Melchizedek Connection, Royal Priesthood

Rhamiel · Jun 27, 2009

Standing Up said:
So, in a sense all believers are in the Melchizedek priesthood, but RCC priests are also in the Aaronic priesthood. Right? If so, why? And are you sure this (RCC priest is Aaronic priesthood) is what RCC teaches?

I am not sure, I know the priesthood of all believers is differant then the ordained priesthood, the Catholic Church teaches that, but that the ordainded priesthood is the aaronic priesthood, that I am not so sure about, might be though, never read up on it

bbbbbbb · Jun 27, 2009

I have just a few observations to interject here, as follow:

1. The writer of the epistle to the Hebrews is the only one to bring up the subject of Melchizedek in the New Testament and he uses Melchizedek as a type of Christ as priest.
2, The same writer makes it crystal clear that the Aaronic priesthood has been entirely done away with by the perfect priestly work of Jesus Christ,
3. The same writer never indicates that Melchizedek is anything other than a type or symbol of Jesus Christ.

Thus, although many denominations justify their clergy on the Old Testament priesthood - either very loosely or more tightly - they are in error in doing so.

One denomination (LDS) has invented a "Melchizedek" priesthood which is entirely unbiblical. To use Melchizedek in any other way than that of the writer to the Hebrews is to contradict his message.

Standing Up · Jun 27, 2009

Rhamiel said:
I am not sure, I know the priesthood of all believers is differant then the ordained priesthood, the Catholic Church teaches that, but that the ordainded priesthood is the aaronic priesthood, that I am not so sure about, might be though, never read up on it

Okay, thanks for that. Got to get the lingo right in order to communicate.

So, when I say priesthood of believers, including like Melchizedek offered bread and wine, RCC (or Orthodox too?) would not exactly agree to that, but reserve/redefine the definition of priesthood to Aaronic ordained in order to effect change in the bread/wine.

That makes sense. Not agreeing with it, but now it makes sense.

Is this really the RCC stance though? Do they really reapply the idea of Aaronic priesthood to their ordained priests? It makes sense by what they do/say/believe, but I've got to pick up my jaw off the floor!

I'd guess Orthodox would agree more or less to that as well, right?

a_ntv · Jun 27, 2009

Standing Up said:
So, in a sense all believers are in the Melchizedek priesthood, but RCC priests are also in the Aaronic priesthood. Right? If so, why? And are you sure this (RCC priest is Aaronic priesthood) is what RCC teaches?

No, the ordained priesthood in the Catholic Church is NOT the Aaronic priesthood (that it is ended)

It is a service AS the Aaronic priesthood was a service. It started with Christ, it is not a continuation of something older.

The prayer of consecration of a Catholic priest, said by the bishop at the laying of the hands, is the following:
Come to our help,
Lord, holy Father, almighty and eternal God; you are the source of every honor and dignity, of all progress and stability.
You watch over the growing family of man by your gift of wisdom and your pattern of order. When you had appointed high priests to rule your people, you chose other men next to them in rank and dignity to be with them and to help them in their task;
and so there grew up the ranks of priests and the office of levites, established by sacred rites.

In the desert you extended the spirit of Moses to seventy wise men who helped him to rule the great company of his people.
You shared among the sons of Aaron the fullness of their father's power, to provide worthy priests in sufficient number
for the increasing rites of sacrifice and worship. With the same loving care your gave companions to your Son's apostles to help in teaching the faith; they preached the Gospel to the whole world.

Lord,
grant also to us such fellow workers, we are weak and our need greater.

Almighty Father,
grant to these servants of yours the dignity of the priesthood.
Renew within them the Spirit of holiness.
As co-workers with the order of bishops may they be faithful to the ministry that they receive from you, Lord God, and be to others a model of right conduct.

May they be faithful in working with the order of bishops, so that the words of the Gospel may reach the ends of the earth, and the family of nations, made one in Christ, may become God's one, holy people.

We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ver. Amen.

I've highligheted the reference to the Aaronic priesthood: it souds as " Lord, as you once a time choosed for your service the Aaronic priests, now choose as your server these priest.

As you can see there is no reference to the Melkisedek Priesthood, because it is of Chirst, and all the Christians, cleric or lay, male or female, Catholic or Protestant, share the Melkisedek Priesthood (=priesthood of all believers) because of the baptism

Standing Up · Jun 28, 2009

a_ntv said:
-snip-

I've highligheted the reference to the Aaronic priesthood: it souds as " Lord, as you once a time choosed for your service the Aaronic priests, now choose as your server these priest.

As you can see there is no reference to the Melkisedek Priesthood, because it is of Chirst, and all the Christians, cleric or lay, male or female, Catholic or Protestant, share the Melkisedek Priesthood (=priesthood of all believers) because of the baptism

Why is there a distinction between the Aaronic-like priesthood in Mass service of a priest and Melchizedek priesthood of believers?

Rhamiel · Jun 29, 2009

Standing Up said:
Why is there a distinction between the Aaronic-like priesthood in Mass service of a priest and Melchizedek priesthood of believers?

the ordained priesthood of the Catholic Church does not come from Arron but from the Apostles, that is differant then the priesthood of all believers, just as the Apostles had a special role, priests and bishops have a special role

a_ntv · Jun 29, 2009

Rhamiel said:
the ordained priesthood of the Catholic Church does not come from Arron but from the Apostles, that is differant then the priesthood of all believers, just as the Apostles had a special role, priests and bishops have a special role

You are right

The Melkizedek's priesthood is the more important one.
It allows any baptized Christian (male or female, Catholic o r Protestant, cleric or lay) to:
- offer to God his prayer, his fast, his life, transforming any moment of his life in a liturgy to the Lord
- to unit himself to Christ non the Holy Calvary: (If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.)

The Orthodox and Catholic priesthood is simply a service. As Christ choose 12 Apostles to give a special service, so the Apostles laid their hands on their successors, and so on till the present bishops, priests and deacons.
These bishops, priests and deacons has to serve as the Apostles served, but they are at all equal to any other Christian with respect to the important issue: the sharing of the Melkisedek's priesthood.

It is not necessary to be ordained priest to be saint, while it is necessary to share the Melkisedek's priesthood

Standing Up · Jun 29, 2009

Rhamiel said:
the ordained priesthood of the Catholic Church does not come from Arron but from the Apostles, that is differant then the priesthood of all believers, just as the Apostles had a special role, priests and bishops have a special role

Bishop, priest/elder, deacon may all do the Mass?

All saints (believers) are in Melchizedek priesthood, and any of those who aspire to "go on" to bishop, priest/elder, deacon may do so? Aaron was by blood lineage, believers by 'whosoever' will?

What happens if a Melchizedek only believer offers Mass?

OrthodoxyUSA · Jun 29, 2009

Standing Up said:
Bishop, priest/elder, deacon may all do the Mass?

All saints (believers) are in Melchizedek priesthood, and any of those who aspire to "go on" to bishop, priest/elder, deacon may do so? Aaron was by blood lineage, believers by 'whosoever' will?

What happens if a Melchizedek only believer offers Mass?

You mean The Divine Liturgy?

There is no point for anyone ever to do it alone. The Divine Liturgy is about Unity.

If you were to pray the Liturgy yourself then you have had "private prayer" and not communal prayer.

Are you really asking what would happen if someone of the office of "laity" performed the Liturgy for others?

Forgive me...

Standing Up · Jun 29, 2009

OrthodoxyUSA said:
You mean The Divine Liturgy?

There is no point for anyone ever to do it alone. The Divine Liturgy is about Unity.

If you were to pray the Liturgy yourself then you have had "private prayer" and not communal prayer.

Are you really asking what would happen if someone of the office of "laity" performed the Liturgy for others?

Forgive me...

Definitions

EOC Divine liturgy = RCC Mass?

Private divine liturgy?

Can a laity believer perform Liturgy for others in EOC or RCC?

OrthodoxyUSA · Jun 29, 2009

Standing Up said:
Definitions

EOC Divine liturgy = RCC Mass?

Private divine liturgy?

Can a laity believer perform Liturgy for others in EOC or RCC?

== Mass comes from misal... as in dismisal... "Did you stay for mass?" Would actually be "Did you stay for the ending?" IOW ~ Mom want's to know if you skipped Church or did you stay till the end. The Divine Liturgy has never had a "name" just a description of what it is... "The Divine work of the people". Plural.

No such thing as a private Divine Liturgy. It's takes more than one to celebrate it.

Laity does not perform "The Divine Litugy" without the Bishop or his representative. ...but there are others services that can be done. We do them here at our Chapel all the time. When we are worshiping and there is not a Priest, we pray 1st, 3rd and Typika.

Forgive me...

Standing Up · Jun 29, 2009

So, neither RCC or EOC permit the laity to service Mass or Divine Liturgy? Right?

Instead, if a laity wants to serve bread/wine, like this, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? " with others, he has to first be an ordained priest in RCC or EOC. Right?

Why do you/they draw the distinction? Is it simply a matter of learning the "proper words" or what?

Standing Up · Jun 29, 2009

OrthodoxyUSA said:
== Mass comes from misal... as in dismisal... "Did you stay for mass?" Would actually be "Did you stay for the ending?" IOW ~ Mom want's to know if you skipped Church or did you stay till the end. The Divine Liturgy has never had a "name" just a description of what it is... "The Divine work of the people". Plural.

