Do Catholics teach and believe the Last Supper was propitiatory?

[ThundersnowIV]

was that a “yes”?
Was the wrath of God appeased at the Last Supper?
Do Catholics teach and believe the Last Supper was propitiatory?

No…

 

[alwayswill]

Let me try to answer you by asking you a question. Do you think the Last Supper would have happened the way it did without the impending Cross?

Keep in mind Jesus had 33 years of suppers that were not His last.

no it would not have happened that way:

Just like the prayer in John 17 would not have happened the way it did without the impending Cross.

Just like the prayer in the Garden would not have happened the way it did without the impending Cross.

I don’t think any conversation or action would have happened the way it did without the impending Cross.

I don’t see how your question is an answer the OP:
Did the Last Supper appease the wrath of God?

my answer is; No, the Last Supper did not appease the wrath of God, that was done on the Cross, not at a meal the night before.

 

[rcwitness]

The Lord’s Supper, whether during the institution or when we receive at any given Communion, is the fruit of God’s salvation, the Lamb of God who was slain for an eternal sacrifice. We receive the sacrifice which “appeased the wrath of God”. The night Jesus instituted the Supper was not the moment Jesus actually died..

Matthew 26
*And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you;for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

 

[Duane1966]

Ex12
6 Each family must take care of its animal until the evening of the fourteenth day of the month, when the animals are to be killed. 7 Some of the blood must be put on the two doorposts and above the door of each house where the animals are to be eaten. 8 That night the animals are to be roasted and eaten, together with bitter herbs and thin bread made without yeast. 9 Don’t eat the meat raw or boiled. The entire animal, including its head, legs, and insides, must be roasted. 10 Eat what you want that night, and the next morning burn whatever is left. 11 When you eat the meal, be dressed and ready to travel. Have your sandals on, carry your walking stick in your hand, and eat quickly. This is the Passover Festival in honor of me, your Lord.

12 That same night I will pass through Egypt and kill the first-born son in every family and the first-born male of all animals. I am the Lord, and I will punish the gods of Egypt. 13 The blood on the houses will show me where you live, and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. Then you won’t be bothered by the terrible disasters I will bring on Egypt.

**The Angel of Death passes over the house because they were “under” the blood;
not because of what they were going to eat later.

They were safe the very moment the blood was placed over the door way .**

so was the wrath of God appeased at the very moment the wine was poured: or Christ blood/life was poured out on the Cross?

From Dr. Scott Hahn:

Well, go back to the Old Testament, to the book of Exodus. Suppose that night as head of my household and father, I sacrificed an unblemished lamb with no broken bones, and I sprinkled his blood on the door post, and then I said, "Family, we’re safe, let’s go to bed’, and we went to bed. I’d wake up in the morning to tragedy. My firstborn would be dead. Why? You had to eat the lamb. It isn’t enough to kill him. That is the satisfaction for sin, but the ultimate goal of sacrifice is not blood and gore and God making sure He sees the death. The ultimate goal is to restore communion, to have fellowship with God restored. And that’s what’s signified by eating the lamb. Who shares a common meal? Family. What is this a sign of? Covenant. And what is a covenant? A sacred family bond. In the Old Testament any family that sacrificed a lamb and sprinkled the blood had to eat the lamb. It wasn’t enough to say, ‘Well we don’t like lamb do we, kids? Why don’t we make lamb cookies? Little lamb wafers that symbolize the lamb? We’ll eat those and those’ll be enough, right? Symbolic presence of the lamb, and all that?’ No, you’d wake up and you’d be dead. You ate the lamb and you burned what was left. But you ate the lamb to reestablish and restore communion with your heavenly Father through His firstborn Son and Lamb. That’s the way it was in the Old Testament, and St. Paul recognizes that it’s still the way it is in the new covenant, only in spades, only with more glory. Why? Because Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us. Once and for all on calvary he’s been put to death, therefore_what? Therefore we’ve nothing to do. Just celebrate the sacrifice, which is over and done with_ No, something’s missing. We need to eat the Lamb. We need to receive the Lamb to restore communion and to complete the sacrifice and to keep the feast . It’s proper, and we now judge it to be necessary. 1 Corinthians 5:7-8, “Christ our Passover Lamb has been sacrificed and now let us celebrate the feast.” And the next five chapters in many ways St. Paul describes how the Eucharist is to be celebrated, because it’s the culmination of the Passover sacrifice.

 

[alwayswill]

The Lord’s Supper, whether during the institution or when we receive at any given Communion, is the fruit of God’s salvation, the Lamb of God who was slain for an eternal sacrifice. We receive the sacrifice which “appeased the wrath of God”. The night Jesus instituted the Supper was not the moment Jesus actually died..

