These talks on the Apostle Paul are great! I really get inspired when I hear Catholics discuss the faith, especially those coming from previous Christian traditions who, then go and defend the faith with so much energy and passion. I learn a lot by listening to these talks.
Thank you!

If Hebrews calls Jesus a priest and Peter calls Christians priests in spite of the temple cult in Jerusalem, why wouldn’t ministerial priests be called that as well? And why couldn’t Romans 15:15-16 apply to all Christians doing missionary work?

About the pater terminology, 1 Cor 4:14-15 doesn’t contain pater, but gennao, begetting terminology, which is connected but not the same. The point is that X has begotten Y in the gospel, X is the father of Y in the gospel. But not all priests have begotten all believers, so should we call all priests our fathers or only the one that baptised us? Paul doesn’t call himself a father apart from his work of begetting as if the fatherhood came from “orders”.

Paul only calls himself a father by analogy in 1 Tess but he also describes himself as a mother in the same way in the same letter. But we don’t call priests mothers.

And yes, please do try to get the rest online on the Christmas break! Thank you!

The indelible character doctrine derives from Paul’s talk of “seal”.

I sense a confusion in your question: “Isn’t it impossible to determine whether he thought the gift of the Spirit would leave if the minister went apostate?” Here it seems like you’re using “gift of the Spirit” as “seal”. Am I wrong.

Clearly the gift of the Spirit does leave when a man is devoid of sanctifying grace, be he ordained or not. What does not leave an ordained man is the indelible character of Orders (which is distinct from the Holy Spirit).

Paul doesn’t call ministers “priests” directly because of the confusion with the Temple cult in Jerusalem. However, he speaks of them as priestly as I demonstrated in the podcast.

I’ve said elsewhere that the term “pater” and “presbyter” are priestly terms hearkening back to the priesthood of the first-born under the era of natural law (i.e. before the Exodus and the Old Law). This is my talk from last year’s Letter and Spirit, and I’ll try to put it up as a podcast soon.

1) Where is the idea of an indelible character in Paul? Isn’t it impossible to determine whether he thought the gift of the Spirit would leave if the minister went apostate?

2) Why doesn’t Paul call the ministers priests if he thought they share in Christ’s priesthood? Why doesn’t Hebrews talk about the ministerial priesthood offering the Eucharistic sacrifice? Why doesn’t Paul anywhere clearly connect the New Covenant priesthood with the Eucharistic sacrifice? Eg he never tells Timothy to offer the Eucharistic sacrifice with dignity and respect, though a Catholic would think that’d be the first thing Paul would tell a priest to do.