How Do You Feel About The Eucharist, Dark Knight?

[RabbiBarry]

Dark Knight you said:

I agree completely. Furthermore, I see that blood of Christ, poured at the Golgatha was the Universal and Final Sacrifice. Believing in it (alongside producing the good works of the Faith and repentence of sins and shunning sin) is how we receive absolution of our sins.

The teaching of the Arian Catholic Church is:

Holy Eucharist, this service cleanses our souls of sin through the Body and Blood of Christ represented symbolically using Bread (or Rice Paper) and Wine (Red Wine and Holy Water). This service is provided in the form of Holy Communion and can also be served on a one to one basis by appointment.

How do you reconcile these two statements, Dark Knight?

[dark_knight]

Somehow I felt this would come up. As I am a young and ignorant man, I cannot fully and comprehensively reconsile this. Even so, I will tell you that I take the Supper and believe it is symbolic, not 'trassubstantiation', but even as such, our participation to it cleanses our soul.
Maybe there is some paradox in what I said, but I believe in all these things I said. Maybe you could show me more clearly how you think they contradict, so I can give better answer.

Also, I do not think that Eucharist is abosolutely necessary for our eternal salvation, since it is more a symbol, than a sacrifice. It would be a blasphemy to sacrifice Jesus again and again.

[dark_knight]

I think that the Eucharist is an important sign that we believe in the Final Sacrifice. It is a holy commemoration of it.

[David Kone]

I view the sacrament as the bonding of the congregation through acknowledgement of the bounty of God’s blessings and shared sacrifice. The bread which is made from many grains gathered together represents the body of Christ, the true church; that is the gathering of all believers. The wine represents the cost of love which is given to us freely by God in which we are invited to join in by partaking of the cup that Jesus accepted as the true Son of the Father. It is not about normal substances but about the Spirit of Holy Communion that we strengthened when we gather together participating in this holy ritual. It is not just the bread and wine that under go spiritual transubstantiated but all the participants.

[RabbiBarry]

Somehow I felt this would come up. As I am a young and ignorant man, I cannot fully and comprehensively reconsile this. Even so, I will tell you that I take the Supper and believe it is symbolic, not 'trassubstantiation', but even as such, our participation to it cleanses our soul.

Actually, your Archbishop takes the Lutheran position.

How do reconcile these words especially in the Greek:

John 6:52: The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" 53 Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh (sarkos, flesh without blood) of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

Maybe there is some paradox in what I said, but I believe in all these things I said. Maybe you could show me more clearly how you think they contradict, so I can give better answer.

I want you to explain the mechanism by which both the scriptures and you can be correct. You are surely aware that the combined weight of tradition, scripture and the sensum fidelium, the sense of the faithful, stands against you.

Now I would present to you a slightly different understanding. I want to focus on the word "my". In Hebrew we say, "elohenu", which means, our G-d. Now, the use of the word 'our' implies that others have a different G-d. This has been the position of the original Judaism from the beginning. Abraham did not say YHVH, the great war G-d of the nomads was the only G-d, merely, his G-d. Evolution and understanding eventually got us where we are at. Now, the majority of the world says YHVH is our g-d. Likewise, Yeshua says that the bread and wine is his body, not the only body, but his. What I am going to say now comes from Jewish tradition and understanding. We make much of the word 'l'zikaron'. To remember for us means more than just recalling. It means being present at the event. So we l'zikaron the Passover by being present at the Passover and the ritual of Passover teaches solemnly that if we do not see ourselves as present at the Passover, we have not in fact kept the Passover and are thereby in deep sin. Paul tells us in one of the earliest records of Christianity that Yeshua said:

"This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance (or l'zikaron) of me." 1 Cor. 11:24.

And again he says: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance (l'zikaron) of me." 1 Cor. 11:25.

For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 1 Cor. 11:26-27.

The point is this, Melchizedek gave to Abraham bread and wine and that was sufficient sacrifice to save him. Yeshua paid for the return to the bread and wine sacrifice with his life. He therefore claims the sacrifice as his own. He says that in his sacrifice bread is the body and wine is the blood, because flesh and blood are the essence of the thanksgiving (Eucharist in greek) offering. He says if you see and spiritually are present at this Passover meal in which I am explaining the real meaning of Passover and giving it new meaning then you understand the essence of what I am about to do. He says every time you come together you should remember this event. It is the central event in history. I am making a new covenant with you. It is a new passover. The angel of death cannot claim your soul. I will see that your body is raised on the last day and that your soul has a place for it to be alive again.

