Bro... the Catholic church condemned the Lord's Supper as was practiced by the Apostles. It was separated from the meal and then it was ordered that only a priest could facilitate it. These are the individuals who distorted the Lord's Supper. Of course they will support pagan sacramentalism.
The catholic church did no such thing. The Catholic church wasn't even completely formed when quotes were made by Early Church fathers regarding what they called Eucharist. When do you believe the institution of the Catholic Church began?
The Roman Catholic Church didn't truly begin as its structured until later with the Roman Bishop as head.
Jesus said, this is my body (he broke bread) and this is my blood (they drank of the cup). Neither Jesus or the apostles taught you as a Christian had to observe this as a feast. That was a Jewish custom and you know how the transfer of jewish customs into Christianity worked out?
So if you choose a feast, that is your preference, as there is no condemning either. However the only part to be concerned about is the bread and the vine.
__________________ To be able to unite in difference carries more weight than all the opinions the universe can hold
The catholic church did no such thing. The Catholic church wasn't even completely formed when quotes were made by Early Church fathers regarding what they called Eucharist. When do you believe the institution of the Catholic Church began?
The Roman Catholic Church didn't truly begin as its structured until later with the Roman Bishop as head.
The Catholic Church has codified it. Did they not officially decree that the Eucharist was to be taken as part of Mass? Did they not decree that it could only be officiated by an ordained priest.
Quote:
Jesus said, this is my body (he broke bread) and this is my blood (they drank of the cup). Neither Jesus or the apostles taught you as a Christian had to observe this as a feast. That was a Jewish custom and you know how the transfer of jewish customs into Christianity worked out?
I'm not talking about a Jewish feast. lol I'm talking about the Lord's Supper. I Corinthians 11 is clear that it was originally conducted as part of love feast.
Quote:
So if you choose a feast, that is your preference, as there is no condemning either. However the only part to be concerned about is the bread and the vine.
I could go as far as to say that the only truly imortant part is the bread and the wine (or grape juice). But that takes away from it being in remembrance of the Last Supper. It takes away from it being a love feast of fellowship (ancient cultures valued eating together as part of covenant). It takes away from it being a symbolic meal representing the one in which we will feast with Jesus in the Kingdom. Lastly, it was a feast wherein the less fortunate saints were often fed.
To partake in a tiny wafer and a thimble of grape juice as the Catholics do is to completely gut the Lord's Supper of it's true symbolic and functional meaning.
I mean, if it doesn't bother you to take the Lord's Supper as a Eucharistic "snack"... that's you're choice. However, give me true Apostolic custom.
The Catholic Church has codified it. Did they not officially decree that the Eucharist was to be taken as part of Mass? Did they not decree that it could only be officiated by an ordained priest...
To partake in a tiny wafer and a thimble of grape juice as the Catholics do is to completely gut the Lord's Supper of it's true symbolic and functional meaning.
I seem to remember a thoughtful argument being made by Arnold Murray, I believe it was, that doing the bolded part up there guts it pretty good, too? Early Christians had the Lord's Supper like 3 or 4 times a year?
1 Cor.11: ..27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.
28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.
31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged.
32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.
So...what are some thots on this....does God still make folks sick and kill them for doing this "unworthily"? (judgement)
__________________ As for me, may I never boast about anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because of that cross, my interest in this world has been crucified, and the world’s interest in me has also died.- Gal. 6:14
Waiting for discussion on Shag's question! That's a truly puzzling passage of scripture.
Supper, Feast, Snack, Churrasco, or Fondue... in the end it is the two elements that are to remind us of his broken body and shed blood... Wine and Bread.
If those two elements are there then it is enough. Same in Baptism... the important thing is that the Name of Jesus is called upon for salvation and the baptism is with water.
__________________ "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
Yes, interesting isn't it? The RCC uses wine, as Jesus most likely used... but sacramentalizes it in a tiny itty bitty wafer. And your mainstream Apostolic churches use the Catholic wafer AND don't use wine, opting to use Welche's Grape Juice. So one could argue that communion among Apostolic churches is even further removed from the original form than the RCC's sacrament.
Linear Mode
