Monday, October 14, 2024

Was The Lord's Supper The First Catholic Mass?

  • Defining The Issues:
          -Traditional Catholics often view the Last Supper as the first mass. They believe that during the Last Supper, Jesus instituted the eucharist, which is a central component of the mass in Catholic theology. This perspective is rooted in the belief that Jesus' actions during the Last Supper set the foundation for the liturgical celebration of the Mass.
          -"At the Last Supper, on the night when He was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of His Body and Blood. He did this in order to perpetuate the Sacrifice of the Cross throughout the centuries until He should come again, and so to entrust to His beloved Spouse, the Church, a memorial of His Death and Resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a paschal banquet in which Christ is eaten, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.'' (Pope VI, Mysterium fidei, paragraph 4)
  • Surveying Matthew's Presentation Of Christ Pronouncing Blessing On The Bread And Wine:
          -"And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it. For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matthew 26:26-28)
            *Jesus' usage of "is" here is as much a Hebraism as that found in Matthew 13:20. In the latter text, the one who hears the word of God does not become the message that he embraces. Thus, the communion elements do not literally become Christ, but represent what He did for us on the cross.
            *Jesus said that the symbols which the communion elements point to will find their ultimate fulfillment at His second coming (Matthew 26:29). If His words are taken literally in this verse, that would detract from Him saying the bread and wine will no longer be necessary at His return. The communion elements clearly represent spiritual truths.
            *If we take Christ's words literally in Matthew 26:26-27, then should we conclude that the disciples will be eating and drinking an ever present supply of Christ's flesh and blood based on Matthew 26:29?
  • Surveying Mark's Presentation Of Christ Pronouncing Blessing On The Bread And Wine:
          -"And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many." (Mark 14:22-24)
           *Mark 14:14 says that what the disciples ate was the Passover meal, not the flesh and blood of Christ. It was primarily a traditional meal rather than the institution of the eucharist.
            *The Synoptic Gospels make it clear that this event was indeed a Passover celebration. The meal itself was not meant to be the first mass, but rather Jesus reinterpreting the elements of the Passover meal.
            *If Jesus intended His words be understood literally, then why did the bread and wine not become His very body and blood right there and then?
            *What happened during the Lord's Supper was not a change in the nature of the bread and wine, but a change as to what they signified. The Passover ceremony looked backward, whereas the celebration of the Lord's Supper looks forward into the future.
  • Surveying Luke's Presentation Of Christ Pronouncing Blessing On The Bread And Wine:
          -"And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." (Luke 22:19-20)
            *The Gospel of Luke emphasizes inclusivity and compassion, perhaps downplaying ritual formalism. While this passage is significant, it may be more about Jesus’ sacrifice than prescribing a detailed liturgical framework. The term "mass" itself, and its formalized structure, evolved much later within the early church.
            *Luke often frames Jesus' actions within a broader narrative. It sometimes departs from strict historical accounts to emphasize theological points. Therefore, Luke's recounting of the Last Supper might be more concerned with conveying theological truths than accurately documenting the first “Catholic Mass."
            *Luke’s focus on table fellowship and community inclusivity could suggest that he was portraying the eucharist more as a communal practice than a liturgical ritual, further distancing it from the idea of a formal Catholic mass. 
            *Look at the story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10, where a meal symbolizes acceptance and salvation. Similarly, in Luke 24:30-31, the resurrected Jesus reveals himself in the breaking of bread with the disciples at Emmaus. These examples show Luke's emphasis on meals as pivotal moments of divine revelation and community building rather than just liturgical acts. They point to a broader theological significance of shared meals in Luke’s narrative.
  • Surveying Paul's Presentation Of Christ Pronouncing Blessing On The Bread And Wine:
          -"And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." (1 Corinthians 11:24-25)
            *Luke would have shared much of Paul's theology. Not only did he accompany the apostle (2 Timothy 4:11), but also both shared a special emphasis on the doctrine of salvation. For example, he used the word "justify" in a Pauline sense in Luke 18:14.
            *Paul would have had a greater concern with a symbolic application of bread to enforce spiritual truths than with the substance itself. He described a god-centered life in terms of unleavened bread of sincerity and truth (1 Corinthians 5:7-8).
             *Paul used a different verbal form for "is" when he said, "the rock was Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:4), yet He is never said to have gone through a process of petrification.
             *After Jesus' resurrection, He broke bread with the disciples without any mention of it becoming His body again (e.g., on the road to Emmaus). This consistency in practice suggests a symbolic rather than literal interpretation.

No comments:

Post a Comment