Does Hebrews refute the Mass?

[reccanboy]

I cannot find any reason to reconcile the argument found in the epistle to the Hebrews with the Doctrine of the Mass in Catholic theology. The reasons are as follows:

*10:1 “For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.”
*
The author asserts that the Temple sacrifices offered yearly cannot make the worshipers (i.e. those who draw near) perfect. Catholics would agree with this. If we go on:

10:2 “Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins.”

The author claims that if these said sacrifices could make the people perfect, then they would’ve ceased to have been offered long ago, since having once been cleansed, they would no longer have any conscience (i.e. guilt) of sin.

If the Mass is the propitiatory sacrifice of the Lord, why hasn’t it perfected once and for all, those for whom it has been offered? After all, would it not have ceased to have been offered, since the people, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?

 

[kamalayka9]

I think your understanding may be a little off.

The Mass does not sacrifice the Lord “over and over.”

The Mass, whenever and wherever it is celebrated, *partakes *of the infinite Sacrifice of Christ.

The Mass, whether celebrated in America in 2009 or Egypt in 1402, both *transcend *space and time-they both simultaneously share of the one Sacrifice.

 

[Nita]

I cannot find any reason to reconcile the argument found in the epistle to the Hebrews with the Doctrine of the Mass in Catholic theology. The reasons are as follows:

*10:1 “For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.”
*
The author asserts that the Temple sacrifices offered yearly cannot make the worshipers (i.e. those who draw near) perfect. Catholics would agree with this. If we go on:

10:2 “Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins.”

The author claims that if these said sacrifices could make the people perfect, then they would’ve ceased to have been offered long ago, since having once been cleansed, they would no longer have any conscience (i.e. guilt) of sin.

If the Mass is the propitiatory sacrifice of the Lord, why hasn’t it perfected once and for all, those for whom it has been offered? After all, would it not have ceased to have been offered,** since the people, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins**?

I’m not sure how you interpret/understand the words “no longer have any conciousness of sins”. Could you clarify?
**

 

[Ignatius]

I cannot find any reason to reconcile the argument found in the epistle to the Hebrews with the Doctrine of the Mass

What is it that you think is the “Doctrine of the Mass”? (Hint: there is no such thing as a ‘Doctrine of the Mass’, someone is yanking your chain bub!) I’d suggest doing a little homework next time before posting. You can buy a Catechism of the Catholic Church as a way to check that the tripe someone is trying to feed you is actually a Catholic teaching before posting.

 

[reccanboy]

I think your understanding may be a little off.

The Mass does not sacrifice the Lord “over and over.”

The Mass, whenever and wherever it is celebrated, *partakes *of the infinite Sacrifice of Christ.

The Mass, whether celebrated in America in 2009 or Egypt in 1402, both *transcend *space and time-they both simultaneously share of the one Sacrifice.

I never made the claim that the Mass is sacrificing Christ over and over again. Perhaps you should read my original post.

My argument is that the Mass doesn’t make the believer perfect in the sense that the author describes, otherwise we wouldn’t need the propitiatory sacrifice of the Mass, because having once been cleansed, we would no longer have any guilt of sin.

 

[reccanboy]

What is it that you think is the “Doctrine of the Mass”? (Hint: there is no such thing as a ‘Doctrine of the Mass’, someone is yanking your chain bub!) I’d suggest doing a little homework next time before posting. You can buy a Catechism of the Catholic Church as a way to check that the tripe someone is trying to feed you is actually a Catholic teaching before posting.

“Since according to the judgment of even Protestant historians of dogma, St. Cyprian (d. 258) is to be regarded as the “herald” of Catholic doctrine on the Mass, we may likewise pass him over…”

newadvent.org/cathen/10006a.htm

Perhaps you should research your own sources before you accuse others of not doing their own homework.

 

[Nita]

Hi reccanboy,
I don’t know if you enjoy Biblical typology or not, but one of my favorite OT “types” of both Our Lord’s sacrifice on Calvary and it’s ongoing “presentation” in the Mass occurs in the book of Exodus. The LORD even commands Moses to write this event down as a memorial!
Exodus 17:8 Then came Am’alek and fought with Israel at Reph’idim. 17:9 And Moses said to Joshua, “Choose for us men, and go out, fight with Am’alek; tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in my hand.” 17:10 So Joshua did as Moses told him, and fought with Am’alek;** and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. 17:11 Whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed; and whenever he lowered his hand, Am’alek prevailed. 17:12 But Moses’ hands grew weary; so they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat upon it, and Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one on one side, and the other on the other side**; so his hands were steady until the going down of the sun. 17:13 And Joshua mowed down Am’alek and his people with the edge of the sword. 17:14 And the LORD said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Am’alek from under heaven.”

1. See Moses’ walking to the top of the hill and extending his arms on his own as a “type” of Jesus climbing the hill of Calvary and extending His arms on the cross.
2. At a certain point, Aaron (priest) and Hur (Israelite soldier) assist in keeping Moses’ arms extended. Keep in mind, that altho Aaron and Hur assist, the power to overcome the wicked enemy flows from the extension of Moses’ arms (not from the arms of Aaron and Hur).
   Jesus chose to institute the Mass and the priesthood as the means of making His sacrifice (extension of His arms on the cross) present in time.
   Those of us who are not priests are the “Hurs” – soldiers in the army, helping to fight evil by joining our prayers and sacrifices to the Sacrifice of Our Lord.
3. The need for Moses’ arms to remain extended continues until the enemy has been conquered in time.
   Likewise, as long as the battle against evil and sin needs to be waged here on earth, it is the power merited by Our Lord’s sacrifice that needs to be made present.

I’ll leave you to ponder the interesting item that it is when Moses sits down on the “stone” that Aaron and Hur are called upon to assist in keeping Moses’ arms extended.

 

[Nita]

What is it that you think is the “Doctrine of the Mass”? (Hint: there is no such thing as a ‘Doctrine of the Mass’, someone is yanking your chain bub!) I’d suggest doing a little homework next time before posting. You can buy a Catechism of the Catholic Church as a way to check that the tripe someone is trying to feed you is actually a Catholic teaching before posting.

?? We have doctrines concerning the Mass.

 

[Mintaka]

The Letter to the Hebrews is practically all about why we celebrate Mass, and how it is like and different from Temple worship, and how Jesus’ ascension to His Father is connected to Mass. So there’s no contradiction at all, if you read the epistle as a whole.

If you have the time, I highly recommend the excellent lectures on Hebrews by Fr. Phillips down at Our Lady of the Atonement. (Scroll down to the bottom of the page.)

atonementonline.com/podcasts/index.php

 

[wanner47]

“Since according to the judgment of even Protestant historians of dogma, St. Cyprian (d. 258) is to be regarded as the “herald” of Catholic doctrine on the Mass, we may likewise pass him over…”

newadvent.org/cathen/10006a.htm

Perhaps you should research your own sources before you accuse others of not doing their own homework.

I think you’re misreading this quote. There are Catholic doctrines regarding the Mass (or, as the article says, “on the Mass,”) but there is no one specific “Doctrine of the Mass.” That seems to be where the confusion lies.

As to your question, the early Church fathers – many of whom were disciples of the original Apostles – did not find a conflict between these doctrines and Scripture.

For example – St. Cyprian, whom you quoted above, said, “If Christ Jesus, our Lord and God, is himself the high priest of God the Father; and if he offered himself as a sacrifice to the Father; and if he commanded that this be done in commemoration of himself, then certainly the priest, who imitates that which Christ did, truly functions in place of Christ” (Letters 63:14 [A.D. 253]).

Also, as this article states:

“At the Last Supper, on the night he was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of his Body and Blood. He did this in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the centuries until he should come again, and so to entrust to his beloved spouse, the Church, a memorial of his death and resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a paschal banquet in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us” (Sacrosanctum Concilium 47).

