Posted on 05/22/2014 8:23:50 AM PDT by Salvation
Where in the New Testament are "priests" mentioned?
Full Question
The New Testament mentions three categories of Church leaders: bishops, presbyters, and deacons. So how can the Catholic Church justify its office of "priest"? The New Testament writers seem to understand "bishop" and "presbyter" to be synonymous terms for the same office (Acts 20:17-38).
Answer
The English word "priest" is derived from the Greek word presbuteros, which is commonly rendered into Bible English as "elder" or "presbyter." The ministry of Catholic priests is that of the presbyters mentioned in the New Testament (Acts 15:6, 23). The Bible says little about the duties of presbyters, but it does reveal they functioned in a priestly capacity.
They were ordained by the laying on of hands (1 Tm 4:14, 5:22), they preached and taught the flock (1 Tm 5:17), and they administered sacraments (Jas 5:13-15). These are the essential functions of the priestly office, so wherever the various forms of presbuteros appear--except, of course, in instances which pertain to the Jewish elders (Mt 21:23, Acts 4:23)--the word may rightly be translated as "priest" instead of "elder" or "presbyter."
Episcopos arises from two words, epi (over) and skopeo (to see), and it means literally "an overseer": We translate it as "bishop." The King James Version renders the office of overseer, episkopen, as "bishopric" (Acts 1:20). The role of the episcopos is not clearly defined in the New Testament, but by the beginning of the second century it had obtained a fixed meaning. There is early evidence of this refinement in ecclesiastical nomenclature in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch (d. A.D. 107), who wrote at length of the authority of bishops as distinct from presbyters and deacons (Epistle to the Magnesians 6:1, 13:1-2; Epistle to the Trallians 2:1-3; Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8:1-2).
The New Testament tendency to use episcopos and presbuteros interchangeably is similar to the contemporary ... use of the term "minister" to denote various offices, both ordained and unordained (senior minister, music minister, youth minister). Similarly, the term diakonos is rendered both as "deacon" and as "minister" in the Bible, yet in Protestant churches the office of deacon is clearly distinguished from and subordinate to the office of minister.
In Acts 20:17-38 the same men are called presbyteroi (v. 17) and episcopoi (v. 28). Presbuteroi is used in a technical sense to identify their office of ordained leadership. Episcopoi is used in a non-technical sense to describe the type of ministry they exercised. This is how the Revised Standard Version renders the verses: "And from Miletus he [Paul] . . . called for the elders [presbuteroi] of the church. And when they came to him, he said to them . . . 'Take heed to yourselves and all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you guardians [episcopoi], to feed the church of the Lord.'"
In other passages it's clear that although men called presbuteroi ruled over individual congregations (parishes), the apostles ordained certain men, giving them authority over multiple congregations (dioceses), each with its own presbyters. These were endowed with the power to ordain additional presbyters as needed to shepherd the flock and carry on the work of the gospel. Titus and Timothy were two of those early episcopoi and clearly were above the office of presbuteros. They had the authority to select, ordain, and govern other presbyters, as is evidenced by Paul's instructions: "This is why I left you in Crete . . . that you might appoint elders in every town as I directed you" (Ti 1:5; cf. 1 Tm 5:17-22).
Answered by: Catholic Answers Staff
If you have not yet read, The Cae for Clerical Celibacy, by Cardinal Stickler, I recommend it highly for its scholarly treatment of the history of clerical celibacy. It was a real eye-opener for me.
Your question solicits references of priest occur in the bible, but then conveniently cherry pick, while leaving out other canonized, biblical scripture, ever pretending that you're covering the waterfront, so to speak, if not being exhaustive.
Are you denying biblical canon? Do you burden biblical questions with other, extra-biblical tradition? What sense does that make?
HF
Thank you for the referral.
It seems to me that you made no representation other than that the word priest appears in 1 Peter.
Also, your swipe at Eucharistic Vestments points to an agenda.
Is this some distinction you're drawing, as if non "ministerial priests" do cease to belong to the priesthood of the faithful? I'd be interested to know how you arrived at that.
If membership in the priesthood is all by baptism, is there no falling away other than official, church recognized excommunication (I presume you buy the excommunication exclusion--but maybe you don't)?
HF
HF
“However, should the priest’s current wife die, they may not remarry”.
Deacons also can’t remarry.
Exactly, we just don’t take it seriously, do we?
This thread is for Catholics, so unless you’re a Catholic, you need to leave the thread. It would be greatly appreciated.
I made no personal attack, other than responding to "salvation" that I was not working from my own interpretation of scripture, as that person suggested.
I think your choice to exclude my post has helped to define FR to be a less-than-friendly, supposedly conservative forum, especially when some would suggest they can post here as if some threads are only for (some definition of elite).
HF
I’ve asked that it be changed to an Ecumenical thread since I made a mistake in posting. It’s OK.
The Church distinguishes beteen the priesthood of the faithful — which is the set of all Catholics — and the ministerial priesthood — which is the set of all Catholic men who have been ordained as priests in the sacrament of Holy Orders. Both the priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood are different (but not mutually exclusive) ways of sharing in the one priesthood of Christ.
How special!
HF
I didn’t hit the abuse button. I don’t even know what you posted.
Hey, holden, it happens to Catholics too.
It’s an ecumenical thread. The mods are busy — go ahead and post.
Some instruments need to be tuned more often than others,
The only criteria I can at this point understand is that it was based on some form of elitism.
"If for some offense, say the offense"; non-Catholic is all I've heard in that category.
HF
Here are the facts regarding celibacy and the priesthood:
1) There is absolutely NOTHING in the Bible which mandates celibacy as a prerequisite for service in the priesthood.
2) The priesthood, though not mentioned in the New Testament, is mentioned extensively in the Old Testament, and yes of course priests were married men with families including Moses’s brother, Aaron.
3) Mandatory clerical celibacy did not come about until much later in the Catholic Church. After the Middle Ages. In fact the first 40 popes at least were married men and the overwhelming majority of priests and bishops were married men for at least 1,000 years after the founding of the Catholic Church.
4) Mandatory clerical celibacy was put into force by the Church to fight rampant corruption, primarily nepotism and simony.
The Lord commands us to be fruitful and multiply, to celebrate life, not celibate life.
There are ALREADY married men serving as priests in the Catholic Church and they are just as holy as the single celibate priests.
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.