Posted on 01/01/2012 3:02:56 PM PST by rzman21
HomeAmharicFranćaisDeutschOriental Church MusicPhoto Gallery Discussion / ForumLinksCalendar
CHAPTER 7
THE SACRAMENT OF THE HOLY ORDERS I. Definition. “Holy Orders” is the sacrament through which the clergy are ordained to celebrate the various church services. Some Protestants say that Christ did not distinguish anyone in His church, and that all the members are the same, and that there is no need for separating special persons as ministers. This is utterly wrong, because of the following reasons: (1) Christ set apart special persons as Apostles, and spent a whole night before choosing them. “And it came to pass in those days, that He went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all nigh in prayer to God. And when it was day He called unto Him His disciples: and of them He chose twelve whom also He named Apostles.” (Luke 6:12, 13)
(2) He gave them special privileges which were not given to others e. g . He said to them “Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matt, 18:18)
(3) When sending them before His ascension He promised them to be with them “ even unto the end of the world” (Matt. 28:20) This promise is of course taken to be valid for their successors also.
(4) When Judas dropped out of the number of the Apostles, they me together, spent some time in discussion and prayer, and chose another to fill this vacancy. (Acts 1:15-26). Had it not been necessary that there should be certain persons set apart for God’s service, they would not have taken the trouble of appointing another one instead of Judas.
(5) Were all Christians of the same degree, they could perform the same services in the church. But a careful study of the Bible specially the “Acts”, shows that the clergy had their own duties which the laity could not dare to perform, and that every category of the clergy had its own duties which could not be performed by another category. For instance when Philip preached in Samaria, he, being a deacon, had not the right to lay on his hands for granting the gift of the Holy Ghost. For this reason the Church of Jerusalem “sent unto them Peter and John, who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost. Then laid they the hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8-17)
(6) The Bible appointed certain conditions which should be observed when choosing the bishops, and other conditions when choosing the deacons. (1 Tim. 3; Tit. 1)
(7) And the Bible also appointed certain procedures for the ordination of the clergy; e.g. the laying on of hands. (1 Tim. 4. 14)
(8) All historians agree that there have been certain ministers in the church since the first century. All the churches that were instituted at the first century keep lists of their bishops since their beginning.
II. Institution of the Sacrament. (1) This sacrament was instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.
It was he who appointed the twelve Apostles and the seventy disciples. It was He who sent the Apostles in to the world before His ascension. “ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” (Matt. 28: 19,20)
St Paul says that it was Christ Himself who appointed some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers (Eph. 4: 11)
And when giving advice to the ministers of the Church of Ephesus he said to them, “Take heed therefore, unto yourselves and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers” (Acts 20: 38)
(2) And according to the power given to them by the Lord those Apostles appointed bishops, priests and deacons in the churches which they established as will be seen afterwards.
III. The Visible Sign. There are two visible sings: (1) The laying on of hands. The Bible stated that this was performed in the case of bishops (1 Tim. 4: 14; 2 Tim. 1: 6), and priests (1 Tim. 5: 22) and deacons (Acts 6: 6)
(2) The prayers of consecration. (Acts 6: 6; 14:23)
IV. The invisible Grace. The ordained minister is given a divine gift appropriate to the service to which he is called. “Neglect not the gift that in thee; which was given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.” (1 Tim. 4: 14) “Therefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.” (2 Tim. 1: 6) This gift is given by the Holy Ghost who alone can help the minister to perform his duties.
V. Degrees of the Holy Orders. The Bible mentions three degrees; the bishop, the priest and the deacon, (1) The Bishop. This is the highest degree. In 1 Tim. 3: Tit 1 and other places the Bible gives detailed instructions for the choice of bishops. The bishop is given the following rights:- 1. Ordination of the clergy. It was the Apostles who consecrated bishops (2 Tim. 1:6), and ordained priests (Acts 14: 23) and deacons (Acts 6: 3,6) And the bishops, whom the Apostles consecrated, were given that right of ordination. St. Paul, writing to Titus, said: “For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are waiting, and ordain elders (priests) in every city, as I had appointed thee.” (Tit. 1:5) And, when writing to Timothy, he said; “Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men’s sins.” (1 Tim. 5: 22)
2. Trial of the clergy and rebuking them. “Against an elder (priest) receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.” (1 Tim. 5: 19,20)
3. Consecration of the Holy Oil used for the sacrament of confirmation.
4. Consecration of the altar and the Holy vessels in the case of building a new church, or getting new vessels.
5. They also have the right to celebrate all the church sacraments and rites if they like.
6. Management of the general affairs of the church.
(2) The Priest: Priests are mentioned in many places of the Bible. “They ordained them elders (priests) in every church.” (Acts 14: f23) “Let the elders (priests) that rule well be counted worthy of double honour.” (1 Tim. 5: 17) “For this cause left I thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in order the things that are waiting, and ordain elders priests in every city, as I had appointed thee. (Tit. 1: 5) “ Is any sick man among you: let him call for the elders (priests) of the church, and let them pray over him. Anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. (James 5:14) The priest has the right to celebrate the six sacraments mentioned above, and all church rights . He has also the right to teach and preach.
