Posted on 02/28/2015 12:17:20 PM PST by RnMomof7
How much is your church like the ancient church?
That’s a popular question these days—especially if you read guys like Robert Webber, Brian McLaren, Wolfgang Simson, or Frank Viola and George Barna.
Most of the contemporary discussion about the ancient church attempts to show discrepancies between what is now and what was then. The not-so-subtle implication is that there is something very wrong with the contemporary church. Blame Constantine. Blame the Enlightenment. Blame Capitalism. Blame the Fundamentalists. It doesn’t really matter. The only way to fix the church today is to get back to the ancient church.
Based on this premise we are told (by some) that the church needs to be more sacramental, more liturgical, and more mystical. We ought to light candles, burn incense, celebrate the arts, foster community, and avoid conventional church structures (like, especially, preaching). By others, we are told that we need to meet in houses and not church buildings. (And again, cut down on the preaching.)
All of this is proposed on the supposition that these practices characterized the ancient church.
Really?
Is that what the ancient church was like? And have theologically-conservative, Bible-believing churches in America gone so far off course that the twenty-first century church looks nothing like the early church of the first or second centuries?
Perhaps the best way to answer such questions, rather than perusing modern books on the subject, is to read a description of the ancient church by someone who was actually there.
Enter Justin Martyr.
Justin was born toward the end of the first century. He died in 165 as a martyr for his faith in Jesus Christ.
Around 150, he wrote a defense of the faith to the Roman emperor—called his First Apology—arguing that Christianity should not be illegal. In the course of his defense, he describes what a typical church service was like in his day.
I think you’ll be encouraged to see what was included in an ancient Christian worship service.
(Note that Justin referred to the pastor by the term “president,” namely as the one “presiding” over the worship service. This was likely done because he using terminology that a pagan emperor would understand.)
Justin wrote:
On the day called Sunday there is a gathering together in the same place of all who live in a given city or rural district. The memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits. Then when the reader ceases, the president [pastor] in a discourse admonishes and urges the imitation of these good things. Next we all rise together and send up prayers.
When we cease from our prayer, bread is presented and wine and water. The president in the same manner sends up prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people sing out their assent, saying the ‘Amen.’ A distribution and participation of the elements for which thanks have been given is made to each person, and to those who are not present they are sent by the deacons.
Those who have means and are willing, each according to his own choice, gives what he wills, and what is collected is deposited with the president. He provides for the orphans and widows, those who are in need on account of sickness or some other cause, those who are in bonds, strangers who are sojourning, and in a word he becomes the protector of all who are in need.But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration. (First Apology, 67)
Per Justin’s description, we get a pretty good idea of what took place in an ancient Christian church service. Notice at least seven important factors: (1) Scripture was read, from both the New Testament (“the memoirs of the apostles”) and the Old Testament (“the writings of the prophets”). (2) The pastor preached a message (“discourse”), exhorting the people to obey the things they had just heard from the Scripture. (3) The congregation prayed together. (4) The congregation participated in commemorating the Lord’s Supper. (5) In their preparation for Communion, the pastor prayed and the congregation sang songs of affirmation. (6) An offering was taken in order to meet the needs of fellow saints. (7) All of this took place on Sunday, the day on which Jesus rose from the dead.
When I read Justin’s description I am encouraged, because those same things are found at my church too. Like the ancient church described here, we read the Scripture, listen to preaching, pray, sing, give, and regularly celebrate the Lord’s Table. And, of course, we also meet on Sundays.
When contemporary authors argue that the church needs to get back to the “ancient practices” of the church, my question is: What “ancient practices” are they talking about? The sacramental mysticism of the medieval period perhaps?
If you really want the ancient church, it doesn’t get any more ancient than the quote provided above. In fact, Justin’s description of an ancient church service is the earliest we have outside the New Testament.
So, should we get back to the practices of the ancient church? If this passage from Justin provides the model, I’m all for it.
snicker
Thanks. I have had the same experiences over my lifetime in the different churches I have gone too.
Pastor makes it clear that he is no different/better than anyone attending and that his primary purpose is to educate folks on Jesus and to make sure everyone understands who He is and why they should absolutely love Him. All this delivered in a regular speaking tone and interspersed with current societal examples. Pastor also made it clear that we will never be told what his political leanings are because the purpose of the Church is to get people to know, love, trust, and rely on Jesus.
“If your church is not following Acts 2:38 for converting souls”
Worship is not intended for converting souls. Worship is focused on God, not man.
But wait!
There’s more!
And it’s actually right there where the OP gets his snips. Leaves out this whole section. Now, why in the world do you suppose this whole section is IGNORED??
CHAPTER LXVI — OF THE EUCHARIST.
And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html
Except that they are.
CHAPTER LXVI -- OF THE EUCHARIST.
Link in my post 25
For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished IS THE FLESH AND BLOOD OF THAT JESUS WHO WAS MADE FLESH.
of course what Justin Martyr described and thank you to rnmomof7 for posting is the Catholic Mass.
to all followers of the 16th century tradition of men, Justin faithfully describes to you the Apostolic Faith...the Eucharist is the Body of Christ.
So you think Jesus sinned by eating blood ey?
And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true
isn’t ironic, Justin Martyr would not allow the author of this piece Nathan Busewitz, nor the other followers of the 16th century tradition of men to share the Eucharist with the second century Church since he and the others deny the Eucharist is the Body of Christ.
no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes the things we teach are true.........
as A. Morrisette sang “isn’t it ironic, don’t you think?”
1 Corinthians 10:16
the cup of blessing which we bless, IS IT NOT A PARTICIPATION IN THE BLOOD OF CHRIST?
those blindly following the 16th century tradition of men would have to answer Paul - no, the cup contains wine, nothing more, nothing less.
see how different the Apostolic Faith believed by Justin Martyr and Christians for 2,000 years is than the tradition of men?
Why do Catholics assign the sin of eating blood to Jesus then still try to claim He was sinless?
Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Why do Sola churches distribute red grape juice? Why not purple Kool Ade? Or carrot juice?
My point was that the OP blatantly IGNORES the complete rendering of Justin Martyr's explanation. He leaves out a whole chapter. Some might call that intellectual dishonesty.
Would you disagree with that?
is the cup of blessing St Paul talks about in 1 Corinthians 10 a participation with the blood of Christ, yes or no?
answer that and then I will answer whether a Christian is literally buried with Christ, but your answer must start with either YES or NO.
You haven’t answered my question.
Your stalker continues her infatuation with you!
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
like·ness
ˈlīknəs/
noun
noun: likeness; plural noun: likenesses
the fact or quality of being alike; resemblance. "her likeness to him was astonishing" synonyms: resemblance, similarity, similitude, correspondence "her likeness to Anne is quite uncanny" antonyms: dissimilarity
the semblance, guise, or outward appearance of. "humans are described as being made in God's likeness" synonyms: semblance, guise, appearance, outward form, form, shape, image
"she appeared in the likeness of a ghost" a portrait or representation. "the only known likeness of Dorothy as a young woman" synonyms: representation, image, depiction, portrayal;
Your question is nonsense. You cannot account for the FACT that Protestants and Sola Christians distribute red grape juice as a symbol. If it does not symbolize blood, then what does it symbolize?
I don't think it means what you think it means.
koinónia - spiritual fellowship, a fellowship in the spirit. [http://biblehub.com/greek/2842.htm]
1 Corinthians 10:16 The cup of the blessing that we bless -- is it not the fellowship (koinónia) of the blood of the Christ? the bread that we break -- is it not the fellowship (koinónia) of the body of the Christ?
2 Corinthians 13:14 the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship (koinónia) of the Holy Spirit, is with you all! Amen.
Galatians 2:9 and having known the grace that was given to me, James, and Cephas, and John, who were esteemed to be pillars, a right hand of fellowship (koinónia) they did give to me, and to Barnabas, that we to the nations, and they to the circumcision may go,
Philippians 1:5 For your fellowship (koinónia) in the gospel from the first day until now;
Philippians 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship (koinónia) of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
Did you also literally suffer with Christ?
Don this article is about church services not a discussion of transubstantion. As we both know that was a doctrine that all church fathers did not have agreement on. This quote does show that the early church had no mass and no “sacrifice” Note no priest , no mass. The pastor was called the” president”. Later the church called the pastors “clerks”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.