How was the Eucharist celebrated in the early church?

Question

any bible references and info?

Answer 1

The Lord's Supper was never referred by the word "Eucharist" in the Bible.

The Lord's Supper was celebrated by the first century church on the first day of every week (Sunday). (Acts 20:7)

The same phrase, "on the first day of the week" was also used in 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 in the command to take up a collection on the first day of the week. (The New American Standard Version of the Bible translates this as "on the first day of every week".)

The early church, therefore, observed the Lord's Supper on the first day of each week. The significance of this day was that it was the day Jesus rose from the dead (Mark 16:1-2) and it was the day the church was established (Acts 2 - Pentecost was always on the first day of the week).

These verses that specify the first day of the week are similar to the commands in Exodus 20 that specify that on the seventh day they should remember the Sabbath Day. They realized that every week had a seventh day, therefore every Saturday (and only on Saturday) they remembered the Sabbath.

Likewise, the early church observed the Lord's supper every Sunday, and only on Sunday.

During the Lord's Supper, the early church ate unleavened bread to remember Christ's body and they drank grape juice (juice from "the fruit of the vine") to remember Christ's blood. (1 Corinthians 11:24-25)

When Jesus said "This is my body (blood)", he was talking in a figurative since. The bread and juice were not his literal body and blood, because when he said it, His literal body was still there with them. They could see his body standing there, and knew what Jesus was giving them was a representation.

I hope this helps!

Answer 2

The Eucharist (“The Thanksgiving”) , also known as the Lord’s Supper or (Holy) Communion, is Jesus’ reinterpretation of the Jewish Passover feast. Therefore, the First Century Christian practice looked much like the Passover celebration meal, at least among Jewish Christians. There is considerable debate over how the earliest practitioners understood the two major elements of the meal, the bread and the wine. Among Christians, all parties agree the meal is sacred, and was so regarded by early believers. But did they see the bread and wine as literal embodiments of Jesus’ blood and flesh, or did they understand them in a more metaphorical sense? Consider the following key passage

“For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 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. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.” 1 Corinthians 11:23-34. See also Luke 22:19-20, Matthew 26:26-28, Mark 14:22-24.

Here, Paul uses the word “anamnesis,” translated “remembrance,” to describe the believer’s objective in the performance of the Lord’s Supper. One school of thought says this fits into the broader pattern of mythical reenactment through ritual. In such reenactments, the participant is thought to be bringing the symbolized event from the past into the present, such that it is actually happening in the “now” of ritual participation. This understanding of “anamnesis” would support, to some degree, the Roman Catholic idea of “real presence,” that the body and blood of Christ are literally, physically present in the bread and wine. However, the lexical information on this word, especially in the context of Jewish Passover, suggests a more pedestrian sense of transporting the participant from the present back to the context of the event, much more like a vivid remembering in the ordinary sense. The early church fathers do not provide uniform testimony on this question until after the Third Century, when they begin to take a distinctly more literal view of the elements as a present, ongoing sacrifice, not as simply a memorial.

However, it is important to remember that this meal celebration did not emerge from thin air, but was Jesus’ modification of the Jewish Passover. He used the pattern of expression typical of the Passover ritual as it was then practiced, wherein the breaker of the bread would say, by formula, “this is the bread of affliction,” which according to Jewish sources such as Maimonides and the Babylonian Talmud, was taken to represent the “body of the Passover lamb.” Thus, by using this formula, Jesus was not identifying Himself literally with a piece of bread, but with the sacrificial Passover lamb already associated with that bread in the mind of His Jewish hearers. Therefore, “this is my body” fits perfectly into the already existing pattern of using the bread to point to something else. Therefore, it appears to me that the early Christian community must have taken this more metaphorical approach, because Christianity emerged from a Jewish context where the use of the Passover as metaphor was already common practice, and is not contradicted by any teaching of Christ or the Apostles, notwithstanding deviations into literalism by later theologians of the church.

Answer 3

It depends on your definition of Eucharist. If you mean the Catholic view that the bread and wine literally become the body and blood of Jesus, then it’s not in the Bible. But, if you are referring more generally to the Lord’s Supper, in which, the bread and wine represent the body and blood that Jesus shed for us, then here are some verses to consider:

Matthew- While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body’. And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins’.”

Mark- Very similar wording to Matthew.

Luke- The wording is different, but the meaning is the same as the previous.

Acts- “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.” (The rest of this passage discusses the result of the first sermon recorded to have put someone to sleep).

1 Corinthians 11- “For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, ‘This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me’…[same thing with the wine]… For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.”



Basically, when we take communion (the Lord’s Supper), we reflect on our current lives. If there are any unrepented-of sins that separate us from God (or us from another believer), we should skip communion until those sins are resolved, otherwise we bring judgment upon ourselves. Additionally, the Bible says that communion should not be a time when people pig out on bread and wine (which is one reason why most churches have little tiny cups and wafers or have the priest hand feed people). The Acts passage is the reason for most churches to only hold communion on Sundays (the first day of the week).

The wine represents Christ’s blood (but it obviously isn’t blood and nowhere in the Bible does it say otherwise). The bread represents Christ’s body (but it obviously isn’t flesh and nowhere in the Bible does it say otherwise). When we take communion we are taking part in the crucifixion by recognizing that Christ gave up His body and His blood in order to take our place. He provided the ultimate sacrifice to pay the debt that humanity owed to God for the sins we have all committed.

Answer 4

the sacrament is a false teaching of Paul that the catholic church enforced by pain of death to the point it became a part of even the protestant church. more people were burned at the stake over the reception of the eucharist. it is a false doctrine of christianity.

Answer 5

It wasn't. But it traces its 10th century roots to the story of the "Last Supper", and to this verse in Acts:

Acts 2:46 "And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,"

Reading this in context with the verses around it, the bible is clearly promoting communism (small "c") as the only true "Christian" path in this instance.

Answer 6

None. Jesus never said to be a cannibal.

There is no "eucharist". There is remembering that Jesus, who is God, died for our sins on the cross and rose again.

Answer 7

The early believers in Christ continued in the traditions of their Jewish forefathers, worshiping as they had in both the Temple and the Synagogue . To this worship practice they added the distinctly Christian components which were, in fact, transformed Jewish worship practices. These included Baptism, the Eucharist, the Agape meal, and others. Baptism was also present in Jewish religious practice as a personal repentance for sin. Baptism, like the Lord's Supper, was transformed in both meaning and content by our Lord Jesus Christ. Baptism became not only a repentance for one's sins, but being baptized in the name of the Trinity now also assured forgiveness and incorporation into the Body of Christ, the Church. Baptism was the once and for all initiatory rite whereby one received the Holy Spirit and came into the Church.

The early Christians with their transformed understanding of the central elements of Judaism had a practical problem: how to conduct worship? They wanted to carry on their old Jewish worship practices while at the same time incorporating this new meaning and content. They accepted the necessity for continuity with the old, and for the celebration of the new, but could not do both together. The result was doing both in parallel. The Temple hours of prayer and the Synagogue worship were kept, but were not centered in Christ. Each day of the week, those Christian believers in Jerusalem would attend the Temple for prayers during the daily cycle, and on Saturday — the Jewish Sabbath — they would attend either Temple or Synagogue.


The Eucharist and the Resurrection

But what to do about the Eucharist? It could not be added to a Synagogue service, yet it was to be celebrated as the Lord had commanded. The answer was tied to the Resurrection. Jesus had been crucified on Friday, the day before the Jewish Sabbath, and had risen on Sunday, the third day. Thus the day after the Sabbath was seen as the day of the Lord's Resurrection, the Lord's Day. At the Lord's Supper, the parousia or presence of Jesus Christ was experienced in the consecrated gifts; here people encountered Christ's new life in His resurrection. It was only natural that the Eucharist or Lord's Supper should be celebrated each Resurrection Day. Thus, the typical pattern for early believers became Synagogue worship on the Sabbath, followed by gathering for the Lord's Supper on the "next day". For the Jews, the day ended at sundown and the next day began. Sunday began at nightfall on Saturday. As Luke records in Acts 10:7, "On Saturday evening we gathered together for the fellowship (communion) meal" (NEV). The pattern typically became one of worshiping in Synagogue on the Sabbath morning, and then gathering together again in the evening (the next day — Sunday) for the celebration of the Lord's Supper.
In the early Church , the Lord's Supper was celebrated at the end of the Agape (love) or fellowship meal. This was an extension of the Passover supper tradition, and was a means for believers to show each other the love and unity they shared together in Christ. All gathered, each bringing what they were able. At the conclusion of the meal was the Eucharist, the "thanks-giving" for the grace of Jesus Christ. The sacrament conveyed the understanding and symbolism of the Passover Supper, now consummated in the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God.





The doctrine of the Eucharist has been held from the very earliest days of the Church. For the first 800 years of Christianity, there was no doubt regarding the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Here is a sample of writings from the fathers of the early Church illustrating this.


Paul writing in 1 Cor 10:15-16

"I speak to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?"


Paul writing in 1 Cor 11:23-30

"For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself."


Ignatius of Antioch, 110 AD

"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again... Let that be 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." (Epistle to the Smyreans)


"Take heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to [show forth] the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants: that so, whatsoever you do, you may do it according to [the will of] God." (Epistle to the Philadelphians)


Justin Martyr, 150 AD

"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration and is thereby living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus."

Irenaeus of Lyons, 190 AD

"Christ has declared the cup... to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies. If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?"