Biggest differences of today's Church vs. 1st century?

[AmericanMuslim]

Following up on this thread…what are the biggest differences between the Church today and the 1st century?

In my mind:

• Different perception of the Parousia. In the 1st century, there were still companions of Jesus alive and a different sense of when Jesus would return.
• Less familiarity with scripture. Partly because the canon wasn’t finished being developed/written, and also the lack of the printing press. I doubt most 1st century Christians had read more than one Gospel, if that.
• A lot of later theology that was not developed, particularly regarding Mary.
• Much different form of “clergy”.
• Obviously, many later devotions and forms that did not exist in the 1st century. Monasticism would be another large area of Catholic practice that didn’t exist.

Others?

 

[Garyjohn2]

Oh yeah, there are LOTS of differences. The church has grown so much! We still preach Jesus is alive though.

Then Jesus asked, ‘What is the kingdom of God like? What shall I compare it to? It is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his garden. It grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air perched in its branches.”
Luke 13:18-19

A mustard seed is the smallest of seeds, just a dot. See how it grows large enough, so it can now support the nests of birds! In what other ways did the mustard seed change? Too many to count.

I think that is the biggest difference. It has grown so much in terms of members and physical distribution. All over the world!

 

[PJM]

=AmericanMuslim;8079546]Following up on this thread…what are the biggest differences between the Church today and the 1st century?

In my mind:

• Different perception of the Parousia. In the 1st century, there were still companions of Jesus alive and a different sense of when Jesus would return.
• Less familiarity with scripture. Partly because the canon wasn’t finished being developed/written, and also the lack of the printing press. I doubt most 1st century Christians had read more than one Gospel, if that.
• A lot of later theology that was not developed, particularly regarding Mary.
• Much different form of “clergy”.
• Obviously, many later devotions and forms that did not exist in the 1st century. Monasticism would be another large area of Catholic practice that didn’t exist.

Others?

Three things come to mind:

The Growth likely would be a surprise

The Gift of the Bible and the Completeness of Theology on so many issues and levels

I suspect that FAr, FAR fewer are willingto DIE for there faith than in the early years of the Church. [YES I am aware that there are more Martyrs in the 20th century] than all the others combined. I’m speaking relatice to the catholic Population World wide.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Wesley7]

what are the biggest differences between the Church today and the 1st century?

Mainly; cultural,social, and political.

 

[Rogare]

Mariology
The number of sacraments
The papacy

 

[Garyjohn2]

Mariology
The number of sacraments
The papacy

I think the number of sacraments and the papacy has remained the same actually…
Not sure about Mariology. I know the disciples honored Mary though.

 

[chuckfrmvalyfrg]

Rogare;8080249[:

Mariology
The number of sacraments
The papacy]

Rogare,
Could you be a little more forthcoming .
In the 1st century Church Mary would have been alive for part of it . They Knew who she was , some would have met & known her . They would have known that she was in the care of one of Christ’s Apostles ( who if I remember correctly , was the last to die ) . They also would be aware of her role in Salvation History . Mary had free will , did you ever wonder what if she had told the Angel Gabriel , "no " ?

Why do you think all 7 Sacraments did not exist in the 1st century Church ?

Re: the Papacy , could you tell me what you mean ? Peter had successors who exercised authority .

 

[AmericanMuslim]

Why do you think all 7 Sacraments did not exist in the 1st century Church ?

They would have existed in different forms, if all did exist:

• Baptism: yes
• Confirmation: ?
• Eucharist: yes, but different. For example, consecration by the priest alone.
• Penance: different form I suspect - more making penance to the community
• Holy Orders: very different, if at all. “Clergy” as such would have been married
• Anointing of the Sick: yes
• Marriage: presumably

Of course, all of these would have been very different in terms of ritual, forms, words, etc.

 

[Garyjohn2]

They would have existed in different forms, if all did exist:

• Baptism: yes
• Confirmation: ?
• Eucharist: yes, but different. For example, consecration by the priest alone.
• Penance: different form I suspect - more making penance to the community
• Holy Orders: very different, if at all. “Clergy” as such would have been married
• Anointing of the Sick: yes
• Marriage: presumably

Of course, all of these would have been very different in terms of ritual, forms, words, etc.

Not so different, actually!

Confirmation: same. The are given the holy spirit by the laying of hands
Eucharist: same. Jesus said the words, took bread, blessed it, broke it, and said “do this in memory of me.” This one is has changed the least!
Holy Orders: same. Being married or not in the past does not change the sacrament!

Not sure if penance was different. The bible extols us to confess our sins to one another. We still do that. We confess to the priest, who is a representative of the faithful community.

Some of them have changed, for example baptism. We say “in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” The first baptists (john the baptist?) was not knowledgable of the Trinity at this time.

That does not mean the sacraments weren’t all there though. I guess you can say they have developed, and the forms have evolved…but if you ask what is different since the 1st century, saying “sacrements” wouldn’t really be accurate, unless you really got into details.

 

[AmericanMuslim]

Eucharist: same. Jesus said the word, took bread, blessed it, broke it, and said “do this in memory of me”
Holy Orders: same. Being married or not in the past does not change the sacrament!

But did the 1st century early church have priests who consecrated the Eucharist? i.e., this man here has received the sacrament of Holy Orders and can consecrate the Eucharist, but this man here has not and therefore cannot?

I get the sense that the Eucharist in the very early church was more “whenever two of you are gathered in my name” but I really don’t know.

 

[Cavaradossi]

But did the 1st century early church have priests who consecrated the Eucharist? i.e., this man here has received the sacrament of Holy Orders and can consecrate the Eucharist, but this man here has not and therefore cannot?

I get the sense that the Eucharist in the very early church was more “whenever two of you are gathered in my name” but I really don’t know.

Yes, they did. The three way distinction between Priests, Deacons and Bishops is mentioned within the Epistles.

 

[Garyjohn2]

But did the 1st century early church have priests who consecrated the Eucharist? i.e., this man here has received the sacrament of Holy Orders and can consecrate the Eucharist, but this man here has not and therefore cannot?

I get the sense that the Eucharist in the very early church was more “whenever two of you are gathered in my name” but I really don’t know.

Good question! I don’t have the records going back to then, but I know there was the priesthood. The apostles taught others, and charged them to do the work of Christ (holy orders). These would be the ones to lead the worship services. I know the bible states that there were priests and bishops though, going back to the 1st century. That is really all I’m going off of. There might be other historical sources though. Where does this “sense” of yours come from?

 

[Rogare]

Rogare,
Could you be a little more forthcoming .
In the 1st century Church Mary would have been alive for part of it . They Knew who she was , some would have met & known her . They would have known that she was in the care of one of Christ’s Apostles ( who if I remember correctly , was the last to die ) . They also would be aware of her role in Salvation History . Mary had free will , did you ever wonder what if she had told the Angel Gabriel , "no " ?

Forgive my lack of clarity. Yes, they would have known her. I also assume that the 1st century writers (the apostles) would have left some writings about her being born sinless, her perpetual virginity, her assumption (possibly, may have “happened” too late). Rather, based on 1st century writings, none of these things were known or discussed. It took many centuries for all of this extra-Biblical lore to develop. I believe her role in salvation was covered in its entirety: she gave birth to Christ.

Why do you think all 7 Sacraments did not exist in the 1st century Church?

The actions themselves existed, but they were not considered sacraments:

The number of the sacraments remained yet for a long time indefinite; though among the church fathers of our period baptism and the Lord’s Supper were regarded either as the only Sacraments, or as the prominent ones. Augustine considered it in general an excellence of the New Testament over the Old, that the number of the sacraments was diminished, but their import enhanced, and calls baptism and the Supper, with reference to the water and the blood which flowed from the side of the Lord, the genuine or chief sacraments, on which the church subsists. But he includes under the wider conception of the sacrament other mysterious and holy usages, which were commended in the Scriptures, naming expressly confirmation, marriage, and ordination. Thus he already recognizes to some extent five Christian sacraments, to which the Roman church has since added penance and extreme unction…This uncertainty as to the number of the sacraments continued till the twelfth century. Yet the usage of the church from the fifth century downward, in the East and in the West, appears to have inclined silently to the number seven, which was commended by its mystical sacredness.”

       -Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, ch.7, part 91

The Church did not teach 7 sacraments since day one; the number has evolved over time.

the Papacy , could you tell me what you mean ? Peter had successors who exercised authority .

The current role of the papacy has also changed and evolved much over time. There is no Biblical evidence (1st century writings) of Peter acting as pope.

 

[Garyjohn2]

I also assume that the 1st century writers (the apostles) would have left some writings about her being born sinless, her perpetual virginity, her assumption (possibly, may have “happened” too late). Rather, based on 1st century writings, none of these things were known or discussed. It took many centuries for all of this extra-Biblical lore to develop. I believe her role in salvation was covered in its entirety: she gave birth to Christ.

