[annalex]

Douay translates:

Then were gathered together the chief priests and ancients of the people into the court of the high priest, who was called Caiphas:

This is accurate in the historical context, since the episode occurs before the Christian priesthood is established.

[HarleyD]

Douay translates:

Then were gathered together the chief priests and ancients of the people into the court of the high priest, who was called Caiphas:

This is accurate in the historical context

I see. It is accurate in the historical context but is it accurate in the linguistic context? Not that I can tell. The actual rendering of the verse should be:

Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas,

Please note how this was changed in the Douay translation. I am, so far, unclear as if it was changed in the Vulgate. I suspect not since my reference is from the KJV which is based on the Vulgate. This would mean that the Douay translation is poor at best or has some other motive for the way it has altered the scripture.

In the text (Matt 26:3), the word for chief priest is "archiereus", the word for scribe is "grammateus", and for elders "presbuteros". These are three different and distinct groups of people; not lumped together as "ancient of the people". (I'm sure they wouldn't be too happy with that term.)

Reader_David made a valid point that another word is used in scripture for priest but the English word "priest" is derived from the term for "elder, bishop" through "presbuteros". I can understand that logic. However, it creates problems in Titus 1:5 in trying to claim that Paul was talking about "ordaining priests". Priest is only an English derivation of a term-not the actual group of people as Paul is talking about.