I was looking at how in a span of a little over 200 years how in America we interpret the constitution quite differently than our fore fathers; I think they would be rolling over in their graves if hey could see what has become of the US. I listen to Catholic apologist staking high credibility that the traditions began early in the 3 or 4 hundreds were began like transubstantiation....we see how the US has departed form the original intent in 200 years how can you stake your credibility on things began 300 years past the days of Jesus and the Apostles? If we anchored to scripture and did not deviate from the concept did Jesus teach it was it practiced in the book of act and did the epistles mention it; the Catholic church might still look the the church out of the book of Acts.
LineDancer2011-08-14T09:03:10Z
Favorite Answer
There are loads of Catholic tradition and doctrines that have nothing to do with the Bible, the book that Catholics claim as their book. Consider:
If the Catholic Church made the Bible, is it not strange that she failed to include any word about the assumption of Mary, her immaculate conception and about the efficacy of praying to her; about the veneration of relics, images and saints; about the use of holy water; about the ceremony of the mass; about a pope’s being the vicar of Christ; about monsignors, archbishops and cardinals; about purgatory; about a celibate clergy; about not eating meat on Friday or during Lent; about making novenas; about infant baptism; etc.? Is not the fact that the Bible is silent on all these outstanding points of the Catholic religion strong circumstantial evidence that the Catholic Church did not make the Bible? that it is not a Catholic book?
Where the True Presence of the Holy Eucharist is, there is Jesus Christ. Where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.
Jesus Christ established the Catholic Church in 33AD. It was not established 3 or 4 hundred years later.
The Apostles celebrated the Sacrament of Holy Eucharist. Acts 2:46 "Day by day, attending the Temple together and breaking bread in their homes…"
The Apostles were visibly religious Jews. They wore the kippah (prayer hat), the tallit (prayer shawl with fringes) and the tephillin (phylacteries). Long after Jesus ascended to the Father, Peter protested that he had never in his life eaten anything unkosher. Acts 10:14 When these Jewish Apostles remembered Christ's command, Lk 22:19 "Do this in remembrance of Me," they added it to their synagogue worship. They began with synagogue prayer and Scripture readings, and then went to their homes to celebrate the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood. To this very day, the Introductory Rite and Liturgy of the Word come directly from Jewish synagogue worship. The Liturgy of the Eucharist comes directly from the Apostles' breaking bread in their homes.
"The Eucharist is not a thing. It is not a dead object. It is Christ, and He is fully alive. Receiving Him with this awareness, we become more fully alive, so that we can say with St. Paul, "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me."
<<I listen to Catholic apologist staking high credibility that the traditions began early in the 3 or 4 hundreds were began like transubstantiation>>
No, transubstantiation began immediately after the death of Christ. It is what Jesus talked about in John 6 and what he instituted at the Last Supper.
In 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 we read:
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.
Paul says here that if we do not discern the "Body" and receive unworthily, we drink and eat judgment on ourselves. The only way this could be true is if the bread and wine were truly the Body and Blood of Christ, that is what we are to discern.
Then the early Christian writings, in the first century confirm this belief that the Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ. Ignatius of Antioch, in his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans said:
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God ... They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes.107AD
Ignatius studied with John the Apostle of Christ.
So nothing has changed in the matter of doctrine. What changes sometimes is non-doctrinal disciplines and practices. There are those who had meaning at a particular time and were used for spiritual growth and devotion. But over time things change and those devotions may need to be changed to be relevant to a particular society.
They didn't start 300 post Jesus and the Apostles, Christianity (although it wasn't initially named as such ) started WITH Jesus and the Apostles. Many of the traditions were establised by the Apostles and their disciples, i.e. the early church. Many of the books of the NT were around a few hundred years before they were all complied into one volume, now known as the Bible. In fact by the end of the first century, Christianity was a recognised religion, set apart from it's founders of Judaism, and early into the second century an official church hierarchy was well establised.