The First Mass(es)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kolbe96
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The article you reference makes sense to me. The Mass is something, like liturgy, creed, hierarchy, and canon, that developed with the developing understanding of the early church. We have evidence in the Bible of theological evolution, so the understanding of the Lord’s supper as a mass as we understand it is probably anachronistic.

First, there is evidence that the first Christians celebrated the Eucharist as part of a larger meal, which was commonly referred to as “agape feasts” or “love feasts.” The words of institution in 1 Cor 11 actually occur in the middle of other instructions from Paul about the proper conduct of these feasts (notably ensuring that rich and poor ate together). These love feasts are mentioned by later early Christians (see Jude 12) and were the basis of pagan stereotypes of early Christians (e.g., that the feasts were orgies).

Second, in Pliny the Younger’s letter to Trajan, there’s even evidence that the agape feast took place in a separate location than the singing of hymns and communal prayers. This again suggests that the mass as we currently understand it did not exist in the form we recognize for some time after the first century.

As to whether the meal in the upper room was a Eucharist, I think it’s reasonable to say that if our mass is our partaking in the sacrifice of Christ, which is in the past, that when Christ said that the bread was his body, that he was having his followers partake in his sacrifice of the next day.
 
Traditionally, Catholics have seen the Last Supper as the first Mass. In a mysterious way, the Crucifixion has also been seen as the first Mass.
 
What makes a Mass a Mass?

The Mass is the Sacrifice of Calvary made present on the altar throughout time.

Christ, acting through the priest, continually offers Himself to the Father at every Mass–it’s the same Sacrifice He made on the Cross.

The bare minimum to make a liturgy a true Mass throughout history was this understanding, and two consecrations (bread->Precious Body, then wine ->Precious Blood).

There have to be two because Christ did it that way. In hindsight we understand that Our Lord did that to better connect it to the Cross, where his Blood was separated from His Body.

Does that answer your question?
 
Kolbe96 said:
Hey Y’all,

I recently found on this site (whosoeverdesires.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/why-the-last-supper-was-not-the-first-mass/) that the Last Supper was NOT the first Mass. Is this true?

For me, this raises some questions (despite whether the statement is true or false):
What makes a Mass a Mass?
Are there certain parts that CANNOT be excluded or included?
Any help would be great!

Thanks, and God Love You!
Click to expand...
Ugh.

That was pretty convincing but goes against the grain.

I’m going to defer to those smarter than me to sort this one out.
 
“I recently found on this site (whosoeverdesires.wordpress.co…he-first-mass/) that the Last Supper was NOT the first Mass. Is this true?”

No, and if you check the comments at that site many say God is not limited by time and exists outside of it. So, to God, Our Lord’s work of salvation existed from the world’s foundation.

The Catholic Mass needs a Catholic priest and must follow the Catholic approved liturgy.

Peace,
Ed
 
Ed_Silvia said:
The Catholic Mass needs a Catholic priest and must follow the Catholic approved liturgy.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Not really. The RCC recognizes even the Nestorian schismatic group Assyrian Church of the East as having a valid liturgy, and in their liturgy (Divine Liturgy of Addai and Maris, spellings vary), they don’t even have words at the consecration!

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20011025_chiesa-caldea-assira_en.html
 
Kolbe96 said:
Hey Y’all,

I recently found on this site (whosoeverdesires.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/why-the-last-supper-was-not-the-first-mass/) that the Last Supper was NOT the first Mass. Is this true?

For me, this raises some questions (despite whether the statement is true or false):
What makes a Mass a Mass?
Are there certain parts that CANNOT be excluded or included?
Any help would be great!

Thanks, and God Love You!
Click to expand...
I have the 2 volume set by Jungmann S.J. amazon.com/The-Mass-Roman-Rite-Development/dp/0870611291

In which he says [vol 1, pg 7]
the records of the Last Supper contain few details concerning the ceremonial of the meal, probably because this ceremonial was not meant to be the lasting setting of the celebration.
And still we should like to know more about that first mass.
Click to expand...
This is not to say the mass in its origin, is complete here. It went through development. But the main part of the mass, the height and summit of our faith, is the Eucharist, established at the Last Supper.

After the resurrection, how did the disciples recognize Jesus? In the “breaking of the bread”…the Eucharist. Luke 24:28-35

I also have this book amazon.com/Christ-Said-First-Lords-Supper/dp/0895552078/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1377109678&sr=1-1&keywords=how+christ+said+the+first+mass it’s also downloadable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top