(3) The Deacon: Deacons are mentioned in the Bible in Acts 6: 3-6 Phil. 1: 1, 1 Tim. 3 A deacon has not the right to celebrate any of the church sacraments, but only to help the priest and the bishop in celebrating them, keep good order in the church, read the various portions of the Bible in the church, teach, preach and perform any service which the bishop or the priest may ask him to do. It was said in the “Orders of the Apostles” that “the deacon is the bishop’s eyes and ears”. In the former times there was a degree of “deaconess.” Her function was to serve the women in the Church, keep good order in the place allowed for them in the church and anoint the bodies of women at the sacrament of confirmation after being anointed by the priest only on their forheads. (Didaskalia 34)
“No woman is allowed to come to the bishop to ask for anything unless she is accompanied by a deaconess.” (Didaskalia 6) “If there is any need for the bishop to send anyone to the women’s houses, he should send a deaconess, because it is not lit to send a deacon.” (Didaskalia 34) It seems that this degree existed in the church at the Apostolic time, St. Paul, writing to the Romans, said “I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant for “deaconess” as in other copies and other versions) of the church which is at Canchrea”. (Romans 16: 1) And when writing to Timothy he said, “Let not a widow be taken into the number (into the list) under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man.” (1 Tim. 5: 9) some think that the Apostle mans here the list of those who were deaconesses in the church.
VI. Ordination of the Clergy (1) A bishop is consecrated by the laying on of the hands of at least three bishops, because one bishop alone cannot consecrate a bishop.
(2) A priest or a deacon is ordained by the laying on of hands of only one bishop.
(3) Ordination can never be repeated for the same degree if the bishop, priest or deacon was previously ordained in a legal way. In the Apostolic Canons (68) it is stated that “if any bishop, priest or deacon is re ordained for the same degree, he will become worthy of excommunication together with him who ordained him.”
(4) No money should be paid at all for the ordination of any one of the three degrees. When Simon offered money for the sake of obtaining one of God’s gifts. St. Peter rebuked him saying “thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.” (Acts 8: 18-20) The church teachers that every ordination performed against any payments is illegal, and that the bishop who accepts any money should be excommunicated.
VII. Obligations of the Clergy (1) Before ordination. Those who are chosen for the holy orders must be: 1. Sure that the call came to them from God. “No man taketh this honour of the holy orders) unto himself but he that is called of God as was Aaron.” (Heb. 5: 4)
2. Blameless, in order to be good examples to the congregation. ST. Paul wrote to Timothy saying : “Be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.” (1 Tim. 4: 12) In 1 Tim. 3, and Tit. 1, St. Paul mentioned many conditions which should be taken into consideration when choosing bishops and deacons.
3. Well acquainted with the Bible and church teachings.
(2) After ordination. 1. They should serve not as hired men who work merely to get their wages. “Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly, not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind.” (1 Pet. 5:2) “He that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.” (John 10:12)
2. But they should be good shepherds, full of deep feeling that the sheep are theirs, and that they are responsible for keeping them from beasts and for feeding them. They should also know that the good shepherd must be ready to offer any sacrifice that may be needed for the sake of the sheep. “The good shepherd gives his life for the sheep.” (John 10:11)
More about the sacrament of Priesthood
The Orthodox Church Sacraments Rev. Marcus Daoud Tinsae Zagubae Printing Press May 1952 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~//~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_________________________________________________________________________ ©2003-Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church - About-us . Privacy-Statement . Contact-us
The Eritreans are an interesting lot. Have you ever seen their writing? Squigglies! How can I trust the food of people who write in squigglies? :o)
I always get STUCK at the booths were there is food. Hahaha.
It’s going to be interesting to watch as different denominations, sects, and so called “churches” begin to join together drifting closer to the one world religion coming. I wonder what individual lay people will use to understand what truth is. As for me I will continue to use scripture alone with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. No “wisdom of men” for me.
Deut. 32:4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
2 Sam. 22:2 And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; 3 The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence.
Psalm 18:31, "And who is a rock, except our God."
Isaiah 44:8, "Is there any God besides Me, or is there any other Rock? I know of none."
Rom. 9:33, "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and he who believes in Him will not be disappointed."
1 Cor. 3:11, "For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ,"
1 Cor. 10:4, "and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock (petras) which followed them; and the rock (petra) was Christ."
1 Pet. 2:8, speaking of Jesus says that he is "A stone of stumbling and a rock (petra) of offense"; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed."
You aren’t giving the CC nearly enough credit for longevity. Many of the symbols and rituals go back much farther than 2000 years. Many of them go back to the time of Nimrod at least.
“It’s NO different than what Catholics try to do with Protestantism.
The unity we have is in the belief of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. No works necessary to earn salvation. We recognize the ultimate authority of Scripture in matters of faith and morals.
The slight differences between the vast majority of Protestant denominations are not any worse than anything the Catholic church can produce.”
Wrong. You are a member of a denomination. One of MANY. All different. There is ONE Catholic Church. All it’s respective parts are ONE. That is a significant difference between protestantism and THE Catholic Church.
“That depends on whether one considers the Catholic church the mode of salvation, which it isn’t. JESUS is the way, the truth, the life. No man comes to the Father but through HIM.
The true church is built of those who are true believers. It is not an organization or institution what one joins through some initiation process. That is a warped view of what the church really is.”
You’ve just spouted a Clintonism, i.e., “That depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.
Merriam Webster defines apostasy as such:
“Definition of APOSTASY
1: renunciation of a religious faith
2: abandonment of a previous loyalty : defection
Origin of APOSTASY
Middle English apostasie, from Late Latin apostasia, from Greek, literally, revolt, from aphistasthai to revolt, from apo- + histasthai to stand “
The Catholic Church has continuously taught, for 2,000 years, that it is the path to salvation, from it’s founder, Our Lord, Jesus Christ, through the centuries. You chose to reject the Catholic Church, which He founded. As I said earlier, your prerogative. Your rejection of the term in not your prerogative. It is not pejorative is use, but literal.
“When the RCC determines that one must be subject to the Roman pontiff for salvation and the Orthodox do not acknowledge the legitimacy of that office, that is more than a small difference.”
We were not discussing the Orthodox. We were discussing the Catholic Church. Stay on target, please. Conflation does no one any good.
The fact remains: There is ONE Catholic Church. There are many protestant churches. That is not denigration, but FACT.
Your initial comment attempted to conflate the Catholic and Orthodox. I provided much-needed correct data, that’s all.
You aren’t giving the CC nearly enough credit for longevity. Many of the symbols and rituals go back much farther than 2000 years. Many of them go back to the time of Nimrod at least.
>>Nothing like a selective reading of scripture to confirm certain prejudices.
The thread is too active to be locked at this time.
The fact remains: There is ONE Catholic Church. There are many protestant churches. That is not denigration, but FACT.
Your initial comment attempted to conflate the Catholic and Orthodox. I provided much-needed correct data, that’s all.
So, you're saying that the Orthodox, who claim to be Catholic, aren't?
metmom,
I agree about thoroughly reading before posting - and also checking to see if posted previously.
My largest issue with the OP is that he specializes in his posts on being the Junior Assistant Accuser of the Bretheren.
I suggest a reading of the Bible would clarify how Christians are to treat Christians. I don’t see a lot of that in the article selection or follow up posts.
But then, I am only in charge of me...
That’s what the Evangelicals on FR do best. Make everything personal.
65 posted on Sunday, January 01, 2012 9:56:24 PM by rzman21
To: boatbums
Isn’t Catholic bashing what you guys are all about? All of FR is the Protestant caucus. I call it apologetics.
72 posted on Sunday, January 01, 2012 10:20:52 PM by rzman21
To: Religion Moderator
Please lock this thread. It’s going from bad to worst fast.
82 posted on Sunday, January 01, 2012 11:17:31 PM by rzman21
For a poster of 3 1/4 months, he is really a quick study or has been around before.
Your observations have been duly noted by others as well.
For the life of me, I cannot imagine posting an article without having read it myself and knowing the actual content.
But like you said, I am only in charge of me...
xone,
My working theory is that he/she is a member of the mormon cult, using a Catholic/Orthodox cloak in order to foment dissension among the brethren... and likely one who was here under a different screen name previously. I find it hard to believe that someone would just show up and focus on creating dissension like this. Satan needs no junior helpers in this.
...time will tell. He has proven himself/herself ZOT-worthy already.
And posted a LOT of threads that seem to be designed only to be contentious.
Perhaps, and I really don’t think that the RM needs any more work to do, but perhaps there ought to be a waiting period for newbs before being allowed to post threads on the RF. Or for that matter anywhere. It might rein in some of the blog pimps as well.
IOW, not posting threads until a comment posting history has been established. Let it be a more of a privilege, although it would ruin the fun of watching the DU suicide runs ride the lightning. That is a downside.
Any decent dictionary will tell you that the English word "priest" comes from the Greek word "presbyter". That's just basic etymology.
It's certainly true that the Greek word hiraeus is also translated into English as "priest". Blame the English language (and Latin before it) for having only one word to express two somewhat different but related concepts.
You didn't read that in the Bible, so stop trying to pretend that the Bible is your only authority and you have no time for "traditions of men".
You read that in Alexander Hislop's Two Babylons, which is a vast compendium of logical errors, bad archaeology, and outright lies about both the archaeology and the Catholic faith ... in other words, a "tradition of men not found in Scripture".
the devil hates that he has not been able to overcome the Church for 2,000 years. the Holy Spirit is stronger than he is. ever since Jesus bound him at the cross, the devil can’t frustrate the Gospel being preached to all nations, for all time.
sorry CB, that’s the way God has ordained it and you will just need to accept that fact.
It's called "this present EVIL world"..Gal. 1:4.
He is called the "prince of the power of the air, the spirit that NOW worketh in the children of disobedience;" Eph. 2:2. He deceives men and nations. Hardly "bound".
Satan is not afraid of your religion. His fear is the preaching of the Cross, the finished work of Christ for our salvation, which your church has chosen to ignore in favor of traditions and doctrines of men. Your church is not bringing in the Kingdom of Christ. That will not happen until Christ returns and sets up His Kingdom.
Your God-given commission is to preach the gospel of the grace of God, not the Ten Commandments and priests remitting or retaining sins and acting as alter Christus, another Christ, while performing magical acts of turning baptismal fonts into magical water or wafers and wine into the body and blood of Christ.
Your church has taken upon itself the idea that she will bring unity to the whole world, then Christ will return, being so grateful of her work for Him. And that's your stumblingstone. It's not about your work for Him. It's all about His work for you. Even Satan knows this. Satan is well alive and very content to have the Cross be made of no effect by "religious" organizations that place man's efforts to get to God a system of do's and don'ts. He looks upon your church and smiles. Yeah, your church has really "bound" him...
Satan’s been bound?
I’m sure that explains the rampant corruption and immorality that has existed within the Catholic church for centuries.
The Orthodox might not agree with your statement. I’d check with them before attempting to speak for them, myself. Do you mean the various Eastern Catholics, such as the Maronites, or Byzantine Catholics, or the Greek Catholics? They’re great folks. And, they’re Catholic. Whereas, while we share much with the Orthodox, they would not agree with your statement. Best advice, if I may be so bold: don’t try to speak for them.
i see no evidence RZ is anything other than someone who holds the orthodox, historical, biblical Faith that comes to us from the Apostles.
he certainly has given no indication he is a mormon nor has he done anything that is “zot” worthy.
i thought conservatives believed in the free marketplace of ideas, that truth can hold itself up to scrutiny. that’s why if i made the rules, i would do away with the whole cacaus concept and have anyone post in a thread, as long as there were no cursing or threats of violence. i would allow insults, as i think they are the surest way to expose phonies who claim to be Christian and besides, it always is done by someone losing the debate.
i have been on FR for one year now, and had to put up with this “newbie” stuff and accusations i used to be someone else who got “zotted”. my philosophy is “let a 1,000 flowers bloom”
as one can tell by my screen name, i feel strongly that Christians have a duty to follow the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Faith, if one is concerned for the salvation of souls. One of my favorite chapters in the Bible is John 17 and the prayer of Jesus to the Father. Paul echos Jesus in 1 Corinthians 1, stressing the unity of the Faith.
so RZ, when the Catholic Faith ( Latin or Greek ) is attacked on FR, i rejoice!! Jesus tells us to be glad and rejoice. the interesting part of FR for me, is the attackers never have to disclose what denomination or faith tradition they are part of. so you can have a mormon attacking the Church, and will be joined in the attack by a Baptist, Presbyterian and a Seventh Day Adventist. the only thing they have in common is opposition to the Catholic Faith. if the Catholic Church didn’t exist, the mormon would attack the Lutherans or Presbyterians, so we should be happy to take the incoming.
the big disapointment i have found on FR, is the outright falsehoods that the Church’s opponents post, but are never called out by the non-Catholics as falsehoods. i thnk mhgin tenn called out quix for some outrageous “untruth”, and i congatulated him/her for intellectual honesty. i have defended non-Catholics against Catholics on here when they were being unfairly attacked over doctrine, it’s called loving the truth more than lies.
so we will see what 2012 brings. for me, i hope it brings a stronger faith in Jesus Christ and unity in His Church.
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.