Answering A Catholic Critic Of Passover
By Dr. G. Reckart
Copyright All Rights Reserved
I have been asked to do an analysis of the discussion of Brother Jason Weatherly, Minister Charles Johnson, Deacon Charlie Nevarez, and Brother Rod Johnson.
In a nut shell, Brother Weatherly presented the Catholic and Church of Christ view of the Lord's Supper. He even went so far as to identify his methodology by using the system of hermeneutics invented by the Churches of Christ. His arguments were based upon the three principles they used "Command", "Example", and "Necessary Inference".
What Brother Weatherly never did was show where the Apostles used this Church of Christ method in matters of doctrine. His main thrust was to attack the doctrine of observing the Lord's Supper on Passover. He claimed that since there was no record in the book of Acts or the Epistles expressly stating the Lord's Supper should be held on Passover, this means it could be held at any time as the Catholic Church invented.
He rejects the record of history that reports an accurate accounting of the Asia churches following an annual observance on Passover. But then he inserts his claim of history the Western churches under the papacy of Rome held the Lord's Supper on Easter Sunday and this was the original Apostolic practice. He quotes the Catholic claims that Paul and Peter established the Lord's Supper on Easter Sunday and this is the accurate Apostolic record.
He made the statement that Polycarp held the Communion with Pope Anicetus on a Sunday and this means he did not hold the Lord's Supper on Passover to be the only time it should be observed. His final point in defense of Communion at any time a person wished, was to take scriptures used by the Church of Christ where breaking of bread was mentioned and converted these into Lord Supper events. His doctrine is the Lord's Supper can be held any time a person wants to hold it. This "oft" doctrine was first used and invented by the Catholic church. It was the foundation of their daily, weekly, and often mass. I do not need Brother Weatherly to try and convert me to this Catholic interpretation of "oft". The Asia Apostolics took "oft" to mean annual and that is the way I will interpret it. I am not going to accept the Catholic intrepretation on this even if Brother Weatherly stamps it ok.
Brother Rod Johnson disagreed with him and presented many Scriptures showing the continuity of Passover for 1400 years and also the fact it was to be observed for ever. He tried to make the point that the New Testament Passover replaced the old Passover but this was rejected by Brother Weatherly. He also made the point that Jesus instituted his memorial on Passover and the Lord's Supper was in fact his own Passover feast memorial. Brother Weatherly rejected this.
Deacon Nevarez likewise presented information challenging the theory that the Lord's Supper could be held at any time. Everything he presented was rejected.
Minister Johnson claimed along with Brother Weatherly that there is no scripture that says the Lord's Supper should be held on any particular day. He claims his own revelation of the text is that Jesus instututed the Lord's Supper as his own Passover celebration. He called it "first example." But did not conclude this was an ordinance that need be followed on Passover alone. He posted a link to a Church of Christ college showing where Brother Weatherly got his doctrine on Command, Example, and Necessary Inference.
Brother's Rod Johnson, Minster Charles Johnson, and Deacon Charlie Nevarez stood by the Lord's Supper on Passover. Brother Weatherly stood by the Catholic and Church of Christ Lord Supper doctrines.
I have written and preached about this subject extensively. I do and will use history to prove the Catholic church did alter the annual observance to Easter sunday. They did this at the Council of Nicaea. Brother Weatherly throws this out and says it cannot be used unless there is scripture that says the Lord's Supper should be held on Passover. I have repeatedly shown that Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper on Passover and commanded "this do," Any and all observances of the Lord's Supper, regardless of which group you follow, points back to Passover night when Jesus institued it. No one can claim the Lord's Supper is not a memorial of his own Passover. Anyone who denies this is a two-fold child of satan. If the Lord's Supper does not point back to the Passover observance Jesus instituted then it is of the devil. The command "this do" is not a suggestion. It is not open for debate. The word "this" refers to the complete Passover event of unleavened bread, wine, giving thanks, and foot washing. What do these symbolize? Of course the Passover Lamb which his blood in the Cup represents and which the unleaveded bread represents. This is Passover any way you cut and dice it. If the Lord's Supper is not the Passover of Christ, then it is nothing. The word "do" means to perform per the example, accomplish what the example teaches, to do an action copying what was done, and to convey it exactly as it was demonstrated.
The Lord's Supper is an ordinance. Anyone who denies the Lord's Supper is an ordinance (statute) is a two fold child of satan. This do is a command by Jesus and incorporated in this command is the historical fact of his Passover memorial. No one can remove Passover from the Lord's Supper. And no one can remove the Lord's Supper from Passover. This seals it for ever.
Now what of the doctrine of Brother Weatherly that if there is no scripture to back up what Jesus did on Passover, that we are to throw his observance on Passover out the window? May I say to one and all, Jesus does not need the witness of any Church, or any Apostle, of any man, or Brother Weatherly to back up his command "this do."
Even in the case of the Corinthian church that was doing it wrong, there is no way to take this to try and claim Jesus did not mean to celebrate his Passover annually. One thing Paul never taught was the Catholic doctrine or Church of Christ doctrine of anytime you wish. There is no need for any scripture to establish how, where, when, the Church should observe the Lord's Supper, Jesus already did it when he said "this do." I do not need another witness to back him up or make his words valid. And I shall never accept Brother Weatherly's doctrine that Jesus did not intend for his memorial to be observed each Passover. This comes from the Catholic church that the observance should not be held with the Jews but instead on Easter sunday.
Now, did Polycarp go to Rome and have Communion with Pope Anicetus? The Catholic church says he did. But I do not accept it. Why? Because the Catholic church fudged the dates of Polycarp's life and that of Pope Anicetus. they got caught and then revised the dates. Polycarp is said to have lived 70-155AD. Anicetus was said to be Pope 154-167AD. There is no way Polycarp could have been in Rome in 154AD and then back home to live several years and die under Statius Quadratus who ruled 154-156AD. Polycarp would have had to be in Rome before Pope Anicetus was even Pope. Several scholars believe this Polycarp trip is false. They also believe his Eptistle to the Philippians is false. I agree. Why? Because Polycrates mentions Polycarp and in his own letter to Pope Victor and makes a long list of those who held the Lord's Supper on Passover, of which was Polycarp. He says: "All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith." If Polycarp had diviated with Pope Anicetus he could not have listed him as one who held the Lord's Supper on Passover. He said he did not diviate and I will not accept Rome's lies that he did.
I have dealt with the lies that Peter and John stated the Catholic observance of the Lord's Supper on Easter sunday. Anyone who accepts this falsehood spread by the Catholic church, is beyond foolish.
Now does observing the Lord's Supper on Passover mean we should hold it then in Jerusalem in an upper room? This is a smoke and mirror tactic, a smoke screen to get people to accept the Catholic and Church of Christ doctrine. Sorry, that ploy will not work here. It is what Jesus instituted and when it should be observed that is the issue of doctrine.
The Passover Feast was never referred to as the breaking of bread. The Lord's Supper is no where mentioned as the breaking of bread. The breaking of bread is a meal and the bread is leavened. The texts Luke 24:35, Acts 2:42, and 20:7 do not describe the Lord's Supper. There is no such thing as eating bread and this alone is the Lord's Supper. The breaking of bread in the texts is nothing but eating a meal. No mention is made that this bread was unleavened in order to comply with the Lord's Supper. No mention of the Cup or feet washing. Any attempt to make these the Lord's Supper is false. The Peshito Version claim shows again the Catholic doctrine Brother Weatherly is trying to pass off as truth. The word Eucharist was fabricated by the Catholic church to rename the Lord's Supper from the annual Passover to a new name. The old Passover NEVER was called the Eucharist. What does Eucharist mean? It is the blessing prayer said over all the emblems of the Passover. The prayer is not the Passover and it is not the Lord's Supper. The use of the word Eucharist is part of the total antisemitism package scheme of the Catholic church against the Lord's Passover celebration.
Why did the Asiatics observe the Passover as the time of the annual Lord's Supper and the Western churches under the papacy observed the resurrection as the time to observe the Lord's Supper? Which is correct is easily understood.
Finally, is there New Testament scripture that tells when and how to observe the Lord's Supper? Yes! Jesus gave it when he instituted it. When he said "this do" he was referring to a memorial to be observed on the annual day of Passover, the day which he would become our Passover. That is final on this issue. We do not need another scripture to back this up. Jesus commanded it. The faithful will observe it. We do not need Brother Weatherly to stamp his approval on it before it is truth and doctrine. He has nothing to do in this annual observance and only last year decided to do it for the first time. But then he turned and denounced it.
Passover in 2009 will be the evening of April 9th. This year our theme is Feast of Love.
There is more to this subject and you will need Pastor Reckart's Cds on this to hear it all. You can have all the messages for a donation of $25 toward our missions program. If you do not believe in the annual Lord's Supper Passover do not request the Cds.
God bless the Israel of God who will celebrate the Feast of Love on Passover 2009.
My thanks to Brother Rod Johnson, Minister Charles Johnson, and Deacon Charlie Nevarez, for standing up for the Lord's Passover. God bless you more and more.
See these studies below:
Quartodeciman Easter Controversy