Posted on 06/15/2009 1:42:58 PM PDT by NYer
As a Baptist Sunday School and Bible study teacher, one of the questions that used to nag at me incessantly was this: Why, after such painstaking deliberation in dictating an institutional religion that pleased Him in the Old Testament and that was designed to lead the people to recognize the Messiah when He came, would God then introduce a system in the New Testament Church that was so completely unlike the one He established in the Old? There are innumerable examples of how ridiculous this complete “change” would be, but take the priesthood, for instance.
Priests were the officiators of worship whose main duties, those that set them apart from the “priesthood of the people” (Exodus 19:6), were to maintain the tabernacle sanctuary, offer sacrifices, and facilitate the peoples’ confession of sins through them. God Himself established this formal priesthood, stipulating everything about it in the Law of the Torah. The priests must be descendants of Aaron, the first priest selected by God Himself; their bodies must have no defect in them, because their persons and bodies were an offering to God (like the animals they would sacrifice on the altar); they must be dedicated in a special seven-day ceremony that involved bathing, oils, and sacrifices.
They were clad in special garments. They wore a “coat” woven from a single piece of linen without seam that symbolized spiritual integrity, wholeness and righteousness. The headpiece, called a miter, was made by God’s direction to look like a flower in bloom to illustrate the wearers’ spiritual health and bloom. The girdle, specified by God, was a belt worn around the waist to show that theirs was an office of service to the people.
While in active service to God in the tabernacle, and later at the temple, the priests were to have no marital relations with their spouses. This celibacy illustrated the inherent purity which the priest must embody. Along with offering sacrifices, they were to be the teachers of the people. This was not to prevent the people from learning, praying, or studying the Law on their own; it was simply to protect the people from error. They were also the office of authoritative judgment for the people, a way of justice for them.
This priesthood was so sacred that even the priests’ possible, probable and, later, actual, infidelity to God would not negate it. The people were instructed to officially hear and obey them due to the sanctity of their office, as it was a function of God’s grace rather than the priests’ merit. The priesthood was to be a perpetual institution (Exodus 40:15), as were the sacrifices they would offer Him.
”If this is true, where is the priesthood in the New Testament, after Christ?” I asked myself as a Baptist. It cannot simply be that members of the body of Christ were now “The Priesthood” as I had been taught through 1Peter 2:9 and the Book of Hebrews; not if the Old Testament is to be our example as the Scriptures so clearly say (Matthew 13:52). In the Old Testament, the people were also said to be a priesthood, though still not of the official, institutional office (Exodus 19:6), and St. Peter uses the same wording when he speaks of the “priesthood of the believer.” If the Old Testament is our example, there must also be a formal New Testament office of the priesthood in addition to the priesthood of the believer. The “fulfillment” of the Old Testament in Christ cannot, and would not, negate the perpetual and institutional nature of the office of the priesthood. He Himself said He came to fulfill it, that is to give it its proper orientation and meaning, not abolish it (Matthew 5:17-18).
This was one of the questions that bothered me the more I learned about the Old Testament example, especially after experiencing the epidemic rebellion, disunity, and church-splitting of the sole “priesthood of the believer” propounded in Protestant churches. Although the Scriptures are full of how consecrated and special they are to God, there is little respect for pastors’ authority or office in denominational churches anymore. A sign of the times, of course, but also a sign of a fundamental structural error (and appropriately of the exact nature of the original error) that is now making itself evident; for the perpetual, institutional priesthood was carried forth in obedience in and through the Catholic Church.
Everything about the Old Testament example, including the priesthood of the believer, is both fulfilled and perpetuated in Her, through Christ’s eternal sacrifice, just as the Scriptures teach. The sacrifices Catholic priests make are the single sacrifice pleasing to God: His only Son. This is the Sacrifice pictured and eternally being offered in the heavenly temple revealed to St. John in the Book of Revelation, the Sacrifice initiated and perpetuated by Christ Himself in the words “do this in remembrance of me,” this being the very thing Jesus was about to do — sacrifice Himself. Who obeys this command to the letter, offering and consuming the Blood of the new covenant and the Body which is broken for us, but the priesthood of the Catholic Church? Who officiates at this true and perpetual Sacrifice but the priesthood of the Catholic Church? Who maintains the sanctuary, offers the Sacrifice, and facilitates the peoples’ confession of sin? Who carries forth the descendants and celibacy of Christ’s priesthood with the consecration and the garments? Who administers the official and error-free, authoritative Teaching of Christ? Who but the priesthood of the Catholic Church?
The formal priesthood was to be an eternal sign of God’s wish and order that there be an institutional system in service to His precious people. As Catholics, we can rejoice and rest in the provision, Scriptural nature, and orthodoxy of our beloved formal priesthood. Let us confidently pray for vocations, while striving to meet our own obligation to holiness as part of the priesthood of the believer.
I called my dad “dad.” The reference in Matthew is to calling someone on earth your father in a spiritual sense.
I know that Matthew’s gospel is inspired because it is part of the canon of Scripture, just as the gospels of Mark, Luke and John are.
Matthew didn’t write the gospel—God did. Matthew was just the human secretary that God used. Matthew wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
If you have a problem with the gospel of Matthew, you’d be better off taking it up with God. It’s His word, not mine. I have no doubt of His ability to reveal that to you.
That’s my prayer—that the Lord would reveal Himself to you through His word. Hebrews 4:12 says, “For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Isaiah 55:11 says, “So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; it shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish what I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.”
I am not afraid of anything you might learn or any conclusion you might come to by simply reading His word.
You wrote:
“Unless you can point to a scripture, then you are speculating.”
Nope. Remember, you didn’t even know Christ was called high priest in Hebrews 3.
“Personally, I do not speculate. The scriptures are silent on this point. I do not know and will refrain from any speculation on Christ’s marital status.”
The scriptures are not silent. Christ NEVER MARRIED A WOMAN. His bride is the Church. IS this news to you like Christ being the high priest?
2 Corinthians 11:2-3
2 I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him.
John 3:29-30
29 The bride belongs to the bridegroom. The friend who attends the bridegroom waits and listens for him, and is full of joy when he hears the bridegroom’s voice. That joy is mine, and it is now complete. 30 He must become greater; I must become less.
Revelation 19:6-8
6 Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting: “Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. 7 Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready. 8 Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear.”
Ephesians 5:25-28
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
Christ would never have more than one bride. His ONE bride is the Church. Period.
Am I going to get one? Is there a Scriptural basis for any? Thanks in advance.
Paul was a member of the Sanhedrin, so yes, he was married—that was a requirement for Sanhedrin membership.
Mark 1:30 and Luke 4:38 tell us that Peter was married, also.
Hebrews 3:1: “Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus”
Hebrews 4:14-15: “Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.”
Hebrews 6:19-20: “This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters the Presence behind the veil, where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.”
Here is a more technical one on the topic of Catholic priesthood: THE PRIESTHOOD DEBATE
Excuse me, for assuming you had the sense to see the difference between "father" referring to your progenitor, or "Father" as a title for someone. If all you saw was a case of upper vs. lower case, you're hopeless.
your own weird interpretation of them
weird? as compared to what? Your interpretation?
The school’s better off
No, I am better off. I had a hard time walking every day into that building, with a statue of St. Francis staring at me, and a picture of John Paul II watching me walk to my classroom. I had never before really understood the commandment against graven images, but then it became painfully real. They were a burden to my soul, and I was jubilant the day I walked out of that building for good!
Thank you for posting this. A lovely analogy. It’s just a pity that so many people feel utterly compelled to rail against it. May God open their eyes to the truth.
LOL. You should read the Holy Scripture every now and then.
I read them every day. How about you?
You wrote:
“I called my dad “dad.” The reference in Matthew is to calling someone on earth your father in a spiritual sense.”
Really? Then why did St. Paul say he had children - and he wasn’t talking about those who got DNA from him?
“I know that Matthew’s gospel is inspired because it is part of the canon of Scripture, just as the gospels of Mark, Luke and John are.”
But where does scripture say that it is inspired? Are you admitting it doesn’t say it? Also, how do you know the other books are inspired? Who decided they are inspired? Where is the inspired table of contents of the Bible?
“Matthew didn’t write the gospel—God did. Matthew was just the human secretary that God used. Matthew wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”
Again, how do you know that if the Bible no where mentions that Matthew wrote a gospel? Aren’t you then, by your own standards, following a tradition of men?
“2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.””
Where is 2 Timothy do you see any books mentioned by name? How, for instance, do you know Enoch is not inspired? How do you know?
“If you have a problem with the gospel of Matthew, you’d be better off taking it up with God. It’s His word, not mine. I have no doubt of His ability to reveal that to you.”
He already did reveal it to me. What I am trying to figure out is where in the Bible He revealed it to YOU. Show me or admit that you’re just assuming it.
“That’s my prayer—that the Lord would reveal Himself to you through His word.”
Your prayer was answered - many years ago. That’s why I am not a Protestant.
“Hebrews 4:12 says, “For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Isaiah 55:11 says, “So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; it shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish what I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.””
Again, how do you know Hebrews is inspired?
“I am not afraid of anything you might learn or any conclusion you might come to by simply reading His word.”
Neither am I. Again, I’m not a Protestant. God is the reason why.
And what do you call your dad? Ever call him father?
1 Timothy 2:5 says, “For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus.”
So you never ask anyone to pray for you.
We no longer need to go through other men to gain access to God.
Who does?
...as a former Catholic...
Ahhh.
I am Catholic. Not only do I read the Scripture, I know the Scripture. Including the 1 Cor. 7:7f part.
You wrote:
“I still haven’t received an answer on the selling of induldgences;”
The Catholic Church never sold indulgences. So why would you expect the Church or her members to provide a verse for you in support of something the Church never did?
“the praying to dead people;”
The saints - according to Christ - are alive. Also, Not all truths are in scripture so why would you expect all truths to have a verse?
“and the celibate priesthood.”
Christ Himself was celibate among human beings. He also praised celibacy in the gospel of Matthew.
They're not dead.
...and the celibate priesthood...
A voluntary vow taken by those who want to follow in the work of Christ's twelve unmarried apostles.
Is there a Scriptural basis for any?
Where is the "Scriptural basis" for demanding a "Scriptural basis?" Sola Scriptura is a false tradition of men.
You wrote:
“Excuse me, for assuming you had the sense to see the difference between “father” referring to your progenitor, or “Father” as a title for someone. If all you saw was a case of upper vs. lower case, you’re hopeless.”
No, I think the hopeless case is yours. Let’s look at your own words: “According to the Webster’s Dictionary, it means “father”. Notice, it does not say “Father”.” Yeah, you’re case is hopeless.
“weird? as compared to what? Your interpretation?”
Compared to how Christians have ALWAYS interpreted them. When do you think some Protestant (Protestants didn’t even exist until after 1516) came up with the weird interpretation you’re putting forward? What century? 16th? 17th? 19th?
“No, I am better off. I had a hard time walking every day into that building, with a statue of St. Francis staring at me, and a picture of John Paul II watching me walk to my classroom.”
If you think the statute and picture were watching you, then, yeah, the school is MUCH BETTER OFF without you.
“I had never before really understood the commandment against graven images, but then it became painfully real. They were a burden to my soul, and I was jubilant the day I walked out of that building for good!”
Yeah, it was such a burden on your soul that you took their money for a year and showed up every day, right? Some burden.
2 Macc. 15:12-16
A voluntary vow taken by those who want to follow in the work of Christ's twelve unmarried apostles.
Matthew 8:14 (KJV): And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever. 15 And he touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose, and ministered unto them.
Still think the 12 Disciples were unmarried? Seriously? What else you got?
They're not dead.
So, to which other non-alive people am I authorized to pray? My grandmother? Lenny Bruce?
First, I need to explain that I was born in Europe, brought up Catholic, attended Catholic school through 12th grade, so I am not talking about hearsay but real life experiences. I was 8 or 9 when my grandmother went on a pilgrimage to Rome. She visited the Vatican, saw Pope John XXIII in a general audience, and returned home with a certificate that she had purchased right there, at the Vatican. It stated that my father, and all of his family, did not have to spend time in purgatory for any sins commited up to the date the certificate had been issued. What do you call that? I know I was young, but I'll never forget my mom trying to find out how much had grandma paid for it. It certainly wasn't free! It's been almost 14 years since I last visited Spain, but last time I was there, the framed certificate was still hunging there, in an honored place in the living room.
Several people have correctly pointed out that 2 Timothy 3:16 says that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. What does the word “all” mean to you?
If you use a Catholic Bible and you’re looking at the table of contents, what comes after Malachi and before Mark in your Bible? The Catholic Church doesn’t dispute the inclusion of Matthew in the canon of Scripture. Look in your Bible—what does Matthew 23:9 say in your Bible?
As for Hebrews, let’s go back to your Bible’s table of contents again. What comes after Philemon and before James in your Bible? You see, then, that the Catholic Church doesn’t dispute the inclusion of Hebrews in the canon of Scripture either.
Ditto for 2 Timothy.
For the record, I do not consider myself to be a religious person. I am a born-again follower of Jesus Christ. He is the One I bow to. No mere man is worthy of (or entitled to) our worship.
1st Timothy 2:5 For there is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, not a Pope, Not Mary, Not a Priest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.