Christians have become caught up in the question of whether this is the real body of Yeshua and the real blood of Yeshua. They have missed his point. Jews do not eat human flesh. But, the word l'zikaron tells us not a physical event but a spiritual event that must be transforming in our thought process.
We must, not only be present at the Passover called the Last Supper, but also must be present at the first Passover. For as Paul says, Christ has become our Pascha, our Passover Lamb.

The Eucharist is a real event. The Blood is real. After the consecration, the blood heals and casts out demons. We, Nasoreans, do a special ceremony on Yom Kippur and save that blood. We keep it for healing and exorcisms throughout the year. You should see Demons run when I put that blood in a possessed persons mouth. Paul even says:

"That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and considerable number are dying." 1 Cor. 11:30.

I believe what the early Church reported. It is not important whether Yeshua or Paul said these words. I have seen the miracles that accompany the Blood of the Lamb. I do not question them anymore. That would be blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I testify, and words are true, that the Wine is Real Food and it saves us from Sin.

Also, I do not think that Eucharist is abosolutely necessary for our eternal salvation, since it is more a symbol, than a sacrifice. It would be a blasphemy to sacrifice Jesus again and again.

Obviously, John's Gospel disagrees.

Rabbi Barry Albin

[dark_knight]

I see your question is well based and I 'owe' you an explanation.
However, I am currently tired of defending christianity alone here - I feel like it anyway. Surely my theology has it's lacks. You must understand I am young man and I am in process of learning.
There is no need to make me feel more stupid than I already feel. Therefore, I will wait someone else (Arian Christian, preferred ordained) to tell me if I'm completely lost at this subject.
During that period, I'll examine this doctrine and then evaluate my position in the light of the Scriptures, with prayer.

I need guidance from Arians. I have no resources to defend my position alone - And if my position is opposite to Arian, or completely heretical in eyes of ACC, someone must tell me and teach me - Thus I do not discuss this topic any further - YET!

[RabbiBarry]

I view the sacrament as the bonding of the congregation through acknowledgement of the bounty of God’s blessings and shared sacrifice. The bread which is made from many grains gathered together represents the body of Christ, the true church; that is the gathering of all believers. The wine represents the cost of love which is given to us freely by God in which we are invited to join in by partaking of the cup that Jesus accepted as the true Son of the Father. It is not about normal substances but about the Spirit of Holy Communion that we strengthened when we gather together participating in this holy ritual. It is not just the bread and wine that under go spiritual transubstantiated but all the participants.

We are very close to the same place. Luther knew something had happened in the ritual ceremony as well. He just could not put his finger on it. You have got the essence of what happens at Pesach. Those present are changed. We become the one loaf that is broken. We share in the pain of the first and second Passover when we drink the third cup, the cup of blessing and know that joins in spirit with the Lamb of G-d. We, the whole people, present at this renewal of the Pesach are transubstantiated.

Rabbi Barry Albin

[dark_knight]

I took the Bread and Wine first time last summer. I felt good energies streaming inside me. I felt the Spirit. I can tell you this.
In so many fancy theological arguments, I cannot say anything and refrain doing it.

[David Kone]

I took the Bread and Wine first time last summer. I felt good energies streaming inside me. I felt the Spirit. I can tell you this.
In so many fancy theological arguments, I cannot say anything and refrain doing it.

If you know this then there is no more truth to be found in words. I too am a person of action. 'The proof is in the pudding' as the old saying goes.

[RabbiBarry]

You say Henrik:

You must understand I am young man and I am in process of learning.

I remember those days Henrik. I do not seek to embarrass but to raise your consciousness. You have not read as broadly as you need to read. You have so much theology to catch up on. And you do not realize when you say things which are totally contrary to the ancient Arian position.

You say: There is no need to make me feel more stupid than I already feel.

I can not make you feel. If you feel a given way, then you must look in yourself and find the cause. The real cause may be a sense of pride, because you are already teaching others in your bible study. All of us must learn to sit at the feet of others. I sit at the feet of my hero, Professor Tabor, and learn from him even as he tells me that I am learning correctly. And I sit at the feet of the Spirit who constantly instructs me to look at this question or that book or this issue or that scriptural passage.

