Christians who believe a Priest is not necessary for the Lord's Supper

[MartinJordan]

Yes, the minister always prays over the elements. It of course doesn’t change the elements, but as Wannano said we still set aside the bread and wine a part for sacred use.

You mention sacred use. What is done with it?

MJ

 

[ltwin]

There were a couple of special occasions, in my Pentecostal family, where we observed Communion at home, with my father blessing the elements for Mom, me, and my little brother. That sort of thing isn’t frequent, however, and for a very sound reason (for better or worse): the Christians who don’t think a priest is necessary for the Lord’s Supper usually don’t consider the Lord’s Supper something necessary to partake of in the first place–much less with any regularity!

Except for that whole “do this in remembrance of me” commandment.

 

[ltwin]

You mention sacred use. What is done with it?

MJ

It’s consumed.

 

[MartinJordan]

It’s consumed.

Okay. So, after it’s consumed, does it affect the person’s Spiritual nourishment ie. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.

MJ

 

[ltwin]

Okay. So, after it’s consumed, does it affect the person’s Spiritual nourishment ie. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.

MJ

It is spiritual nourishment for those who receive the body and blood of Christ by faith.

 

[MartinJordan]

It is spiritual nourishment for those who receive the body and blood of Christ by faith.

Which means? Something like what I’ve heard “blood of Jesus cover me” and the like?

MJ

 

[ltwin]

Which means? Something like what I’ve heard “blood of Jesus cover me” and the like?

MJ

Hmm. Well, Christians are covered by the blood, and we can “plead the blood” in prayer and supplication when engaged in spiritual warfare, but that’s not quite what I"m talking about.

What I mean is that those who partake in faith receive strength and blessing from Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, making our relationship with Christ stronger. One obvious blessing is that the Lord’s Supper can also bring physical healing to those who are sick.

 

[MartinJordan]

Hmm. Well, Christians are covered by the blood, and we can “plead the blood” in prayer and supplication when engaged in spiritual warfare, but that’s not quite what I"m talking about.

Okay.

What I mean is that those who partake in faith receive strength and blessing from Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, making our relationship with Christ stronger. One obvious blessing is that the Lord’s Supper can also bring physical healing to those who are sick.

What is the need to perform the Last Supper if it’s just Faith?

MJ

 

[mattp0625]

With all the varying views and opinions, it makes sense that Ignatius of Antioch wrote it is the bishop who administers the proper Eucharist.

 

[believerdoc]

Okay.

What is the need to perform the Last Supper if it’s just Faith?

MJ

The Lord’s Supper is celebrated because it is a DIRECT command from Jesus. We do this in rememberance of Him and we procalim “for as often as you eat of the bread and drink of the cup you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes again” We do it to receive spiritual strength, to honor God’s great gift to us, and to proclaim Christ’s great sacrifice. The Lord’s Supper is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace.

 

[ltwin]

Okay.

What is the need to perform the Last Supper if it’s just Faith?

MJ

Speaking in terms of my tradition (Pentecostalism), we do not believe that the bread and wine transform into the actual body and blood of Christ. However, we do believe that an act of faith in partaking leads to a real work of the Spirit in us to strengthen us in the inner man and to heal us in our physical bodies. Christ is present spiritually.

And I don’t really understand what you mean by “just Faith.” Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. Faith is the vehicle by which we receive every grace and blessing from Christ.

 

[Le_Cracquere]

Except for that whole “do this in remembrance of me” commandment.

Sure. But again, the church where I was reared didn’t interpret that as a call to do it with much regularity. They’d have Communion maybe two or three times a year, and not in observance of any particular occasion.

 

[MartinJordan]

The Lord’s Supper is celebrated because it is a DIRECT command from Jesus. We do this in rememberance of Him and we procalim “for as often as you eat of the bread and drink of the cup you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes again” We do it to receive spiritual strength, to honor God’s great gift to us, and to proclaim Christ’s great sacrifice. The Lord’s Supper is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace.

Didn’t Jesus talk about eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood earlier? Recall, he gave thanks and held the bread and wine (in the cup). And earlier he spoke about his Father upon teaching about his Flesh and Blood.

So, you trace the above view how?

MJ

 

[believerdoc]

Didn’t Jesus talk about eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood earlier? Recall, he gave thanks and held the bread and wine (in the cup). And earlier he spoke about his Father upon teaching about his Flesh and Blood.

So, you trace the above view how?

MJ

May I invite you study a history of the early New Testiment Church. Communion was often part of a fellowship meal and not the ritualistic communion that is common today. Many times worship was held in the catacombs with bread and wine hidden in various location; not exactly the churches we know today.The early church was more a systems of home churches so communion was not viewed as it is today. Jesus most definitely speaks of body and blood but in a symbolic manner. He was teaching the people not establishing a sacramental church. What better way to teach than with elements that the people were familiar with and knew were essential to life. As a Protestant I am not convinced by sacred scripture that the apostles were given any supernatural power to bring about such a change in the bread and wine nor any real need to do so.Christ died once for all so for me the idea that there is any need to have the “bloodless sacrifice of the altar” is foreign. I will say if I did believe it I also would have that power due to the “priesthood of all believers”.That all being said I did not post to debate Real Presence or anything else. The OP ask a question and I answered it. This forum is to learn about and understand the beliefs of other churches (yes we are churches) and not to debate them; that belongs in the apologetics forum in my opinion.

Acts 2:42
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

 

[MartinJordan]

The Lord’s Supper is celebrated because it is a DIRECT command from Jesus. We do this in rememberance of Him and we procalim “for as often as you eat of the bread and drink of the cup you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes again” We do it to receive spiritual strength, to honor God’s great gift to us, and to proclaim Christ’s great sacrifice. The Lord’s Supper is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace.

Yes. Direct command from Jesus to his Apostles (Ministerial Priesthood). But their word (hears you, hears me) is passed to us (common Priesthood). Apostolic Faith dear friend.

MJ

 

[MartinJordan]

May I invite you study a history of the early New Testiment Church. Communion was often part of a fellowship meal and not the ritualistic communion that is common today. Many times worship was held in the catacombs with bread and wine hidden in various location; not exactly the churches we know today.The early church was more a systems of home churches so communion was not viewed as it is today. Jesus most definitely speaks of body and blood but in a symbolic manner. He was teaching the people not establishing a sacramental church. What better way to teach than with elements that the people were familiar with and knew were essential to life. As a Protestant I am not convinced by sacred scripture that the apostles were given any supernatural power to bring about such a change in the bread and wine nor any real need to do so.Christ died once for all so for me the idea that there is any need to have the “bloodless sacrifice of the altar” is foreign. I will say if I did believe it I also would have that power due to the “priesthood of all believers”.That all being said I did not post to debate Real Presence or anything else. The OP ask a question and I answered it. This forum is to learn about and understand the beliefs of other churches (yes we are churches) and not to debate them; that belongs in the apologetics forum in my opinion.

Acts 2:42
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

We don’t practice rituals. Be careful. But the Mysteries we call Sacraments. Holy. Catholic. Apostolic. And because God is Love.

So you are a protestant. Protesting?

MJ

 

[Lenten_ashes]

May I invite you study a history of the early New Testiment Church. Communion was often part of a fellowship meal and not the ritualistic communion that is common today. Many times worship was held in the catacombs with bread and wine hidden in various location; not exactly the churches we know today.The early church was more a systems of home churches so communion was not viewed as it is today. Jesus most definitely speaks of body and blood but in a symbolic manner. He was teaching the people not establishing a sacramental church. What better way to teach than with elements that the people were familiar with and knew were essential to life. As a Protestant I am not convinced by sacred scripture that the apostles were given any supernatural power to bring about such a change in the bread and wine nor any real need to do so.Christ died once for all so for me the idea that there is any need to have the “bloodless sacrifice of the altar” is foreign. I will say if I did believe it I also would have that power due to the “priesthood of all believers”.That all being said I did not post to debate Real Presence or anything else. The OP ask a question and I answered it. This forum is to learn about and understand the beliefs of other churches (yes we are churches) and not to debate them; that belongs in the apologetics forum in my opinion.

Acts 2:42
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

Hi believer.

I’m glad you refer to the New Testament. Because it’s there that we find that the first public act that Jesus does after resurrecting is say Mass:

**Luke 24:26-31New American Bible (Revised Edition) (NABRE)

26 Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer[a] these things and enter into his glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in all the scriptures. 28 As they approached the village to which they were going, he gave the impression that he was going on farther. 29 But they urged him, “Stay with us, for it is nearly evening and the day is almost over.” So he went in to stay with them. 30 And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. 31 With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight.**

First hearing of the Word, then receiving of the Sacrament. Two parts, just as we see today in a Catholic Mass and in some Protestant denominations as well.

And I would argue that it’s not a coincidence that “their eyes were opened” after receiving the blessed hosts.

God bless.

 

[believerdoc]

Yes. Direct command from Jesus to his Apostles (Ministerial Priesthood). But their word (hears you, hears me) is passed to us (common Priesthood). Apostolic Faith dear friend.

MJ

Here is where we really disagree. Christ gave the command to the whole people of God and not to a select few or even just the church. The Apostles were the messengers and while we follow what the discipes taught (apolostic) we do not endow them with attributes not attested to in Sacred Scripture.

 

[believerdoc]

Hi believer.

I’m glad you refer to the New Testament. Because it’s there that we find that the first public act that Jesus does after resurrecting is say Mass:

First hearing of the Word, then receiving of the Sacrament. Two parts, just as we see today in a Catholic Mass and in some Protestant denominations as well.

And I would argue that it’s not a coincidence that “their eyes were opened” after receiving the blessed hosts.

God bless.

This is a rather unique and over literal interpretation of this passage. It is generally acepted that when “breaking of bread” is spoken of it was more of a common meal than communion.

 

[believerdoc]

We don’t practice rituals. Be careful. But the Mysteries we call Sacraments. Holy. Catholic. Apostolic. And because God is Love.

So you are a protestant. Protesting?

MJ

First of all we are not protesting anything. Protestans have a much different conept of God; more personal but i totally agree that GOD IS LOVE. We do not beleve in Sacrements in the same way you do. We first call them Ordinances and have only two; those directly institutrd by Christ Himself. I would suggest that your current means of worship harken back to the days of Jewish temple worhip which we believe is no longer necessay due to the attoning Sacrifice of Christ. And you may find this hard to accept but I am not anti-catholic in any way; I just believe differently. I have found Protestants the genuinely love Jesus as well as Roman Catholics, Orthodox, fundamentalists, evangelicals, etc.God Bless!