Christ Died Once for All

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Randy_Carson

Guest
Many non-Catholic Christians would agree with the following statement:

“The sacrifice of the Mass contradicts the biblical teaching that Jesus died once for all.” (cf. Heb. 9:26-28)

Since these folks wish to convince the Catholic members of this forum of the truth of this position, the burden of proof falls upon them.

We await your arguments. 😉
 
Here’s Dr. Mizzi’s claim:
The Catholic doctrine on the Mass is a distortion of the biblical doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. The Bible describes the Eucharist as a “memorial” or “commemoration” of Christ, and a “proclamation” of His death, and not as a sacrifice for sin. More seriously, the Mass is the denial of the perfection and sufficiency of the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross of Calvary. If it needs to be carried on, perpetuated, renewed re-presented and re-enacted, the implication is that His once-for-all sacrifice was not enough for the forgiveness of His people. Let’s say that I go to my friend’s house. If there is no answer when I knock at the door, I will renew my efforts and keep on knocking. If, however, the door is opened, I would stop knocking because my purpose would have been achieved. Even so, having accomplished the redemption of His people by His death on the cross, Christ ascended into heaven and is now seated on the right hand of God. His mission is accomplished!
 
MarcoPolo said:
Here’s Dr. Mizzi’s claim:
The Catholic doctrine on the Mass is a distortion of the biblical doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. The Bible describes the Eucharist as a “memorial” or “commemoration” of Christ, and a “proclamation” of His death, and not as a sacrifice for sin. More seriously, the Mass is the denial of the perfection and sufficiency of the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross of Calvary. If it needs to be carried on, perpetuated, renewed re-presented and re-enacted, the implication is that His once-for-all sacrifice was not enough for the forgiveness of His people. Let’s say that I go to my friend’s house. If there is no answer when I knock at the door, I will renew my efforts and keep on knocking. If, however, the door is opened, I would stop knocking because my purpose would have been achieved. Even so, having accomplished the redemption of His people by His death on the cross, Christ ascended into heaven and is now seated on the right hand of God. His mission is accomplished!
Click to expand...
Here, Dr. Mizzi shows his ignorance of the Church’s teaching. All the events of Christ’s sacrifice, the Incarnation, the Last Supper, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, and the Ascension are not repeated in the Eucharist, but they are made present. He should remember in Revelations how the Lamb appears as slain before the throne in Heaven. Jesus Christ sits at the right hand of the Father making intercession for us, which we have through Him by His Cross and Resurrection. Just as the Last Supper was, mystically speaking, a participation is Christ’s one sacrifice on the Cross, so when the Church continues to celebrate the Eucharist as a memorial of His suffering and death, it too is a participation in, not a re-enactment of, that “once-for-all” sacrifice.
 
RyanML said:
Here, Dr. Mizzi shows his ignorance of the Church’s teaching. All the events of Christ’s sacrifice, the Incarnation, the Last Supper, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, and the Ascension are not repeated in the Eucharist, but they are made present. He should remember in Revelations how the Lamb appears as slain before the throne in Heaven. Jesus Christ sits at the right hand of the Father making intercession for us, which we have through Him by His Cross and Resurrection. Just as the Last Supper was, mystically speaking, a participation is Christ’s one sacrifice on the Cross, so when the Church continues to celebrate the Eucharist as a memorial of His suffering and death, it too is a participation in, not a re-enactment of, that “once-for-all” sacrifice.
Click to expand...
Then why does He return? Revelation
 
MarcoPolo said:
Here’s Dr. Mizzi’s claim:
The Catholic doctrine on the Mass is a distortion of the biblical doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. The Bible describes the Eucharist as a “memorial” or “commemoration” of Christ, and a “proclamation” of His death, and not as a sacrifice for sin. More seriously, the Mass is the denial of the perfection and sufficiency of the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross of Calvary. If it needs to be carried on, perpetuated, renewed re-presented and re-enacted, the implication is that His once-for-all sacrifice was not enough for the forgiveness of His people. Let’s say that I go to my friend’s house. If there is no answer when I knock at the door, I will renew my efforts and keep on knocking. If, however, the door is opened, I would stop knocking because my purpose would have been achieved. Even so, having accomplished the redemption of His people by His death on the cross, Christ ascended into heaven and is now seated on the right hand of God. His mission is accomplished!
Click to expand...
Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink (John 6:53-55).

This was not a parable but a forth right and down right instruction.

Jesus lost many of His followers when saying this and did not say thats not what I meant. Do you mean Jesus would let them leave to be condemned forever rather than re-explain.

There was no reexplanation Jesus said what He meant and Meant what He said.
There is no wiggle room here. and He wold not let the Apostles wiggle either in finishing this section.
 