John A. O’Brien, writing in The Faith of Millions, said, “The manner in which the sacrifices are offered is alone different: On the cross Christ really shed his blood and was really slain; in the Mass, however, there is no real shedding of blood, no real death; but the separate consecration of the bread and of the wine symbolizes the separation of the body and blood of Christ and thus symbolizes his death upon the cross. The Mass is the renewal and perpetuation of the sacrifice of the cross in the sense that it offers [Jesus] anew to God . . . and thus commemorates the sacrifice of the cross, reenacts it symbolically and mystically, and applies the fruits of Christ’s death upon the cross to individual human souls. All the efficacy of the Mass is derived, therefore, from the sacrifice of Calvary” (306).

 

[reccanboy]

I think you’re misreading this quote. There are Catholic doctrines regarding the Mass (or, as the article says, “on the Mass,”) but there is no one specific “Doctrine of the Mass.” That seems to be where the confusion lies.

As to your question, the early Church fathers – many of whom were disciples of the original Apostles – did not find a conflict between these doctrines and Scripture.

For example – St. Cyprian, whom you quoted above, said, “If Christ Jesus, our Lord and God, is himself the high priest of God the Father; and if he offered himself as a sacrifice to the Father; and if he commanded that this be done in commemoration of himself, then certainly the priest, who imitates that which Christ did, truly functions in place of Christ” (Letters 63:14 [A.D. 253]).

Also, as this article states:

Can you respond to the exegesis I provided of Hebrews 10:1-2?

 

[wanner47]

Can you respond to the exegesis I provided of Hebrews 10:1-2?

First tell me by what authority you interpret Scripture, and why I should trust your interpretation over the Church’s.

However, if you’re interested, a refutation of your interpretation can be found here: catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0309sbs.asp

 

[dnu]

Weren’t they already celebrating Mass when St. Paul wrote that? If so, it would be curious that he would refute something he was already practicing.

 

[crazzeto]

Weren’t they already celebrating Mass when St. Paul wrote that? If so, it would be curious that he would refute something he was already practicing.

It would indeed, here’s the key to understanding this. Take “annual sacrafice”, what was this Paul was writing about? Well it was a literal animal sacrafice every Jew was required to make once a year. This is the sacrafice Paul is talking about, and this is something which most certainly never happens in Catholic Mass. We do have the Holy Sacrafice of the Eucharist, but this isn’t our sacrafice in anyway. It’s Christ’s sacrafice, something we mystically get to partake in. And here is when you start getting deep into the mass, so deep in fact I quite honestly don’t exactly understand it all.

My high level understanding is this:

God exists out side of space and time, this concept is a bubble created for us. To God (& Jesus, & all the saints) the sacrafice Jesus made is ever present, to them It’s still right there, it’s still happening and always will be happening. While here on earth, it’s long done once and for all. Through the celebration of the Eucharist, God makes that sacrafice of Christ, present to us in a mystical way. In this way we partake in Christ’s sacrafice, which again from our perspective is done already.

Christ made the one perfect sacrafice for all time, but we get to partake in it thanks to the grace of God. To get much deeper, I would point you towards matierials published by Scott Hahn, Steve Ray, and over at alabamacatholicresources.com/church_history.html, download those free talks.

 

[Ignatius]

"
What is it that you think is the “Doctrine of the Mass”? (Hint: there is no such thing as a ‘Doctrine of the Mass’, someone is yanking your chain bub!) I’d suggest doing a little homework next time before posting. You can buy a Catechism of the Catholic Church as a way to check that the tripe someone is trying to feed you is actually a Catholic teaching before posting.
"

“Since according to the judgment of even Protestant historians of dogma, St. Cyprian (d. 258) is to be regarded as the “herald” of Catholic doctrine on the Mass, we may likewise pass him over…”

Exactly! It doesn’t say anything about any “Doctrine of the Mass”. There is no such thing.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10006a.htm

You can clear up a great deal of your misunderstandings if you fact check these things by reading through The Catechism of the Catholic Church for Catholic teaching before posting.

Get yourself a Catechism and you’ll see that there is no “Doctrine of the Mass”.

 

[fbl9]

10:2 “Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins.”

The author claims that if these said sacrifices could make the people perfect, then they would’ve ceased to have been offered long ago, since having once been cleansed, they would no longer have any conscience (i.e. guilt) of sin.

If the Mass is the propitiatory sacrifice of the Lord, why hasn’t it perfected once and for all, those for whom it has been offered? After all, would it not have ceased to have been offered, since the people, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?

Do you still on ocassion commit sin?If you say yes, then i say you never have been cleansed then.

 

[kepha1]

Heb. 13:15 - “sacrifice of praise” or “toda” refers to the thanksgiving offerings of Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30 which had to be eaten.

The ancient Jews had a special ritual meal called the Todah (Hebrew: thanks). The Todah sacrificed an animal, but it was greater than other animal sacrifices because it added the suffering of one’s own life.

Our Father in heaven was slowly preparing His covenant children for the move from animal sacrifices to the Final Sacrifice.
(Ps 40:6,8) “Burnt offering and sin offering Thou hast not required. … I delight to do Thy will, O my God; Thy law is within my heart.”
Again, David wrote,
(Ps 51:17) “The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit.” And again,
(Ps 69:30) “I will praise the name of God with a song; I will magnify Him with thanksgiving. This will please the Lord more than an ox or a bull with horns and hoofs.”
Isaiah spoke the words of God,
(Is 1:11) “I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams.” God called instead for a baptism:
(Is 1:16) “Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your doings from My eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do good.”

The ancient rabbis believed that when the Messiah would come all sacrifices except the Todah would cease, but the Todah would continue for all eternity. In 70 AD the Temple fell to earth and all of the bloody animal sacrifices stopped.
Only the Todah remains, the eucharistia, the Final Sacrifice at which the last words spoken are Todah l’Adonai, “Thanks be to God.”

http://www.ourgardenofcarmel.org/marty.html
What are the last words spoken at Mass? "Thanks be to God."

 

[kepha1]

Heb. 9:23 - the Eucharistic sacrifice also fulfills Jer. 33:18 that His kingdom will consist of a sacrificial priesthood forever, and fulfills Zech. 9:15 that the sons of Zion shall drink blood like wine and be saved.

Heb. 13:15 - this “sacrifice of praise” refers to the actual sacrifice or “toda” offering of Christ who, like the Old Testament toda offerings, now must be consumed. See, for example, Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30 which also refer to the “sacrifice of praise” in connection with animals who had to be eaten after they were sacrificed.

Heb. 2:18 - although His suffering is past tense, His expiation of our sins is present tense because His offering is continual. Therefore, He is able (present tense) to help those who are tempted.

Heb. 5:6,10; 6:20; 7:15,17 - these verses show that Jesus restores the father-son priesthood after Melchizedek. Jesus is the new priest and King of Jerusalem and feeds the new children of Abraham with His body and blood. This means that His eternal sacrifice is offered in the same manner as the bread and wine offered by Melchizedek in Gen. 14:18. But the bread and wine that Jesus offers is different, just as the Passover Lamb of the New Covenant is different. The bread and wine become His body and blood by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit.

Heb. 4:14 – Jesus the Sacrifice passes through the heavens by the glory cloud of God, just like the sacrifices of Solomon were taken up into heaven by the glory cloud of God in 2 Chron. 7:1. See also Mark 16:19; Luke 24:51; and Acts 1:10.

Heb. 7:24 – Jesus holds His priesthood is forever because He continues forever, so His sacrificial offering is forever. He continues to offer His body and blood to us because He is forever our High Priest.

Heb. 8:2 - Jesus is a minister in the sanctuary offering up (present tense) His eternal sacrifice to the Father which is perfected in heaven. This is the same sanctuary that we enter with confidence by the blood of Jesus as written in Heb. 10:19. See also Heb. 12:22-24.
Heb. 8:3 - as High Priest, it is necessary for Jesus to have something to offer. What is Jesus offering in heaven? As eternal Priest, He offers the eternal sacrifice of His body and blood.

Heb. 8:6; 9:15; cf. Heb. 12:22-24; 13:20-21 - the covenant Jesus mediates (present tense) is better than the Old covenant. The covenant He mediates is the covenant of His body and blood which He offers in the Eucharist. See Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - which is the only time Jesus uses the word “covenant” (which is the offering of His body and blood).

Heb. 9:12 – Jesus enters into heaven, the Holy Place, taking His own blood. How can this be? He wasn’t bleeding after the resurrection. This is because He enters into the heavenly sanctuary to mediate the covenant of His body and blood by eternally offering it to the Father. This offering is made present to us in the same manner as Melchizedek’s offering, under the appearance of bread and wine.

Heb. 9:26 – Jesus’ once and for all appearance into heaven to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself shows that Jesus’ presence in heaven and His sacrifice are inseparable. This also shows that “once for all,” which refers to Jesus’ appearance in heaven, means perpetual (it does not, and cannot mean, “over and done with” because Jesus is in heaven for eternity). “Once for all” also refers to Jesus’ suffering and death (Heb. 7:27; 9:12,26;10:10-14). But “once for all” never refers to Jesus’ sacrifice, which is eternally presented to the Father. This sacrifice is the Mal. 1:11 pure offering made present in every place from the rising of the sun to its setting in the Eucharist offered in the same manner as the Melchizedek offering.

Heb. 10:19 - we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus on earth in the Eucharistic liturgy, which is the heavenly sanctuary where Jesus’ offering is presented to God in Heb. 8:2.

Heb. 13:8 - this is because Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. While His suffering was temporal (because bodily pain is temporal), Jesus and His sacrifice are eternal (because redemption, salvation, and the mediation of the New covenant are eternal).

Heb. 13:15 – the letter concludes with an instruction to continually offer up, through Christ, a sacrifice of praise to God. The phrase “sacrifice of praise” refers to the “toda” animal sacrifices that had to be consumed. See, for example, Lev. 7:12-15; 22:29-30. scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html

And see the previous post.

Hebrews affirms the Mass.

 

[NHInsider]

Hebrews affirms the Mass.

Exactly. The whole point of Hebrews is that the Old Covenant has been fulfilled and that believers live under the New Covenant. Jesus our High Priest offers the unblemished Lamb on the Heavenly altar (8:1, 9:11-12), and we who have been washed clean in baptism are priveleged to pass through the veil (10:19-22) and worship at the Heavenly tabernacle when we participate at the Mass (which we should not neglect, 10:25).

 

[SHW]

Revelation 5:6
And I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent out into all the earth.

Jesus is the subject of Revelation 5. He is interceding for us in heaven right now and will continue to do so until His Second Coming. Hebrews 7:25 It is true that He suffered and died only once and that He did it for all people of all time periods, for those who died before His sacrifice and also for those who were born after His sacrifice. 1 Timothy 2:3-7

We each receive the fruit (which is salvation) of His redemptive sacrifice when we are baptized. Hebrews 9:15 Baptism redeems us from Original Sin and thereby saves us because Baptism regenerates us. Romans 5, Titus 3:4-6, 1 Corinthians 6:11

However, we must maintain our salvation by obeying God’s commandments and doing His will in order for us to actually inherit eternal life when we die. Matthew 19:17, Revelation 22:14, Matthew 7:20-24 God helps us to do His will when we ask Him to help us since we cannot fulfill His will without His help/graces.

We can choose to disobey Him and we can choose to ignore Him using our own free wills after our baptisms. But, those who disobey Him after their baptisms and do not repent before they die, along with those who do not choose to know Him while they are alive; these persons will all be thrown into everlasting hellfire when they die. 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10

If we fail to continue in the faith (obey His commandments and do His Father’s will until we die) then we will be damned when we die. Colossians 1:21-23, Romans 11:21-23