Authority, Freedom, and the Pharisees
Hey, Dr. Bill. I’m picking up my last thread where I left off with questions about the RC Church. Here’s one of my bigger trouble spots. In Ex. 6 God announces that if the people obey his voice and keep his covenant they will be, among other things, a kingdom of priests. God then established the Levitical system and ordained priests and a high priest, etc. I’ve been learning more and more about how closely the liturgies of the RC Church resemble Judaism and I understand that a vast majority of the liturgies and practices of the Church come either directly or indirectly from Scripture and ancient Jewish practices. The more I learn, the more amazed I am and the more beautiful the liturgies become for me.
At the same time, though, the writer of Hebrews declares that Jesus is the ultimate high priest whose sacrifice brought us under a new covenant. Now, through Christ, we can enter the holy place. In the introduction to Revelation John calls us “a kingdom of priests”. So, if I understand correctly, God desired his people to be a kingdom of priests, and this was accomplished at the cross. If that is correct (and that’s a big if), why can only priests ordained by the RC Church handle the Eucharist and perform many of the sacraments? If we are a kingdom of priests, shouldn’t we all be performing the duties of a priest?
And, as a sometimes-stereotypical Gen-Xer challenging rules and authority, why does the Church command so many rules that appear to be extra-Biblical. Many of the rules I’ve become familiar with seem an awful lot like the “hedge around the Law” that Jesus opposed so strongly in his arguments with the Pharisees. Some of the rules in the RC Church even seem to contradict the teachings of Scripture. This is one of the things that make me most hesitant to become a member of the RC Church.
Can you comment on these things? In particular, what is the basis for the authority structure in the RC Church? Am I misinterpreting these things? And/or has the RC Church evolved from a Pharisaic strand of Judaism? (When I say “Pharisaic” here I do not mean it in a derogatory way – Paul still considered himself a Pharisee after he was following Christ. Paul and Barnabas had some convincing to do before James declared that Gentile believers should not be bound by the Torah.) It almost feels like the Church has returned to a form of Christianity from before the Jerusalem council, enforcing a type of “law” that Jesus freed us from and James declared unnecessary.
Okay, I keep trying to write short questions and then I get carried away, sorry! Anything you could offer on this topic would be deeply appreciated!
-Russ