You say: Therefore, I will wait someone else (Arian Christian, preferred ordained) to tell me if I'm completely lost at this subject.

I have noticed a glaring lack of Ordained Arians entering into our discussions. I suspect they lurk elsewhere. I would love to enter into real dialogue with them on some of their positions that are totally contrary to the ancient Arian position and to the more ancient Nasorean position.

You know I have had to change my position from the standard opinion so many times. The Spirit directs me to new sources and the new truth burns in my heart and I know that the Spirit is teaching again. Do not be afraid to change?

[dark_knight]

Dear Rabbi,

I have changed a lot. First there was my upbringing, then a time of unfaithfulness to the God, then a searhing period, and now this. I am still learning, and want to show humility. I do teach others, but that is because I am best of the available persons, not because I'd be truly equipped in all.

Thank you for giving food for my thoughts.

-Henrik

[RabbiBarry]

There are three central issues that separate Jews from Christians:

1) The Divinity of Jesus
2) The meaning of the cross
3) The Eucharist

There are three central issues that separate the Catholic-Orthodox majority from the Protestants and other minor Christian sects:

1) Authority
2) Salvation by faith alone
3) The Issue of Baptism

Your central studies need to resolve in you the answers to these questions and then and only then should you choose a church.

[Dean]

I feel I must step in here and defend the Arian Catholic Clergy!

Henrik and David,
From what you say it certainly sounds like you have experienced the love of the Holy Spirit through the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. That in itself speaks louder than words.

Rabbi Barry,
You must understand that we are not Gnostic unlike the Nasorean sect, and nor are we based entirely on Arianism. Our Church follows the teachings of Christ and the Apostles through the early Church, heeding the guidance of St Arius and applying Christianity with logic and reason. Christ introduced many ideas that upset the older Jewish tradition!

You refer to the Gospel according to John, which was the latest of all the Gospels, written about 100 AD, and clearly not a reliable authority on the teachings of Christ and the Apostles! Although you may not believe in the Eucharist, we do, and all three of the earlier Synoptic Gospels are in agreement with this Sacrament which is our doctrine.

Our Clergy will arrange to minister all the Sacraments for anyone who requests it although due to distance and availability of staff, it is not possible to reach everyone, yet, but we will always do whatever we can to reach our parishioners! All our Clergy are non-stipendiary and sometimes we do need to make special arrangements to reach people. This is a problem that the early Church also faced!

As for the Archbishop being a Lutheran - I think is laughable (and insulting!) - some of the Church's beliefs may coincide since Luther stumbled across errors in the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church but we are certainly not Lutherans.

May I also remind you that this Forum is for discussions about the relationships between Arian Catholicism (the early Catholic and Apostolic Church through logic and reason) and Messianic Judaism (prior to its conversion to trinitarianism), and with all due respect this is not a recruiting ground for your sect!

The Arian Catholic Church currently has nine ordained members, four of whom are associate members because of their present commitments, and of the remaining five active clergy only three are computer literate. Hence our drive to train more clergy. We have also been quite stretched recently due to two of our active clergy being away at University and I have been dogged with illness and family pressures which have reduced my involvement too, so I believe the Archbishop has done a stalwart job in holding the fort. If you support Arian Catholicism then please do so; we ask for help and this forum has been provided at great expense out of the Archbishop's own pocket to bring like minded people together to discuss true Christianity.

Rev. Brian Lane-Fox

[RabbiBarry]

Rabbi Barry,
You must understand that we are not Gnostic unlike the Nasorean sect,

I represent the oldest level of Christianity, the Church of Jerusalem. Reputable scholars have agreed that my position is consistent with what we know about that earliest level of Christianity which was still a Sect of Judaism.

and nor are we based entirely on Arianism.

That needs to be made clear to people who are coming here with the intention of interacting with Arians. I was invited by the Archbishop. If he has changed his mind about my presence, he merely should let me know.

Our Church follows the teachings of Christ and the Apostles through the early Church, heeding the guidance of St Arius and applying Christianity with logic and reason. Christ introduced many ideas that upset the older Jewish tradition!

Which ideas might those be?

You refer to the Gospel according to John, which was the latest of all the Gospels, written about 100 AD, and clearly not a reliable authority on the teachings of Christ and the Apostles!

Actually John was put together in four separate redactions. Only the last dates from circa 100 C.E. The first may date from as early as 40 C.E. Historically, John may be a better source than the Synoptics or so argues Dr. Tabor.

Although you may not believe in the Eucharist, we do, and all three of the earlier Synoptic Gospels are in agreement with this Sacrament which is our doctrine.

What could I have possibly said that led you to believe that I do not believe in the Eucharist? It is of the highest importance. The Kiddush service on Friday is a remembrance of the Passover in which bread and wine are transformed into the true Lamb of G-d

As for the Archbishop being a Lutheran - I think is laughable (and insulting!) - some of the Church's beliefs may coincide since Luther stumbled across errors in the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church but we are certainly not Lutherans.

The Arian Churches statement on the Eucharist sounds very Lutheran and its separation of the sacraments into two sections was instituted by Luther

May I also remind you that this Forum is for discussions about the relationships between Arian Catholicism (the early Catholic and Apostolic Church through logic and reason) and Messianic Judaism (prior to its conversion to trinitarianism), and with all due respect this is not a recruiting ground for your sect!

Our sect strongly opposed proselytism but Truth is of the highest order to us. We present Truth; let the believer do with it as they will. Again, I was invited to come here by your Archbishop

"Nevertheless we would value your knowledge and experience even as an associate member of the Arian Catholic Theological Society (ACTS) which would also give you an official associate presence in the ACC, this is the method chosen by four of our associate Bishops who have certain commitments at stake." From his Grace's e-mail of 10/20/06.


If you support Arian Catholicism then please do so; we ask for help and this forum has been provided at great expense out of the Archbishop's own pocket to bring like minded people together to discuss true Christianity.

This rather disingenuous method of asking for funds would suggest you wanted me to support you ministry when you are not supporting mine. I certainly never have asked for support from you, nor should you from me

I trust that you are not speaking for His Grace, the Archbishop, because that would be very unfortunate for our future relationship.

Rabbi Barry Albin

[David Kone]

Dear Brothers,

We are all here for a reason. The lessons we are learning pertain directly to the problems faced by the early church. I can condemn the tactics used by those who secularized the spiritual legacy bequeathed to us by Jesus and his followers but I will not sit in judgment on their souls for they were participants in a great transition that had no historical parallel. We, here on this site, also are at an historical moment. Just the fact that there is a reopening of the discussion about whose traditions should be included under the umbrella of ‘Catholic’ places on ours shoulders and especially the shoulders of the Archbishop the original responsibility to get the meaning of Jesus’ teachings right. Thank you Br Brian; it is important to us to know that you are there ready to defend ACC. Thank Rabbi Berry; you have helped to expose the complexity of the historical beginnings of our shared belief. My only critique is that you are perhaps giving us too, much too fast. Thank you Henrick; your honest responses are most valuable of all for they help us to see a little better the road that lies ahead.

[RabbiBarry]

[QUOTE=David Kone;615]Dear Brothers,
Thank Rabbi Berry; you have helped to expose the complexity of the historical beginnings of our shared belief. My only critique is that you are perhaps giving us too, much too fast.

Thank you Brother David. If I am going to fast and introducing too much, that is a fair and honest assessment. I will slow down. I made some assumptions that the fora were ready to deal with a theologian. I play with scholars, Professors at universities, who are among the leading biblical archaeologists and scripture scholars. They welcome me as one of them. They have been urging me to complete a new book: The Spiritual History of the Western Tradition, which in its first draft is being taught at one seminary already. They want me to write another book called A Nasorean History. I am working on it. To some degree, our discussions here, help me to focus on my writing.

I apologize. My own disciples regularly complain that I make assumptions as to their readiness as well. I should have learned by now. I am just so blessed by being able to communicate with my heroes, Professors Tabor and Eisenmann. I know that my friend, Professor Showley, sends much of our discussions on to them and occasionally they respond. How wonderful to get positive feedback.

I apologize to Fr. Brian if I was too rough. After all, I have been a cleric and bishop for 21 years and I just assume sometimes everyone has had the experiences that I have had.

[RabbiBarry]

As there seems to be a question in some parts as to what the Nasorean Orthodox Qahal believes, I will answer the questions I posed:

1. Divinity of Jesus -- The Scripture makes a claim that Angels are divine because they live in Heaven. They are divine beings in the eyes of the writers of the Tanakh. I affirm the Yeshua is King of these Divine Beings, that he is the One who arises in the Assembly of the Divine Ones. I affirm that he is the Creator. I do not believe that He is G-d, there being only one G-d, and he is Ain Sof, the Endless Light. I affirm with 1 John 1 that G-d is Light. This affirmation represents the earliest opinion of the Nasoreans and comes from the time of James and the Apostles. I believe that Arius would affirm these truths as well.

2. Yeshua's death on the cross was the necessary blood required to change the law from the bloody sacrifices required by the Mosaic law back to the bread and wine required by Melchizedek. It also was an act that opened the sacrifice to all persons, not just Jews. The Nasorean Church affirms that it is Yeshua's blood that is offered as the Lamb of G-d on the Mercy Seat in Heaven by Yeshua himself.

3. The Nasorean Qahal affirms the Didache and its teachings on the Eucharist. It believes that the Kiddush service on Friday night is the crucial service of the week. It believes that service renews the Passover feast of the previous year. It believes that at the Passover feast the worshippers are present not only at the Last Supper to receive the body and blood of Yeshua but also at the first Passover to receive the Paschal Lamb. How this happens is a mystery that science cannot explain. It is a question of the heart. The earliest believers did not ask whether this was the body and blood, but believed that it was what Yeshua instituted and that it was the sufficient sacrifice. The concept of real presence and the concept of remembrance, l'zikaron, are the same.

4. The Nasorean Orthodox Qahal is governed by its Supreme Assembly. The Supreme Assembly consists of 500 persons maximum. The Supreme Assembly serves for five year periods. The Supreme Assembly elects from within its body a Supreme Council of 120. They meet quarterly to consider matters of church government, order, theology, etc. The Supreme Council elects from within its membership a Great Sanhedrin of 72. The three Pillars are automatically members of this body for life. This body is the supreme judicial and deliberative body of the Church. It meets monthly. From within the Great Sanhedrin fifteen persons as elected to serve in the Apostolic College for a one year period. The fifteen always include the Three Pillars. The Apostolic College meets weekly. The Three Pillars are chosen by the Supreme Assembly for Life after careful discernment. They each govern in the particular area most appropriate to them: the High Priest -- liturgy, intercession, judicial matters; the Chief Rabbi -- preaching, theology, and administration; the Chief Prophet -- authentic spirituality, governance of the gifts, support for spiritual gifts. The Chief Rabbi is Patriarch of the Nasoreans and is the Supreme Bishop of the Church. The Supreme Assembly establishes diocese and supervises the first election of a bishop. They form a Diocesan Assembly, Council, Sanhedrin, College and the Three Diocesan Pillars. The Patriarch ordains the Three Pillars to their offices which they hold for life on good behavior.

5. The Holy Spirit enlivens a heart to believe. Only after the faith that comes with belief is one able to do works that are pleasing to G-d. Faith engenders a desire to do works. Faith without works is not real. A person who is on the Path will naturally do works because they hear the Voice calling them to serve. There is no salvation without faith and works.

6. This church follows the ancient requirements of Didache. The preferrable form of baptism is thrice immersion in the Jordan River. However, any river will do if the Jordan is not available. However, any pool will do if a river is not available. However, if there be no pool, then thrice sprinkling will do. All this in accordance with the Didache.

To the claim of Gnostic, we plead not guilty. To the claim of strict obedience to the ancient truth, we plead guilty.

[David Kone]

This is a real banquet of information. Forgive us, most of us are not accustomed to the terms and customs you expound upon therefore are very suspicious. As you know there is a lot of weird stuff out there under the heading of Christian religion. Sorting the goats from the sheep is going to be a real challenge for us as we try to derive the original teachings of the church.

To the claim of Gnostic, we plead not guilty. To the claim of strict obedience to the ancient truth, we plead guilty.

I am sorry and quite confused. The term Gnostic is of course usually used as a pejorative. The early editors of the canonical scriptures it seems were intent on eliminating every trace of it; which they failed to do. I thought your belief system leaned towards the Gnostic. Most likely this is because of my own prejudices. Please give us your definition of Gnostic and how you differ. As to ancient truth; we are here to learn but please a little at a time. Most of us have very busy lives and these things require a considerable amount of processing.

