The Priesthood of Believers

  Having grown up as a Baptist, I have long been familiar with both the concept and the term “priesthood of the believer.” However, it was not until I was reading about Martin Luther’s conception of that doctrine in the last few days that I really gave it much thought, from a biblical perspective. I’ve always just considered it to be one of the “Baptist distinctives.”

   According to Justo González in The Story of Christianity, Luther’s understanding of the priesthood of believers was as follows:

“While it is true that all Christians, by virtue of their baptism, are priests, this does not mean—as some later interpreters have said—that one is self-sufficient to approach God for oneself. There is a direct communion with God that all Christians can and should enjoy. But there is also an organic reality within which all communion with God takes place, and that reality is the church. To be priests does not mean primarily that we are our own individual priests, but rather that we are priests for the entire community of belief, and that they are priests for us. Rather than setting aside the need for the community of the church, the doctrine of universal priesthood of the believer strengthens it.” (Vol. 2, pg. 33)

   The thing that immediately struck me about this view of the doctrine was that this was almost exactly the opposite of what I had understood the doctrine to mean: I thought it meant “I can go to God for myself.” And yet, that is not the role of a priest! A priest goes to God for others. So, I started looking at the various biblical passages that speak of the priesthood of believers. Two things are apparent from the passages that talk about believers' priesthood (1 Peter 2:5, 9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6). The first is that Luther's community focus of the doctrine is correct: the passages speak of the Church as a priesthood and believers as priests, but they do not individualize the doctrine. So, while the individual believer is a priest, to emphasize that is to miss the point. The second conclusion is that a major function of all priests is to offer sacrifices, and this is made evident in most of the deeper teaching that I found. A practical consequence of this is that believers should be seeking to understand what sacrifices God expects of them.

   So, why have Baptists considered this one of their distinctive doctrines when virtually all Protestants hold to these conclusions? As far as I can tell, the major way in which this doctrine is applied for Baptists is in the defense of congregational church government. The argument is as follows, “Because all believers are priests with access to and communion with God, they are all competent to help lead the church (though some are more competent than others).” While I believe in a form of congregationalism, I am no longer certain that the above argument is valid at all. In fact, I think that is probably a damaging twist on a vital doctrine. If this doctrine is to support congregationalism at all, it should be said that as the community of believers approach God on each other’s behalf, seeking divine wisdom and grace, they may expect to receive such wisdom and grace as a community of God-ordained mediators.

  Please do not simply co-opt this doctrine to further the Western cultural values of individualism and democracy; rather love the doctrine for its biblical truth!  Let us learn to live as a holy and royal priesthood, mediating for our fellow believers and offering acceptable sacrifices to our God.  For we have a High Priest who mediates for us and has offered the Acceptable Sacrifice which allows us access with confidence to the our beloved Father's Throne of Grace.