Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: count-your-change
Deacons was not a title so the caps aren't necessary

The capitalization was invented at the same time Protestantism was invented, neither is a scriptural proposition. It is clear from the scripture that all three: deacon, priest and bishop were chosen very carefully (Timothy 5:22). The duties are somewhat mixed: indeed a bishop is primarily a priest and only secondarily an overseer of priests and all, including laity, have an obligation to evangelize. However, the scripture shows us St. Stephen, a deacon, evangelizing but not offering Eucharist or overseeing priests; the scripture shows us priests -- not deacons and not bishops -- to be called for a sacrament, and it shows Sts Timothy and Titus being bishops, i.e. appointing and overseeing priests. so they had common dutues and they had distinct duties. The phrase "It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables" (Acts 6:2) shows that the system was hierarchical, designed to relieve higher offices from lower duties. Now, when someone receives an office, a title comes with the office, whether we have that particular mode of address itself recorded in the scripture or not.

That the Holy Orders make an ontological change in an ordained man is plainly seen from this scripture:

Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophesy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood. (1 Timothy 4:14)

Anyone that served others could be termed a deacon or diakonos, a minister.

Possibly so, -- and likewise today deaconate is much more accessible to people who wish to do ministry, than priesthood. But the Holy Scripture, if you ever read it, does not give us an example of someone "being termed deacon" just spontaneously to cover the needs of a moment, and it does show us an example where deacons are very carefully selected and appointed to their office ("look ye out among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business", Acts 6:3).

This is an example of a bias in translating as the word here translated as “rule” is the Greek word “poimainein” and means here ‘to shepherd or pastor’ the flock not to rule.

To translate ποιμαινειν "shepherd" does not change the fact that the bishops are placed by this verse in a certain relation of authority with respect to the rest of the Church; and from other places we see what that authority was: select and ordain priests (1 Timothy 5:22, Titus 1:5), and be responsible for the soundness of the doctrine (1 Timothy 4:16, 2 Timothy 3:10, and many similar).

The word “presbuteros” means simply an elder, an older man and does not connote the idea of a priest.

Someone was a priest since both Sts Timothy and Titus were told to ordain them, and in doing so confer special grace on them. "Elder" is just a lousy Protestant "translation" intended to lie to people about the Gospel.

The only instance of any Christian being termed a priest was those that had been resurrected to heaven to serve as kings and priests

I gave you several in my previous post and in this one, of priests being living people, and, contrary to your "elder" insinuation, often quite young (1 Timothy 4:12).

Read much?

Yes I do. I can read the Greek original and so I know the meaning of words of the Holy Scripture unobfuscated by Protestant shysters. I also read the Fathers of the Church diligently, so I also know the historical context in which the New Testament was written, and how it was understood by the First Church. I also hear the Holy Scripture as I pray in church in the presence of the eucharistic Christ. Worry about yourself.

38 posted on 09/08/2011 5:55:27 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: annalex
Capitalization in the English language can change a word no matter when or who started the practice. It makes a huge difference when, in translating, a descriptive and general designation is turned into an exclusive and specific title.

“Now, when someone receives an office, a title comes with the office, whether we have that particular mode of address itself recorded in the scripture or not”

That's a bit of reverse and novel exegesis on the part of the Catholic church,i.e., invent an office title and then claim to find it in Scripture even if it requires the most obvious mistranslation. But you say:

“..... I can read the Greek original and so I know the meaning of words of the Holy Scripture unobfuscated by Protestant shysters.”

Then why insist that elder, older man, whether literal or figurative, is a priest when the NT plainly recognizes what a priest is seeing Jewish priests and recognizes the only priests that come from the Christian congregation are those faithful believers that die and only after resurrection to heaven serve as KINGS and PRIESTS.

These were priests, the Greek ‘hiereus’ of Rev. 1:6. But anyone able to read Greek in the original would know that wouldn't they?

And they would know too that the gifts given Timothy (1 Tim. 4:14) by prophecy with his appointment (ordination) are those Paul spoke of at Eph. 4:7,8:

“But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
Wherefore he saith When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.”

“Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophesy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood. (1 Timothy 4:14)

The presbytery was not a priesthood as anyone who is familiar with how the Greek is used. Hence no so called “ontological” transformation that is claimed for Catholic priests.

“But the Holy Scripture, if you ever read it, does not give us an example of someone “being termed deacon” just spontaneously to cover the needs of a moment.”

You said of yourself:

“Yes I do. I can read the Greek original and so I know the meaning of words of the Holy Scripture unobfuscated by Protestant shysters. I also read the Fathers of the Church diligently, so I also know the historical context in which the New Testament was written, and how it was understood by the First Church. I also hear the Holy Scripture as I pray in church in the presence of the eucharistic Christ. Worry about yourself.”

Then with all that training and qualifications have you forgotten that Martha became a diakonos “just spontaneously to cover the needs of a moment.” (Luke 10:40) "I also hear the Holy Scripture as I pray in church in the presence of the eucharistic Christ. Worry about yourself." I'm not the one hearing voices in my head but thanks for the concern.

39 posted on 09/08/2011 10:06:04 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson