OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 01, 2014, 08:38:33 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Hebrews 7  (Read 982 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« on: June 03, 2011, 06:21:00 PM »

Anybody have insight on this chapter, Hebrews 7?
Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,992


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2011, 06:24:38 PM »

It might be helpful to note that the words used for Presbyter and OT Priest are not the same.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2011, 07:20:42 PM »

To give my two cents (which is quite over-valued...)

St. Paul here is talking about the supplanting of the Priesthood of Levi with the Priesthood of Melchizedek. It was the Tribe of Levi which became the priestly caste in Israel, and Aaron the High Priest, passing it down his own line. St. Paul is explaining to his audience here the fulfillment of that priesthood in Christ. To do so, he points back to a type of Christ in the Scriptures...the Priest-King Melchizedek, who appears as the King of Salem (Heb. King of Peace). St. Paul connects the Aaronic priesthood with this type by reminding the Hebrew readers that Melchizedek received tithe from Abraham, and thereby from the entire nation of Israel, even Levi himself, since he was "in his fathers' loins" (v.10). In the same way, the Levitical priesthood received a tithe from the rest of the Israelite tribes for their priestly service.

St. Paul now connects Melchizedek with Christ, explaining that Christ is the hope of a better covenant (v. 22), since the Levitical priesthood was imperfect. For they must offer sacrifice for their own sins (v. 27) and ultimately, they still must cease their ministry, seized by death (v. 23). Christ, however, is all-together holy and separate from our sinful state (v. 26) and reigns as a priest forever, as the Psalmist says (and St. Paul quotes, multiple times). St. Paul asserts the passing of the Aaronic priesthood, and its being supplanted by the priesthood of Melchizedek in Christ, for the fulfillment of the Law and the hope of drawing nearer to God (vv. 18-19).

Continuing, St. Paul expounds upon Christs' sacrifice on the cross, once-for-all, as being the final end to the endless sacrifical system of the Mosiac Law (v. 27), and announces Christ as the perfect and eternal high priest (v. 28). In the next chapter, St. Paul continues speaking of the sacrifice of Christ, and the imperfection of the sacrifices of the Law in the face of Christ's perfect and eternal sacrifice on the cross.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2011, 12:03:21 PM »

To give my two cents (which is quite over-valued...)

St. Paul here is talking about the supplanting of the Priesthood of Levi with the Priesthood of Melchizedek. It was the Tribe of Levi which became the priestly caste in Israel, and Aaron the High Priest, passing it down his own line. St. Paul is explaining to his audience here the fulfillment of that priesthood in Christ. To do so, he points back to a type of Christ in the Scriptures...the Priest-King Melchizedek, who appears as the King of Salem (Heb. King of Peace). St. Paul connects the Aaronic priesthood with this type by reminding the Hebrew readers that Melchizedek received tithe from Abraham, and thereby from the entire nation of Israel, even Levi himself, since he was "in his fathers' loins" (v.10). In the same way, the Levitical priesthood received a tithe from the rest of the Israelite tribes for their priestly service.

St. Paul now connects Melchizedek with Christ, explaining that Christ is the hope of a better covenant (v. 22), since the Levitical priesthood was imperfect. For they must offer sacrifice for their own sins (v. 27) and ultimately, they still must cease their ministry, seized by death (v. 23). Christ, however, is all-together holy and separate from our sinful state (v. 26) and reigns as a priest forever, as the Psalmist says (and St. Paul quotes, multiple times). St. Paul asserts the passing of the Aaronic priesthood, and its being supplanted by the priesthood of Melchizedek in Christ, for the fulfillment of the Law and the hope of drawing nearer to God (vv. 18-19).

Continuing, St. Paul expounds upon Christs' sacrifice on the cross, once-for-all, as being the final end to the endless sacrifical system of the Mosiac Law (v. 27), and announces Christ as the perfect and eternal high priest (v. 28). In the next chapter, St. Paul continues speaking of the sacrifice of Christ, and the imperfection of the sacrifices of the Law in the face of Christ's perfect and eternal sacrifice on the cross.

This is confusing to me in the sense of what role do the apostles and those that followed serve? If Jesus is the singular eternal Priest and the Apostles were called to spread the news, then why do we have Priests today? Why do we need to tithe and offer other forms of sacrifice?
« Last Edit: June 06, 2011, 12:03:49 PM by Dart » Logged
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2011, 01:47:52 PM »

To give my two cents (which is quite over-valued...)

St. Paul here is talking about the supplanting of the Priesthood of Levi with the Priesthood of Melchizedek. It was the Tribe of Levi which became the priestly caste in Israel, and Aaron the High Priest, passing it down his own line. St. Paul is explaining to his audience here the fulfillment of that priesthood in Christ. To do so, he points back to a type of Christ in the Scriptures...the Priest-King Melchizedek, who appears as the King of Salem (Heb. King of Peace). St. Paul connects the Aaronic priesthood with this type by reminding the Hebrew readers that Melchizedek received tithe from Abraham, and thereby from the entire nation of Israel, even Levi himself, since he was "in his fathers' loins" (v.10). In the same way, the Levitical priesthood received a tithe from the rest of the Israelite tribes for their priestly service.

St. Paul now connects Melchizedek with Christ, explaining that Christ is the hope of a better covenant (v. 22), since the Levitical priesthood was imperfect. For they must offer sacrifice for their own sins (v. 27) and ultimately, they still must cease their ministry, seized by death (v. 23). Christ, however, is all-together holy and separate from our sinful state (v. 26) and reigns as a priest forever, as the Psalmist says (and St. Paul quotes, multiple times). St. Paul asserts the passing of the Aaronic priesthood, and its being supplanted by the priesthood of Melchizedek in Christ, for the fulfillment of the Law and the hope of drawing nearer to God (vv. 18-19).

Continuing, St. Paul expounds upon Christs' sacrifice on the cross, once-for-all, as being the final end to the endless sacrifical system of the Mosiac Law (v. 27), and announces Christ as the perfect and eternal high priest (v. 28). In the next chapter, St. Paul continues speaking of the sacrifice of Christ, and the imperfection of the sacrifices of the Law in the face of Christ's perfect and eternal sacrifice on the cross.

This is confusing to me in the sense of what role do the apostles and those that followed serve? If Jesus is the singular eternal Priest and the Apostles were called to spread the news, then why do we have Priests today? Why do we need to tithe and offer other forms of sacrifice?

Because Christ has established a Church (Matt. 16:18), and He has commanded us to do these things.

We are commanded to partake of the Eucharist (1 Co. 11:25-26), to be baptized and chrismated (Matt. 28:19, John 3:5-6, Acts 2:38). Christ operates in His Church to forgive and retain sins, used in the mystery of confession (John 20:23). The sick are anointed by priests in holy unction (James 5:14, "elder" being the Greek "presbyter", which evolved to "prest" and then "priest"), etc.

This is the way the Church functions. The Apostles are given their ministry in the Church by Christ, and they in turn appointed overseers (Greek, episcopoi, from where the word "bishop" comes), eventually, these elder-overseers developed into bishops (the "hierarch", lit. "first priest [of a certain area]") and priests as fully seperate offices as early as the 2nd century, and the diaconiate being established by the apostles in Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts 6:1-6. The ordination to these holy offices is conveyed by the laying on of hands, as recorded multiple times in Scripture (Acts 6:6, 8:17, 13:3, 19:6, etc.) not to mention the attesting to all of these things by early church fathers (Ss. Justin Martyr, Ignatius, etc.)


EDIT: Sorry! To finish answering. We sacrifice because Christ calls us to it. Many times our Lord exhorts us to "take up your cross" and "follow me" (Matt. 10:38, 16:24; Mark 8:34, 10:21; Luke 9:23). The Christian life is not one of ease. For we must die and rise with Christ. We do this by our aceticism, from the Greek for "training." We give of ourselves, because He gave of Himself. We must follow Christ, In order to experience the Resurrection, we must experience the cross.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2011, 01:52:34 PM by Benjamin the Red » Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2011, 03:55:06 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Read this text in its context, it was written for Jewish converts to the Early Church, and so it speaks of the flaws of legalism.  St Paul first describes this apparently contradicting story of Abraham and Melketsedek, king of Salem.  This story was fundamental to the Early Church, as the story of Melketsedek prefigures the Divine Liturgy, as he offered a prayer service of thanksgiving with Abraham and his entourage after that battle, using bread and wine.  So St Paul was drawing several meanings from this one piece of symbolic imagery, that of good father Abraham recognizing the priestly authority of Melketsedek, so much so as to offer a tithe of the spoils of the battle, even though from a strictly Mosaic legal perspective, Abraham was the only one entitled to receive tithes, being the ancestor of the priestly Levi.  Jewish theology at the time would have ascribed Abraham's material success as being of the virtue of the Law and the Levitical priesthood, that is to say, St Paul was saying to a Jewish audience that while Abraham had indeed succeeded in a battle for material game precisely because of the universal authority of the Levitical priesthood (of which Abraham was a blood representative in its proto-state) even blessed Abraham acknowledged tithing to a different priesthood.  This would have been puzzling to Jews at the time.  Further, St Paul was intending to silence Jewish legalists in the Early Church who would have been arguing that bloodline Levites should be the rightful priests within the Church.  St Paul was providing a historical and venerable instance where even Abraham (that is Levi) gave tithe and authority to another priesthood, under Melketsedek.  Any good Pharisee would have been rightfully outraged, as the Jewish priesthood based its entire mandate and authority on the ethnicism of the Levitical covenant.  This is why they would in the Church continue to insist on their authority.  Many Christians might have been persuaded as such, even today in a modern era we struggle with how to understand how to co-opt the Law into the Church.  St Paul's point then was to defend the legitimacy and authority of the Orthodox Church priesthood OVER the Jewish Levitical priesthood.  Surely Levites could also become Orthodox priests, but their Levite ancestry did not give them preferential spiritual authority in the eyes of God, and as St Paul explained elsewhere that the Scriptures and the people attest that Abraham was a man who "pleased God" and so his example in itself is authoritative on this matter.  If father Abraham could recognized the priesthood of Melketsedek, than surely even a Pharisee convert could recognize the spiritual and ecumenical authority of the Orthodox Church.

Now in regards to Orthodox human priests and Jesus Christ's priesthood, St Paul is also arguing for multiple priesthoods in a sense.  St Paul did not necessarily inviolate Abraham's own priesthood in his explanation of the story with Melketsedek, rather St Paul seems to affirm the priesthoods of both men simultaneously.  So it can be inferred also than that St Paul's first point about the "Melketsedek Priesthood" was to explain the spiritual legitimacy and authority of Christian priests over Jewish Levites who were contemporaries.

The second point of the latter half explains Christ's own priesthood.  Jesus Christ is the true Chief Priest, above the Levites, as His Priesthood never ends, and He has no sins of His own to account for.  Jesus Christ as a Priest eternally petitions on the behalf of humanity, but it is deeper than this, because that is the human aspect of Jesus Christ, but the Divine Word not only speaks on behalf of humanity but acts directly for their salvation.  Not only does Jesus Christ act as a priest by praying on our behalf, but He is the very source of the answers of those same said prayers! 

How are Orthodox Priests still priests if Jesus Christ is the Chief Priest? They are lesser priests so to speak, who serve within the Ministry of Jesus Christ in the Apostolic Church.  With Jesus Christ as the True Patriarch of our Church, the True High Priest, all those other priests serve and minister under Him, just as earthly priests serve under the Bishop.  The Bishop does not necessarily lord over the lesser priests in a spiritual sense, rather the Bishop represents a seat of spiritual authority from where it stems forth.  If Jesus Christ is the True High Priest sitting at the right hand of the Father ministering eternally on our behalves, then these lesser Orthodox priests we have here on Earth are ministering under Jesus Christ's central spiritual authority.  The Priesthood of Jesus Christ stems out from Him, He is the Source, and our priests which we have here receive His authority.  With the Levites the authority of their priesthood came from themselves, of themselves, by the virtue or privilege of their ancestry and genealogical background, where as the priesthood of the Orthodox Church and our clergy's authority is by no means of themselves, it comes directly from Jesus Christ.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2011, 08:14:35 AM »

Thank you for your responses. This makes more sense when looking at the context and understanding that St Paul was ordained directly by the ressurected Christ. He was not chosen by a clerical order but by Jesus the most high and eternal priest.
Logged
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2011, 08:40:52 AM »

Thank you for your responses. This makes more sense when looking at the context and understanding that St Paul was ordained directly by the ressurected Christ. He was not chosen by a clerical order but by Jesus the most high and eternal priest.

I'm glad you've been helped with this difficult passage! It's interesting to note Christ's active involvement in His Church, he selects Paul and moves in his life to make him a missionary, an Apostle, of the Church. However, I do want to point out that Paul does not supersede the structure of the Church.

Christ brings Paul into the Church through Ananias, the bishop of Antioch, who is hesitant due to knowing of Paul's persecution of Christians. When he questions, Christ answers. "Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake." Acts 9:15-16.

After this, Ananias accepts Paul into the Church by baptism and chrismation (v. 18, these two sacraments have always been linked and almost always administered in a single rite, just as we do today) Paul, still a rabbi and Pharisee, speaks in a synagogue, but does not minister to the Church and on its behalf until he is ordained several years later in Antioch:

Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away. Acts 13:1-3

Paul (and Barnabas) are in Antioch, while the teachers of the church are "ministering." This verb is in Greek is "λειτουργέω" (leitourgeō, lit. "liturgizing"). We also know that they are fasting while liturgizing. This is a Divine Liturgy, and the leaders of Antioch are serving it, keeping the Eucharistic fast (which we know has apostolic origin, and is mentioned in the Didache). During all of this, Christ speaks to them through the Holy Spirit, and they are told to "separate to me" Paul and Barnabas. The Greek verb here is ἀφορίζω (aphorizō). This is more literally understood as "set apart for a specific purpose, appoint, ordain." Paul and Barnabas are here ordained to the presbyterate (priesthood), and Paul is counted among the Apostles due to his direct revelation from Christ.

However, he does not circumvent the structure of the Church. Paul is ordained at the hands of the presbyter-bishops of Antioch, but that does not mean he is ordained simply by "a clerical order," but by those in the Priesthood of the Church, led by the Holy Spirit, sent by Christ. It is all done by Christ in His Church, His Body through which He works in the world.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2011, 07:43:59 PM »

It was 3 years from his conversion till he met Peter and James and then 14 years more after that before he was ordained (in Antioch as you say). And he was "ordained" as an equal to the Apostles not just a presbyter. That is 17 years in which he spoke and taught the gospel without connection to the Church other than through the direction of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I agree that St Paul was not above or outside of the Church but that the Apostles in Jerusalem were not the Church. Jesus is.

Galatians 1:15-24
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone;nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother. (In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!) Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. And I was still unknown in person to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They only were hearing it said, "He who used to persecute us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy." And they glorified God because of me.



« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 07:47:47 PM by Dart » Logged
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2011, 08:59:35 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

It was 3 years from his conversion till he met Peter and James and then 14 years more after that before he was ordained (in Antioch as you say). And he was "ordained" as an equal to the Apostles not just a presbyter. That is 17 years in which he spoke and taught the gospel without connection to the Church other than through the direction of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I agree that St Paul was not above or outside of the Church but that the Apostles in Jerusalem were not the Church. Jesus is.


I think that Paul had been ordained in some capacity after the third year, and his ordination was only elevated after 17 more in Jerusalem.  Of course I only consulted Acts 9-15 in this regard, I haven't the time now to consult the Patristic Writings or the Histories to flesh out more details.  Barnabas had been delegated jurisdiction over Antioch and Damascus by the Jerusalem Synod and this his how he came in contact with Paul. Apostle Paul himself was given this same jurisdiction  years later at Jerusalem by the Apostles directly, but I'm not quite sure we could say that for the years before that Paul had worked separate from the Church at Jerusalem, as clearly Barnabas and others remained directly connected.  It seems to me that when Paul went to Jerusalem in that 17th year, it was for a promotion based on the success of Christianity in the preceding years, in particular the success and popularity of Paul himself. Perhaps then it was at this time that Paul was granted the Apostolic authority to found Churches which he began to do after that Synod meeting in Jerusalem with the more eminent of the Apostles.  Remember that the 72 were also operating in direct connection with the Apostles in Jerusalem concurrently so we shouldn't assume that somehow the Synod in Jerusalem was separate or not directly active with the other regional Churches from the very beginning at Pentecost.  If anything, it may be an anachronism from our historical and contemporary experiences long after to assume any distinctions.

Stay Blessed,
Habte Selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2011, 10:10:55 PM »

Jesus was baptised. Was He also ordained? When and by whom?
If not, why was it necessary for Him to be baptised but not ordained?
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,530


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2011, 10:27:28 PM »

Jesus was baptised. Was He also ordained? When and by whom?
If not, why was it necessary for Him to be baptised but not ordained?

Lord have Mercy....

You're just going to continue these circular arguments, to no end.   Undecided
Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #12 on: June 14, 2011, 10:55:43 PM »

Jesus was baptised. Was He also ordained? When and by whom?
If not, why was it necessary for Him to be baptised but not ordained?

Lord have Mercy....

You're just going to continue these circular arguments, to no end.   Undecided

Aren't you suppose to call me a troll first?
Logged
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2011, 01:40:49 AM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Read this text in its context, it was written for Jewish converts to the Early Church, and so it speaks of the flaws of legalism.  St Paul first describes this apparently contradicting story of Abraham and Melketsedek, king of Salem.  This story was fundamental to the Early Church, as the story of Melketsedek prefigures the Divine Liturgy, as he offered a prayer service of thanksgiving with Abraham and his entourage after that battle, using bread and wine.  So St Paul was drawing several meanings from this one piece of symbolic imagery, that of good father Abraham recognizing the priestly authority of Melketsedek, so much so as to offer a tithe of the spoils of the battle, even though from a strictly Mosaic legal perspective, Abraham was the only one entitled to receive tithes, being the ancestor of the priestly Levi.  Jewish theology at the time would have ascribed Abraham's material success as being of the virtue of the Law and the Levitical priesthood, that is to say, St Paul was saying to a Jewish audience that while Abraham had indeed succeeded in a battle for material game precisely because of the universal authority of the Levitical priesthood (of which Abraham was a blood representative in its proto-state) even blessed Abraham acknowledged tithing to a different priesthood.  This would have been puzzling to Jews at the time.  Further, St Paul was intending to silence Jewish legalists in the Early Church who would have been arguing that bloodline Levites should be the rightful priests within the Church.  St Paul was providing a historical and venerable instance where even Abraham (that is Levi) gave tithe and authority to another priesthood, under Melketsedek.  Any good Pharisee would have been rightfully outraged, as the Jewish priesthood based its entire mandate and authority on the ethnicism of the Levitical covenant.  This is why they would in the Church continue to insist on their authority.  Many Christians might have been persuaded as such, even today in a modern era we struggle with how to understand how to co-opt the Law into the Church.  St Paul's point then was to defend the legitimacy and authority of the Orthodox Church priesthood OVER the Jewish Levitical priesthood.  Surely Levites could also become Orthodox priests, but their Levite ancestry did not give them preferential spiritual authority in the eyes of God, and as St Paul explained elsewhere that the Scriptures and the people attest that Abraham was a man who "pleased God" and so his example in itself is authoritative on this matter.  If father Abraham could recognized the priesthood of Melketsedek, than surely even a Pharisee convert could recognize the spiritual and ecumenical authority of the Orthodox Church.

Now in regards to Orthodox human priests and Jesus Christ's priesthood, St Paul is also arguing for multiple priesthoods in a sense.  St Paul did not necessarily inviolate Abraham's own priesthood in his explanation of the story with Melketsedek, rather St Paul seems to affirm the priesthoods of both men simultaneously.  So it can be inferred also than that St Paul's first point about the "Melketsedek Priesthood" was to explain the spiritual legitimacy and authority of Christian priests over Jewish Levites who were contemporaries.

The second point of the latter half explains Christ's own priesthood.  Jesus Christ is the true Chief Priest, above the Levites, as His Priesthood never ends, and He has no sins of His own to account for.  Jesus Christ as a Priest eternally petitions on the behalf of humanity, but it is deeper than this, because that is the human aspect of Jesus Christ, but the Divine Word not only speaks on behalf of humanity but acts directly for their salvation.  Not only does Jesus Christ act as a priest by praying on our behalf, but He is the very source of the answers of those same said prayers! 

How are Orthodox Priests still priests if Jesus Christ is the Chief Priest? They are lesser priests so to speak, who serve within the Ministry of Jesus Christ in the Apostolic Church.  With Jesus Christ as the True Patriarch of our Church, the True High Priest, all those other priests serve and minister under Him, just as earthly priests serve under the Bishop.  The Bishop does not necessarily lord over the lesser priests in a spiritual sense, rather the Bishop represents a seat of spiritual authority from where it stems forth.  If Jesus Christ is the True High Priest sitting at the right hand of the Father ministering eternally on our behalves, then these lesser Orthodox priests we have here on Earth are ministering under Jesus Christ's central spiritual authority.  The Priesthood of Jesus Christ stems out from Him, He is the Source, and our priests which we have here receive His authority.  With the Levites the authority of their priesthood came from themselves, of themselves, by the virtue or privilege of their ancestry and genealogical background, where as the priesthood of the Orthodox Church and our clergy's authority is by no means of themselves, it comes directly from Jesus Christ.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
So, are Orthodox priests part of the Order of Melchisedek?
Logged
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2011, 07:59:02 AM »

It was 3 years from his conversion till he met Peter and James and then 14 years more after that before he was ordained (in Antioch as you say). And he was "ordained" as an equal to the Apostles not just a presbyter. That is 17 years in which he spoke and taught the gospel without connection to the Church other than through the direction of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I agree that St Paul was not above or outside of the Church but that the Apostles in Jerusalem were not the Church. Jesus is.

Galatians 1:15-24
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone;nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother. (In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!) Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. And I was still unknown in person to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They only were hearing it said, "He who used to persecute us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy." And they glorified God because of me.


It could be argued that he was an "Apostle" from his conversion, if you really wanted to make the argument, since it was revealed to Ananias that Paul would be sent among the Gentiles (Apostle meaning "one who is sent"). To say someone is "just a presbyter" is a bit misleading, especially in the first century, when the office that we call "priest" today was not yet entirely distinct from the office of bishop. There was a number of elders, of overseers, in a city, and one was most senior among them, the first among equals. As Christianity grew, this changed. Ultimately, the overseer of a principle city in a Roman diocese became the "bishop" and all of the others worked under him to administer the sacraments, thus distinguishing a bishop from a priest as a separate office.

Jesus was baptised. Was He also ordained? When and by whom?
If not, why was it necessary for Him to be baptised but not ordained?

I think you have a grasp on the theology of Theophany, so I'm just going to roll my eyes and keep going...
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,530


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 15, 2011, 11:39:26 AM »

Aren't you suppose to call me a troll first?

Your antics are beyond name calling and labeling.  You ought to take up a hobby (gardening is calming and relaxing for most people) and stay off the Internet.   Wink
Logged
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #16 on: June 15, 2011, 12:39:18 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Aren't you suppose to call me a troll first?
and stay off the Internet.   Wink

I think that is good advice for a LOT of people angel

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2011, 10:19:27 AM »

Aren't you suppose to call me a troll first?

Your antics are beyond name calling and labeling.  You ought to take up a hobby (gardening is calming and relaxing for most people) and stay off the Internet.   Wink

Standard tone for welcoming people into your church?
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,530


WWW
« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2011, 12:02:09 PM »

Standard tone for welcoming people into your church?

What does that have to do with this thread? Huh  You call yourself a Sunday School Teacher and you come on this forum asking who ordained Jesus?   Huh
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.096 seconds with 45 queries.