[Danage]

What does Gnostic mean? Despite getting an A Level in Philosophy of Religion and Christian Ethics, I am somewhat ignorant as to it's meaning.

[David Kone]

What does Gnostic mean? Despite getting an A Level in Philosophy of Religion and Christian Ethics, I am somewhat ignorant as to it's meaning.

Had a similar class probably didn't do as well. I did get 'A's in technical design. Let’s make sure we are all using the same tools, not some eclectic metric and standard like mix, by agreeing on the terms of our discussion. I am may be somewhat Gnostic in that I think knowledge and wisdom are key elements in understanding the teachings of Jesus and this may come as insight. I do not hold to Gnosticism as I do not think matter is evil. Evil is an attribute of corrupt sentient beings.

[LeviathanNI]

What does Gnostic mean? Despite getting an A Level in Philosophy of Religion and Christian Ethics, I am somewhat ignorant as to it's meaning.


This is something I have had a problem with also.. would it be possible to have a section of the forum that would have all terms, words etc entered with an explanation? It could be self editing (ie we, or rather all of you would put the words in with an explanation).

Just one of Rabbi Barry's posts would probably fill a whole section (:D), but it would be a valuable tool for any of us (me) who are new to the whole theology thing.

[RabbiBarry]

I am sorry and quite confused. The term Gnostic is of course usually used as a pejorative. The early editors of the canonical scriptures it seems were intent on eliminating every trace of it; which they failed to do. I thought your belief system leaned towards the Gnostic. Most likely this is because of my own prejudices. Please give us your definition of Gnostic and how you differ. As to ancient truth; we are here to learn but please a little at a time. Most of us have very busy lives and these things require a considerable amount of processing.[/QUOTE]

Gnosticism presupposes that there was a G-d who through some mistake created a Demiurge who was evil. The Demiurge created man by entrapping his spirit into a physical form. The goal of the Gnostic was to free the spirit from the physical form and return to the world of G-d.

Standard Nasorean teaching presumes there is a G-d who intentionally created the First One, called the Archangel of the Presence or Adam Kadmon. This being intentionally created mankind to aid him in learning how to give freely of the Light that was given to him. The creation was purely good. This being created all souls for the purpose of experiencing life so that they could learn how to give of themselves. There goal is to return to the Light as well but only after first learning to be perfected to the point of being able to Give themselves completely. This is normally accomplished in six or seven life experiences.

Gnosticism presupposes that with sufficient knowledge and spiritual practice one can escape this world and get to the next. Nasoreanism presupposes that every being wants to give back and that the purpose of wisdom is to learn how to give of ourselves to other human beings thus perfecting the world. There is no conception that the world is bad because everything created by G-d is good.

Origen and Arius the fathers of Arianism believed in exactly the same view of G-d as do the Nasoreans. This view of G-d is the ancient belief of the Jerusalem Church and is therefore the Orthodox view. Trinitarianism and Gnosticism are heresy.

[RabbiBarry]

[QUOTE=LeviathanNI;632]This is something I have had a problem with also.. would it be possible to have a section of the forum that would have all terms, words etc entered with an explanation? It could be self editing (ie we, or rather all of you would put the words in with an explanation).

I think that this is a good idea. Perhaps the Archbishop will be able to create a place for a glossary of terms. I would add those terms as I use them and their definitions.

[RabbiBarry]

It would be good if we had a general reference place on the books of the New Testament, there alleged writers, the context in which they are written and known redactions of those books. It would help to know the relative time frame in which they were written as well.

[dark_knight]

Rabbi, your knowledge overwhelms me. There are not many people who have such vast knowledge on Judeo-Christianity. This does not mean I have to agree with you, though :D

It is an honor having a communications with you.

[RabbiBarry]

Rabbi, your knowledge overwhelms me. There are not many people who have such vast knowledge on Judeo-Christianity. This does not mean I have to agree with you, though :D

It is an honor having a communications with you.

Thank you Henrik. You remind me very much of my adopted son, Eric. I have thought that I should introduce him to you as he really wants be part of a new Knighthood. He is a Nasorean though and I do not know how that would work. He was in the US Army for one term and is 6'4". He is Swedish and Apache.

[dark_knight]

Thank you Henrik. You remind me very much of my adopted son, Eric. I have thought that I should introduce him to you as he really wants be part of a new Knighthood. He is a Nasorean though and I do not know how that would work. He was in the US Army for one term and is 6'4". He is Swedish and Apache.

We will have to see if the ACC is willing to support and consecrate the Knights. That is what I hope, and if so, we will have to submit to the instructions of Archbishop Michael John or his appointed delegate. As I am a self made primus motor of this project, I would be happy to consider your son into the Fellowship of Knights. He has very nice roots! True Vinlander I assume ;) Feel free to give my msn-account to him (found in my profile) for email or chat.

-Henrik

[Archbishop Michael-John]

We will have to see if the ACC is willing to support and consecrate the Knights.
Henrik,

The acOSB as the representatives of the old Order of the Poor Knights of Christ, which is built-in to its culture ceremonially, is considering the idea of officially reviving this status. The acOSB receives advice from sympathetic members of the OSB and their valued input will also be taken into account. I am keen for this to go ahead as I believe it is His wish since there has been a steady drive towards the acOSB establishing itself.

I am also posting a new thread about the Poor Knights of Christ in the acOSB Forum.

[Dean]

I apologize to Fr. Brian if I was too rough. After all, I have been a cleric and bishop for 21 years and I just assume sometimes everyone has had the experiences that I have had.

Rabbi Barry,

I had a conversation with the Archbishop last week about this thread and he advised me to take a few days to consider my thoughts before replying. Also since then I have been quite preoccupied again and unable to return to the forum until now.

The Archbishop had cracked his whip earlier asking for more contributions to the forum from the clergy. From what you were saying I wrongly thought that you were criticising the Eucharist! This caused the old Fox to leap into action and so I apologise for any offence or confusion that this might have caused. :'(

Also I did pick up on several remarks you made, which appeared to be in my view unfair criticism of the Arian Catholic Clergy and an apparent attempt to convert people from our faith! I hope I wasn’t too rough on you! ;-) I assure you that my post certainly wasn’t asking you for funds! My point was that it seemed quite unfair to put down the ACC clergy on their own forum when so much effort and expense had been made. Are you with us or against us (?), if you’re with us then please do help by being supportive on the forum, there is also much to be said for the value of constructive criticism!

I am aware that the Archbishop did invite you to our forum and again my point was not criticizing that. I do respect that you have been a Bishop for 21 years and I know that you have contributed some excellent articles on the forum which have given great insight and I respect that! My 11 years as a Clerk in Holy Orders have been a steep learning curve for me, I have studied Theology to a Bachelor’s level and I fully intend to increase on that.

With regards to the principle beliefs of Arian Catholicism I don’t think that there is anything that needs to be made clearer than it already is, a description of the principle beliefs of Arian Catholicism are defined in the main page of the website and in the introduction page which goes into more depth.

I do still stand my ground with you on the Gospel of John, parts of John may have been written earlier (c.60 AD), we know, but significant edits were made as late as the second century which renders parts of the Gospel unreliable. The writer of John is known to have used elements of Mark and Luke, the first edition of Mark (“The Gospel”) is believed to have been written in the late 30s or 40s AD, and so I definitely do not believe that John was written at the same time.

The Nasorean Sect does have an old tradition dating back to 100 BC, and its modern theology is very close to that of the Jerusalem Church, it was identified at the time as separate from mainstream Judaism and even regarded as heretical! But with its Gnostic approach how can it claim to represent the Church of Jerusalem?

You asked me which ideas Christ introduced that upset the older Jewish tradition! As far as I am aware there are plenty, you should know this! I will give you some examples but I will not spend all day quoting these: Matthew 12:1..8 Controversy over labouring on the Sabbath, Mark 3:1..5 Controversy over Healing on the Sabbath, Matthew 14:30 Transgressions over the tradition of the elders etc.

Our resources are quite stretched but that is about to change for the better this year, I pray that our clergy numbers will swell to keep pace with our faithful. As I explained previously I have commitments at the moment that are hindering the time I can spend on the forum but I will look in and contribute as often as I can.
:vbgrin:
Peace be with you.

[RabbiBarry]

The writer of John is known to have used elements of Mark and Luke,

I would certainly like to know where you got this idea. Please cite a scripture scholar who agrees with you.

the first edition of Mark (“The Gospel”) is believed to have been written in the late 30s or 40s AD,

Most scholars place Mark at 64 or 65, some as late as 75 CE. Could you cite your source for the 30's or 40's? The earliest Pauline letter is placed at 55 C.E. (1 Thessalonians). Some scholars are now placing Thomas as early as 55 C.E. I am unaware of any scholar that will place any gospel before 1 Thessalonians.

The Nasorean Sect does have an old tradition dating back to 100 BC, and its modern theology is very close to that of the Jerusalem Church, it was identified at the time as separate from mainstream Judaism and even regarded as heretical! But with its Gnostic approach how can it claim to represent the Church of Jerusalem?

The Christology of the Nasorean Church is almost identical to that Origen and Arius. I do not think you understand the Christology of Gnosticism in its many incarnations. I would challenge you to identify how the Arian Catholic Church is Arian if it does not adopt the Arian Christology. Besides I am unaware of any Gnostic sect that is Torah observant, while the Kabbalah is acceptable to even Orthodox Jews.

You asked me which ideas Christ introduced that upset the older Jewish tradition! As far as I am aware there are plenty, you should know this! I will give you some examples but I will not spend all day quoting these: Matthew 12:1..8 Controversy over labouring on the Sabbath, Mark 3:1..5 Controversy over Healing on the Sabbath, Matthew 14:30 Transgressions over the tradition of the elders etc.

The alleged traditions mentioned in these passages are all Pharisee positions. The Pharisees were a minority point of view until after 70 C.E. The ideas that you claim were upsetting an older tradition are really a new tradition taught by the Pharisees. Nasoreanism is older than Phariseeism and its traditions more venerable.


I look forward to your continued presence.

[Postulare42]

Back to the original topic question, though not directed to me...here are my minna:

In the most primitive practice of the Jerusalem community (among the Ebionites), the altar was merely the dinner table at which the Sabbath and Passover meals were eaten. A place of Fellowship. In as much as we break and share the final loaf and share the last cup of wine in rememberance of Jesus, his teachings, his promises, and the new contract between ourselves and the Father, it is the same. The simple table itself can become a symbol for all of these, and of the sacrifice of one so dear.

Because the message of Jesus hinges so strongly upon our relationships, not just with the Father, but also with ourselves and each other...indeed with the whole Earth, it is essentially a social message far more comprehensive than any up to that time, and progressive even by the standards of today. For this reason, except in the case of those called to the solitary life, the practices of the "altar" are truly and properly observed ONLY in community.

This does not bear upon private prayer.

Still, we are told that "...where two or three are gathered together.."

[Banned User 201202172230]

I have noticed a glaring lack of Ordained Arians entering into our discussions. I suspect they lurk elsewhere. I would love to enter into real dialogue with them on some of their positions that are totally contrary to the ancient Arian position and to the more ancient Nasorean position.

I have no idea if Rabbi Barry is around anymore or if this thread is at all alive anymore, but this statement strikes me as really rather odd. To my knowledge, no Arian writing exists that takes a definitive position on the Eucharist. Can anyone explain for me where Barry's knowledge of the ancient Arian position comes from?

[Hermes]

I have no idea if Rabbi Barry is around anymore or if this thread is at all alive anymore, but this statement strikes me as really rather odd. To my knowledge, no Arian writing exists that takes a definitive position on the Eucharist. Can anyone explain for me where Barry's knowledge of the ancient Arian position comes from?

There are some texts that I haven't yet acquired, hints of which I have picked up from some theological journals. I'm only an autodidact (with poor Latin and no credit card!) so I don't know much about these. They are:

* "Arian fragment of Vatican"
* Fragment of the "Anonymous Arian" - Mohlberg, Sacramentarium Veronese, pp. 202-203
* Fragmenta theologica - Bobbio fragments
* 12 Arian sermons in a homiliary of Munich (CPL 695a).
* Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum
* Kenneth Steinhauser - Anonymi in Iob Commentarius - Anonymous Commentary on the Book of Job

And I think there was a book called "Sermons ariens inedits". Also, a book called "Arianism and Other Heresies (The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century)" apparently contains an Arian sermon in it.

They're pretty mysterious. They may give some idea of the eucharist. I've been collecting as many Arian texts as possible, but these are harder to get.

[Danage]

I'm only an autodidact (with poor Latin and no credit card!)

A debit card should suffice. My debit card is what I use to purchase things on the Internet all the time. I have never had a credit card, and I don't intend on ever having one. Use a debit card, they are better than credit cards, in my opinion.