Sacerdotalism

[Standing Up]

There is not barrier; the rending of the curtain in the Temple attests to that!

Praise God!

Amen.

 

[Trento]

What version is that?

But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving (offer the eucharist because eucharist is thanksgiving) after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one who is at odds with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: "In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations."

What sacrifice? Your thanksgiving, your eucharist that you present. Not the priest's, but yours. Heb. 13:15 By him (Jesus) therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of [our] lips giving thanks to his name.

In addition, in the next paragraph, the didache, following scripture, recognizes only elders (bishops) and deacons. Nothing about a priest. So it's impossible to be referencing the later idea of a priest and resacrifice.

It's the version that Protestant Patristic scholars gave us .Protestant early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly writes that in the early Church "the Eucharist was regarded as the distinctively Christian sacrifice. . . . Malachi’s prediction (1:10–11) that the Lord would reject Jewish sacrifices and instead would have "a pure offering" made to him by the Gentiles in every place was seized upon by Christians as a prophecy of the Eucharist. The Didache 70 AD indeed actually applies the term thusia, or sacrifice, to the Eucharist. . . .
In addition St .Ignatius backs this up in his Letters which we know comes from Apostolic teaching.
Adolph Harnack,another Protestant Patristic scholar who was not always so minded along with Lightfoot another Protestant scholar describes these proofs as "testimony as strong to the genuineness of the epistles as any that can be conceived of" (Expositor, ser. 3, III, p. 11). The evidence is overwhelming to the Patristic scholars and As an intimate friend of Ignatius, Polycarp writing shortly after the martyr's death, bears contemporaneous witness to the authenticity of these letters.

I’m amazed that so many people don;t want to know what’s going on. The blind trust and apathy will ultimately destroy us. The Catholic Church has existed for almost 2000 years, and it certainly has been tried by Heretics, Jews, Romans, Protestants, the French Revolution, Hitler, Communism, and a whole host of others to overthrow it.
How is it that massive empires such as the Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire, Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany, USSR, ect. have collapsed yet the Catholic Church has survived? Divine intervention.

 

[simonthezealot]

Where is it not?

The last supper, the feeding, the great commission, Paul's assertion of his apostleship, etc etc etc...

Most specifically, the grace, that is the love of God is clearly administered through the Eucharist:
Joh 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
Yes - this is the love that is manifested in the sacrement of the gathering, the culmination of which is union with God, He who is divided yet remains whole, He who is consumed yet is never consumed, He who is fully present yet never in heaven. This is the love that Christ showed the apostles at the Last Supper and commanded them to go and show this love to each other. This is the new covenant - love; the love Christ exhibited in the gather of His flock together in His name, we become the Body of Christ and we consume the Body of Christ, He is the head of the Body - the priest or bishop fulfills role of He who is Ascended into heaven, who's body is glorified, he is the tongs that delivers the coal to our lips that wipes away our transgressions. This is the scripture, this is the truth - there is no way around it.

Nowhere in the poetic writing you've pieced together indicates that it takes a sacerdos,(someone special to perform the sacred giving of grace) nor anywhere in scripture.

 

[Christos Anesti]

Sure it is, except you aren't aware that's what happened about 1800 years ago as the church departed from what was handed down.

The gates of hell prevailed against the Church until relatively recentally when the radical branch of the Protestant reformation happened and people finally understood the "real" meaning of the Bible? This is exactly what the Jehovah's Witness, Mormons, and SDA teach. All the groups that want to create a new religion and pretend that it's actually the doctrine of Christ.

 

[Standing Up]

It's the version that Protestant Patristic scholars gave us .Protestant early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly writes that in the early Church "the Eucharist was regarded as the distinctively Christian sacrifice. . . . Malachi’s prediction (1:10–11) that the Lord would reject Jewish sacrifices and instead would have "a pure offering" made to him by the Gentiles in every place was seized upon by Christians as a prophecy of the Eucharist. The Didache 70 AD indeed actually applies the term thusia, or sacrifice, to the Eucharist. . . .
In addition St .Ignatius backs this up in his Letters which we know comes from Apostolic teaching.
Adolph Harnack,another Protestant Patristic scholar who was not always so minded along with Lightfoot another Protestant scholar describes these proofs as "testimony as strong to the genuineness of the epistles as any that can be conceived of" (Expositor, ser. 3, III, p. 11). The evidence is overwhelming to the Patristic scholars and As an intimate friend of Ignatius, Polycarp writing shortly after the martyr's death, bears contemporaneous witness to the authenticity of these letters.

