Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Petrosius
First, I notice that you did not answer my questions. When did Catholic presbyters, whose office dates from the New Testament, cease being presbyters?

Then what you did not notice was that, as expressed, the distinctive celibate sacerdotal class called Catholic priests are distinctively not NT presbyters, thus they do not date from the New Testament, but are distinctively called priests, using a word that evolved but which does not reflect its distinctive function.

When asking what is the correct term to use for translating presbuteros it must be remembered that it is not just a question of translating an ancient Greek word but that the office of presbuteros continues to exist in the church today uninterrupted from the time of the New Testament. In English that office has always been called priest.

Wrong again, as it is the issue of translating the Greek with a corresponding word, hiereus long ago was translated as priest (Latin sacerdos), versus presbuteros, which means senior, but in Catholicism presbyteros took on the meaning of sacerdos.

Priest is, and always has been, the English word for presbuteros

A bare assertion, while Tyndale (c. 1494–1536), for one, going back to the Greek, translated presbuteros as elder instead of priest. Since the Vulgate itself called OT priests sacerdos, from hiereus, and which Latin is translated into English as priests, then the distinction is warranted btwn the two, reflecting the distinction the Holy Spirit made. We are long past the days of Old English, which does not establish what correct translation should be.

Fr. Brown was referring to the Latin/Greek terms of sacerdos/hiereus, not the English term priest, which would not exist for another 800 years! Since English today has lost a specific term for hiereus (i.e. sacerd), he is forced to use the term priest, which is also used in English for presbyter.

And which supports my argument for which Brown is invoked, since the English term which came to be used for Latin sacerdos from hiereus was not originally applied to bishop and presbyter then that distinction is warranted, and using the same term for both is wrong.

If priest was a corresponding term for presbyterous in distinction to to hiereus then you would have a case for its use, but instead it is wrong to justify using the same term for both presbyterous and hiereus when the Holy Spirit makes a distinction by never doing so.

Time to sleep.

99 posted on 03/10/2017 9:16:43 PM PST by daniel1212 ( Turn to the Lord Jesus as a damned and destitute sinner+ trust Him to save you, then follow Him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies ]


To: daniel1212
Your argument has two flaws, one grammatical and one theological. Your first flaw is insistence that the word "priest" can have only one unequivocal meaning. Thus if it means hiereus it cannot mean presbuteros at the same time. This is completely false. Language does not work that way. If it did then please give me the one unequivocal meaning for "right" or "bow." Words can have more than one meaning. The fact that you are upset by the imprecision and confusion that this creates with the meaning of "priest" does not change this. "Priest" has two valid meanings: 1) the Christian office of presbuteros and 2) a sacrificial minister.

Your second flaw is that because the presbyters have a different title than the temple priesthood that they could not have a sacerdotal function. Abraham and the patriarchs offered sacrifices without being temple priests. One of the functions of a presbyter is to celebrate the Mass or Lord's Supper following our Lord's instruction of "do this in memory of me." The Last Supper (the "this" our Lord was referring to) was not just a simple meal. It was a sacrificial meal, the new Passover. It is clear from the words that our Lord spoke when he instituted the Eucharist:

Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you." (Luke 22:19-20)
His Body and Blood that were given to the Apostles were sacrificial elements just as the lamb of the Jewish Passover was a sacrificial offering. This was also the understanding of the early Christians:
The Didache

"Assemble on the Lord’s day, and break bread and offer the Eucharist; but first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be a pure one. Anyone who has a difference with his fellow is not to take part with you until he has been reconciled, so as to avoid any profanation of your sacrifice [Matt. 5:23–24]. For this is the offering of which the Lord has said, ‘Everywhere and always bring me a sacrifice that is undefiled, for I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is the wonder of nations’ [Mal. 1:11, 14]" (Didache 14 [A.D. 70]).

Pope Clement I

"Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have offered its sacrifices. Blessed are those presbyters who have already finished their course, and who have obtained a fruitful and perfect release" (Letter to the Corinthians 44:4–5 [A.D. 80]).

Ignatius of Antioch

"Make certain, therefore, that you all observe one common Eucharist; for there is but one Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, and but one cup of union with his Blood, and one single altar of sacrifice—even as there is also but one bishop, with his clergy and my own fellow servitors, the deacons. This will ensure that all your doings are in full accord with the will of God" (Letter to the Philadelphians 4 [A.D. 110]).

"God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve [minor prophets], as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: ‘I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord, and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands; for from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, my name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering, for my name is great among the Gentiles . . . [Mal. 1:10–11]. He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us [Christians] who in every place offer sacrifices to him, that is, the bread of the Eucharist and also the cup of the Eucharist" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 41 [A.D. 155]).

Irenaeus

"He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is my body.’ The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood. He taught the new sacrifice of the new covenant, of which Malachi, one of the twelve [minor] prophets, had signified beforehand: ‘You do not do my will, says the Lord Almighty, and I will not accept a sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice; for great is my name among the Gentiles, says the Lord Almighty’ [Mal. 1:10–11]. By these words he makes it plain that the former people will cease to make offerings to God; but that in every place sacrifice will be offered to him, and indeed, a pure one, for his name is glorified among the Gentiles" (Against Heresies 4:17:5 [A.D. 189]).

Only someone's adherence to the man-made traditions of the Protestant reformers could blind one from recognizing the historical fact that the early Christians did, indeed, view the Mass as a sacrifice.
102 posted on 03/11/2017 3:15:14 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | 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