He wrote an Epistle to the Ephesians (around 62 A.D.), and wrote a couple to the Corinthians while he was in Ephesus, in which he laid down rules for the proper reception of the Lord's Body and Blood (1 Corinthians 11:29), by which we may reasonably infer that he celebrated the Eucharist and was accepted as an authority on its correct observance.
As I understand it, Paul was succeeded as bishop (overseer) of Ephesus by Timothy, whom he had ordained, and who was a native of the city (see 1 Timothy 1, 3; 2 Timothy 1, 18; 4:12) Thus an Apostolic succession. During the first three centuries, Ephesus was one of the main sees of the Church in Asia Minor: Eusebius (Church History) records some of the early ecclesial activity there.
As for the sacrifice of being, as you claim, "only" one of thanksgiving (eucharistia), all the churches, Orthodox and Catholic, which trace their roots through Ephesus and other Apostolic Sees, understand that as being synonymous with Eucharistic Liturgy.
I don't know of any that didn't. Can you name any of the ancient churches that didn't? I'm here to learn.
(Please excuse the rather breathless sentence structure here. I'm in and out of the house, maybe not as coherent as I ought to be!) Peace!
Okay, that makes him equivalent to a bishop.
he laid down rules for the proper reception of the Lord's Body and Blood (1 Corinthians 11:29), by which we may reasonably infer that he celebrated the Eucharist and was accepted as an authority on its correct observance.
The Eucharist was a celebratory meal associated with the so-called Agape feast done in remembrance of Jesus, and not as part of the sacrificial liturgical service. One must keep in mind that the Christians in the first century, and especially in Paul's time, were still consider Jews and gathered in the Temple, while performing the "breaking of the bread" at home! (Act 2:46, 3:1) They also attended Friday services in the synagogues like the rest of the Jews.
St. Paul did not describe a "Mass" but the Agape meal. His objection was with some people eating and drinking too much. He thought it disrespectful as a memorial gathering to remember Christ's Last Supper; he does not describe a liturgical Eucharistic sacrifice, or transformation of the bread and wine. He simply objected to the unruliness and selfishness (gluttony) of some.
The Agape meal was never synonymous with or part of the Eucharistic liturgy.
Things began to change towards the end of the century when Christians were basically excommunicated and needed to establish a legitimate divine authority (because they could no longer claim Jewish tradition). They also had to establish a substitute for the temple and synagogal service which they could no longer attend.
The break with Judaism comes after the rabbis, who moved from Jerusalem to Jamnia following the destruction of the second Temple, decided to reject all Christian books along with their beliefs, condemn them Nazarenes as the "minim" (usurpers and sectarians), and proceeded to throw them out of synagogues.
This took place in the last decade of the first century. It is not a coincidence that this period sees the emergence of John's Gospel, precisely because of the theological vacuum created by this, and with the explicit as well as implicit aim at establishing divine authority in Christ by equating him to God.
That's why at this point we have evidence from Apostolic Fathers such as +Ignatius (born c. 60 AD, died c. 107-110 AD) of the emerging Eucharitsitc liturgy, tripartite clergy ( explicitly differentiating between presbyters as priests, and episcopes as bishops, and deacons).
Ignatius no longer speaks of the "breaking of the bread" or a memorial meal, but says that the Eucharist is the "medicine of immortality" (see Ignatius, Epistle to Ephesians 20). To him, heretics were all who denied the Eucharist as the very flesh of Jesus Christ, so it is obvious that by the early 2nd century the "orthodox" faction of Christianity believed and offered Eucharistic sacrifice and no longer identified it with a "meal" done in rememberance at home.
One can therefore reasonably infer that at the time of the break with Judaism (c. 90-100 AD), and not prior to it, the Christians developed their own liturgy, established their own clergy, established churches as places or worship as well as sacrificial offerings, and developed religious service that combined the functions of the Temple and the synagogue in one, and in line with their beliefs in the divinity of Jesus.
As for the sacrifice of being, as you claim, "only" one of thanksgiving (eucharistia), all the churches, Orthodox and Catholic, which trace their roots through Ephesus and other Apostolic Sees, understand that as being synonymous with Eucharistic Liturgy.
Of course they do. However, the oldest liturgy of the Church is the Liturgy of St. James. Experts cannot agree on its earliest date, one extreme believes it was as early as the year 60 AD (and only in Jerusalem) but the majority place it in the 4th century AD, simply because there is no evidence of any Christian liturgy until the end of the first century for the reasons outlined above, one major being that they were Jews who gathered around the Temple for sacrificial offerings and in synagogues for pastoral services, while "breaking the bread" in memory of Christ at home (as per the Book of Acts referenced above).
The Church may have been born on the Pentecost, but liturgically and theologically had to gradually evolve.