The actions themselves existed, but they were not considered sacraments:

The Church did not teach 7 sacraments since day one; the number has evolved over time.

The current role of the papacy has also changed and evolved much over time. There is no Biblical evidence (1st century writings) of Peter acting as pope.

I knew this was going to turn into one of those threads.

 

[BK_Norhstar]

this is a very interesting thread. it makes regret leaving catholiscm in the first place

 

[KathleenGee]

AmericanMuslim…

St. Justin the Martyr explained to the Roman emperor how Mass was said in Rome, in the countryside, and in general how Mass was said in the Christian world, his letter completed in 155 AD. By the year 100, the Church had the essentials of liturgy, the administrative and clerical forms as mentioned previous---- bishop, deacon, and priest…Previously, there was different norms, the Gentile being more conciliar…but the Jewish model of bishop and priest was the must durable and practical. Also by the, we had the Apostles Creed. All this by 100 AD. As Christianity became settled, one priest challenged his bishop, Arian, contesting that Jesus was born afterwards.

The Church created a new word, consubstantiated…meaning Jesus is of the same substance of God. Jesus is the Word Incarnate. It is through the Incarnate Word of God, for example, ‘Let there be light, etc.’…that through Jesus Christ the universe was made. This problem/debate caused the Church to meet at Nicea, and to further define Christ in His oneness with the Father and Holy Spirit. We believe in One God, but with 3 persons…beings…God’s essence is Divine Love, relational…so one of His essences is that He is relational. The Council of Nicea, because it further defined some aspect of Christ, was the final revelation or completion of our understanding of Christ, this including both Latin and Orthodox Churches.

The Orthodox Church is also founded by the Apostles, actual witnesses to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In our faith tradition of what is authentic, the local church must be based one one of the founders of the original 12 apostles who were with Christ. One apostle betrayed Christ and was replaced. Twelve represents perfection, the Church, and also the 12 tribes of Israel.

And Christ’s death and resurrection broke the power of sin and death, and in Him…when people enter into His kingdom…they are united with Him and the world is made new.

The liturgy of ancient times, with the sacred Body and Blood of Jesus Christ…the fulfilment of Milchezedek who prophesized the coming of the perfect sacrifice…is Jesus. And the Mass of today has the same tone, spirit, and purpose as did the earliest Masses. It is also fascinating to study how the ancient Roman Christians worshipped the Lord, the Light of the World, in the dark tombs of the Roman dead underneath the Eternal City.

last I heard, the relics at St. Peter’s in Rome are indeed that of St. Peter’s…and right now they are still investigating the possible remains of St. Paul, also there in Rome.
We also have the largest library in the world because the Church documents as best it can every parish and priest and bishop. It was difficult in the first 300 years due to persecution and means, and so we have artifacts, tombs, etc.

God bless you, American Muslim.

 

[KathleenGee]

I also think the Church has become so large because it is administrating so many races and cultures around the world, being the universal church. It takes time to integrate a new culture of people with a liturgy fitting them, and they communicating to us their contributions to the universality of faith.

So, I hate to use the word, but it is more bureaucratic.

And Mary has come to us in many ways may be beginning around 200 AD…she has always been esteemed as Perpetual Virgin. And the saints’s numbers have grown. Many of them have studied the spirituality of Christ in their times and the walk in perfection. The more they could see a common walk we all must take…this helped us to also understand Mary’s walk better as well.

 

[Garyjohn2]

this is a very interesting thread. it makes regret leaving catholiscm in the first place

Well come on back, the doors area always open! Figuratively speaking, in most cases…you know what I mean.

 

[PJM]

=AmericanMuslim;8080336]They would have existed in different forms, if all did exist:

• Baptism: yes
• Confirmation: ?
• Eucharist: yes, but different. For example, consecration by the priest alone.
• Penance: different form I suspect - more making penance to the community
• Holy Orders: very different, if at all. “Clergy” as such would have been married
• Anointing of the Sick: yes
• Marriage: presumably

Of course, all of these would have been very different in terms of ritual, forms, words, etc.

Baptism in the OT was covered by circumission

Confirmation was covered by the “comming of Age” customs Barmitzva

Eucharist is the peerfection of Manna

Penance was similar: through a priest who offerd sacrifice on behalf of the sinners

Holy Orders too is from the OT where Yahweh tells Moses to set Aaron and his sons abart for priestly duty. And they too were annointed and wore special grb.

Marriage changed from "here TAKE HER to a Sacrament

An the Annointing in that it has the same effects on the soul as Baptism is a completetion of what Baprism begins.