Indeed he did.. But my friend he translated the HEBREW into LATIN
Not the New testament but the OLD TESTAMENT.
So your observation has nothing to do with this discussion
The New Testament has no role for the priesthood because Christ fulfilled that type
The NT church had overseers (bishops) ,deacons, pastors and elders. ..no priests
In the early church the pastors were called clerks ..from which we get the word clergy ...
Greg Dues has written Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide (New London: Twenty Third Publications, 2007). On page 166 he states, "Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions."
"A clearly defined local leadership in the form of elders, or presbyteroi, became still more important when the original apostles and disciples of Jesus died. The chief elder in each community was often called the episkopos (Greek, 'overseer'). In English this came to be translated as 'bishop' (Latin, episcopus). Ordinarily he presided over the community's Eucharistic assembly."
"When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice, the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist."
As for Greg Dues:
Question I was perusing a book in our parish library the other day called "Catholic Customs and Traditions" by Greg Dues, and some of it I found uncomfortable. I was skimming through the Holy Orders section and he was saying things like the elders of the different churches around the Holy Land "considered" themselves to be the succesors to the apostles. Also, he was saying things like the priesthood was not like what we understand it today and that the early Church (ie: first century or so) still thought of the priests of the old covenant as their priests and it wasn't until AFTER the destruction of the Temple that the priesthood of the new covenant "evolved" (my word) into what we know it today. Can you help me understand some of this. First, have you heard of this book and is it trustworthy? Second, did Jesus indeed "ordain" the Holy Apostles and they themselves "ordain" bishops, priests, and deacons (I mean, the NT seems to me to clearly show that He and they did!)? And did the Apostles celebrate the liturgy of the Eucharist up until they were kicked out of the Synagogues (sp) by the Hebrews, and then they celebrated the liturgy of the word AND the Eucharist together (what we now know as Holy Mass)? This is a tad confusing for me. I appreciate your help and your work you do to build up the Kingdom!
Answer by Matthew Bunson on 10-15-2002: While at times an interesting work on the cultural environment and traditions of the Church, in my opinion the work lacks sufficient doctrinal clarity. Particularly notable is its lack of theological depth in the area of the sacraments. This is perhaps due to the effort -- no doubt sincere -- to present the work as a popular resource. As a consequence, I would suggest disregarding the book's declarations regarding your questions. It is useful to remember that not every book written about the Church provides reliable information, but parishes and individuals purchase many books simply because they are available, fill some perceived hole in a library, or have attractive covers and interesting titles (one would be surprised how well bad books do with a pleasing presentation).
Thanks anyway, but I'm sticking with the Catholic Church's guidance in this matter- and all others.
God bless you!