We are dealing in this series with historical challenges to the issue of justification by faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone. This doctrine, as we have seen, is clearly annunciated, defined and defended in the Pauline epistles, particularly in Romans and Galatians.  

In post-apostolic times, three major doctrinal diversions developed that completely undermined the biblical doctrine of justification: 1) mystification of water baptism so that it was perceived as a washing away of sins; 2) mystification of the Lord’s Table so that it was seen as a means of eternal life and eventually as a re-sacrifice of Christ with saving efficacy; and 3) sacerdotalism or priestism: the belief that priests were endowed with powers and privileges unique to their craft, so that they and they alone could minister these "efficacious" sacraments. The first two of these doctrinal diversions were dealt with in previous articles. The rise of sacerdotalism is the focus of this article.

While Paul and the Apostles were alive, preaching and teaching was not confined to a particular class. Every convert could proclaim the Gospel to unbelievers and indeed they did: we are told in Acts 8:4 that those scattered by the persecution of Saul went everywhere preaching (lit., "evangelizing") the word. Philip went to Samaria and "preached Christ to them," Acts 8:5: he later baptized the Ethiopian eunich without consulting anyone (Acts 8:38)! So with the Thessalonian converts; for, as Paul tells us, "from them sounded out the word of the Lord," I Thess.1:8. Every believer who had the gift could teach and exhort and were encouraged to do so: Rom. 12:6-8; I Pet. 4:10-11.  

Moreover, the New Testament knows no spiritual aristocracy or privileged class; it calls all believers "saints," regardless of their lifestyles. Nor does it recognize a special priesthood as mediating between God and the believers. It knows only one high-priest, Jesus Christ, and clearly teaches the priesthood of all believers, I Pet. 2:5,9; 5:3; Rev. 1:6. 

Even in the Pastoral Epistles, in which Paul speaks of the teaching, ruling and pastoral functions of elder-pastors, nothing is said of sacerdotal functions. The Apostles themselves never claimed or exercised a special priesthood. 

Whence then priestism (sacerdotalism) in the church?

The idea of a special priesthood, distinct from the common believer, along with the accompanying notion of sacrifice and altar finds its roots in both Jewish and heathen institutions. All pagan religions had their priestly castes, special altars, sacrifices, and temples. Mosaic Law by God’s design specified a Levitical Priesthood, a unique altar, and specific sacrifices for the nation of Israel. Priesthood, sacrifice, altar: all were intrinsically connected.  

Some bishops of the third century found in the Levitical system an analogy they could not resist. As the Levites had three priestly ranks, high-priest, priest, and Levite, so the church the three-fold ministry of bishop, priest, and deacon. In other words, the episcopacy represented by various church offices was the successor to the Levitical priesthood. No such concepts could abide as long as Paul was on the scene, but with his death and that of the Apostles, reversion to priestly ideas coupled with mysticism of the sacraments slowly began to erode the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer until priestism became full-blown in the late third and fourth centuries.  

The issue: wrongly dividing the word of truth! The church itself, much less the bishops, has no relationship to Israel and the Levitical priestly system. Paul clearly taught in Ephesians 3:1-10 that the church, the Body of Christ, is new and unique in God’s revelatory plan. Pastors, elders and deacons are not successors to the Levitical priests in any way, shape or form. As previously stated, all believers are priests in the church-age with Jesus Christ himself solely functioning as our high-priest-intercessor. 

But if one perceives the bishops, priests, and deacons as priestly castes with biblical support in the Levites, then one automatically buys a descending order of rank and authority. Or, conversely, an ascending order, a hierarchy. And where does the common believer fit in this mentality? He and she make up the "laity," a rank lower to and separated from the lowest of the "clergy." Sad and totally foreign to the New Testament!

Whence then the title "Priest" (Latin, sacerodos) and with it, the sense of an exclusive priestly caste? 

Interestingly, it first asserts itself in the West, that is, in the Latin church, and that not until the third century. Philip Schaff, scholarly church historian of the late nineteenth century, states that Tertullian (dies, ca. 230 AD) was the first to expressly assert sacerdotal ("priestly") claims on behalf of Christian ministry.¹ In his chapter entitled "Of the Unction" as it relates to priestly ordination, Tertullian writes, "We are thoroughly anointed with a blessed unction…wherein on entering the priesthood (lit., sacerodos) men were wont to be anointed with oil from a horn ever since Aaron was anointed by Moses."² The concept and terminology of "clergy" and "laity" are repeated in the writings of Tertullian, but in his later apologies, he clearly states the universal priesthood of every believer. Part of his leaving the western church and espousing Montanism was due to the rigid ecclesiastical hierarchy that was asserting itself there. He argues for consistent values for priest and layperson alike when he writes in his later life: 

Thus, what the clergy had come to see as their unique sacerdotal privilege, Tertullian in his later life sees as the privilege of all believers.  

Regardless, the die was cast: during the third century, it became customary to apply the term "priest" directly and exclusively to clerics and especially to those who bore the title of "Bishop."

No single church personage contributed more to this hierarchical, priestly-caste mentality than Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage from 248 until his martyrdom in 258 AD. In his best known treatise, De Catholicae Ecclesiae Unite, directed against the schismatic Novatian, he advocates:⁴ 

Philip Schaff’s evaluation of Cyprian: 

Thus as early as the third century, the foundations of a complete hierarchy were laid. And the universal priesthood of every believer so clearly taught in the New Testament would soon be totally discarded. In its place, the title "priest" would be exclusive to the clergy. 

Not only did sacerdotalism win out in the west, the church itself by 500 AD was seen as a saving institution, just as Cyprian claimed it to be. The doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Roman Church prevailed through the Middle Ages and even well into our times. It is only in this century that Rome has had to modify this doctrine (more on this in successive articles). A Church (an institution) that saves is nothing less than blasphemy; but that is the way it was from Rome’s point of view for over 1400 years! 

Priest, sacrifice, and altar, though totally inappropriate in the church-age, was and is carried on in the hierarchy known as the Roman Catholic Church. 

Footnotes: