Originally posted by phillybeth
That is what made it all the more remarkable. Imagine the bravery it takes to break a cultural and religious taboo because of your belief in the Messiah!
And didn't the High Priests eat of the flesh of the sacrificial lamb?
It was reserved for the highest, the most holy. Jesus made it accessible to everyone, the sinners and prostitutes, the dregs of society, who needed him the most.
ok, not being a Christian, I can't speak to your beliefs. but as a Jew and a historian I can certainly speak ...
early Christians were Jews and were required to follow Jewish ritual. it wasn't until after Jesus' death that the debate began within the church as to whether Gentiles could become Christians.
what you are confused about is how Jewish law was interpreted. according to my faith, there is both written law (Torah -- the first five books of the Bible) and oral law. the Pharisees, the Saddeusses, the Essenses and the early Christians all accepted the authority of Torah, but all had different interpretations of oral law and tradition.
the Jewish Passover celebration in times of the Temple meant that EVERYONE ate the pascal lamb. we no longer eat lamb at our Passover celebration in modern times, because there is no Temple in which to hold a sacrifice. but the lamb was meant for all. the issue in ancient times was that you were supposed to bring your own lamb to the Temple to be sacrificed -- and poor people might now have been able to afford a lamb. in fact, if you read deuteronomy, there are passages addressed to whether Jews may eat meat that was not part of a ritual sacrifice. the lamb was NOT reserved for the Kohanim, the Temple priests.
the service also required wine -- not grape juice.
if I understand the concept of transfiguration correctly (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong), according to Catholic tradition, isn't the body and blood of Christ hidden beneath the bread and the wine? I just can't see Jesus and his disciples with cups of "blood" at the table.
as for unleavened bread -- we're required to eat matza during Passover to remember the unleavened bread our forefathers ate in their haste to depart from Egypt. but Jewish tradition recognizes that someone may be unable to fulfill a commandment because of illness. if a Jew were to suffer celiac disease, our rabbis have ruled that he or she may substitute some other form of unleavened "bread" for the traditional matza. in the Jewish view, it's better to fulfill the commandment in spirit with a substitute than to forego the commandment because of illness.
though I suppose the Catholic Church must make that decision for its members.
