Priesthood was abolished under the NT

  • Thread starter Thread starter MooCowSteph
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MooCowSteph

Guest
I’ve been in a dialog with a non-Catholic friend for a few months. We are stuck on a few issues, mainly authority, and the priesthood. Because, if the priesthood is unnecessary, that invalidates a great many Catholic teachings, I suppose. Here is a basic summary of her most recent argument. I’ve given a wide variety of quotes showing the office of presbyter in the NT, but she maintains that there is nothing to show for certain that they were actually ordained and not just fellow members of the universal priesthood of believers. I’m sort of at a loss here. I’ve dug down and explained to the best of my ability, but I need to learn more about how the Levitcal priesthood developed into the Catholic priesthood.

“The New Testament in the book of Hebrews explains that Jesus is the High Priest in the line of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 7:11 “ 11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?”) 1 Peter 2:5 calls the people a new generation of a royal priesthood and Paul in Timothy says that Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and man. The priesthood of the Roman Catholic faith does not spring from the tribe of Levi and do not sacrifice under the OT law. They can’t be defined as a continuation of the OT priesthood. They can be a new ministerial priesthood that was formed. I just don’t know when that role was instituted and by who. The OT law is filled with specific instructions including specific directions for performing sacrifices. There are no instructions in the Bible for performing a Eucharistic sacrifice outside of Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-24, and Luke 22:17-20 that I am aware of.”
 
MooCowSteph said:
"The New Testament in the book of Hebrews explains that Jesus is the High Priest in the line of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 7:11 “ 11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?”)
Click to expand...
Because the New Covenant switches from the bloody offerings of the Old Covenant to the grain and wine offerings of Melchizedek. But notice, it is the New COVENANT. A Covenant and offerings must be made. Priests share in the priesthood of Christ. Jesus even notes this when He instructs that before we bring our offering to the altar, we must reconcile with our brother first, so that our sacrifice might be pure.
1 Peter 2:5 calls the people a new generation of a royal priesthood and Paul in Timothy says that Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and man.
Click to expand...
Paul also discusses in Timothy about how he ordained him, and instructs him on how to ordain others. Ask your friend to explain these ordinations. If there’s no priesthood, exactly what is Paul doing here? And why does he instruct Timothy to continue it on and commands it to keep continuing?
The priesthood of the Roman Catholic faith does not spring from the tribe of Levi and do not sacrifice under the OT law. They can’t be defined as a continuation of the OT priesthood. They can be a new ministerial priesthood that was formed.
Click to expand...
Correct. A priesthood in the continuation of Jesus’ priesthood, in the vein of Melchizedek.
I just don’t know when that role was instituted and by who.
Click to expand...
At the Last Supper. Jesus’ command, to “Do this”, is a sacrificial offering that priests make.
The OT law is filled with specific instructions including specific directions for performing sacrifices. There are no instructions in the Bible for performing a Eucharistic sacrifice outside of Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-24, and Luke 22:17-20 that I am aware of."
Click to expand...
How many do there need to be? If God says something even once, isn’t that good enough?

And don’t forget 1 Corinthians, Paul details it as well.
 
The most important priesthood is that of Jesus the High Priest and is of the order of Melchizedek.

The second most important is ours (I Pe 2:5)

That of presbyters comes next.

Protestants believe exactly the same as us but leave out the last level (except some Anglicans, in a watered-down fashion).

Apart from sacramental questions, it’s remarkable how little difference it makes.

In other words, Christians (of whatever kind) have far more priests than the Old Testament Jews ever had, hallelujah!
 
Hello MooCowSteph.

I will try to give you some reasonable answers here (I’ll have to do a little homework myself but I will attempt to give you good, cogent, and persuasive truths about the Catholic Priesthood).

Some of the answers I may give will be purposefully designed to help her (and you) answer the questions for yourselves.

Then hopefully responding to the deeper issues/questions on your own, you will come quite naturally to the correct conclusions.

God bless.

Cathoholic
In its most basic sense, what is a “priest?”

What is a “priest”? Not necessarily a “Catholic Priest” (Remember. Sacred Scripture describes Moses’ pagan father-in-law, Jethro (Reuel), as a priest of Midian. Midianites were pagans, not Priests of God. Yet they were still in a sense, “priests”.

(I’ll use the NIV here as it is a Protestant translation and I assume your friend is a Protestant Christian.)

In the verses below in Exodus 2, we are at the “well” scene, and the women were being hassled by shepherds who came along and somehow drove these women away.

Moses comes along and gets the women UN-hassled somehow.

We don’t know to what extent these women were being pestered or hounded.

It may have just been shepherds “budging in line” for water, or it could have been something more, like we are finding out that “taharrush” is “something more”–much more. (See here, here, and here if you want more information on that ugly form of “abusive amusement”).

We just don’t know the extent of the harassment that was taking place at the well that Moses had to help against, but there are hints earlier in this same Exodus 2 about “water” and the associated life and death conditions due to oppression.

EXODUS 2:16-19 16 Now a priest of Midian had seven daughters, and they came to draw water and fill the troughs to water their father’s flock. 17 Some shepherds came along and drove them away, but Moses got up and came to their rescue and watered their flock.

18 When the girls returned to Reuel their father, he asked them, “Why have you returned so early today?” 19 They answered, “An Egyptian rescued us from the shepherds. He even drew water for us and watered the flock.”

Clearly Jethro (Reuel) would not be a “priest of God most High”, yet Jethro IS in some sense, a “priest”. . . at least according to the Bible.

So what is a “priest” in the most basic sense, and what does a priest do? (Or what is “priesting”)?

I’d start in the Book of Hebrews.
 
If there was not an ordained, ministerial priesthood in the Christian Church, then St Jude’s reference to “Korah’s rebellion” really doesn’t make much sense, as Korah’s rebellion seems to have been over the ordained, ministerial priesthood of the Old Covenant. After recounting all the prerogatives Korah already enjoyed as a Levite, Moses said to Korah, “And would you seek the priesthood also?” (Numbers 16:10)
 
MooCowSteph said:
I’ve been in a dialog with a non-Catholic friend for a few months. We are stuck on a few issues, mainly authority, and the priesthood. Because, if the priesthood is unnecessary, that invalidates a great many Catholic teachings, I suppose. Here is a basic summary of her most recent argument. I’ve given a wide variety of quotes showing the office of presbyter in the NT, but she maintains that there is nothing to show for certain that they were actually ordained and not just fellow members of the universal priesthood of believers. I’m sort of at a loss here. I’ve dug down and explained to the best of my ability, but I need to learn more about how the Levitcal priesthood developed into the Catholic priesthood.

"The New Testament in the book of Hebrews explains that Jesus is the High Priest in the line of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 7:11 “ 11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?”) 1 Peter 2:5 calls the people a new generation of a royal priesthood and Paul in Timothy says that Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and man. The priesthood of the Roman Catholic faith does not spring from the tribe of Levi and do not sacrifice under the OT law. They can’t be defined as a continuation of the OT priesthood. They can be a new ministerial priesthood that was formed. I just don’t know when that role was instituted and by who. The OT law is filled with specific instructions including specific directions for performing sacrifices. There are no instructions in the Bible for performing a Eucharistic sacrifice outside of Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-24, and Luke 22:17-20 that I am aware of."
Click to expand...
Jesus said ““Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.” (Matt. 5: 17). The Old Testament was a preparation established by God for the coming of Jesus Christ and the establishment of His eternal kingdom begun here on earth which is the Church Christ founded. Jesus himself is the fulfillment of the Levitical priesthood of the Old Testament for He is our eternal high priest. Christ appointed the twelve apostles to continue his ministry after his ascension into heaven. And the apostles appointed bishops to continue their ministry after their deaths, and so on. Holy Orders is the sacrament Christ established in His Church by which the sacraments would be administered in the Church and by which the Church would be governed. The apostles took the place of Christ after his ascension into heaven “He who hears you, hears me.” Many things can be said here why we there is a priesthood in the Catholic Church but it is simply traced back to Jesus himself and the apostles. It is a part of the Sacred Tradition of the Church. We will find it in the writings of the apostolic fathers and the fathers of the Church, this is a historical fact. And the apostolic fathers and fathers of the Church did not invent the catholic priesthood but it was something that was handed on down to them from Jesus and the apostles and continues to this day. The hierarchical constitution of the Church can be traced back to the very beginnings of the Church of Christ and the New Testament itself. Accordingly, the priesthood of the Catholic Church was certainly not abolished under the New Testament unless we flat out deny the actual real history and Sacred Tradition of the Church as well as we would have to admit that the holy fathers of the early Church were living a lie and not a part of the Church Christ founded, and worse yet, not true followers of Jesus Christ, not even Christian. This is most unreasonable, a blindness, however, this is what the instigators of the protestant reformation would have us believe.
 
Yes, we all have priesthood in Christ, but only ordained priests can preform the Sacarments in persona Christi

Let’s use a little bit of logic… If the priesthood is incorrect, then why do the Catholics, Eastern Orthdox, Oriential Orthodox, and Assyrian Church of the East all have an ordained priesthood? I.E. All of the ancient churches have the priesthood and the 7 Sacarments.

The Oriential Orthodox and Assyrians split from the Catholic Church in the 300/400s AD. The priesthood is mentioned in the Church Fathers. There are no ligitimate, historical documents that deny an ordained priesthood.

So again, there are three kinds of “priesthoods”
  1. the divine priesthood of Jesus Christ, as our High Priest
  2. the ordained priesthood which works in persona Christi for Christ to perform the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar and to exercise Christ’s authority
  3. the pristhood of all believers to evangelize by spreading the Gospel and leading the domestic Church - which is our families.
God Bless
 
MooCowSteph said:
I’ve been in a dialog with a non-Catholic friend for a few months. We are stuck on a few issues, mainly authority, and the priesthood. Because, if the priesthood is unnecessary, that invalidates a great many Catholic teachings, I suppose. Here is a basic summary of her most recent argument. I’ve given a wide variety of quotes showing the office of presbyter in the NT, but she maintains that there is nothing to show for certain that they were actually ordained and not just fellow members of the universal priesthood of believers. I’m sort of at a loss here. I’ve dug down and explained to the best of my ability, but I need to learn more about how the Levitcal priesthood developed into the Catholic priesthood.

"The New Testament in the book of Hebrews explains that Jesus is the High Priest in the line of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 7:11 “ 11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?”) 1 Peter 2:5 calls the people a new generation of a royal priesthood and Paul in Timothy says that Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and man. The priesthood of the Roman Catholic faith does not spring from the tribe of Levi and do not sacrifice under the OT law. They can’t be defined as a continuation of the OT priesthood. They can be a new ministerial priesthood that was formed. I just don’t know when that role was instituted and by who. The OT law is filled with specific instructions including specific directions for performing sacrifices. There are no instructions in the Bible for performing a Eucharistic sacrifice outside of Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-24, and Luke 22:17-20 that I am aware of."
Click to expand...
I usually find it very helpful to find out what the “Terminator” has to say about it. Here’s a link to some info that should help you:

jimmyakin.com/library/the-office-of-new-testament-priest
 
Thank you. Everyone has made such wonderful,* logical* arguments. Unfortunately I am up against feelings. I am reading Scott Hahn’s book on the priesthood to hopefully better understand the whole issue.
 
Richca said:
Jesus said ““Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.” (Matt. 5: 17). The Old Testament was a preparation established by God for the coming of Jesus Christ and the establishment of His eternal kingdom begun here on earth which is the Church Christ founded. Jesus himself is the fulfillment of the Levitical priesthood of the Old Testament for He is our eternal high priest. Christ appointed the twelve apostles to continue his ministry after his ascension into heaven. And the apostles appointed bishops to continue their ministry after their deaths, and so on. Holy Orders is the sacrament Christ established in His Church by which the sacraments would be administered in the Church and by which the Church would be governed. The apostles took the place of Christ after his ascension into heaven “He who hears you, hears me.” Many things can be said here why we there is a priesthood in the Catholic Church but it is simply traced back to Jesus himself and the apostles. It is a part of the Sacred Tradition of the Church. We will find it in the writings of the apostolic fathers and the fathers of the Church, this is a historical fact. And the apostolic fathers and fathers of the Church did not invent the catholic priesthood but it was something that was handed on down to them from Jesus and the apostles and continues to this day. The hierarchical constitution of the Church can be traced back to the very beginnings of the Church of Christ and the New Testament itself. Accordingly, the priesthood of the Catholic Church was certainly not abolished under the New Testament unless we flat out deny the actual real history and Sacred Tradition of the Church as well as we would have to admit that the holy fathers of the early Church were living a lie and not a part of the Church Christ founded, and worse yet, not true followers of Jesus Christ, not even Christian. This is most unreasonable, a blindness, however, this is what the instigators of the protestant reformation would have us believe.
Click to expand...
These are wonderful points. Thank you for your thoughtful answer.
 
It is also worth considering the word priest itself. As I understand it we get it from German where it was priester. German got it from Latin where it was presbyter. Latin got if from Greek where it was presbuteros. This should be uncontroversial.

What seems interesting to me is what does priest mean in modern English? What is it about the word priest that Portestants object to? It is the sacrifice priests offer that is most objectionable. Protestants don’t object to the Old Testsment priesthood. They don’t object to those priests offering sacrifice.

Why do we use the word priest to describe the duties of someone in the Old Testament who offers sacrifice? Why do we use it to denote a religious authority? We use it because the best word we have is the same word for the Christian office, mentioned throughout the New Testament, of presbuteros. We use it because in English the office of presbuteros was one who had authority and offered sacrifice. This is what the people experienced. So as language developed they expanded the use of priest to apply not just to the Christian office but to a religious authority who offers sacrifice.

So through the development of language we can understand that presbuteros was an office which offered sacrifice. Of course this line of reasoning isn’t immune to attack. Someone could always say the Church went off the rails in the first generation. Against such an argument there isn’t much you can do. Someone who makes that argument wants to avoid history and use the Bible alone. The weaknes there is of course that there was no Bible. It had to be compiled and was compiled after the time the person says the Church went astray.
 
Todd977 said:
If there was not an ordained, ministerial priesthood in the Christian Church, then St Jude’s reference to “Korah’s rebellion” really doesn’t make much sense, as Korah’s rebellion seems to have been over the ordained, ministerial priesthood of the Old Covenant. After recounting all the prerogatives Korah already enjoyed as a Levite, Moses said to Korah, “And would you seek the priesthood also?” (Numbers 16:10)
Click to expand...
You made a good point here, Todd. 👍

It doesn’t make any sense to warn New Testament believers of the danger of “rejecting authority” and perishing in “Korah’s rebellion” (which is usurping the ministerial priesthood)…unless there exists a New Testament ministerial priesthood to reject/usurp.
 
Todd977 said:
If there was not an ordained, ministerial priesthood in the Christian Church, then St Jude’s reference to “Korah’s rebellion” really doesn’t make much sense, as Korah’s rebellion seems to have been over the ordained, ministerial priesthood of the Old Covenant. After recounting all the prerogatives Korah already enjoyed as a Levite, Moses said to Korah, “And would you seek the priesthood also?” (Numbers 16:10)
Click to expand...
Yep and I guarantee you that you’d get looks like a deer in the headlights when you’d explain that to people. I think protestants are so hung up on the priesthood of believers that they forget Jesus role as HIGH PRIEST along with prophet and king.

Melchisidek offered to God Most High the sacrifice of bread and wine and this is what Jesus offered to God as well with his death. Jesus bread and wine is his blood and his flesh and if he is priest FOREVER then Jesus offers this same sacrifice forever through the Mass where his flesh and blood are offered. Makes sense. Only ignorance prevents true belief and before somebody blasts me for that comment, I’ve been there and thank God I’ve seen the light!

My prayer is that ALL come home to Rome!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top