainly God’s guidance. I prayed about it a lot during my conversion. I asked Him to lead me to the truth.

Perhaps you meant by your remark that I am relying on some private interpretation of scripture. I don’t think so. I think my beliefs are in accord with what the scripture says. Scripture is one of the 3 pillars and we as Catholics are encouraged to read and study it.
However, we are all subject to error and in various stages of our Christian journey, so I most certainly do not claim to be ‘right.’
I only claim to be able to think for myself.

Good, I think its important to think for yourself. But thinking for yourself doesn’t have to mean dissenting from Church teaching. For the true Catholic, it should mean coming to a deep understanding of why he or she believes what the Church teaches, of truly understanding the doctrine and trying to master whatever their own objections to it might be, rather than just continuing in blind faith.

 

[ron77nyc]

All who believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus are priests.

1 Peter 2:9 But you are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of his own, so that you may announce the praises” of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Revelation 1:6 To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, who has made us into a kingdom, priests for his God and Father, to him be glory and power forever (and ever). Amen.