Thanks for the explanation.

No such thing as a private Divine Liturgy. It's takes more than one to celebrate it.

As in 2 or 3 gathered in His name?

-snip-

a_ntv · Jun 30, 2009

Standing Up said:
Definitions

EOC Divine liturgy = RCC Mass?

Private divine liturgy?

Can a laity believer perform Liturgy for others in EOC or RCC?

The term "Mass" is the popular name and came from the the last word in the liturgy which was in Latin "ite missa est" (it means "you shall go in mission", but this sentence was used only as last sentence of the Mass)

Yes, the EOC Divine Liturgy and the RCC Mass are the same rite: it is composed by prayer, readings (2 in the EOC, 3 in the RCC), and by the consacration of the Eucharist and its distribution. After 2000 years the scheme of these celebrations is very similar.

A deacon cannot celebate it from the altar: he in both RCC and EOC can make the people pray, can read the Gospel, and can serve at the altar
The bishop is the main celebrant in both the tradition. When the bishop is not present the priest can do it. (the priest is the helper of the bishop)

Nor in EOC nor in the RCC is possible to clebrate the Mass/Divine Liturgy if there is not a bishop or a priest.
The deacon is optional also in the EOC
The laity is required in the EOC but optional in the RCC (for the RCC the priest/bishop is layty not something different. anywya usually the layity is always prsent also in the RCC)
The bishop and the priest are ordained by a physical succession form the 12 Apostles.

The EC, that are Churches that uses the Easter Liturgy and are in full Communion with the RCC, follow the rules and the liturgies of the EOC

Standing Up · Jun 30, 2009

a_ntv said:
The term "Mass" is the popular name and came from the the last word in the liturgy which was in Latin "ite missa est" (it means "you shall go in mission", but this sentence was used only as last sentence of the Mass)

Yes, the EOC Divine Liturgy and the RCC Mass are the same rite: it is composed by prayer, readings (2 in the EOC, 3 in the RCC), and by the consacration of the Eucharist and its distribution. After 2000 years the scheme of these celebrations is very similar.

A deacon cannot celebate it from the altar: he in both RCC and EOC can make the people pray, can read the Gospel, and can serve at the altar
The bishop is the main celebrant in both the tradition. When the bishop is not present the priest can do it. (the priest is the helper of the bishop)

Nor in EOC nor in the RCC is possible to clebrate the Mass/Divine Liturgy if there is not a bishop or a priest.
The deacon is optional also in the EOC
The laity is required in the EOC but optional in the RCC (for the RCC the priest/bishop is layty not something different. anywya usually the layity is always prsent also in the RCC)
The bishop and the priest are ordained by a physical succession form the 12 Apostles.

The EC, that are Churches that uses the Easter Liturgy and are in full Communion with the RCC, follow the rules and the liturgies of the EOC

Thanks for the explanation.

So, why can't a laity person perform Mass? For lack of a better term at this point, it seems to me the bishop or priest are Aaronic-priesthood like, separate from the brethren, able to perform "bloodless sacrifice".

OrthodoxyUSA · Jun 30, 2009

Standing Up said:
So, neither RCC or EOC permit the laity to service Mass or Divine Liturgy? Right?

Instead, if a laity wants to serve bread/wine, like this, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? " with others, he has to first be an ordained priest in RCC or EOC. Right?

Why do you/they draw the distinction? Is it simply a matter of learning the "proper words" or what?

That's right... the learning, being elected, the approval of all and the laying on of hands (ordained).

If you wanted to do it as a vocation, you must be approved by the people that you serve. IOW ~ It's not by your choices... but rather theirs. The laity elects it's leaders. These leaders go through a process of leaning... they become readers, then sub-deacons and Deacons, then they are ordained Priest by the Bishop.

We don't just pick it up and start doing it. These people are elected servants of The Church.

Forgive me...

LittleLambofJesus · Jun 30, 2009

OrthodoxyUSA said:
That's right... the learning, being elected, the approval of all and the laying on of hands (ordained).

If you wanted to do it as a vocation, you must be approved by the people that you serve. IOW ~ It's not by your choices... but rather theirs. The laity elects it's leaders. These leaders go through a process of leaning... they become readers, then sub-deacons and Deacons, then they are ordained Priest by the Bishop.

We don't just pick it up and start doing it. These people are elected servants of The Church.

Forgive me...

Greetings Ortho! I would venture to guess the Orthodox do not elect a Bishop the way the RCC does.....with "smoke signals"?

OrthodoxyUSA · Jun 30, 2009

Ummm.... no.