Regarding ‘it is finished’. The protestant interpretation of this verse certainly is wrong considering what Paul says about the resurrection and the fact that Christ had not risen yet. If Christ is not risen then you are still in your sins is what Paul says. And if Christ had not risen then it was not complete because sin and death had not been conquered yet. Golgotha is utterly meaningless without the empty tomb. Protestants make a mistake by focusing everything on the death of Christ. Salvation encompasses much more than that. The incarnation itself was redemptive and salvific. The life of Christ was salvific. The crucifixion and death was salvific. And the resurrection was salvific. The protestants who subscribe to the theology in this thread have made everything Christ did previous to His death meaningless. They have also made everything after His death meaningless too, including the resurrection, the assension, Pentecost, and even the conversion of the individual sinner because as they say ‘it is finished’. Christ made the sacrifice, the idea that you need to convert to be saved is basically saying that Christ’s sacrifice wasn’t good enough or complete enough.
 
Dr. Mizzi is also apparently unfamiliar with the Jewish understanding of a memorial as a reliving of an event. So also is does his interpretation negate what happened in Luke 24. In Luke 24, the risen Christ celebrates the Eucharist for the first time after the resurrection (v. 30). Upon consuming the Eucharist, the disciples who had previously not been able to recognize Him (v. 16), suddenly recognized Him (v. 31). They confirmed this account in v. 35, saying: “Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.” Does this happen if the bread is just bread? Just a “memorial”?

You see also the double meaning in this passage. They recognized Jesus right there when He broke the bread. And we recognize Jesus in the breaking of the bread. Cross-reference with:*1 Cor 11:29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.*Does this Scriptural evidence support Dr. Mizzi’s imposed 21st century understanding of commemoration? No. :o
 
RyanML said:
I’m not sure i understand the question. 🙂
Click to expand...
I was responding to below.

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo
Here’s Dr. Mizzi’s claim:

, I would stop knocking because my purpose would have been achieved. Even so, having accomplished the redemption of His people by His death on the cross, Christ ascended into heaven and is now seated on the right hand of God. His mission is accomplished!
 
c659smith said:
I was responding to below.

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo
Here’s Dr. Mizzi’s claim:

, I would stop knocking because my purpose would have been achieved. Even so, having accomplished the redemption of His people by His death on the cross, Christ ascended into heaven and is now seated on the right hand of God. His mission is accomplished!
Click to expand...
Oh! It makes sense now! 😛
 
Randy,
Code: 
 As I am sure you will agree, protestants use this as an arguement due to there ignorance of Catholic teaching.  They simply do not understand what the Mass is and why we do what we do during Mass.  Not to beat the dead horse, but to reiterate the responses, they fell to understand what the Jewish meaning of the word "rememberance" or "to remember" means.  They neglect the fact that resurrection was just as important as him dying on the cross.  Again, as you know, it's not either/or but rather both/and.  At Mass, we make Christ's sacrifice present, we do not re-sacrifice Christ.  We make it present just as the Old Testament Jews made the Passover present each year, just as the New Testament Jews/Christians did in the Eucharist.
Brothers In Christ,

Brock
 
MarcoPolo said:
Maybe not enough are seeing it cuz it’s not in the Non-Catholic Religions forum?
Click to expand...
Someone peeëm Protestant101, SemperReformanda, and NonCatholic. :eek:

I already peeëmed them for the other thread, so I’m off the hook. 🙂
 
MarcoPolo said:
Christ ascended into heaven and is now seated on the right hand of God. His mission is accomplished![/INDENT]
Click to expand...
Many Protestants see it just this way. Christ in heaven, and unable to leave his throne.

That’s putting God in a Box, restricting his ability to commune with his Church on earth.

The Church teaches that the Trinity is unified. Whereever is the Spirit, there also is the Son & Father. Christ is the Head of the Church, Christ also dwells in the hearts of the Church body.

The ‘visible’ Christ will not be seen again til the end day, but the ‘spirit’ of Christ is active here on earth … and bodily present at Mass, etc.
 
jimmy said:
Regarding ‘it is finished’. The protestant interpretation of this verse certainly is wrong considering what Paul says about the resurrection and the fact that Christ had not risen yet. If Christ is not risen then you are still in your sins is what Paul says. And if Christ had not risen then it was not complete because sin and death had not been conquered yet. Golgotha is utterly meaningless without the empty tomb. Protestants make a mistake by focusing everything on the death of Christ. Salvation encompasses much more than that. The incarnation itself was redemptive and salvific. The life of Christ was salvific. The crucifixion and death was salvific. And the resurrection was salvific. The protestants who subscribe to the theology in this thread have made everything Christ did previous to His death meaningless. They have also made everything after His death meaningless too, including the resurrection, the assension, Pentecost, and even the conversion of the individual sinner because as they say ‘it is finished’. Christ made the sacrifice, the idea that you need to convert to be saved is basically saying that Christ’s sacrifice wasn’t good enough or complete enough.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this - this is it in a nutshell.

👍
 
Protestants are always telling us what we believe is wrong.

Firstly, they don’t know what we believe - they distort what we believe and even when we explain that it is a distortion, they persist in their stance! Can’t understand that.

I know that Protestant101 and NonCatholic have both been invited to come on this thread and so far they have stayed away.

Perhaps they have read page 1 and seen the explanations which are really very good, and maybe, just maybe, the penny has dropped and they are either looking for ammunication or planning to surprise us with a “OK Guys, we understand - thank you for your explanation”. In which case we will be able to celebrate.

Doughnuts and cappuccinos?

Cheers
Cinette
😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top