This article originally written by Greg Durel (found at Reaching Catholics for Christ) was referred to me by a friend, we both agreed that this was poorly researched. But I felt it was a good opportunity to answer some of the more common Protestant misunderstandings about the priesthood.

(Greg Durel) As a Roman Catholic for over a quarter of a century, I said those words often. For the unlearned, they are said at the beginning of every trip to the confessional where a Catholic goes to seek absolution for their sins.

Mr Durel, starts off by informing his readers that he is an apostate Catholic Church of which he had been a member for 25 years. Greg informs us of this hoping we will draw the following conclusions:

A. After being a Catholic for 25 years he is well aware of the structure the Catholic Church and its teachings.

B. Now, after 25 years of being a Catholic he knows (believes) that the church is wrong and are teaching.

C. That he has found the truth.

Throughout this article we shall examine these three points more closely.It is always sad when we find  someone like Greg, the idea of people leaving the truth to the church founded by God to become apostates is nothing new,the Bible tells us about people like Greg:

But he that shall deny me before men,I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.---Matt. x. 33

As Saint Augustine (died A.D. 430) said "No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have the sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church." (Sermo ad Caesariensis Ecclesia plebem)

( Greg Durel) For the unlearned again, Roman Catholicism teaches that a Catholic priest has the power to forgive sins. For those that doubted this, Pope John Paul II reaffirmed this teaching in the first years of his papacy. Hence the petition "bless me, Father."

the power of forgiving sin, for the exercise of which the priesthood is just as necessary as it is for the power of consecrating and sacrificing. Like the general power to bind and to loose (cf. Matt., xvi, 19; xviii, 18), the power of remitting and retaining sins was solemnly bestowed on the Church by Christ (cf. John, xx, 21 sqq.). Accordingly, the Catholic priesthood has the indisputable right to trace its origin in this respect also to the Divine Founder of the Church.

This was clearly understood by the early or Christians, as we read in the first century Didache [A.D. 70], a writing attributed to the apostles.

"Confess your sins in church, and do not go up to your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life. . . . On the Lord's Day gather together, break bread, and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure" (Didache 4:14, 14:1).

( Greg Durel) The Catholic is seeking favor from the priest himself. Now the Bible prohibits the addressing of any person as "Father" in the spiritual sense. Yes, you may address your biological father as such but NOT someone in a religious context. For the Lord Jesus is very clear on the subject: "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven" (Matt. 23:9 (KJV). In the context of the chapter He is clearly referring to men assuming the role that only God the Father has a right to.

"Call no one your father as if you had no other father with rights over you." That is, we must realize that all paternity is of God, and that we owe our being, and all that we have, including our earthly father, to Him. Nor can any claims of an earthly father avail against our duties to God, our heavenly Father. Meantime, Catholics do not call a Priest "Father" in the same sense as that in which they call God their Father. A Priest, by God’s Providence and by the authority of Christ, is a father in the spiritual sense, just as a natural parent is a father in an earthly sense. By administering Baptism he gives spiritual life to a soul; he nourishes that life by conferring the Sacraments; he warns, teaches, helps with his advice, corrects, and does all in the spiritual life that an earthly father does in the temporal order. So much so that St. Paul attributes a true paternity to himself, saying, "I admonish you as my dearest children... for in Christ Jesus, by the Gospel, I have begotten you." I. Corinthians,, 4:14.

( Greg Durel) So the very thought of a person being addressed as your spiritual "father" is unbiblical to say the least. Referring to a person as THE HOLY FATHER is blasphemous at best. It does not take a rocket scientist to see the path that Rome puts its sheep on.

By this meant no human may be given the HONOR and respect due to God the father. St. Paul tells us that he is our spiritual father.

"For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many Father, For I became you Father in Christ Jesus through the Gospel"(1 Cor. 4-15)

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that Greg Durel has not studied the Bible thoroughly or he certainly would have known this

( Greg Durel) From the get-go they are taught that the priest is something special, holier than thou and certainly closer to God than a mere lay person. The Baltimore catechism teaches that when a priest puts on his vestments he becomes an "alter christus," i.e, another Christ. Then you see the priest you are seeing Jesus Christ as well. In the minds of many Roman Catholics the parish priest is sacrosanct and above reproach.

No where Does the Catholic Church teach that the priest is"holier than thou and certainly closer to God than a mere lay person" or that the priest is "sacrosanct and above reproach". As Catholics we do not give any "special" respect to the person, but rather to the office of the priesthood. Similar to the way we as citizens give respect to a Judge, does being a judge mean he is a better person or citizen than we are? of course not, neither does being a priest make one Holy than a lay person. it is the office of the priesthood which we respect, unlike the judge who receives his authority and responsibility from a earthly civil government the priest receives his authority and responsibility from Christ and his church. it is for this reason scripture says:

Obey them that have the rule over you and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.---Heb. 13, 17:

( Greg Durel) Remember that it is a priest and only a priest that can change the bread and wine of the Lord’s table into the literal body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I agree, but allow me to rephrase this statement: 

Only a CATHOLIC priest that can change the bread and wine of the Lord’s table into the literal body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The fact that the Eucharist is the literal body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ was clearly understood and taught by the early Christians. Such as St.Ignatius of Antioch  who was appointed by the Apostle St. Peter to be the Bishop of Antioch.(Theodoret "Dial. Immutab.", I, iv, 33a, Paris, 1642)  St. John Chrysostom lays special emphasis on the honor conferred upon the martyr (St. Ignatius) in receiving his episcopal consecration at the hands of the Apostles themselves ("Hom. in St. Ig.", IV. 587). Natalis Alexander quotes Theodoret to the same effect (III, xii, art. xvi, p. 53).

St. Ignatius of Antioch [A.D. 110]

"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible" (Letter to the Romans 7:3). and "Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1).

( Greg Durel) What if there were no priests or priesthood? To put the answer very simply, there would be no Roman Catholic Church. If the Bible were ever to become authoritative in the Catholic Church, there would certainly be no priests. 

Did not saint Paul tell us that Christ is the high Priest? Would it not be safe to say that with out Christ (the HIGH PRIEST)   and the order of priesthood which he establish there would be no christianity, church or Bible? Did Christ establish a church or a book? where the Bible does Christ command writing of a book? is the Church a product of the book of the book product of the Church? the answer is simple Christ established the Catholic Church the Catholic Church wrote and produced the Bible. It is for this reason St. Augustine [A.D. 397] , Bishop of Hippo Stated:

"I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so." (St. Augustine, Conra Epist. Fundam. i,6)

( Greg Durel) An example of the complete disregard for the sacred Scripture held by the Roman Catholic Church is seen in the mandatory requisite of celibacy for every priest. One simply must read Paul’s epistle to Timothy, where God gives the requirements for a Pastor: "A bishop, then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach" (1 Tim. 3:2).

This is simply false. The Bible no where states that all Bishops "must be married," it states that they can be married "but once." It is not a statement to the effect that every Bishop must have a wife, for even St. Paul himself did not have a wife, but that no one is to become a Bishop who has been married more than once.

( Greg Durel) Now the phrase "must be" is very interesting. Maybe you have seen it before in the Bible. Perhaps in the third chapter of the Gospel of John? Do you remember what Jesus said to Nicodemus? He said, "you must be born again." Now I am sure that no respectable Roman Catholic theologian would deny the fact that this command is obligatory. The new birth is NOT optional! The language in 1 Timothy 3:2 is the same as in John 3. Therefore the pastor must be a MARRIED MAN.

No the Scripture says "then must be blameless," it does not say "must be a MARRIED MAN" as I pointed out above St. Paul who wrote this letter to Timothy himself did not have a wife surely if St. Paul commanded all bishops to be married he himself would be a hypocrite. The Apostle's desire was that other men might be as himself (I Cor., vii, 7-8),  precludes the inference that he wished all ministers of the Gospel to be married. The words beyond doubt mean that the fitting candidate was a man, who, amongst other qualities which St. Paul enunciates as likely to make his authority respected, possessed also such stability of divorce, by remaining faithful to one wife. The direction is therefore restrictive, no injunctive; it excludes men who have married more than once, but it does not impose marriage as a necessary condition.

( Greg Durel) How clear is that? There is nothing like the word of God to clear up a religious education. Do you realize the impact of this truth? There is only one "church" where NONE of its pastors are married. Not only are they not married, but also the Roman Catholic Church forbids them being married.

It is interesting to note here that Mr. Durel clearly has never taken the time to learn about our Faith during his 25 years as a Catholic, if he had he would know there ARE married priests in the Oriental Churches in communion with the Holy See, we may note that as a general principle married clerics are not ineligible for the subdiaconate, diaconate, and priesthood. As in the Russian Church they must either be married in accordance with the canons, or else as a preliminary to ordination they are asked whether they will promise to observe chastity. The full recognition of the right of the Oriental clergy to retain their wives will be found in the Constitution of Benedict XIV, "Etsi pastoralis", 26 May, 1742. For more on the subject please read the Catholic Encyclopedia, article on "Celibacy of the Clergy".

( Greg Durel) Now the Bible has something to say about anyone that would forbid a pastor from being married: "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth (1 Tim. 4:1-3).

The Catholic Church DOES NOT FORBIDE marriage, on the contrary we hold marriage in extremely high regard, a holy sacrament. Greg Durel has fallen into a basic misunderstanding of the Catholic Church, only in the Roman right do priests not marry. These youn men choose on their own to abstain from marriage on their own free will. upon being accepted in the priesthood of the Catholic Church these men announce this personal choice in the form of a promise to God, the Catholic Church only requires that these priests hold to this promise.

"He Speaks of the Gnostics, the Marcionites, the Encratites, the Manicheans, and other ancient heretics,who absolutely condemned marriage,and the use of all Kind of meat: because they pretended that all flesh was from an evil principal. whereas the church of God, so far from condemning marriage, holds it a holy sacrament; and forbids it to none but such as by vow have chosen the better part: and prohibits no the use of any meats whatsoever in proper times and seasons; though she does not judge all kind of diet proper for days of fasting and penance."(footnote to the Douay-Rheims Bible)

( Greg Durel) If you believe the Word of God you must then reject the Roman Catholic Church. For their Doctrines are of devils and completely contrary to the Bible. At best you must reject this absurd notion of a celibate priesthood, which in turn makes the teaching magisterium of the church no longer infallible, but in fact heretical and therefore should be rejected.

Above we see that if, gives us a list of accusations which he believes "you must" accept and "should be" accepted, but fails to prove any of them.  Mr. Durel has the gaul to command that you "reject the Roman  Catholic Church. For their Doctrines are of devils and completely contrary to the Bible" history tells us that was the Catholic Church which created the Bible and has protected throughout the centuries. Mr. Durel has been to be completely unable and prove that the Roman Catholic doctors Doctrines contrary to the Bible, rather we see that it is Mr. Durel who has twisted the words and sacred stricture for his own purposes, and in doing so has turned sacred truth into lies. it is to Mr. Durel that we repeat the words of Christ:

Do not be liars against the truth. This is not the wisdom that descends from above. It is earthly sensual, devilish---James 3:1-15

Mr. Durel says that"At best you must reject this absurd notion of a celibate priesthood" but he has been unable to prove that notion of a celibate priesthood is "absurd" after all St. Paul himself was celibate, would Mr. Durel consider St. Paul "absurd" ? Christ who sacred scripture tells us is the hight priest was celibate , would Mr. Durel DARE call Christ "absurd" ? one must keep in mind that Mr. Durel accuses the sacred priesthood which Christ founded as being "absurd". Considering these things it becomes obvious it is not the Catholic Church but Mr. Durel who's "Doctrines are of devils and completely contrary to the Bible"

( Greg Durel) The Bible and a Sacrificing, Mediating Priesthood. The Council of Trent declared (loc. cit., n. 961)"If anyone saith that there is not in the New Testament a visible and external priesthood; or, that there is not any power of consecrating and offering the true body and blood of the Lord, and forgiving and retaining sins, but only an office and bare ministry of preaching THE GOSPEL; OR, THAT THOSE WHO DO NOT PREACH ARE NOT priests at all: let him be anathema."

The Council of Trent also decreed (Sess. XXIII, can. iii, in Denzinger, n. 963): "If any one shall say that order or sacred ordination is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ our Lord. . .let him be anathema."

( Greg Durel) It seems clear that Rome knows that if she has no priesthood that she must close up shop.

As we have shown above if there were no priesthood there would be no Christianity and no Bible. the priesthood forms so indispensable a foundation of Christianity that its removal would entail the destruction of the whole edifice. A Christianity without a priesthood cannot be the Church of Christ.

( Greg Durel) Let us prove that there is no sacrificing priesthood in the New Testament from their scholars.

The Catholic Encyclopedia says: "THE DIVINE INSTITUTION OF THE THREEFOLD HIERARCHY CANNOT OF COURSE BE DERIVED FROM OUR TEXT: IN FACT IT CANNOT IN ANY WAY BE PROVED DIRECTLY FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT: IT IS A CATHOLIC DOGMA BY VIRTUE OF THE DOGMATIC TRADITION. I.E., IN A LATER PERIOD OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY….BUT DOGMATIC TRUTH CANNOT BE TRACED BACK TO CHRIST HIMSELF BY ANALYSIS OF STRICT HISTORICAL TESTIMONY."

It is important to note that Mr Durel does not reference which article out of hundreds in the Catholic encyclopedia he found this quotation, he does this for the specific reason that he has mis-cited it. below I have provided the exact citation from the Encyclopedia and a link to the article for those who wish to verify the exact wording of this citation:

"The Divine institution of the threefold hierarchy cannot of course be derived from our texts; in fact it cannot in any way be proved directly from the New Testament; it is Catholic dogma by virtue of dogmatic tradition, i.e. in a later period of ecclesiastical history the general belief in the Divine institution of the episcopate, presbyterate, and diaconate can be verified and thence be followed on through the later centuries. But this dogmatic truth cannot be traced back to Christ Himself by analysis of strictly historical testimony."(The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII Copyright © 1910, Hierarchy of the Early Church )

Mr Durel, chopped out the sentence where the Catholic Encyclopedia states the general belief in the Divine institution of the  presbyterate (priesthood) can be verified. This type of dishonesty is apparent throughout this article. In order to twist the truth in a vain attempt to discredit the Catholic Church Mr Durel has degraded to the level of lying. The word priest is derived from the Greek word presbyteros as is explained in the Catholic Encyclopedia:

The word priest (Germ. Priester; Fr. prêtre; Ital. prete) is derived from the Greek presbyteros (the elder, as distinguished from neoteros, the younger), and is, in the hieratical sense, equivalent to the Latin sacerdos, the Greek iereus, and the Hebrew kahane. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XII Copyright © 1911, Priesthood)

Let us prove that there is sacrificing priesthood in the New Testament from the same scholars Mr Durel quotes The Catholic Encyclopedia:

The proof of the Divine origin of the Catholic priesthood must be regarded as established, once it is shown that the Eucharistic Sacrifice of the Mass is coeval with the beginnings and the essence of Christianity. In proof of this we may appeal even to the Old Testament. When the Prophet Isaias foresees the entrance of pagans into the Messianic Kingdom, he makes the calling of priests from the heathen (i.e. the non-Jews) a special characteristic of the new Church (Is., lxvi, 21): "And I will take of them to be priests and Levites, saith the Lord". Now this non-Jewish (Christian) priesthood in the future Messianic Church presupposes a permanent sacrifice, namely that "clean oblation", which from the rising of the sun even to the going down is to be offered to the Lord of hosts among the Gentiles (Mal., i, 11). The sacrifice of bread and wine offered by Melchisedech (cf. Gen., xiv, 18 sqq.), the prototype of Christ (cf. Ps. cix, 4; Heb., v, 5 sq.; vii, 1 sqq.), also refers prophetically, not only to the Last Supper, but also to its everlasting repetition in commemoration of the Sacrifice of the Cross (see MASS). Rightly, therefore, does the Council of Trent emphasize the intimate connection between the Sacrifice of the Mass and the priesthood (Sess. XXIII, cap. i, in Denzinger, "Enchiridion", 10th ed., 957): "Sacrifice and priesthood are by Divine ordinance so inseparable that they are found together under all laws. Since therefore in the New Testament the Catholic Church has received from the Lord's institution the holy visible sacrifice of the Eucharist it must also be admitted that in the Church there is a new, visible and external priesthood into which the older priesthood has been changed." Surely this logic admits of no reply. It is, then, all the more extraordinary that Harnack should seek the origin of the hierarchical constitution of the Church, not in Palestine, but in pagan Rome. Of the Catholic Church he writes: "She continues ever to govern the peoples; her popes lord it like Trajan and Marcus Aurelius. To Romulus and Remus succeeded Peter and Paul; to the proconsuls the archbishops and bishops. To the legions correspond the hosts of priests and monks; to the imperial bodyguard the Jesuits. Even to the finest details, even to her judicial organization, nay even to her very vestments, the continued influence of the ancient empire and of its institutions may be traced" ("Das Wesen d. Christentums", Leipzig, 1902, p. 157). With the best of good will, we can recognize in this description only a sample of the writer's ingenuity, for an historical investigation of the cited institutions would undoubtedly lead to sources, beginnings, and motives entirely different from the analogous conditions of the Empire of Rome. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XII Copyright © 1911)

( Greg Durel) What an admission!

YES, What an admission!