The primary commission ... the sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist ... was made to the twelve, no others. Missionary work and evangelization is not the limited to the priesthood.
Interesting that the Catholic notion of the priesthood seems centered on sacramental ministry. Acts 6:6-7 refers to the appointment of the seven members of the Hellenist party who became priest after being appointed by the Twelve. The Seven's ministry was neither sacramental nor missionary.
The author assumes one knows what a priest does, as they officiate at sacred ceremonies, by they Jewish or pagan
Well, based on the apostles' conduct, the Christian notion of priesthood is a little different.
The twelve apostles had no sacramental prerogatives until after the Resurrection. The Risen Christ authorized them to do baptisms (see Matthew 28). Interestingly, after they were commissioned, the apostles apparently appointed helpers to do a lot of the baptisms. So even the sacrament of Baptism does not seem to define a "primary commission" or job function that is unique to the priesthood.
Regarding the taking of confession, it is unclear whether that is sacred ritual. Forgiveness comes from G-d - meaning any action on the part of a priest adds nothing to the act of forgives itself, which is G-d Divine Mercy in action. The priest hearing of the penitent's confession has value: it makes forgiveness "present" to the penitent in the sense of recalling and affirming G-d's activity in the world and providing a place to renewing commitment and strengthen. But what the priest is doing there is not itself the sacrament. The experiential sacrament lies in contrition and accepting forgiveness.
There are the feasts that accompany the Greek Mysteries, the meal enjoyed by Mithras and Sol, etc., but their symbolism and significance falls far short of the understanding of the Eucharist.
Is unclear whether there is any Biblical support for Christian priests administering holy communion. The term Eucharist does not appear anywhere in the Bible. It seems communion wafers are a vestige of pagan sun worship rituals that used little round cakes to symbolize the Sun.
When Jesus said at the Last Supper, "
Do this in memory of me," this does not strike me as giving the apostles special powers. Rather, it would appear be Jesus instructing the apostles in another form of "making present" - i.e., recalling and affirming G-d's activity in the world.
What the priest is doing when he is giving out communion wafers is principally an informational act rather than an intrinsically "sacred" act that requires certain special power or level of technical competence that make priests different from ordinary sinner. To my way of thinking, it's the personal relationship with G-d through Christ and the Holy Spirit that's sacred.
6:7 sums up the results of the apostle's actions:
"And the word of the Lord increased; and the number of the disciples was multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly: a great multitude also of the priests obeyed the faith."
By this we can assume that the Hellenic Christians came under the direct authority of the apostles — it is they to whom the Faith is entrusted.
I wonder if it would be more accurate to say that it was the Gospel with which they were entrusted. In fact, as we have seen in the foregoing discussion, it is unclear whether sacramental duties and capabilies actually define what it is to be a priest. I would point out that the primacy of the apostles missionary work should be even evident from their title. The term
'Apostle" comes from the Greek
Ἀπόστολος, apostolos -- that is,
"someone sent out", e.g. with a message or as a delegate) were, according to the Synoptic Gospels (i.e., the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke) and Christian tradition, disciples (followers) whom Jesus of Nazareth had chosen, named, and trained in order to send them on a specific mission.
On the Wiki page about the apostles, we find a list of missionaries that the Church has historically referred to as "apostles." The list includes Mary Faustina Kowalska of old Russia, and Saint Nino of Constantinople, both of whom were nuns. Should we accept the premise that apostleship is a prototype for the priesthood, then we must accept an important logical implication:
if the church will recognize women as apostles, then the Church must also recognize them as priests. But it doesn't!
I think it would be fair to say that the Church's policy is ideologically incoherent.
If the priestly involvement with sacraments is strictly an informational function of "making present" by means of interesting liturgical verbalizations and fancy rituals, then one could reasonably argue that the ordination of the priest is essentially recognizes someone whose job functions are mainly ceremonial and educational: invoking religious imagery teaching, and preaching.
From a Christian pov, the distinction between sacramental ministry and missionary ministry would appear to be an "invention."
No, it quite definitely signifies obedience to the twelve.
The terms "obedience to the apostles" is nowhere to be found in the Bible. "Obedience to the twelve" doesn't appear anywhere either. This kind of language conjures up images of power politics that are quite different from what Jesus was trying to promote. Such images are in fact highly misleading.
Again, as we have seen, the differences between the apostles and their appointees were principally differences in authority and knowledge, not differences in power or sacramental prerogative.
Here (Matthew 23:8) is Jesus speaking out against professional religionists and for equality within a religious body: "
you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' because you have only one teacher, and all of you are brothers." In light of such a strong statement arguing against hierarchy, why would one would insist on an elitist, power and status-oriented view of the priesthood?
It is unclear how one can argue that a transfer of power and authority between men makes men priest when this is not supported by the Bible:
Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith. ~Romans 1:5
The term
obedience is perhaps best limited to the matter of honoring G-d and keeping His commandments. This is the obedience that follows from faith and love, not submission to a man-made ecclestiastical system. Indeed, why emphasize obedience to human organizations when we know that the Kingdom is
not of this world, that Jesus is "
the ruler of the kings of the earth" (Revelation 1:5), and that "
we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). . . ? ? . . . .
I was always taught that if one could move a woman's heart, then 10 could move the world, and 100, the universe (as long as Mary Whiskey didn't get involved)...
