The office of the priest

[Ramon96]

Context IS everything yes.
But Jesus' reason wasnt hypocricy.
His reason is clearly stated:

6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8 But be not ye called Rabbi:
for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9 And call no man your father upon the earth:
for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Again, why did he told his disciples not to call no man Father? Was he against the titles? No. Are we to take Christ' word literally? His Disciples didn't. Why should we? The Holy Apostles understood what Christ meant. They found no wrong in using the word "Father" to refer to spiritual leaders, as Christ did too (Matt. 3:9; Luke 3:8, Luke 16:24,30).

If we read Scriptures as whole, then we got to conclude the following:

A) Christ contradicted himself.
B) The Holy Apostles strayed away from Christ' teaching.
C) The Holy Bible can err.

However, if we read Christ' words within context, while reading Scriptures as a whole and within the Living Tradition of the Church, then Christ was not talking literally. He was using hyperbole. He main rejection was the attitude of the Pharisees, not the titles per se.

In IC.XC,
Ramon

P.S. Sometimes we need to dig deeper in Scriptures to find out the truth.......

I suggest all read this Why Orthodox Call their Pastor Father (GOCGO)

 

[E.C.]

In the book of Acts of the Apostles, the Apostles were made the first Bishops of the Church on the day of Pentecost. Their duties included preaching the word and administering the sacraments. In Acts Chapter 6 we read how some of the faithful were not receiving the sacraments because there were not enough Bishops to administer them. Thus the office of the deacon was instituted, and they were ordained with the laying of hands. (Acts 6:1-7.)

The office of the deacon was to administer the sacraments, but not to preach the word. This was soley for the Bishop.

Later on in the Church, the office of the priest was created to preach the word and administer the sacraments. The duties of the deacon were reduced.

Going off of this...

To the Protestants who don't like priests...

Is this not a practical reason for being? What do you have against a guy whose job it is to go out and give the Bread of Life to those who can not make it?

I ask this because somebody along the line abolished the office of the priest. The priest's job is to go out and distribute the Eucharist. Eventually he was allowed to consecrate the Eucharist - a job originally reserved for the bishop.
Why the removal of the priest? What brought about the dumping of the office of the priest?

Just my personal opinion, but I believe the church wanted to make what certain men taught seem to come from someone greater then the average person. Because of the connotation of the words priest, and father these two words replaced elder. Maybe this would not be wrong if Jesus hadn’t told us not to raise someone up above another. Jesus told us we were all equal.

We're all disciples, but we can't all be St. Paul.

Well! Priest and father; does not described an elders job.

What is your source for this? Here, you make a claim. How do you substantiate said claim?

What does that mean? All Americans can be President, but there is one President? All believers are priests, but you have to be in the office of a priest?

There are gifts and callings (apostles, prophets, evangelists, helpers, etc), but not everyone is an evangelist, etc. And we probably wouldn't say each believer is an evangelist. So, what does priest office and priesthood of all mean?

We can all be baseball players, but not everyone is Babe Ruth.

In the Old Testament world, not everyone could be a baseball player. Only those pesky Levites.

You cannot show me where any disciple of Jesus ever called another man here on earth his father.

Why is it whenever people don’t like what a verse says, the say it is taken out of context, hyperbole, or he wasn’t speaking to us?

First I didn’t take that passage out of context. You will have a hard time saying Jesus was exaggerating when he said that about calling another man father. Telling me that he was just talking to the Jews is almost the most ridiculous excuse of all of them.

Isn’t it strange how when it is convenient for your understanding of the written Word of God it becomes a history book? Well it is not. The Holy Spirit had those words placed in the Bible because they are talking to us.

Also I didn’t just come to my understanding by my reasoning. I asked Jesus, and he told me that it was dangerous for both parties. To call another man father is dangerous, and to be called father is dangerous.

It is a shame that you think only you or your church can read the whole Word of God, and have the Holy Spirit explain it to him or her.

Does this mean I can not call the guy whose XY chromosome helped create my body my father? I'm sorry, but that is what it sounds like to me.

 

[Standing Up]

-snip-

Why the removal of the priest? What brought about the dumping of the office of the priest?

-snip-

We can all be baseball players, but not everyone is Babe Ruth.

-snip-

I'd rephrase your second sentence to "we are all baseball players, but not everyone is Babe Ruth".

Perhaps the "can be" contributed to the dumping. 'Course some would say it (the Melchizedek priesthood of the believer) was always there, and is now necessary to be reasserted.

 

[E.C.]

I'd rephrase your second sentence to "we are all baseball players, but not everyone is Babe Ruth".

Perhaps the "can be" contributed to the dumping. 'Course some would say it (the Melchizedek priesthood of the believer) was always there, and is now necessary to be reasserted.

I was thinking about "we are", but then I remember that there are the Atheists who prefer to play football instead and deny the awesomeness and sensibility of baseball

 

[Rebekah30]

Yep Yep... done once and for all.

anamnesis.

Forgive me...

Better go look that one up again. It is exactly to bring something present from the past into the present.

I am giving you the answer "The Church of Antioch" gives me. I am not guessing and I am not reading on my own.

The Church knows her own books and know what they mean.

Forgive me...

I don't not questioning where or why you have that response, I am going by the Greek though.

Yeah, me too...

Forgive me...

Can you elaborate more? What do you think the meaning of anamnesis is?


I know this is off topic to the thread all, bear with me please.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Can you elaborate more? What do you think the meaning of anamnesis is?


I know this is off topic to the thread all, bear with me please.

Remembrance- Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of me." The Greek word for remembrance, anamnesis, does not imply simple psychological recollection. Enlightenment rationalistic assumptions have clouded many an interpretation of Jesus' words here. The word anamnesis, as it was often used in ancient times, means to bring the past into the present and the present into the past. In the Eucharist, we truly experience Christ's life, death, and resurrection, and Christ is made present to us, and we are made present to Him. This is far more dynamic than merely remembering something.

Forgive me...

 

[Rebekah30]

Thank you OrthodoxyUSA.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Thank you OrthodoxyUSA.

You are welcome. Thanks for being kind.

Forgive me...

 

[sunlover1]

Again, why did he told his disciples not to call no man Father? Was he against the titles? No. Are we to take Christ' word literally? His Disciples didn't. Why should we? The Holy Apostles understood what Christ meant. They found no wrong in using the word "Father" to refer to spiritual leaders, as Christ did too (Matt. 3:9; Luke 3:8, Luke 16:24,30).

I understand this is what you believe, IMO the answer is found
right in the same text.

If we read Scriptures as whole, then we got to conclude the following:

A) Christ contradicted himself.
B) The Holy Apostles strayed away from Christ' teaching.
C) The Holy Bible can err.

I don't come to any of the above conclusions.

However, if we read Christ' words within context,

6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8 But be not ye called Rabbi:
for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9 And call no man your father upon the earth:
for one is your Father, which is in heaven

while reading Scriptures as a whole and within the Living Tradition of the Church, then Christ was not talking literally. He was using hyperbole. He main rejection was the attitude of the Pharisees, not the titles per se.

In IC.XC,
Ramon

P.S. Sometimes we need to dig deeper in Scriptures to find out the truth.......

What you believe, is between you and God.

I was merely saying that, to ME, your interpretation made no sense
in light of context. Just my own opinion.

Blessings,
sunlover

 

[Polycarp1]

Rebekah, there is a line I like very much< to the effect that the Eucharist is the only functional time machine. In it we are present with Christ and the Twelve in the Upper Room that first Maundy Thursday, and at the unimaginable Wedding Feast at the End of Time -- with persecuted Christians in the catacombs of Rome and ruins in Russia, in prison camps in Uganda, with all that company of saints who have gone on to glory before us and all those faithful yet to come.

 

[Rebekah30]

You are welcome. Thanks for being kind.

Forgive me...

Rebekah, there is a line I like very much< to the effect that the Eucharist is the only functional time machine. In it we are present with Christ and the Twelve in the Upper Room that first Maundy Thursday, and at the unimaginable Wedding Feast at the End of Time -- with persecuted Christians in the catacombs of Rome and ruins in Russia, in prison camps in Uganda, with all that company of saints who have gone on to glory before us and all those faithful yet to come.

Thank you both.

 

[Giver]

I just did. Just because you either ignore them or reject them entirely is not my problem Giver. You could not have shown me, because no disciple of Jesus every called another man living here on earth at the time they were living here, their father. It is a shame that you twisted words around to make it sound like you were right.

The word "Father" and "Child" was used by the Holy Apostles, denoting a blood relation and spirituality (i.e., Acts 3:13,25; 5:30, Acts 7:2; 22:1; 14, 1 John 2:13, 1 Cor. 4:15, 1 Cor. 4:17, Phil. 2:22, Philemon 10, 1 Tim. 1:2,18). Saint Paul was the Early Christians Spiritual Father in the faith, as he told them (1 Cor 4:15).Again you can’t show me where anyone ever called Paul father. He was using father only as a way to show that he gave birth to their believing in Jesus.

1 Cor. 4:15 - Paul writes, "I became your father in Christ Jesus."

What so hard to understand about these verses? Jesus Christ was not against the titles per se. Did he not tell us the "honor our mother and father"? Yes he did, when someone is one’s father or mother. Not when some guy comes out of a seminary and the only thing he know about being a father is what he has read.




Isn't this what you during the above Scriptures I gave? I mostly certainty like that Scripture, yet I take Scriptures as a whole and through the Living Tradition of the Church to come up with a orthodox understanding of any given Scripture.
Yes I know and you do it so much better then others. Listen that is a cop out. I have read and understand the scriptures, and there is no way this is out of context.
(Matthew 23:8-9) “You, however must not allow yourselves to be called Rabbi, since you have only one Master, and you are all brothers. You must call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, and he is in heaven.”


You have a hard time taking Scriptures as a whole. Rather, what you do is post a Scripture, while ignoring the context of it and ignoring what other Scriptures said. Apparently, The Holy Apostles did not took him literally, and understood what he meant!



Who said it is a history book? They are talking to us, yet we must understand what he [Christ] meant.
The only way to be sure of what Jesus meant is to ask him.


Or so it is based upon your private revelation? I wonder how many of your beliefs are based on what this "Jesus told you"........
Isn’t it strange you are someone who says they use all of scripture, and really don’t know that Jesus gave us his Holy Spirit to teach us? You don’t know that scripture says that man will no longer need to ask his neighbor about God?

You put down private revelation, why? Do you put it down because Jesus has failed to talk to you? Remember Jesus said his people would hear his voice. Have you heard him talk to you? Don’t tell me when you hear your church you are hearing God. Jesus said his people would hear his voice.
Perhaps you should tangle the Scriptures at hand, instead of ignoring them........

In IC.XC,
Ramon

Perhaps you should write the scriptures out and see if they really say what you are alluding to what they say.

 

[E.C.]

Rebekah, there is a line I like very much< to the effect that the Eucharist is the only functional time machine. In it we are present with Christ and the Twelve in the Upper Room that first Maundy Thursday, and at the unimaginable Wedding Feast at the End of Time -- with persecuted Christians in the catacombs of Rome and ruins in Russia, in prison camps in Uganda, with all that company of saints who have gone on to glory before us and all those faithful yet to come.

That is quite true.

Kairos and Chronos. Kairos is "God's time" and Chronos is "man's time".

In the altar areas of an Orthodox church, we do not have watches on because we are on kairos and not chronos as a watch is only indicative of chronos and kairos is above chronos.

Kairos is... to put it simple... beyond comprehension. I think part of why the Divine Liturgy is so beautiful is because we transcend chronos into kairos.

 

[Ramon96]

You could not have shown me, because no disciple of Jesus every called another man living here on earth at the time they were living here, their father. It is a shame that you twisted words around to make it sound like you were right.

They Most certainty did. Any one who read Scriptures will see this. Why don't you?

Saint Paul told the Early Christians that he was there Father. Was Saint Paul wrong? Why would Saint Paul tell the Early Christians he was there Father if they couldn't call him that?

Here what Saint Paul wrote, "And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac" (Rom 9:10).

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were)" (Romans 4:16-17, Saint Paul)

The word "Father" and "Child" was used by the Holy Apostles, not always denoting a blood relation (i.e., Acts 7:2; 22:1; 14, 1 John 2:13, 1 Cor. 4:15, 1 Cor. 4:17, Phil. 2:22, Philemon 10, 1 Tim. 1:2,18). Saint Paul was the Early Christians Spiritual Father in the faith, as he told them (1 Cor 4:15).

Saint Peter (and Saint John) called David "Father" and called the OT Patriarchs "Fathers" (Acts 3:13,25; 5:30, Acts 4:25).

"The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go." (Saint Peter in Acts 3:13).

"The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree." (Acts 5:30)

"Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." (Acts 3:25)


Read Acts 7:11-12, 15,19,38,44-45,51-52 (Stephen refers to our "fathers" in the faith), Acts 7:32 (Stephen calls God the God of our "fathers.") and Acts 13:17,32,36; 24:14; 26:6; 28:17,25 (Saint Paul also refers to the God of our "fathers" in the faith). Read Rom. 4:1 (Saint Paul calls Abraham our "forefather.), Rom. 4:16-17 (Saint Paul says that Abraham is the "father" of us all and the "father" of many nations), and Rom. 9:10 (Saint Paul calls Isaac, a spiritual leader, our "forefather"). Saint James called Abraham "our Father" (James 2:21). Read Acts 22:3 (Saint Paul says he was educated according to the strict law of our "fathers"). Read 1 Peter 1:18, 2 Peter 3:4 (Saint Peter talked about our "Fathers"). Apparently, Christ' disciples err right?

You have a hard time taking Scriptures as a whole. Rather, what you do is post a Scripture, while ignoring the context of it and ignoring what other Scriptures said. Apparently, The Holy Apostles did not took him literally, and understood what he meant! In this verse, Jesus was discouraging His followers from elevating the scribes and Pharisees to the titles of &#8220;fathers&#8221; and &#8220;rabbis&#8221; because they were hypocrites. Christ was against the Jewish leaders because they did not practice what they preach, but they demand there fellow man to lavish them with special titles. Christ was not against the titles per se.

How about "teachers"? In the church at Antioch certain men were called "prophets and teachers" (Acts 13:1). Saint Paul not only recognized teachers as gifts of God to the Church (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), but he also did not hesitate to call himself "a teacher of the Gentiles." (2 Tim 1:11). Another reason why not to take Christ' words literally! Saint Paul didn't! Why should I listen to you Giver and take Christ' word literally, whereas the Holy Apostles didn't?

Who twisting words? What so hard about the word "Father" that the Holy Apostles used? You can't accept these Scriptures because the truth is hard to swallow. It's hard to accept the truth when you been told differently all your life.

Again you can&#8217;t show me where anyone ever called Paul father.

But Saint Paul call others, like Abraham and Isaac, "Father". You haven't read Scriptures.......

I have read and understand the scriptures

No you didn't. You took Scripture out of context and ignore other Scriptures to arrive at your twisted interpretation.

Isn&#8217;t it strange you are someone who says they use all of scripture, and really don&#8217;t know that Jesus gave us his Holy Spirit to teach us? You don&#8217;t know that scripture says that man will no longer need to ask his neighbor about God?

Who said I do not believe the Holy Spirit teach us? He do, through the Church. But let us not dwell on this issue. This is off-topic.

Isn't it strange that someone like you who claim to receive messages from Jesus and know Scriptures yet have zero knowledge of all the Scriptures wherein the Disciples of Jesus call man on earth "Father"? They didn't took Christ' words literally only you do.

Also, I must certainty know that whoever you talked to was not Jesus Christ of the Holy Scriptures, but some other person claiming to be Jesus. Christ will never tell someone something that contradicts Sacred Scriptures! I will be careful who talk to you claiming to be Jesus Christ. Saint Paul said the devil can transform into a angel of light (2 Cor 11:14)

Yes he did, when someone is one&#8217;s father or mother.

Then something is wrong here. Christ must have contradicted himself, right?. Why would he told his disciples to honor there mothers and fathers, yet at the same time tell them not to call man on earth there "Father"? You see the problem with your twisted interpretation of Christ' words in Matthew 23:8-10? You said that we have a excuse to call our biological dad "Father". But you take Christ' words literally, so one have to cancel out this! When it fits your needs, you make exceptions.

Perhaps you should write the scriptures out and see if they really say what you are alluding to what they say.

I tell you what Giver. I give you a challenge. Grab your Bible, and read the Scriptures I gave you. If by any chance they do not contain what I told you, then post what the Holy Bible said (verses what I said) and show that I am ignorant person. Perhaps I have a different Bible than you. Can you say, in front of God, that these Scriptures doesn't contain what I told you? Prove me wrong Giver.

Why are you afraid to tangle the Scriptures I gave you? I know deep inside, you know I am right, you just don't want to admit it. You keep making excuses because you really do not know how to explain the Scriptures I gave you.

In IC.XC,
Ramon

 

[Giver]

They Most certainty did. Any one who read Scriptures will see this. Why don't you?

Saint Paul told the Early Christians that he was there Father. Was Saint Paul wrong? Why would Saint Paul tell the Early Christians he was there Father if they couldn't call him that?
Because they knew what Jesus said and would never have called Paul,(father), and you won&#8217;t be able to find any evidence that they ever did. Paul made a poor choice of describing his role in their conversion by describing it that way. In fact I asked Jesus why Paul did that. Jesus told me that Paul wasn&#8217;t perfect either.

You fail to read what Jesus said our don&#8217;t want to acknowledge that you do know, and that the church is wrong by calling their ministers father. Read what he said carefully.
(Matthew 23:8-9) &#8220;You, however must not allow yourselves to be called Rabbi, since you have only one Master, and you are all brothers. You must call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, and he is in heaven.&#8221;

All the scripture you quote that have the disciples calling anyone father are people who are no longer on earth.

Here what Saint Paul wrote, "And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac" (Rom 9:10).

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were)" (Romans 4:16-17, Saint Paul)

The word "Father" and "Child" was used by the Holy Apostles, not always denoting a blood relation (i.e., Acts 7:2; 22:1; 14, 1 John 2:13, 1 Cor. 4:15, 1 Cor. 4:17, Phil. 2:22, Philemon 10, 1 Tim. 1:2,18). Saint Paul was the Early Christians Spiritual Father in the faith, as he told them (1 Cor 4:15).

Saint Peter (and Saint John) called David "Father" and called the OT Patriarchs "Fathers" (Acts 3:13,25; 5:30, Acts 4:25).

"The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go." (Saint Peter in Acts 3:13).

"The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree." (Acts 5:30)

"Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." (Acts 3:25)


Read Acts 7:11-12, 15,19,38,44-45,51-52 (Stephen refers to our "fathers" in the faith), Acts 7:32 (Stephen calls God the God of our "fathers.") and Acts 13:17,32,36; 24:14; 26:6; 28:17,25 (Saint Paul also refers to the God of our "fathers" in the faith). Read Rom. 4:1 (Saint Paul calls Abraham our "forefather.), Rom. 4:16-17 (Saint Paul says that Abraham is the "father" of us all and the "father" of many nations), and Rom. 9:10 (Saint Paul calls Isaac, a spiritual leader, our "forefather"). Saint James called Abraham "our Father" (James 2:21). Read Acts 22:3 (Saint Paul says he was educated according to the strict law of our "fathers"). Read 1 Peter 1:18, 2 Peter 3:4 (Saint Peter talked about our "Fathers"). Apparently, Christ' disciples err right?

You have a hard time taking Scriptures as a whole. Rather, what you do is post a Scripture, while ignoring the context of it and ignoring what other Scriptures said. Apparently, The Holy Apostles did not took him literally, and understood what he meant! In this verse, Jesus was discouraging His followers from elevating the scribes and Pharisees to the titles of &#8220;fathers&#8221; and &#8220;rabbis&#8221; because they were hypocrites. Christ was against the Jewish leaders because they did not practice what they preach, but they demand there fellow man to lavish them with special titles. Christ was not against the titles per se.

How about "teachers"? In the church at Antioch certain men were called "prophets and teachers" (Acts 13:1). Saint Paul not only recognized teachers as gifts of God to the Church (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), but he also did not hesitate to call himself "a teacher of the Gentiles." (2 Tim 1:11). Another reason why not to take Christ' words literally! Saint Paul didn't! Why should I listen to you Giver and take Christ' word literally, whereas the Holy Apostles didn't?

Who twisting words? What so hard about the word "Father" that the Holy Apostles used? You can't accept these Scriptures because the truth is hard to swallow. It's hard to accept the truth when you been told differently all your life.



But Saint Paul call others, like Abraham and Isaac, "Father". You haven't read Scriptures.......



No you didn't. You took Scripture out of context and ignore other Scriptures to arrive at your twisted interpretation.



Who said I do not believe the Holy Spirit teach us? He do, through the Church. But let us not dwell on this issue. This is off-topic.

Isn't it strange that someone like you who claim to receive messages from Jesus and know Scriptures yet have zero knowledge of all the Scriptures wherein the Disciples of Jesus call man on earth "Father"? They didn't took Christ' words literally only you do.I believe you are being the deceived one.

Also, I must certainty know that whoever you talked to was not Jesus Christ of the Holy Scriptures, but some other person claiming to be Jesus. Christ will never tell someone something that contradicts Sacred Scriptures! I will be careful who talk to you claiming to be Jesus Christ. Saint Paul said the devil can transform into a angel of light (2 Cor 11:14)



Then something is wrong here. Christ must have contradicted himself, right?. Why would he told his disciples to honor there mothers and fathers, yet at the same time tell them not to call man on earth there "Father"? You see the problem with your twisted interpretation of Christ' words in Matthew 23:8-10? You said that we have a excuse to call our biological dad "Father". But you take Christ' words literally, so one have to cancel out this! When it fits your needs, you make exceptions.



I tell you what Giver. I give you a challenge. Grab your Bible, and read the Scriptures I gave you. If by any chance they do not contain what I told you, then post what the Holy Bible said (verses what I said) and show that I am ignorant person. Perhaps I have a different Bible than you. Can you say, in front of God, that these Scriptures doesn't contain what I told you? Prove me wrong Giver.

Why are you afraid to tangle the Scriptures I gave you? I know deep inside, you know I am right, you just don't want to admit it. You keep making excuses because you really do not know how to explain the Scriptures I gave you.

In IC.XC,
Ramon

I talked about the Holy Spirit being given to us to teach us. Why did you ignore my post about that? One&#8217;s personal witness should not be ignored. That is why we are given the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The gifts keep the church on the narrow road.

Because the church has failed to listen to the apostles, prophets, and others with the gift of tongues, interpretations of tongues it has taken a big detour off the narrow path to Heaven.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Per the request of Standing Up (or dare, depending on your outlook on life)...

This thread is about the office of the priest. There is in the New Testament Church an office of clergy which in the English language is called "priest".

The root of this word is actually from Greek. "Presbyter" was the name for a priest. I believe in English it was something like "Elder". Eventually somehow over time and language differences, it was "prests" (perhaps a nickname?) and now to what we in 2009 know and love as "priest".


Who here knows how this office began? What was its original purpose? What was the reason for being of this office?

Use whatever resources thine own tradition or Tradition permit whilst I prepare my foxhole.

1. In the NT, there is no office of priest. The only time that's mentioned in the NT is in reference to Christ who is the High Priest and to all Christians.


2. What I was taught in the Catholic Church is that the clergyman is called a "priest" because he offers the "bloodless" Sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist in the Mass upon the Altar of the Lord. A priest is one who offers Sacrifices - as a Catholic priest does, according to Catholic theology.


3. There appear to be several offices that developed early on - by the 50's anyway: Bishop, presbyter/elder/pastor, deacon. It's not clear exactly how these offices were distinctive, but many are of the opinion that a bishop was a supervisory role, the presbyter/elder/pastor was a teaching role, and deacon was a serving role focused mainly on non-spiritual physical issues (caring for widows, for example). All these originally seem limited to the individual congregation. EVENTUALLY, bishop developed into a role of supervising especially clergy in a group of congregations, presbyter/elder/pastor into the spiritual teacher of the congregation (similar to the role of rabbi in the synogogue) and deacon decreased and eventually faded away and got reassigned to various other offices with various monikers.


4. In COMMON contemporary usage, "priest" is often interchangable with pastor. Today, "father" "priest" "pastor" are all the same thing in common churchese. In Europe, Lutherans call their congregational clergy "Priests" even though they reject the concept of the Holy Eucharist as an on-going Sacrifice of Jesus on the altar; the term continues even though it no longer carries the thought of one offering Sacrifices on an altar. In the USA, Lutherans adopted the term "pastor" and use that almost exclusively.



Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah




.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

I disagree.

Tts 1:5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Textus Receptus
&#932;&#959;&#8059;&#964;&#959;&#965; &#967;&#8049;&#961;&#953;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#8051;&#955;&#953;&#960;&#8057;&#957; &#963;&#949; &#7952;&#957; &#922;&#961;&#8053;&#964;&#8131; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#964;&#8048; &#955;&#949;&#8055;&#960;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#7952;&#960;&#953;&#948;&#953;&#959;&#961;&#952;&#8061;&#963;&#8131; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#8053;&#963;&#8131;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#8048; &#960;&#8057;&#955;&#953;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#946;&#965;&#964;&#8051;&#961;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#8033;&#962; &#7952;&#947;&#8061; &#963;&#959;&#953; &#948;&#953;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#958;&#8049;&#956;&#951;&#957;

&#960;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#946;&#8059;&#964;&#949;&#961;&#959;&#962; = presbyteros

In english presbyteros has been shortened to Priest.


Obviously Bishops (Titus) had the authority to ordain presbyteros.

So yes... It is in the NT.

English speaking Christians just miss it because of the wording chosen by interpreters.


Forgive me...

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I disagree.

Tts 1:5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Textus Receptus
&#932;&#959;&#8059;&#964;&#959;&#965; &#967;&#8049;&#961;&#953;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#8051;&#955;&#953;&#960;&#8057;&#957; &#963;&#949; &#7952;&#957; &#922;&#961;&#8053;&#964;&#8131; &#7989;&#957;&#945; &#964;&#8048; &#955;&#949;&#8055;&#960;&#959;&#957;&#964;&#945; &#7952;&#960;&#953;&#948;&#953;&#959;&#961;&#952;&#8061;&#963;&#8131; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#8053;&#963;&#8131;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#964;&#8048; &#960;&#8057;&#955;&#953;&#957; &#960;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#946;&#965;&#964;&#8051;&#961;&#959;&#965;&#962; &#8033;&#962; &#7952;&#947;&#8061; &#963;&#959;&#953; &#948;&#953;&#949;&#964;&#945;&#958;&#8049;&#956;&#951;&#957;

&#960;&#961;&#949;&#963;&#946;&#8059;&#964;&#949;&#961;&#959;&#962; = presbyteros

In english presbyteros has been shortened to Priest.


Obviously Bishops (Titus) had the authority to ordain presbyteros.

So yes... It is in the NT.

Sooo......


1. You disagree with my Catholic teachers that priest = one who offers Sacrifices upon the Altar of the Lord and since the Holy Eucharist is a Sacrifice, that's why the Officient of such is a PRIEST?

2. How in the world is "priest" a shortened form of the word "presbyteros" in English? Totally lost me there!

3. No, priest in reference to an office in the local congregation is not ever mentioned in the NT. Not once. The ONLY times it is mentioned is in reference to those still under the Old Covenant ("the high priest Caiaphas" for example), in reference to Jesus, and in reference to all Christians. It's never mentioned as an congregational office of ministry. I think you know that.





.

 

[Rebekah30]

That is quite true.

Kairos and Chronos. Kairos is "God's time" and Chronos is "man's time".

In the altar areas of an Orthodox church, we do not have watches on because we are on kairos and not chronos as a watch is only indicative of chronos and kairos is above chronos.

Kairos is... to put it simple... beyond comprehension. I think part of why the Divine Liturgy is so beautiful is because we transcend chronos into kairos.

Thanks for the addition info!

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Sooo......


1. You disagree with my Catholic teachers that priest = one who offers Sacrifices upon the Altar of the Lord and since the Holy Eucharist is a Sacrifice, that's why the Officient of such is a PRIEST?

2. How in the world is "priest" a shortened form of the word "presbyteros" in English? Totally lost me there!

3. No, priest in reference to an office in the local congregation is not ever mentioned in the NT. Not once. The ONLY times it is mentioned is in reference to those still under the Old Covenant ("the high priest Caiaphas" for example), in reference to Jesus, and in reference to all Christians. It's never mentioned as an congregational office of ministry. I think you know that.





.

I think you are highly mistaken.

But then, everyone knows we disagree.

Forgive me...