As Christians we celebrate the Lord's Supper on the first day of every week just as the Christians did in the first century (Acts 20:7), and like them we do not need a priest to make it possible. We have Jesus as our High Priest who is ever at our disposal. Having Jesus, why whould we need some self-appointed man with his shirt on backward to intervene in our behalf.
Please provide a scripture that says that there must be a Priest involved in order to celebrate the Lord's Supper.
"As Christians we celebrate the Lord's Supper on the first day of every week just as the Christians did in the first century (Acts 20:7), and like them we do not need a priest to make it possible."
No you don't. So far as I can see you folks have a pretend Mystical Supper. Its no more real than when my two Catholic altarboy buddies and I an Orthodox altarboy,as 9 year olds played Divine Liturgy in my living room, complete with grape juice and Wonder Bread (I got to be the priest because my altarboy robes were gold and theirs were just black with a white surplice.)
You refer to Acts 20:7. We have an actual description of what was going on in those early liturgies from +Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of the Apostle +John, the successor but one to +Peter as bishop of Antioch. Indeed there is a tradition that he was the child who sat on Christ's lap. At any rate, his Eucharistic theology, from the late 1st, very early 2nd century, makes it clear that the Eucharist occurs only within The Church which is found in its fullness where the bishop is, surrounded by his clergy and laity and centered on the Eucharist. That is where Christ is and thus the Eucharist of The Church is truly the Body and Blood of Christ. He also makes it clear that the bishops are the successors of the Apostles and that they must be obeyed.
Now T, this is about as early as you can get for testimony about what the earliest Christians believed. In fact, his letters are something of a continuation of Acts. He learned from +John himself! I'll grant you that the writings of +Ignatius are not scripture, but they do form part of the knowledge held by The Church, what we in the East and the Latins in the West call Holy Tradition. As such they are part of "what The Church always and everywhere has believed" which constituted the yardstick against which various writings were measured when being tested by The Church for inclusion into the canon of the NT which we all read today. Do you honestly think that The Church, in putting together the canon of the NT would have constructed it as it did so that a proper interpretation of it would contradict everything The Church stood for in its ecclesiology? That's absurd.
The Eucharist may only be celebrated within the body of The Church. We live our lives within The Church as a liturgical people and advance in theosis within a community nourished by the Eucharist which is Christ.
Because all Christians believed that The Church is defined as I laid out above for the first 1500 years of its existence, and those in The Church do to this day, and because that definition requires that the consecrated Eucharist be in fact the very Body and Blood of Christ, if one is in a group which does not have bishops, or better said, bishops within the Apostolic Succession and a "real" Eucharist, one isn't in, strictly speaking, a church at all but rather an "ecclesial community" as +Benedict XVI (whom we Orthodox have the greatest respect for as the elder brother at Rome) so finely put it. Your personal interpretation of scripture in this regard is just that, personal. It is not at all what Christ's Church infallibly believes.
Please provide a scripture that says that there must be a Priest involved in order to celebrate the Lord's Supper.
Our Lord clearly established a hierarchy among his followers, distinguishing between disciples and apostles. (I hope that you are not going to dispute this.) As my earlier quote from Acts shows this was an office that survived the death of its first holders and was passed on to others. At the Last Supper our Lord gave the command "Do this in commemoration of me" only to the apostles. Your reference to Acts 20:7 only shows that the Christians gathered on Sunday for the breaking of the bread, not that any believer could preside over such an assembly without holding the office of priest. I will now turn the tables on you and ask you to pleas provide Scripture that shows any Christian believer can preside over the Eucharist.
Unfortunately this myth that the early Church had a non-hierarchical congregationalist organization is purely a self-serving product of the Protestant imagination. As early as A.D. 110 we find St. Ignatius of Antioch writing:
You must follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the Apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that by considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Nor is it permitted without the bishop either to baptize or the celebrate the agape; but whatever he approve, this too is pleasing to God, so that whatever is done will be secure and valid.Now I know that you will object that this is not Scripture, but it is testimony of what the early Church believed. It must also be pointed out St. Ignatius was only the second bishop of Antioch after St. Peter and that he had been a hearer of the Apostle John himself. The seven letters of St. Ignatius were written within twenty years (perhaps as few as fifteen) of the death of St. John. Thus this congregationalist style of church that you imagine must have last but a very short time.