I note the ESV is at least careful not to use the noun "priest," but settles on the adjective as descriptive of the kind of service given by the apostle as a minister of the gospel. A "minister" or "leitourgon" itself possesses sacerdotal associations; the apostle was only filling out this overtone of the word when he spoke of the service of the minister in terms of priestly language. There is no basis in the words for suggesting the apostle taught that the minister of the gospel serves as a priest who mediates between God and men.

Examining the way the ESV has translated the verse itself, I fail to see why one would render a participle in this manner. The translators have filled out the figure of speech for the reader, and thus illustrated rather than translated the original. Though the apostle uses a different word for "ministering," it is clear from the syntax that the verb was intended to show the action of the minister; by rendering it "ministering" the reader is provided the basic sense of what the apostle intended to say, and allows further study to bring to light the exact nature of the figure of speech.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."