Forgive me...

a_ntv · Jun 30, 2009

Standing Up said:
So, why can't a laity person perform Mass? For lack of a better term at this point, it seems to me the bishop or priest are Aaronic-priesthood like, separate from the brethren, able to perform "bloodless sacrifice".

Only Christ performs the "bloodless sacrifice" (i.e. the consecration of the Eucharist, that is the re-new of the sacrifice of the Cross).
The bishop/priest who presides the Liturgy/mass is simply a servant which gives his month and hands to Christ and to the community.

The bishop/priest is allowed to say the awful words of Christ, to call the Holy Spirit to came, only because he is granted this permission by Christ himself through the Church of Christ founded by the 12 Apostles

In the RCC there are many different ways to elect/choice who is to became bishop (the uses can change in any dioceses), but the important, as OrthodoxyUSA said, are the next two steps:
- the bishop/priest-elected shall be called by the Church. The service of the bishop/priest has a meaning only into the Church.
- the bishop/priest-elected shall be ordained by the laying of the hands by a bishop who was ordained in the same way, thus to built a chain back to the 11 Apostles and to Christ.
Obviously the Protestants have a very different idea of Church from Catholic or Orthodox, so they have a very different idea of this ministry too.

To be ordained bishop/priest does NOT mean to be more saint. The greater between the saints was not ordained bishop/priest: Mary (or think to other saints as Saint Francis of Assisis)

So dont confuse the sharing of the Melkiseded's priesthood (that is something that allow as to be saint) from the ordained priesthood of bishops/priests that is a ministry

Standing Up · Jun 30, 2009

a_ntv said:
Only Christ performs the "bloodless sacrifice" (i.e. the consecration of the Eucharist, that is the re-new of the sacrifice of the Cross).
The bishop/priest who presides the Liturgy/mass is simply a servant which gives his month and hands to Christ and to the community.

The bishop/priest is allowed to say the awful words of Christ, to call the Holy Spirit to came, only because he is granted this permission by Christ himself through the Church of Christ founded by the 12 Apostles

In the RCC there are many different ways to elect/choice who is to became bishop (the uses can change in any dioceses), but the important, as OrthodoxyUSA said, are the next two steps:
- the bishop/priest-elected shall be called by the Church. The service of the bishop/priest has a meaning only into the Church.
- the bishop/priest-elected shall be ordained by the laying of the hands by a bishop who was ordained in the same way, thus to built a chain back to the 11 Apostles and to Christ.
Obviously the Protestants have a very different idea of Church from Catholic or Orthodox, so they have a very different idea of this ministry too.

To be ordained bishop/priest does NOT mean to be more saint. The greater between the saints was not ordained bishop/priest: Mary (or think to other saints as Saint Francis of Assisis)

So dont confuse the sharing of the Melkiseded's priesthood (that is something that allow as to be saint) from the ordained priesthood of bishops/priests that is a ministry

Ministry to do Mass/Divine Liturgy appears to equate to office, right? The priestly office occupied by an ordained laity believer.

Perhaps this helps to explain the Melchizedek and "Aaronic-like" difference:

Catholic Encyclopedia:
"The simple fact that numerous heretics, such as Wyclif and Luther, repudiated the Mass as "idolatry", while retaining the Sacrament of the true Body and Blood of Christ, proves that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is something essentially different from the Sacrifice of the Mass. In truth, the Eucharist performs at once two functions: that of a sacrament and that of a sacrifice. Though the inseparableness of the two is most clearly seen in the fact that the consecrating sacrificial powers of the priest coincide, and consequently that the sacrament is produced only in and through the Mass, the real difference between them is shown in that the sacrament is intended privately for the sanctification of the soul, whereas the sacrifice serves primarily to glorify God by adoration, thanksgiving, prayer, and expiation. The recipient of the one is God, who receives the sacrifice of His only-begotten Son; of the other, man, who receives the sacrament for his own good. Furthermore, the unbloody Sacrifice of the Eucharistic Christ is in its nature a transient action, while the Sacrament of the Altar continues as something permanent after the sacrifice, and can even be preserved in monstrance and ciborium. Finally, this difference also deserves mention: communion under one form only is the reception of the whole sacrament, whereas, without the use of the two forms of bread and wine (the symbolic separation of the Body and Blood), the mystical slaying of the victim, and therefore the Sacrifice of the Mass, does "

Melchizedek Connection, Royal Priesthood

Member of the Round Table

bbbbbbb

Guest

On and on

Ens Liturgicum

On and on

Member of the Round Table

Ens Liturgicum

On and on

Well-Known Member

On and on

Well-Known Member

On and on

On and on

Ens Liturgicum

On and on

Well-Known Member

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Well-Known Member

Ens Liturgicum

On and on

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency