No Priests?
This came from Father Don-Purdom, and a link to his other content is rightfully included. [Edits appearing in brackets are my own]
There are moments in your faith journey when you discover that what you were taught about Christianity, and what the early Church and Christians actually believed, are not always the same thing.
For many people, [especially modern Protestant Christians], the idea of priests feels foreign, maybe unbiblical, and perhaps even dangerous. Some were taught, in fact, that the early Church had no sacramental priesthood at all....[so they figure it should not exist.] Others were told that the concept of priests was, "invented" centuries later by men seeking power and control.
- But what would you do if that simply is not true?
- What if the New Testament itself reveals ordained presbyters exercising sacramental ministry from the very beginning?
- What if the earliest disciples of the Apostles spoke openly about bishops, priests, apostolic succession, and the Eucharist long before Rome ever became the center of Christianity?
- And perhaps even more importantly, what if much of the modern confusion only comes from how certain Greek words were translated by Protestants as a result of their reformation?
- What would you do?
In this article, I'm answering the question:
“Were There Priests in the Early Church?”
We will explore:
• The true meaning of the Greek word “Presbyteros”
• Why many Bibles translate it as “elder,"... when they shouldn't
• The sacramental role of priests in the New Testament
• What the earliest Church leaders (Fathers) taught
• St. John Chrysostom’s incredible work On the Priesthood
• The difference between the, "priesthood of all believers," aka, self-priesthood, and ordained priesthood.
• Why the Old Testament and New Testament follow the same priestly pattern.
[This is not about attacking anyone's religion or beliefs, although, regrettably, some will take it that way. Rather, it is about fearlessly - lovingly - uncovering the historical and biblical reality of the early Church... the same Church from which all Christians ultimately sprang.
I know this treatise will challenge many entrenched assumptions and notions. As Archbishop Fulton J, Sheen once observed...,
So this will open some eyes - and it will probably anger some people. All I can say is - "Don't take this personally." This is an examination of the truth. All I ask is that you follow that path.
If, in the end, you still do not want to accept these things, that's okay. My goal is to help you understand.]
🕈
Were There Priests in the Early Church?
The Biblical and Historical Evidence Most Protestants Never Hear.
If there really were no priests in the early Church, then one of the foundational structures of Orthodox, Catholic, and all ancient Christian worship collapses entirely. And since all Chritianity stems from these ancient structures, you cannot exclude one from the other.
If the apostles never established a sacramental priesthood, then the Eucharist becomes merely symbolic as some imagine, apostolic succession died with the Apostles and is meaningless, and nearly the entire witness of early Christianity stands in contradiction to modern Protestant assumptions.
Yet, when we actually examine the New Testament, the Greek language of Scripture, and the writings of the earliest Christians, a very different picture emerges.
The early Church was not a loose collection of independent believers, just small groups in cabins eating meager meals together, with no cohesive, sacramental authority or ordained ministry.
Instead, it was deeply liturgical, hierarchical, sacramental, and structured around bishops, presbyters, and deacons. [This should come as no surprise to anyone, as The Church arose from Jewish tradtion.]
What makes this discussion even more fascinating is that much of the modern confusion comes not from the Bible itself, ...[well, not from the origonal Bible texts, anyway]. Rather, it stems from translation choices made during and after the Protestant reformation...even down to this day.
It comes down to the fact that theological assumptions and self-interpretation shaped how certain Greek words were rendered into English — particularly the word, "presbyteros."
But, the historical and biblical evidence is far more compelling than most modern Christians realize.
You can Now Listen to Each Article
The Word “Presbyter” (πρεσβύτερος)
The English word, "priest," goes all the way back to the Greek word πρεσβύτερος (presbyteros), meaning “elder.”
Over time, the word evolved linguistically:
- Greek: presbyteros
- Late Latin: presbyter
- Old English: preost
- Modern English: priest
[At this point you may not really understand why this is important. Maybe you're asking, "Why does this linguistic breakdown even matter?"]
Because wording has been CHANGED from the original texts, and those changes have been deliberate. Many modern readers have very different understandings of these two words, and they assume “elder” and “priest” are entirely different concepts. However, both historically and linguistically, they are not!
We know that the New Testament writings were in Greek, and the Greek word, "presbyteros" was used numerous times to describe ordained leaders within the Church. But it isn't the modern idea of an, "elder."
Presbyter in the New Testament
One of the major controversies surrounding this discussion is the way Protestant Bible translations have rendered the Greek word presbyteros as, “elder” - instead of “priest.”
While presbyteros *could* mean “elder” in some contexts, in this theological context it didn't - and it doesn't. This is far more theological than merely a linguistic stewpot.
Here's what happened.
During the Protestant reformation, the refromists strongly rejected the sacrificial and sacramental understanding of priesthood that had existed within the Church for over 1500 years. [To be frank, they deliberately rejected anything that had to do with the Church. They simply did it out of hand... "If it's of the Church - we will reject it and form our own workarounds."]
But because of this purposeful censorship, translators came to use the term “elder” over time, in order to distance THIER ideas of New Testament ministry from the concept of the ordained sacramental priesthood that has always been a part of Gods plan...and which was part of the original text works.]
The irony is especially thick, because the English word, "priest" itself is historically derived from, 'presbyter.' The two words are not opposites. Rather, “priest” developed linguistically from the very Greek word used throughout the New Testament.
[In other words, modern readers can be misled led to think that, “elder” refers to a simple church administrator, or some old guy that has been a member of the congregation for years. They may view it as something merely ceremonial.]
But, “priest,” refers to the way the early, New Testament Christians knew the concept. They never saw those who were "presbyters," as anything but those who served God by exercising the duties of sacramental, liturgical, and pastoral authority.
This becomes clear when we examine the biblical evidence itself.
- Acts 14:23
Paul and Barnabas appoint presbyters in every church:
“They appointed presbyters* for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, commended them to the Lord in whom they had put their faith.…”
This was not informal leadership. These men were appointed - and committed to the Lord - through prayer and fasting in an ecclesiastical act.
- James 5:14
The presbyters are entrusted with sacramental ministry:
“Is anyone among you sick?* He should summon the presbyters of the church, and they should pray over him and anoint [him] with oil in the name of the Lord,…”
Here the presbyters administer healing through prayer and oil — an early form of sacramental anointing.
- 1 Timothy 4:14
Ordination occurs through the laying on of hands:
“Do not neglect the gift you have, which was conferred on you through the prophetic word with the imposition of hands of the presbyterate."
The priesthood was not a self-appointed position. Grace was imparted through the divine act of ordination.
- Titus 1:5
Paul instructs Titus:
“ For this reason I left you in Crete so that you might set right what remains to be done and appoint presbyters in every town, as I directed you,”
Again, the apostolic Church establishes a visible and ordered clergy.
Were These Merely “Elders” ... or Actual Priests?
[Did you go check these verses in your Bible. If you didn't, go do that now. Ready? If you're an anti-catholic Protestant, I'm going to bet that whatever Bible you have uses the word "elder," instead of presbyter. And you're probably ready to argue that these, “elders” were simply mature believers who taught Scripture and managed congregations.
Remember you've been taught to think that for the last 500 years.
But the New Testament passages presented here came from Catholic Bibles. So why the difference?
Because Catholic Bibles use original verbiage from the oldest texts available in their versions; they are carefully verified for this authenticity. However, many Protestant Bibles have been subjected to the word play we've described up to this point. So if you really want to know what was intended from the origin - you need a Catholic Bible.]
So as you can see, Scripture clearly portrays the presbyter/priest as something much more than our idea of an "elder...."
The presbyters:
- Exercised spiritual authority,
- Administered sacraments,
- Governed the Church,
- Preached doctrine,
- Forgave sins in Christ’s name
- Were ordained through apostolic succession.
This ministry reflects continuity with the Old Testament priesthood, though transformed and fulfilled in Christ. The early Church never understood ordained ministry as merely administrative. It was sacramental.
Christ as the Fulfillment of the Priesthood
Catholicism, either Roman or Orthodox, teaches that Jesus Christ is the eternal High Priest. The Epistle to the Hebrews repeatedly emphasizes this:
“We have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God…” (Hebrews 4:14)
Christ fulfills and perfects the Old Covenant priesthood. But His fulfillment did not abolish ministerial priesthood. Rather, He established a new covenant priesthood that participates in His own ministry. He sent them out in His place.
This is exactly what we see at the Last Supper. In Luke 22:19
Christ tells the apostles:
“Do this in remembrance of Me.”
The word "do" is crucial as is the motivation for fulfillin gthis commanement. The apostles are commissioned to continue the Eucharistic offering. That's what this means. That is what He meant. They understood it just that way, which is why they did it. [Many today, 2,000 years later, want to sometimes dodge around it, telling themselves things like, "Wellll...it was only symbolic..."]
But this Eucharistic ministry becomes central to the identity of the priesthood in the early Church. [There's no reason to think it was to be anything else, and there's no reason to get around it's importance. They didn't - why would we?]
The Priesthood in the Early Church Fathers
But don't take my word for it. Lets review the written historical evidence from the early Church Fathers - it is overwhelming
- St. Ignatius of Antioch (comments c. AD 107)
St. Ignatius was a disciple of the Apostle John, himself. His writings reveal a Church already possessing bishops, presbyters, and deacons in clearly defined sacramental roles.
He writes:
“Let no one do anything pertaining to the Church apart from the bishop."
[In other words, don't run off and do you your own thing just because you can think of it.]
And elsewhere:
"Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
Ignatius consistently describes the Eucharist as something offered under the authority of the bishop and presbyters.
This is astonishingly early evidence — within living memory of the apostles.
- St. Irenaeus of Lyons (2nd Century
In his famous work, Against Heresies (ca. 180 AD), St. Irenaeus defended apostolic succession against heretics by pointing to the ordained bishops who preserved the faith handed down from the apostles.
“One should not seek among others the truth that can be easily gotten from the Church. For in her, as in a rich treasury, the apostles have placed all that pertains to truth, so that everyone can drink this beverage of life. She is the door of life. For she is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers." (Book III, 4.1)
[Irenaeus did not mean any other church, and not a Protestant one...as the Protestant reformation was still 1400 years away. Some Protestants tell temselves that they are, "the church...," the one that was always meant. Or rather, by being a church, any and all of them are the one(s) He intended. And there is some seeming agreement with that in Corinthians.
But we will see in a bit why that is a product of their own imagination.]
Iranaeus here tells us clearly that true doctrine was inseparable from sacramental continuity and ordained ministry, and it is to be found in the Catholic Church.
More on this can be found here: St. Irenaeus on the Church
- St. Cyprian of Carthage (3rd Century)
Cyprian spoke explicitly of priests offering sacrifice at the altar
He writes:
“The priest truly acts in the place of Christ.”
This is unmistakably sacramental language - it can hardly be stated more clearly.
- St. John Chrysostom, and his work, On the Priesthood
Perhaps no early Christian writing demonstrates the sacred character of the priesthood more powerfully than St. John Chrysostom’s work, "On the Priesthood" (Click Here if you would like to download and read it).
Written in the 4th century, the text reveals that the Church was by then acknowledging the priesthood as a holy mystery (sacrament) requiring divine grace.
Chrysostom describes the priesthood as a ministry that belongs simultaneously to heaven and earth.
He writes:
“The priestly office is indeed discharged on earth, but it ranks among heavenly ordinances.”
He further explains that priests are entrusted with mysteries that even angels stand in awe of. Most importantly, Chrysostom explicitly connects the priesthood to sacramental ministry:
- Offering the Eucharist
- Absolving sins
- Baptizing
- Shepherding souls
- Administering divine grace.
What Chrysostom describes in the priest is one who does not merely teach or lead [or sit on a church council from time to time... the modernistic view of an "elder."]
Rather, he participates in the ministry of Christ Himself.
This is profoundly important because it demonstrates that by the 300's AD (4th century) the universal Church thoroughly understood priesthood sacramentally — it wasn't some medieval "invention," but an apostolic inheritance.
When Did the Priesthood Become a Sacrament?
Some of those who have made it this far may ask when the Church officially defined priesthood as a sacrament. The answer depends partly on terminology.
The early Church often used the Greek word, 'mysterion' (“mystery”), rather than the later Latin term, 'sacramentum'. The Church did not initially produce scholastic lists of sacraments as would eventually appear.
However, from the earliest centuries ordination involved:
- Laying on of hands
- Invocation of the Holy Spirit
- Transmission of grace
- Entrance into sacred ministry
In other words, the Church practiced sacramental ordination, de facto, long before later theological systems formally categorized it. [Many Protestants, today, like to point out that the Church is not like it was, "back then." And they are right. But why should it be?
It has existed for nearly 2,000 years, and things are going to change in that amount of time. In fact, if these people were to honestly study their own denominations' history, they would see the same thing - evolving change. That is the norm, not an exclusive exception of the Church.]
Orthodox Catholicism still prefers the language of, “Holy Mystery,” and the Roman Rite agrees. This is because both see the priesthood is far more than some merely legalistic role — it is participation in divine grace.
The Sacramental Role of the Priest
Okay, so what exactly is so sacramental about what a priest does?Both Roman and Orthodox priests do not replace Christ. [That is another misunderstanding that has been developed by non-Catholics.] Rather, the Priest serves as an instrument of, and pipeline to, Christ’s ministry within the Church.
His sacramental functions include:
- Celebrating the Eucharist
- Hearing confessions
- Pronouncing absolution
- Baptizing
- Chrismating
- Anointing the sick
- Invoking Gods grace and blessing in marriages
- Teaching the faith
- Shepherding and caring for the needs of the flock - both spiritual and corporal.
The Priest acts within the life of the Church as the steward of the mysteries of God.
As St. Paul writes:
“This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.” (1 Corinthians 4:1)
The language of “mysteries” referred to here are deeply sacramental, [at the core of both faith and the priesthood.]
The Protestant Objection: “The Priesthood of All Believers”
One of the most common Protestant objections where priests are concerned comes from their general doctrine known as. “the priesthood of all believers.”
[The idea here is that every person is his or her own priest, and they all represent "the church" that Christ intended. Unfortunately, that idea arose with the Protestant reformation. By now it should be obvious that it never existed before then, and a divisive, self-interpreting conglomeration of indivuduals or groups was not the intention of Christ, as we've seen from Scripture and the historical record.
[If we are honest, it is self-serving, and basically gives each person a hall pass to come up with their own ideas - their own interpretations - of what God and Christ want. So, naturally, it is VERY appealing. And it is the reason there are so many different Protestant demoninations: each one has sprung from individual interpretation, with theology and doctrine built around it. It's the theological equivalent of, "I'll do what I want and take from Scripture what I need to back me up..." usually with the added caveat that... "The Catholic Church is wrong."]
This tradition usually appeals to a few Scritural fragments such as:
1 Peter 2:9 “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood…”
[But, surprise! Interpreting Scripture is not the sole privlege of Protestants.] Catholicism fully affirms this verse, too. Every baptized Christian participates in the royal priesthood of Christ in a general sense:
- Offering prayers
- Worship
- Repentance
- Praise
- Self-sacrifice to God
But, this "general priesthood" is not equivalent to an ordained priesthood. Ironically, the Old Testament followed this exact same pattern. Israel as a whole was called to be a priestly people:
Exodus 19:6 - “You shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”
Yet, despite all Israel being called a, “kingdom of priests,” God still established a distinct ordained priesthood through Aaron and the Levites.
So there was:
A general priesthood cinsiting of the people of God, at large, and a ministerial priesthood set apart for sacrificial and liturgical service.
See the connection? The New Testament mirrors this same structure. [Thats what the New Testament is - a continuation that reflects and fulfills the OldTestament. They work together. Neverhteless, there are a few Protestant denominations that dispense with the Old Testamnet. They think Christ's coming invalidated it. Nothing is further from the truth.]
All Christians participate spiritually in Christ’s priesthood. But certain men were, and still are, ordained and set apart for sacramental ministry through the laying on of hands. And the New Testament clearly distinguishes between the two.
So we have to ask..."If every believer is to possess identical priestly authority...
- Why did the apostles ordain presbyters, aka, priests?
- Why was laying on of hands necessary?
- Why were some entrusted specifically with Eucharistic ministry?
- Why did James instruct believers to call the elders/presbyters for sacramental anointing?
- Why did Paul warn Timothy not to ordain hastily?
The existence of a universal "priesthood of believers" sounds great, but it does not eliminate ordained ministry any more than the universal call to evangelism eliminates minsters, pastors, or bishops.
In both Roman and Orthodox Catholicism, all Christians are priests in the sense of offering spiritual sacrifice, but ordained priests are sacramentally set apart for liturgical and ecclesial ministry.
This distinction existed from the beginning, and it is carried through to today.
Apostolic Succession and Continuity
The early Church understood priesthood through apostolic succession
- The apostles ordained bishops and presbyters.
- Those bishops ordained others.
- And so on down the line.
This continuity preserved:
- Doctrine
- Sacramental grace
- Ecclesial unity
The religion that would continue Christs ministry on earth, aka, Christianity, was never envisioned as a collection of self-appointed, self-directing interpreters. It was a visible, sacramental, worshipping communion, and the priesthood today stands in continuity with that apostolic structure.
Conclusion
Lets go back to our original question:
Q. "Were there priests in the early Church?
A. Absolutely.
The New Testament speaks repeatedly of ordained presbyters, aka, priests, exercising sacramental ministry. The Church Fathers universally affirm bishops, priests, and deacons as divinely instituted offices. The Eucharistic life of the Church depended upon ordained clergy from the apostolic era forward.
The modern, often obstinate, denial of these things stems from post-reformation attempts to separate the word, "presbyter," from the concept of a priesthood. By translating 'presbyteros' as merely an “elder,” many readers are unintentionally led to believe that the early Church possessed only administrators, comittees, and teachers - rather than a sacramental clergy.
Yet historically, linguistically, and theologically, the word, "priest," developed directly from presbyter. The two are inseparable, and the early Christians understood it just that way.
Likewise, the Protestant doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers” contains a partial truth - but not the whole picture. [That's the danger encountered when hand picking from Scripture to justify self-interpretations].
However, both the Old Testament and New Testament reveal the same biblical pattern: The people of God as a whole share in a royal priesthood, while ordained ministers are uniquely set apart for sacramental service.
This distinction existed under Moses, continued through the apostles, and remains present in the both the Roman and Orthodox Churches today.
Far from being a later, man-made fabrication, the sacramental priesthood emerges directly through Judaism, down to Christ’s commissioning of the apostles, apostolic ordination through laying on of hands, and the uninterrupted witness of the early Church.
As St. John Chrysostom understood so profoundly, the priesthood is not merely administrative or symbolic. It is a holy mystery — a participation in the very ministry of Christ Himself.
Comments
Post a Comment