One more time. The Didache, like the NT, does not recognize a distinct NT priest office. Chapter 15 lists just the two, bishop and deacon. Therefore, the concept of eucharist as sacrifice is not at all like it came to be understood later. It is impossible. They're trying to assert something like, Newton "discovered" gravity, this means E=mc2.

Besides, the Didache tells us exactly in chapter 9 what it speaks about in chapter 14.

9:1 But concerning the Eucharist, after this fashion give ye thanks.

14:1 But on the Lord's day, after that ye have assembled together, break bread and give thanks, having in addition confessed your sins, that your sacrifice may be pure.

Therefore, again, there is no separate identifiable priest offering a sacrifice. There is however bishops and deacons and you offering the eucharist, thanksgiving. If I come to your house, you lead. If you come to my house, I'll lead. Paul to Corinth gives instructions to the brethren. There is nothing about priests.

It's the OP. Can you do that? If not, why not?

 

[Standing Up]

The gates of hell prevailed against the Church

Sorry to "interupt", but that's simply part of the problem. Gates are defensive, Mt. 27:52, they came out right after Christ. The gates of hell did not prevail.

1 Ths. 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

Do you believe that? I do, therefore, the gates of hell still do not prevail.

until relatively recentally when the radical branch of the Protestant reformation happened and people finally understood the "real" meaning of the Bible? This is exactly what the Jehovah's Witness, Mormons, and SDA teach. All the groups that want to create a new religion and pretend that it's actually the doctrine of Christ.

When the very early church was presented with various claims of catholicity or orthodoxy, they went backward. How old is your teaching?

I know you reject papal infallibitly. Why? It is new. There is nothing about it hundreds of years ago.

To the OP, if we use the Didache as an example, it lists only bishops and deacons. There's nothing about priests and sacrifices. Why use Cyprian who came 200 years later to support those notions?

Folks, we say these things in love, that we all agree and that there be no divisions ...

 

[Christos Anesti]

To the OP, if we use the Didache as an example, it lists only bishops and deacons. Why use Cyprian who came 200 years later?

The practice changed when the bishop could no longer be present at all the Churches in his dioceses to perform the Eucharistic Mystery. Instead the priests were given the authority by the bishop to perform the rite in his stead. The Sacrament of confession is also performed slightly differently now. Originally confession was made publicly before the whole congregation. This worked fine when the Church was small and composed only of devout believers. When the Church grew and gained official status in the empire less devout people associated themselves with the Church and public confessions became a cause of scandal so it was made private instead. The method of presenting the Eucharist has also changed. Originally the Body and Blood where given separately but then people started hiding the body in their mouth and taking it outside of Church with them so it was instead mixed with the Blood. Times change and new requirements may present themselves. I don't see what the problem is with adapting if it is done in an orderly and prayerful manner that is respectful of the spirit of the tradition handed down to us ? The important thing is that a line of Apostolic succession is present for both bishops and priests that links down through the generations to the Apostles themselves via the laying on of hands. I don't think anyone is claiming that at the time of the Apostles the offices were as clearly demarcated and defined as they are now. I don't see why that is a problem however.

 

[simonthezealot]

I don't think anyone is claiming that at the time of the Apostles the offices were as clearly demarcated and defined as they are now. I don't see why that is a problem however.

They weren't defined at all! not in the word of God and NOT in the earliest writings.

 

[Christos Anesti]

They weren't defined at all! not in the word of God and NOT in the earliest writings.

If that is the case and we do not have first hand written accounts of every aspect of the office/s (if one throws out the writings of St Ignatius as "unauthentic" or consider those of Clement of Alexandria (2nd Century) to be to late, etc..) than we can either 1. speculate or 2. trust what has been handed down by the Church throughout the centuries. What makes your historical speculation inviolate and authoritative? What if your scholars are wrong? I trust the Orthodox Church because of it's fruits ("by their fruits you will know them") and by the love of it's saints, confessors, and martyrs ("By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another"). Because of this I have faith in the one , holy , catholic and apostolic Church. This is more important than any fallible historical investigation or speculation.

 

[simonthezealot]

If that is the case and we do not have first hand written accounts of every aspect of the office/s (if one throws out the writings of St Ignatius as "unauthentic" or consider those of Clement of Alexandria (2nd Century) to be to late, etc..) than we can either 1. speculate or 2. trust what has been handed down by the Church throughout the centuries. What makes your historical speculation inviolate and authoritative?

Much safer to look at what's in God's written word that's why it is authoritative.
The book of Hebrews from chapters 5-10 makes it quite clear that we are now the priesthood and Christ made the final sacrifice.

 

[Kristos]

They weren't defined at all! not in the word of God and NOT in the earliest writings.

I don't understand how you can not see this. It was defined in heaven before time! Does the cherubim say to the seraphim - you are a barrier between me and God? No, that is utterly ridiculous. Is not a man the head of a woman? Does this put man between woman and God? Should not a woman cover head when praying? Why? because of the angels! Because there is order in heaven, not chaos. Are we all apostles? Are we all prophets? Are we all teachers?

Jas 3:16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.

 

[Kristos]

Much safer to look at what's in God's written word that's why it is authoritative.
The book of Hebrews from chapters 5-10 makes it quite clear that we are now the priesthood and Christ made the final sacrifice.

Of course we are all priest, how else could be receive the holy spirit, or Christ himself in the Eucharist? This is central tenant of Orthodox theology, so implying that because we have ordained presbyters that we don't believe in the priesthood of all believer is a strawman.

 

[simonthezealot]

I don't understand how you can not see this. It was defined in heaven before time! Does the cherubim say to the seraphim - you are a barrier between me and God? No, that is utterly ridiculous. Is not a man the head of a woman? Does this put man between woman and God? Should not a woman cover head when praying? Why? because of the angels! Because there is order in heaven, not chaos. Are we all apostles? Are we all prophets? Are we all teachers?

Jas 3:16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.

The point is Kristos scripture shows no support to placing the priest between the confessors of sins and the forgiveness of sins, or to exalt the priesthood as mediator between the sinner and God.

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; (I Tim 2:5, KJV.),
regardless of the religious title, who can forgive sin? One alone…
Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? (Mk.2:7).
Furthermore, every believer has free, unrestricted access to God's grace through prayer
By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God (Rom. 5:2);
Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. ( Heb. 4:16).
There is no need to repeat Christ's sacrifice for sins because it has been accomplished once and for all
For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.Heb.9:26;
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Heb 10:10-14
Any attempts to do so is an abomination before God.

 

[Kristos]

I don't see how any of those verses contradict what I am saying. You are associating hierarchy with barriers and ministry with mediation. I disagree with your conclusions based on the multiple biblical examples that I have already provided. A man is no more a barrier to a woman than a presbyter to a communicant.

 

[simonthezealot]

I don't see how any of those verses contradict what I am saying. You are associating hierarchy with barriers and ministry with mediation. I disagree with your conclusions based on the multiple biblical examples that I have already provided. A man is no more a barrier to a woman than a presbyter to a communicant.

Presbyter i would agree, but a priest/sacerdos is different, and is no longer applicable under the new covenant.

 

[Standing Up]

Presbyter i would agree, but a priest/sacerdos is different, and is no longer applicable under the new covenant.

It's always those semantics Presbyter DOES NOT mean levitical-type priest, as it came to be misunderstood LATER.

In addition to scripture and the Didache's two offices of bishop and deacon, believe Clement of Rome, ironically, also only mentions the two offices.

 

[jckstraw72]

according to your definition of barrier, the Bible is a barrier between you and God -- why must you read some book to learn morea bout Him? and pray is a barrier -- why must you do this action to get to know God better? and a pastor is a barrier-- why do you need some other guy to talk to you about God?! why arent you and God just tight right now without you having to do anything?!

 

[MamaZ]

according to your definition of barrier, the Bible is a barrier between you and God -- why must you read some book to learn morea bout Him? and pray is a barrier -- why must you do this action to get to know God better? and a pastor is a barrier-- why do you need some other guy to talk to you about God?! why arent you and God just tight right now without you having to do anything?!

This book is His words. This is why we are to live on His word. Praying is intimate between you and God.. We are told in scripture to preach the word in season and out of season. For we feed on Gods word.

 

[jckstraw72]

This book is His words. This is why we are to live on His word. Praying is intimate between you and God.. We are told in scripture to preach the word in season and out of season. For we feed on Gods word.

but these are items you need and things you need to do in order to draw near to God -- they are your barriers.

 

[Dorothea]

Must the divine blessing of the Eucharist come from a priest? the answer is yes according to both your churches teachings,right?
So how can you guys not see this as a barrier or insulation between yourselves and God.

Where do you see this in the New Testament?

Because Christ appointed men to serve Him through His apostles and their successors. They are there, unworthy as they are (my priest says of himself all the time), to serve the sacraments. It's not every man for himself - chaos - in serving His most pure Body and Blood.