Matthew 26
*And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you;for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

The night Jesus instituted the Supper was not the moment Jesus actually died.
therefore
The night Jesus instituted the Supper was not the moment propitiation was made:

why is that view wrong?

Is it your view that propitiation was made without Jesus actually dying?

Why is that view correct?

 

[rcwitness]

The night Jesus instituted the Supper was not the moment Jesus actually died.
therefore
The night Jesus instituted the Supper was not the moment propitiation was made:

why is that view wrong?

Is it your view that propitiation was made without Jesus actually dying?

Why is that view correct?

We believe, since the incarnation, Jesus was accomplishing salvation. He had the power of salvation. Was it finished at the Last Supper? No

This does not matter, when it comes to the consecrated Eucharist. This meal is a celebration with heaven, at the heavenly Banquet. This means we enter into the eternity of heaven. We receive the eternal body and blood of Jesus.

Heaven was already there!

The difficulty with your question, is it is trying to understand the mystery of time and eternity coming together. And this is hard for me to grasp!

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

if Mass was not celebrated; would God’s wrath become un-appeased.

would the propitiation that was accomplished on the Cross be undone?

Hi. alwayswill
I have introduced the word “Parousia” as it relates to the Last Supper in the present Mass. Your next question relates to the subject of covenant. Jesus established the new and everlasting covenant at the Last Supper, Once and for all.

The New and everlasting covenant in Jesus body and blood has not only appeased the wrath of God for ALL ages in ALL times, The new and everlasting covenant fulfilled the Law and the Prophets.

God’s Word does not return void, for which God the Father sends HIs Word (The Son) to do the Will of God.

To answer your question? No, **what God the Son fulfilled at the Last Supper and made a New and Everlasting Covenant, cannot be undone. **Yes, our humanity can break our covenant, when we sin against God, But God’s Word and Works in the Last Supper or Mass cannot be undone.

Mass is for those who have entered into the Kingdom of God through baptism in the Holy Trinity, these celebrate the New and Everlasting Covenant in the True and substantial presence of Jesus body and blood in Mass.

When we do not celebrate the Mass, It never relinquishes the covenant which Jesus establishes at the Last Supper. When we do a mortal sin, we break our covenant with God. The mortal sin never undoes God’s covenant with our humanity.

Since the resurrection of Jesus Christ. There has never ceased to be a pleasing sacrificial offering (Mass) which appeases God from the rising of the sun to the setting of the sun, celebrated today, till Jesus second coming.

Peace be with you

 

[Wannano]

Yes. Why do you ask?

I am probably wrong but I have always wondered if each of them asked “is it I?” because they each had a tug in their conscience …perhaps a pang of doubt that they might not be completely clean. It is conjecture on my part, I cannot back it up with anything other than my own experience.

 

[rcwitness]

I am probably wrong but I have always wondered if each of them asked “is it I?” because they each had a tug in their conscience …perhaps a pang of doubt that they might not be completely clean. It is conjecture on my part, I cannot back it up with anything other than my own experience.

Judas asked too. And He said Yes. But Judas didn’t pursue repentance then. Jesus warned/admonished him, but he didn’t stop. Only Judas had mortal sin (unclean head).

 

[ShanPO]

no it would not have happened that way:

Just like the prayer in John 17 would not have happened the way it did without the impending Cross.

Just like the prayer in the Garden would not have happened the way it did without the impending Cross.

I don’t think any conversation or action would have happened the way it did without the impending Cross.

I don’t see how your question is an answer the OP:
Did the Last Supper appease the wrath of God?

my answer is; No, the Last Supper did not appease the wrath of God, that was done on the Cross, not at a meal the night before.

If the Last Supper wouldn’t have happened the way it did without the Cross, then that means there was something to what happened at the Last Supper that was important.

The Last Supper has to be taken in conjunction with the Cross because without one, there is no other, and vice versa.

 

[alwayswill]

If the Last Supper wouldn’t have happened the way it did without the Cross, then that means there was something to what happened at the Last Supper that was important.

The Last Supper has to be taken in conjunction with the Cross because without one, there is no other, and vice versa.

I completely disagree:
I think it is quite a stretch to say there would be no Crucifixion if the Last Supper had not taken place.
I completely disagree that the death of the Holy Lamb of God as an atoning sacrifice and appeasing the wrath of God, depended upon the Last Supper.

Well I can’t speak for other Reformers;
I seems to me that that it does a great disservice to what Christ accomplished on the Cross, (that is; appeased the wrath of God, made sacrificial atonement, made propitiation) actually happen the previous night.

 

[rcwitness]

I completely disagree:
I think it is quite a stretch to say there would be no Crucifixion if the Last Supper had not taken place.
I completely disagree that the death of the Holy Lamb of God as an atoning sacrifice and appeasing the wrath of God, depended upon the Last Supper.

I agree that the Last Supper depended on the Sacrifice Jesus was about to endure. If that’s what you mean.

Well I can’t speak for other Reformers;
I seems to me that that it does a great disservice to what Christ accomplished on the Cross, (that is; appeased the wrath of God, made sacrificial atonement, made propitiation) actually happen the previous night.

And I might say you do a disservice to the Lord’s Supper if you do not acknowledge that the cross depended on Jesus’ body and blood being obedient to the Spirit. This is why His body and blood is advantageous in the Last Supper.

 

[alwayswill]

I agree that the Last Supper depended on the Sacrifice Jesus was about to endure. If that’s what you mean.
.

ShanPO stated:
"The Last Supper has to be taken in conjunction with the Cross because without one, there is no other, and vice versa."

do you believe that without the Last Supper there is no Cross?

 

[ShanPO]

ShanPO stated:
"The Last Supper has to be taken in conjunction with the Cross because without one, there is no other, and vice versa."

do you believe that without the Last Supper there is no Cross?

Remember what I said. Jesus had 33 years of suppers that weren’t His last. He knew that He was about to be crucified, therefore had the Last Supper because of it. The Cross was going to happen, and the Last Supper is a part of it.

 

[alwayswill]

…This is why His body and blood is advantageous in the Last Supper

.

if that is a theological term: i am not familiar with it:
does “is body and blood is advantageous in the Last Supper” mean it was propitiatory?

I need to get straight the point:

I believe God’s wrath was appeased only at the Cross: the sacrificial Atonement was made only at the Cross; propitiation was made only at the Cross.

thank you Catholics for participating in this discussion:
I am surprised that no other Protestants joined in …

 

[rcwitness]

if that is a theological term: i am not familiar with it:
does “is body and blood is advantageous in the Last Supper” mean it was propitiatory?

The Eucharist at the Last Supper was receiving the body and blood of the New Covenant. It is God Himself Communing with us! That is awsome!

I believe God’s wrath was appeased only at the Cross: the sacrificial Atonement was made only at the Cross; propitiation was made only at the Cross.

His Eucharist is who was sacrificed at the cross. The Cross is the moment, in our time, when God’s wrath fell on Jesus. Jesus did not suffer death at the Last Supper. The offering of that death was given in Sacrament

:tiphat:thank you Catholics for participating in this discussion:
I am surprised that no other Protestants joined in …

 

[Wannano]

if that is a theological term: i am not familiar with it:
does “is body and blood is advantageous in the Last Supper” mean it was propitiatory?

I need to get straight the point:

I believe God’s wrath was appeased only at the Cross: the sacrificial Atonement was made only at the Cross; propitiation was made only at the Cross.

thank you Catholics for participating in this discussion:
I am surprised that no other Protestants joined in …

You do a better job than I can…I often feel I side track.

Everthing changed as the veil was ripped in two. At the Last Supper Jesus showed His followers how to commerate and remember His upcoming once and for all sacrifice. Later on it made sense to them.

 

[rcwitness]

Everthing changed as the veil was ripped in two. At the Last Supper Jesus showed His followers how to commerate and remember His upcoming once and for all sacrifice. Later on it made sense to them.

Yes. But let me ask… does eating bread and drinking wine remind you of what Jesus did for you?

 

[Wannano]

Yes. But let me ask… does eating bread and drinking wine remind you of what Jesus did for you?

Yes it certainly does because it has always been presented as an important reminder, a hallowed moment. Even though we see it as spiritual the words …the body of Christ or this is my body broken for you…is spoken to the recipient. A Holy moment of thanksgiving is not “just” a symbol.

 

[Duane1966]

You do a better job than I can…I often feel I side track.

Everthing changed as the veil was ripped in two. At the Last Supper Jesus showed His followers how to commerate and remember His upcoming once and for all sacrifice. Later on it made sense to them.

First, one must not separate the sacrifice of our Lord on the cross from the events which surround it. The sacrifice of our Lord is inseparably linked to the Last Supper. Here Jesus took bread and wine. Looking to St. Matthew’s text (26:26ff), He said over the bread, “Take this and eat it. This is My body”; and over the cup of wine, “This is My blood, the blood of the covenant, to be poured out on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.”

The next day, on Good Friday, our Lord’s body hung on the altar of the cross and His precious blood was spilt to wash away our sins and seal the everlasting, perfect covenant. The divine life our Lord offered and shared for our salvation in the sacrifice of Good Friday is the same offered and shared at the Last Supper. The Last Supper, the sacrifice of Good Friday and the Resurrection on Easter form one saving event.-Father William Saunders

Notice, the blood that the Apostles drank at the Last Supper, is the blood that is shed on the Cross.

To enter into the Old Covenant, you had to eat the Lamb. Jesus is telling the Apostles right here to enter into the New Covenant, you have to eat His body and drink His blood.