Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: daniel1212

Holy Euharist is Mass. The apostles and Christians after them celebrated Holy Eucharist. It’s in the Bible, it’s in the writings and history of early Christians as far back as we have and continuous to the present.

You believe otherwise; you’re welcome to your opinion.


60 posted on 07/10/2016 11:01:15 AM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: D-fendr
You believe otherwise; you’re welcome to your opinion.

Likewise; I'm sure.

69 posted on 07/10/2016 12:15:04 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: D-fendr
Holy Euharist is Mass. The apostles and Christians after them celebrated Holy Eucharist. It’s in the Bible, it’s in the writings and history of early Christians as far back as we have and continuous to the present. You believe otherwise; you’re welcome to your opinion.

So I go thru the life of the NT church showing the absolute absence of that mere assertion, and you simply invoke an error that manifestly developed later? Thank God the NT did not have that for its basis. The very ideas of presbuteros and episkopos being separate offices, and a distinct class of sacerdotal priests due to the Lord's supper coming to be seen as a sacrifice for sins requiring this priesthood, were all later developments in contrast to the NT church.

The fourth century Roman Catholic scholar Jerome (347-420) himself confirms,

“The presbyter is the same as the bishop, and before parties had been raised up in religion by the provocations of Satan, the churches were governed by the Senate of the presbyters....If you doubt that bishop and presbyter are the same, that the first word is one of function, and the second one of age, read the epistle of the Apostle to the Philippians. - (Commentary on Tit. 1.7, quoted. in “Religions of authority and the religion of the spirit," pp. 77,78. 1904, by AUGUSTE SABATIER. A similar translated version of this is provided by "Catholic World," Volume 32, by the Paulist Fathers, 1881, pp. 73,74).

Catholic writer Greg Dues in "Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide," states

Beginning in the late 5th century, priests began wearing a long tunic to distinguish them from the laity, who wore a short one...As Christianity swept through the Germanic lands, the church adopted the feudalistic structures of culture and politics that had evolved in Europe. Precise ranking, with exact privileges and responsibilities, was determined for kings, lords, knights, and, on the bottom, the peasants. A parallel ranking made clear distinction among bishops, abbots, priests, monks, and the laity on the bottom.

"Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions."

"When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice [after Rome's theology], the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist."

Soon all presbyters were considered priests because they offered the Eucharistic sacrifice. (http://books.google.com/books?id=ajZ_aR-VXn8C&source=gbs_navlinks_s)

The "Historical Dictionary of Anglicanism" provides additional confirmation:

In the New Testament. the Greek word that is usually translated into English as "priest" is the word 'hiereus'. The use of it and of its cognates in the New Testament is threefold: it is used, first, of Old Testament (Levitical) priests (e.g., Luke 1:5; Heb. 7:5); second, of Jesus Christ as "priest after the order of Melchizedek" (e.g., Heb. 7:17); and third, derivatively, of all believers as together holding a "priesthood" (l Pet. 2:5, 2:9; cf. Rev. 1:6. 5:10). It is never used in the New Testament to denote ordained ministers of the church.

Despite this consistent New Testament usage, from the 2nd century onward the hiereus terminology began to be applied to the ordained ministers - initially only to bishops. but later to presbyters also. The growth in church history of this misapplication of the New Testament usage matched a comparable growth in the understanding of the Eucharist as a distinct ritual offering of a sacrifice to God. (Colin Buchanan, Historical Dictionary of Anglicanism, p. 483)

And for the Lord's supper becoming the Catholic corruption, see here by the grace of God.

The Lord's Supper: solemn symbolism or real flesh and blood?

(Note: allow scripts for pop up Bible verses

Table of Contents

Preface

1Cor. 10,11

Metaphorical versus literal language

Supper accounts and John 6: Conformity to Scripture, and consequences of the literalistic interpretation.

The uniqueness of the Catholic interpretation

The Lord's Supper is not a sacrifice for sins

Absence of the sacerdotal Eucharistic priesthood

Metaphorical view of Jn. 6 is not new.

Endocannibalism


73 posted on 07/10/2016 5:28:23 PM PDT by daniel1212 ( Turn to the Lord Jesus as a damned and destitute sinner+ trust Him to save you, then follow Him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson