That may be but I think this misses the point of a sacrifice altogether. The actual sacrifice, which is mentioned in the Roman Canon or EP1, and addressed in the EF as approaching the Holy of Holies, is hidden from the people.
Well, now that we know what you think is garbage, let me quote from the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales: “So the Mass is both a sacred meal and a sacrifice, or a sacrifice and a sacred meal. [It began in the Upper room and ended on Calvary.] The liturgy of the [Traditional] Mass is redolent of the ceremonies of the Passover liturgy, which Jesus desired with great desire to celebrate for our salvation. “Amen, amen I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall have no life in you. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has life everlasting and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him. As the living Father has sent me, and as I live because of the Father, so he who eats me, he also shall live because of Me” (Jn 6:54-59).”
And so what is the mass, fundamentally, a banquet or a sacrifice?
It is a SACRIFICE, THE Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross, continuing down through the ages, re-presented in an unbloody manner by the hands of the priest, who is an alter Christus.
The mass is not a “banquet”. That’s 1960’s-70’s garbage.
The priest and the people - who are also priests, though unordained - offer Jesus together, along with their very lives, to the Father, facing the same direction in their offering, which is a sign of their unity. The priest is also at the “head” of the people, as the primary minister offering Jesus to the Father.
That’s the way I see it.
From the CCC:
1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit:Christ, our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper “on the night when he was betrayed,” [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.189 [from the Council of Trent]
It is good that you did not quote statistics, as you would have been playing the game of post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Yes, you are correct. I shouldn’t have said that. However, it is primarily a Sacrifice.
You didn’t provide a website reference so I thought I would provide one. (It may be a clarification of your source, but I’m not sure.)
I would agree with you on that, with the exception that since the 50’s, I have never met anyone who held that idea.
I think that is the site. What I am not sure of is the date of the article - do you know?
but I don’t know if that includes the preface.
Thanks.
Fair point, but one can probably question what exactly constitutes a meal, communal or otherwise, since communion is now routinely administered outside Mass. The thing required is for the priest to confect the bread and wine AND consume the sacrifice as did the OT priests mentioned in the Canon and EP1. But I suppose extending the priesthood to the laity brings about some misunderstood concepts concerning “both a Sacrifice and a Meal.” To be honest, I don’t quite understand them either.
If only that were true. I wish it were. If it becomes so again, then the priest and the congregation, His priestly people, will offer Christ together facing in the same direction as previously, looking together to the east awaiting His return in glory. Then modernist hymnals will be tossed, and I won’t be forced to hear week after week hymns about us rather than about Him, the One we are receiving in Holy Communion.
Down in adoration falling
Lo, the sacred Host we hail
Lo, o'er ancient forms departing
Newer rites of grace prevail:
Faith for all defects supplying,But would we as laity be able to share without sacramentally receiving? I believe through the actions of the priest, which I’m not, this would be the case. But I’m no theologian on this.
? I’m a bit confused. Yes, of course we share in the Sacrifice of Christ through the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Was that what you were asking?
I love that prayer too!
