Replies

You just expended 500+ words in not answering my question.

I did not need you to reproduce the Wikipedia article on transubstantiation. It is related to, but not the same as, Eucharistic Realism, i.e. the firm conviction, based on the very words of Jesus Christ, that the Eucharist is His True Body and Blood. This was the continuous belief of Christians for centuries before the technical term "transubstantiation" was adopted, and for 1500+ before the ancient doctrine was rejected altogether by the Protestant new paradigm.

But I didn't ask you about "transubstantiation." I asked you:

"Did any Christian believe the Mass was in contradiction to the NT until the 16th or 17th century?"

Ears perked. I am sincerely interested. I am here to learn.

I did answer it. Transubstantiation is core of the Mass is it not?

And I showed you that it wasn't until Trent that Rome formally declared its position on this topic.

And yes...I did show where there was debate about the Mass/Transubstantiation.

"Did any Christian believe the Mass was in contradiction to the NT until the 16th or 17th century?"

How 'bout these fellows?

24“Since we have heard that some of our number to whom we gave no instruction have disturbed you with their words, unsettling your souls, 25it seemed good to us, having become of one mind, to select men to send to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27“Therefore we have sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28“For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: 29that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell.” Acts 15: 24-29 NASB

Early enough?