On Church – Part 5 (Priests?)

I recently read a couple thought-provoking quotes from James Dunn (1939-2020). Dunn served as a New Testament professor at the University of Durham for about twenty years. In his book Jesus according to the New Testament, which I highly recommend, Dunn explores how Jesus is presented in each section of the New Testament.

In chapter 7 titled Jesus according to Hebrews, Dunn traces the author’s argument regarding Christ’s “unique and unrepeatable” priesthood. Since Christ is our great high priest, we now have direct access to God through Christ’s blood (Heb 10:19-22). And this leads to the elimination of the need for priests as mediators between God and believers.

Dunn then writes:

For if we have properly understood Hebrews, it would have been most natural to conclude that the worshipers of Jesus no longer needed priests. Christ himself was the only priest now needed. All could go directly, for themselves, into the presence of God. But, despite Hebrews, the centrality of priests as intermediaries and essential to effective worship was reaffirmed in second-century Christianity—and quickly became established, again despite Hebrews. Quite how Hebrews could be so prized (as to become canonical) and yet at the same time could be so ignored (by the reaffirmation that priests are still necessary for legitimate worship of the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ) is one of the great puzzles in the early history of Christianity. (153)

He continues:

This always strikes me as one of the most astonishing developments of the late first and early second century in the two religions closest to the heart of Jesus and the first disciples. Despite its long history of being a temple-centered religion, with priests and sacrifices so fundamental to the religion that the religion could hardly be conceived without priest and sacrifice, Judaism became something different from the second century onwards—a religion of book (Torah) and teacher (rabbi), no longer priest and sacrifice. In contrast—indeed in complete contrast—Christianity began with a focus on the word which Jesus preached and embodied, with priest and sacrifice not at all at the center; and yet in the second century Christianity reverted to the concept and practice of religion as focused on priest and sacrifice. The Lord’s Supper was in effect transformed from being part of a shared meal into a reenactment of a priestly sacrifice. Whereas in Judaism priestly ritual gave way to word expounded, in Christianity the word became in effect subordinated to the revived priestly ritual. (154)

Dunn is right; these are truly “astonishing developments.” How did this great reversion occur?

He writes, “The Lord’s Supper was in effect transformed from being part of a shared meal into a reenactment of a priestly sacrifice.” Support for that statement can be found below.

Justin Marytr (ca. AD 160) writes, “He (God) then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist … (Dialogue with Trypho 41)

Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (ca. AD 250) declares, “For if Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, is Himself the chief priest of God the Father, and has first offered Himself a sacrifice to the Father, and has commanded this to be done in commemoration of Himself, certainly that priest truly discharges the office of Christ, who imitates that which Christ did; and he then offers a true and full sacrifice in the Church to God the Father, when he proceeds to offer it according to what he sees Christ Himself to have offered.” (Letter 62.14)

According to Cyprian’s statement, when presiding over the Lord’s Supper, the leader of the local assembly is a priest offering a sacrifice to God the Father. Note the “priest . . . imitates that which Christ did; and he then offers a true and full sacrifice in the Church to God the Father.” The overlap with the Old Testament is striking:

• priest – sacrifice – temple (OT)
• priest – sacrifice – church (NT)

Was Cyprian right? Are church leaders priests who offer a sacrifice?

No church “elder” or “overseer” is called a priest in the New Testament. Moreover, celebrating communion is not referred to as offering a sacrifice to God.

What happened to the priesthood?

Peter says it is now composed of all believers.

As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him—you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Pet 2:4-5)

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. (1 Pet 2:9)

Viewing a priest or pastor as a mediator with God is a major theological problem because “there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim 2:5-6). 

Les Bridgeman

I have served as a high school Bible teacher and counselor in Asia and the U.S. I am passionate about understanding and teaching the Bible. Here’s a link to my book page.