The Great Apostasy, Considered in the Light of Scriptural and Secular History

by James E. Talmage

**Changes in the Ordinance of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper**.

15. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper has been regarded as an essential ordinance from the time of its establishment in the Church by Jesus Christ. Yet in spite of its sanctity it has undergone radical alteration both as to its symbolism and its accepted purpose. The sacrament, as instituted by the Savior and as administered during the days of the apostolic ministry, was as simple as it was sacred and solemn. Accompanied by the true spirit of the gospel, its simplicity was sanctifying; as interpreted by the spirit of apostasy its simplicity became a reproach. Hence we find that in the third century, long sacramental prayers were prescribed, and much pomp was introduced. Vessels of gold and silver were used by such congregations as could afford them, and this with ostentatious display. Nonmembers and members "who were in a penitential state" were excluded from the sacramental service—in imitation of the exclusiveness accompanying heathen mysteries. Disputation and dissension arose as to the proper time of administering the sacrament—morning, noon, or evening; and as to the frequency with which the ordinance should be celebrated.—(See Note 5, end of chapter.)

16. At a later date the doctrine of Transubstantiation was established as an essential tenet of the Roman Church. This briefly summarized, is to the effect that the species—i. e., the bread and wine used in the sacrament—lose their character as mere bread and wine, and become in fact the flesh and blood of the crucified Christ. The transmutation is assumed to take place in such a mystical way as to delude the senses; and so, though actual flesh and actual blood, the elements still appear to be bread and wine. This view, so strongly defended and earnestly reverenced by orthodox members of the Roman Church, is vehemently denounced by others as "an absurd tenet,"— (Milner) and a "monstrous and unnatural doctrine."—(Mosheim.)

17. There has been much discussion as to the origin of this doctrine,—(See Note 6, end of chapter.) the Roman Catholics claiming for it a great antiquity, while their opponents insist that it was an innovation of the eighth or ninth century. According to Milner it was openly taught in the ninth century;—(Milner, "Church History," Cent. IX, ch. 1.) was formally established as a dogma of the Church by the Council of Placentia A. D. 1095,—(The same, Cent. XI, ch. 1) and was made an essential article of creed, belief in which was required of all by action of the Roman ecclesiastical court about 1160.—(The same, Cent. XIII, ch. 1.) An official edict of the pope, Innocent III, confirmed the dogma as a binding tenet and requirement of the Church in 1215;—(Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. XIII, Part II, ch. 3:2.) and it remains practically in force in the Roman Catholic Church today. The doctrine was adopted by the Greek Church in the seventeenth century.—(The same. Cent. XVII, Part II, ch. 2:3.)

18. The consecrated emblems, or "host," being regarded as the actual flesh and blood of Christ, were adored as of themselves divine. Thus, "a very pernicious practice of idolatry was connected with the reception of this doctrine. Men fell down before the consecrated host, and worshipped it as God; and the novelty, absurdity, and impiety of this abomination very much struck the minds of all men who were not dead to a sense of true religion."—(Milner, "Church History," Cent. XIII, ch. 1.) The "elevation of the host,"—i. e., the presentation of the consecrated emblems before the congregation for adoration, is a feature of the present day ritual of worship in the Roman Catholic Church. The celebration of the mass is taught to be an actual though mystic sacrifice, in which the Son of God is daily offered up anew as a constantly recurring atonement for the present sins of the assembled worshippers. A further perversion of the sacrament occurred in the administration of bread alone, instead of both bread and wine as originally required.

19. Thus was the plain purpose and assured efficacy of the sacrament hidden beneath a cloud of mystery and ceremonial display. Contrast such with the solemn simplicity of the ordinance as instituted by our Lord,—He took bread and wine, blessed them and gave to His disciples and said, "This do in remembrance of me."—(Luke 22:19, 20; compare Matt. 26:27, 28.) Of the bread He said, "This is my body;" of the wine, "This is my blood;" yet at that time His body was unpierced, His blood was unshed. The disciples ate bread, not flesh of a living man, and drank wine, not blood; and this they were commanded to do in remembrance of Christ.—(For a general treatment of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, see the author's "Articles of Faith," Lecture 9.) The perversion of the sacrament is evidence of departure from the spirit of the gospel of Christ, and when made an essential dogma of a church is proof of the apostate condition of that church.

20. Behold, "they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant."—(See Isaiah 24:4-6.)

NOTES.

1. Ceremonies Added as a Compromise. "Both Jews and heathens were accustomed to a vast variety of pompous and magnificent ceremonies in their religious service. And as they considered these rites as an essential part of religion, it was but natural that they should behold with indifference, and even with contempt, the simplicity of the Christian worship, which was destitute of those idle ceremonies that rendered their service so specious and striking. To remove then, in some measure, this prejudice against Christianity, the bishops thought it necessary to increase the number of rites and ceremonies, and thus to render the public worship more striking to the outward senses. This addition of external rites was also designed to remove the opprobrious calumnies which the Jewish and pagan priests cast upon the Christians on account of the simplicity of their worship, esteeming them little better than atheists, because they had no temples, altars, victims, priests, nor anything of that external pomp in which the vulgar are so prone to place the essence of religion. The rulers of the Church adopted, therefore, certain external ceremonies, that thus they might captivate the senses of the vulgar, and be able to refute the reproaches of their adversaries." (Mosheim, "Ecclesiastical History," Cent. II, Part II, ch. 4:2, 3.)

A note appended to the foregoing excerpt by the translator, Dr.
Archibald Maclaine, reads as follows: